About Me

Name: The Hermit Crab
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Brief Thoughts

In the midst of an insane statement on Fox News Special Report last Friday, Washington Post toasty Charles Lane got within one letter of the truth for one brief shining moment.  He said that the American people don't like the IRS because "they screw up".  Actually, we don't like the IRS because they screw US!  (I base my insanity accusation on the fact that Lane said last week was a good one for the present, which left me wondering what a bad week would look like.)
 
 
 
I was actually disappointed when the crackpot idea of turning pond scum (aka algae) into fuel predictably failed completely.  I had hoped we had finally found something Charles Schumer is good for.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Attention Conservative Writers and Bloggers! Richard Nixon was not the the king of IRS abuse

Is it necessary for every Republican and/or conservative critic who writes about the current Obama IRS scandal to use Richard Nixon as the epitome of IRS corruption?  When Richard Nixon asked the IRS to investigate certain groups, it was because he was concerned that tax-free dollars were being used to fund illegal and/or violent "protest" activities. (I put "protest" in scare quotes because as honest inquirers now know the Black Panthers were merely a criminal gang using gullible liberals to cover for them by pretending to be something more.)  For the life of me I can't see what's wrong with that.  Remember that we were at war at the time.  On the other hand, after the patriotic Nixon declined to dispute the almost certainly stolen election of 1960, in which the legendary Chicago voting tombstones and the LBJ Texas machine gave (literally) the election to John F. Kennedy over RN, the ever-so-classy Knight of Camelot showed his gratitude by having Nixon audited in 1961, 1962, and 1963.

For real political abuse of the IRS, you have to look to Billy Jeff Clinton.  During his infamous reign, at least 12 conservative groups were audited by the IRS, perhaps 20 or more.  I also read that all five women who publicly accused BJ Horndog of abusing them were audited as well.  (Which leads me to pose the question of whether an IRS anal exam is more or less pleasant than what Clinton did to them.)  Even a woman who declared in advance that she would confront Al Gore at a public event to ask him how he could continue to serve such a man received a letter the very morning of the event advising her that she and her husband were being audited by the IRS.

He's not Richard Milhous Obama, he's William Jefferson Obama!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Jason Collins Plays the Ellen Degeneres Card

Aging NBA basketball playing mediocrity Jason Collins has come out as openly gay.  Of course, in todays culture, he has been lauded on all sides for his courage.  I differ.

I think he did this out of pure (if that's the word) self-interest.  He's trying to make himself fire-proof, the way Ellen Degeneres did.  (I may be mis-spelling her name.  I don't care.)

Not many remember that just before Degeneres "came out", she was on verge of losing her ratings-poor sitcom.  She had to do something to save her TV career, and quickly.  She played the "gay" card.  From that point on, her career was assured.  No matter how many flops in a row she could have from now on, the lavender lobby in Hollywood would always give her another chance and even more publicity than ever.  They were not going to their first portrait in homosexual courage fail.

Now she wins awards every year, and on virtually every imaginable award show.  (Ever wonder who's counting the votes?)  Things have reached such a silly state that she even is a spokesmodel for Cover Girl, despite the formerly fatal drawback that she's not pretty.  Heck, Derek Jeter (who has his own line of Avon products) is prettier.

Now we have Jason Collins, an aging player making big money and playing an average of less than 5 minutes a game for the last two years.  He is 34, and he sees the end of his NBA career approaching.  How can he stay on the gravy train another few years, sitting on the bench and collecting fat paychecks?  He plays the Degeneres card!

Pity the Timberwolves and the NBA as a whole if they release him (the former) and no one (in the latter) signs him.  The Gaystapo and their legal harpies will launch a persecution that will make the asbestos litigation look like a Junior Achievement fair.  Jason Collins and his lawyers may be able to BUY an NBA team by the time the judgments are in.

I'm beginning to think he lied in his declaration.  It's been done by sharper knives than he.  Can anyone poll the NBA groupies?  They might be able to shed a (red) light on the question...

