Social Engineer No. 31415926536

The Wimpling Hems of Manhattan

I walked south on Third Ave during the nooner ensconced in the crowd as 54th Street approached, speaking relativistically here as I was in fact moving toward 54th and not the other way around, when the buildings across the street (I was walking on the left-hand side) exploded in shards of broken glass and pulverized brick.

There emerged from the CGI-like backdrop of expanding debris two young women crossing Third Ave toward my crowd; these two, who among the ubiquitous beauties of young women in NYC were in the top one percentile of the top one percentile, presented the same riveting aspect as did The Terminator's first movie's antagonist who loomed up out of the flaming wreckage of a detonated eighteen-wheeler, high-heeled and summer-dressed, the girls, not the Terminator, approached with rippling lower hems that could have been extended by a double-digit number of inches and still not threaten the knee with so much as a shadow. I did not stare - I merely took the opportunity to chronicle the scene for you, gentle reader - but almost every male within my localized crowd did.

One brazen thirtyish-something New Yorker decided - to the amused embarrassment of his male companion - to misbehave in such a way that a scene might be made. As the distance of intersection between our southward-moving group and the two eastward-moving street-crossing girls shrank, this fellow, full of bravado and confidence, made a flourish toward the young women and gave them the complete up-and-down stare which culminated in a neck-thrust-forward gaze that nearly grazed the young beauty's cheek who was hapless enough to be positioned northward of her companion and, thus, closer to Mr. BT-SNY as they attempted to pass by him.

This elicited a response from Miss Northward to the stargazed admirer. She slowed slightly as her companion Miss S continued her pace unaltered and passed us by, and exposing her anatomically-perfect teeth in a momentary grimace, her face seeming to shimmer as glossy fringes of her dark hair, cast softly but violently forward by the quick turn of her head towards Mr. BT-SNY, it, the hair, briefly shrouding her beauty and then amplifying it as it danced and fell to, she asked her tormenter/admirer "didn't he know it's rude to stare?" to which he retorted: "You WANT me to stare!"

For a brief moment, I could tell this response was unexpected, the way the smile froze and a stray tress lingered across her teeth as she turned her head away and strolled on, catching up with her friend. By now, I had overtaken Mr. B and his friend, and eavesdropped as they walked behind me, the bolus of our crowd crossing 54th and then gradually dispersing throughout the metropolis.

"She wanted me to stare. Wanted me. She knows what she's doing. At the store she goes 'I want something sexy.' Does she know what that word means? Like I'm not gonna look. When a woman looks that good and is dressed like that...."

I looked back over my shoulder to see the wreckage of crumbling buildings only to discover that they had not suffered any violence after all, then I descended below.

Socialism is Dead! Long Live Socialism!

Just in case it got past you, gentle reader, I want to excerpt a recent AP story about the fluctuating fortunes of Latin America's rising star: the Socialist State of Venezuela.

It is yet another cautionary tale to be ignored and downplayed by the typical voter of the United States. Here is the link: (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_venezuela_currency_crunch_1)



One of the most chilling aspects of this story is the implied financial regulation that enables the Venezuelan government to oversee private monetary transfers. This coming at the world's collective consciousness just as the U.S. Administration and Congressional leaders are proposing massive increases in Federal regulation of the financial sector. I feel as one must feel who waits, bound hand and foot, in line for the firing squad, watching as bullets tear open the chest of another, and knowing that in a very short time it will be their turn. Overdramatic, yes; the firing squad metaphor is a bit much, but how else do we describe a growing tyranny that does not value life and liberty?

The Democratic Party of the United States does not respect, firstly, the right to life of every citizen - born or unborn - and it does not respect the liberty and private property of its citizens. Venezuela shows us where these kinds of policies lead.

Here's a lengthy excerpt:

General Motors Corp. is halting production in Venezuela for three months starting Friday. Ford Motor Co.'s subsidiary announced 10 percent cutbacks last week. Other automakers also are shrinking their business — but not because Venezuelans don't want to buy cars.

They're closing down because the government won't give them enough dollars to import parts.

It's a crisis entirely brought on by the currency controls imposed by President Hugo Chavez, Gabriel Lopez, president of Ford Motors for Venezuela and the Andean region, told The Associated Press. "Year after year we're shrinking by about 10 percent compared to the year before," he complained.