Did the above offend anyone?  If so, I will offer these words of Orwell's -- "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."  These are deceitful days, but I refuse to participate in the deceit.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rising Sea Levels and Warmist BS

I was listening to America's Morning Show with Quinn and Rose a few days ago, and I heard about a man whose son is being propagandized by a global warming alarmist teacher.  Hardly surprising, but I was struck by one question on the boy's assignment.  It asked what the consequences would be of a sea level rise of three feet, and the "correct" answer was that some coastal cities would be "submerged".

How many cities do you know of that are only three feet tall?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Since nobody else will bring this up - the White House Tour Ban

Many people have pointed out the absurdity of BO the Lizard King cancelling all White House tours because of the sequester.  (Of course, Jeremiah Wright's boycott is unaffected, as he won't visit until they stop calling it the White House.)  They are concentrating on the financial fallacy involved.  Am I the only person who thinks that BO and his wife the National Scold, along with their pampered princesses are delighted to have a chance to banish the common rabble from "their" palace? 
This is what happens when you get a "first family" who can't tell the difference between a democratic republic and a monarchy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Earth Idiocy Hour

Alan Caruba reminds us that another Earth Idiocy Hours will be observed by the treacherous and the stupid at 8:30 this Saturday March 23rd.  He urges us to turn on all of our lights to be a light against the darkness of tenacious enviro-whacko propaganda.  Once again, Mrs. Crab and I will comply with AC's request.  Won't you join us?  Try doing the laundry that hour.  Run your dishwasher.  Use your imagination.
 
I'd like to add two thoughts to Alan's column:
 
I remember that NBC usually makes some meaningless, PC gesture of support to this foolery (I'd call it tomfoolery, but my brother would rightly be offended), like turning off the lights in the studio or booth where they're broadcasting from.  To consider just how empty their gesture is, consider how much electricity it requires to broadcast their gesture around the world.
 
My second note is to burglars.  You may want to look for the houses with their lights off at that time on a Saturday night.  Their home security systems may be off, too.  I'm not worrying about the seniors who go to bed that early.  They're far too smart to turn off their electricity just because some leftist idiot environmentalists tell them to.
 
They didn't get this far by being gullible.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thoughts, ugly and otherwise

I heard lately that Montana has legalized eating roadkill.  (I can hear Libertarian Tony saying that it never should have been illegal to begin with.)  My thought was this:  I'm glad that Jeffrey Dahmer didn't live to see this.
 
 
 
I watched a bit of Dianne Feinstein's synthetic outrage al la Hitlery Clinton when Ted Cruz tried to explain the word "constitutional" to her.  She had a flicker of honesty when she said that she is fairly well educated (which I interpret as "in a C- kind of way"), but then she said that she has "studied the Constitution".  Is there anyone with a triple-digit IQ who really believes that?  She also said that her bill exempts over 2,200 types of gun from her ban.  You may ask "Why bother with the bill at all, then?"
 
Here's why.  She's trying to set a precedent here.  Ever since the Clinton era gun ban, the Left has been desperate to re-establish the right to ban guns based on their features, cosmetic or otherwise.  If they succeed, then they will simply pass more and more of the same types of restrictions, until no firearms will be able to be sold or owned at all.  Ask the smokers of America if this kind of creeping ban is possible.
 
 
 
While I'm on the subject, I am usually a fan of Jim Quinn of America's Morning show, but he's falling into a dangerous linguistic trap on the issue of gun ownership rights.  He keeps saying that there is no such thing as an "assault weapon", since all weapons can be used in assault.  As all students of gun history know, "assault weapon" is a corruption of the original "assault rifle", which is a rifle capable of "selective fire", which means that it is capable of both semi- and full-automatic fire.  The first modern assault rifle was the German Sturmgewehr of World War II.
 
Here's the danger:  if we were ever to concede that there is no such category as assault weapon, then we are conceding that since all weapons are assault-capable, and some private ownership is already banned (have you tried to buy a ICBM lately?), therefore it is a logical step to the conclusion that all weapon ownership can be restricted or banned outright.
 
We keep losing rights in part because we keep losing the language.  If we lose this debate, we won't be able to defend our rights anymore.  Are you willing to trust your liberties to Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and Janet Napolitano, not to mention the other happy fascists they've surrounded themselves with?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bloomberg, His Flatulency Barack Obama, and "Skeet" shooting

Alan Caruba has an excellent blog post explaining the strategy behind such idiocies as Micro Bloomberg's recently-overturned ban on large soft drinks.  I agree with Caruba, as I usually do, but he should not forget the instinctive spoil-sportness of the modern leftist.  I explained to my wife the other night that today's liberal is a person who lies awake at night afraid that someone somewhere is having a good time.  As for Bloomberg himself, Erich Maria Remarque saw him coming in All Quiet on the Western Front.  He wrote:
 
“It is very qu__r that the unhappiness of the world is so often brought on by small men.”
 
 
 
 
I know that it's hard to accept any publicity photos eminating from this White House as being accurate, but despite the oddly low trajectory of His Flatulency's shot, I have been assured that he was indeed shooting Skeet.  Skeet has been identified as a white man in his forties, employed by the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Parting Shots (for tonight)

I was checking my email, and I read this headline from the Media Research Center's Cyberalert:

ABC Falls in Line, Touts Obama 'Charm Offensive' Effort With Congress

I can't be the only one who thought "Yeah, right.  1% charm, and 99% offensive."



If you've ever tried to explain to someone the difference between literal and figurative, give them this illustration:  Tell them to take a massive overdose of anti-diarrhea medication (prescription would be best) and then eat like a starving wolf for three days running (sorry, couldn't resist), and they still won't be Jay Carney.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Real Reason Head Start Still Exists

A few pundits have been speculating as to why the notoriously ineffective Head Start program still exists and even keeps having its funding increased.  Now all informed people know that that the gains shown at the age of four by Head Start "students" essentially vanish by the 3rd grade.  Or, as I would put it, when the kids are four, they know a lot -- for a four year old.  By the time they reach 3rd grade, they still know a lot - for a four year old. 
 
The cause of this unhappy result is so obvious that no one seems to see it.  (See any good list of George Orwell quotes.)  If a child enters kindergarden or 1st grade ahead of his or her peers, but the teacher is only teaching to the level of proficiency attained by the other children in the class, then the child has no opportunity to build on or even retain their advantage.  In the Rochester, NY school district, the situation is particularly bad, as the Rochester City School District schools, despite the lavish amounts of money thrown into that cesspool, to put it plainly, stink.  As facilities preventing education, they are admirable, but otherwise they are just child warehouses, or even criminal starter schools.
 
So why does Head Start lumber on, like a Frankenstein's monster or a stupid government program?  (Come to think of it...)  That's too simple to see, too.  Many people seem to think that Head Start is an education program.  It is not.  Head Start exists to funnel large amounts of taxpayer money to leftist activist groups like the Urban League (which ruins, er, runs the program in Rochester).  I'll bet a few fragments of what was once the squalid community disorganization known as ACORN gets a lot of money for running this hustle, too.
 
Billions and billions of dollars of your tax money, down the bottomless sinkhole of government/activist graft.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What Didn't Happen in Last Year's Election I

A lot of myths are getting in the way of fixing what went so wildly wrong last year.  If we can't figure out what happened, how are we to prevent its recurrence?  As always, Dr. Crab is here to point out what nobody else seems to have spotted, or at least pointed out to anyone else.  Without further ado, here is item one on my list.
 
The Republican moderates and insiders did not force Mitt Romney on us.  The moderates beat us in 2008 the same way they beat us in 2008:  they united on their candidate before we united on one.  In fact, I don't think we ever did unite on one.  To tell the truth, for the dominant wing of the party, we didn't do a very good job of finding candidates that could both present our views and expound them to the voters who are not already with us -- the moderates in the primaries, and the independents in the voting population in general.  Who did we have?  Rick Perry, a fine governor who seemed to bear up poorly under the heat of the spotlight?  Rick Santorum (a fine man), who lost his last race in a landslide?  (Richard Nixon won under similar circumstances in 1968, but I challenge you to find another man who won the White House under similar auspices.)  Newt Gingrich, older and still mercurial and erratic?  The conservatives may be the Republican base; now we need one who can be the Republican face.

Let's face it -- Mitt Romney won fair and square.  What we have to do is figure out how and with who we can win next time around.

Next time:  Conservative and Tea Party twaddle helped re-elect Commissar B.O.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dr. Crab, Amateur Proctologist: Why Projects like the Keystone Pipeline are Blocked

Many people are wondering why the B.O. administration is blocking the Keystone Oil Pipeline from Canada, despite the fact that it would create tens of thousands, perhaps over 100,000 good paying jobs.  I believe that one of the reasons this project is being blocked is because it would create those good-paying jobs.  Not only don't people who have good paying jobs need government, they start paying taxes.  When they start getting paychecks that show a few bites taken out of them by government-sized teeth, they start to get sore about it.  Angry taxpayers tend to vote Republican.

Democrats will always chose to keep people poor and dependent rather than let them escape dependency and the Democrats.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hemit Crab Minute: the Hidden Danger of Illegal Alien Tuition Breaks

Libertarian Tony sent me an article about the Colorado legislature passing a law that would allow illegal aliens to pay lower tuition at state colleges than American citizens would pay.  After I got past my automatic reaction (rage), I pondered this action and realized another danger in the proposal.  See what you think.

Assuming this bill becomes law, this will make it easier for illegal aliens to attend college in America.  This will qualify them for B.O.'s (illegal) executive order amnesty.  What I haven't seen pointed out yet anywhere is that this will enable them to get college ID cards.  This, combined with same-day registration (which would prevent any investigation of the claims of citizenship and residency on the registration form), would enable the illegal alien students to vote, since in many places college IDs are accepted as valid ID for voting purposes.

Ann Coulter and others refer to illegal aliens as "undocumented Democrat voters".  Now they'll have their document.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hermit Crab Minute: The Two Sides of Bias

Today I was reading some old articles I downloaded to my Kindle and never read, and I read that of all the people who are victims of the Obamaconomy, the worst sufferers have been black Americans.  They have seen their incomes decline (as of the writing of the article) 11%.  Yet up to 97% of black voters voted for B.O. in last year's election.  This is a reminder of the dual nature of prejudice. 

Prejudice is a term with twin definitions.  The one we hear used most often is prejudice against - being against someone or something based on a pre-judgment, meaning a judgment made before gathering evidence, usually without gathering evidence. 

However, it is equally prejudice when someone favors someone based on a pre-judgment.  The "black vote" in 2012 is a perfect example.  95% of black Americans who voted voted for B.O. despite the fact that he has hurt them in particular, even more than he has hurt the rest of us.  His peculiar ideas of law enforcement cannot account for this phenomenon, because that only benefits black felons and thugs (like the New Black Panther Posers), and the vast majority of black Americans are neither.

There was plenty of racial voting in the 2012 election -- and virtually all of it went Democratic.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Minute Crab: Why are the non-military federal agencies arming up?

Like many, I've been pondering why the administrative branch of our government is buying so much ammo and so many military vehicles for branches which are not supposed to be military at all.  I had a nasty thought.  As you know, all of the military branches are required by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to refuse to obey an illegal order.  To the best of my knowledge, employees of FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security, and the other branches of government receiving these munitions are not explicitely forbidden to obey illegal orders.  They aren't covered by the Posse Comitatus law, either.

Might this be at least part of the reason?  I think they are tired of being opposed by the citizenry, and are preparing to "put us down".

Keep your powder dry!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789102728Next »