Chavez began regulating access to dollars and making it harder for businesses and people to transfer money in 2003, after confidence in his government was shaken by a failed coup and a subsequent strike. Venezuelans must now apply to the currency agency Cadivi for dollars at the official rate of 2.15 bolivars to import goods or take vacations.

These controls have backfired with a vengeance — businessmen, companies and private citizens transferred some $72.7 billion out of Venezuela over the last six years — nearly double the outflow of the previous six years, according to the Central Bank — distorting the economy, fueling inflation and discouraging private investment.

But the controls themselves haven't led to a political backlash, perhaps because Venezuelans with means tend to be opposed to Chavez's socialist policies already. Poorer Venezuelans haven't been as affected, partly because the government subsidizes food and free health care.

This IS racism

President Obama's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, has been quoted as saying (from a symposium speech sponsored by the Berkeley La Raza ("The Race") Law Journal in October 2001):

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life."

It is a racist statement. It is an evil statement and should disqualify her from serious consideration.

Most historians and lay students who study the rise of National Socialism in Germany during the 1920s and 30s can ably relate what happened and when it happened and where it happened and perhaps even why it happened, but after all of the analysis the question of HOW IT COULD HAPPEN in a industrially-advanced and modern society is left unanswered.

Once again, I see what is happening. You see what is happening. But, once again, I don't know how this could happen.

Does Perez Hilton think President Obama is a "dumb b-tch"?
On April 19th, 2009, Carrie Prejean, representing California in the pageant, was asked the following question by Perez Hilton:

"Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why? Or why not?"

Miss Prejean responded:

"Well, I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. Um, we live in a land that you can choose: same sex marriage or opposite marriage. And, you know what, in my country and in my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman - no offense to anybody out there - but that's how I was raised and that's how I think that it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you."

Perez Hilton didn't like her answer and later, in a video rant, called her a "dumb b-tch."

In Nelsonville, Ohio on March 3rd, 2008, Presidential candidate Barack Obama was asked about his position on gay marriage; he responded:

"I will tell you that I don't believe in gay marriage, but I do think that people who are gay and lesbian should be treated with dignity and respect and that the state should not discriminate against them. So, I believe in civil unions that allow a same-sex couple to visit each other in a hospital or transfer property to each other. I don't think it should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans. That's my view. But we can have a respectful disagreement on that."

Notice the similarity in the stated opinions of both responders.

I wonder if Perez Hilton doesn't have some choice words for President Obama as well.

DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006

I've been watching the U.S. House of Representatives Budget Committee on CSPAN2 as it debates the FY2010 Federal Budget, and there is one statement Democratic reps continue to make without any pushback from the Republican opposition. This misleading and inaccurate statement needs to be addressed and rebutted at every instance whereever and whenever it is voiced. The statement is: "We have inherited this mess from the last 8 years of the Bush Administration...etc."

The truth is Democrats have created this mess since their ascension to power after the November 2006 elections. When Democrats took over BOTH chambers of Congress after that fateful day at the ballot box, the economy was stable and growing, and the projected budget deficit was around 200 billion. Since January 2007, Democratic policies have authored the mess that we "inherit" today. All of the increase in deficits since then have come from the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives where Federal spending originates.

President Bush and the GOP prior to 2006 bear some responsibility for increasing Federal spending beyond acceptable limits, for "spending like Democrats" as it were. But today the first sixty days of one party rule under President Obama and the Democratic Party have proven Republicans don't know anything about off-the-charts deficit spending.

The American economy began to go over the cliff at the exact moment the Democratic Party gained control over the Federal Budget in November 2006 and convened the subsequent 110th Congress in January 2007 under the leadership of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006
DEMOCRATS HAVE HELD POWER SINCE NOVEMBER 2006

Labels: democrats, failure, obama

Where Boredom Goes To Die

NYC 6:36 pm 28 degrees F E 57th

Nod to the doorman who starts the revolving door spinning, and step outside into the street. The M31 bus roars by with standing room only and the City exerts its charms. Turn left in the direction of Lexington Ave as fast-walking pedestrians move past you: there's a couple dressed in the obligatory dark colors of the City passing the warmth of friendship back and forth as buses roar across Manhattan Island.

Walk one hundred yards to the corner as car horns serenade and upbraid you. This City can't sleep because there is too much noise going on. There are no children here; you see more pets than children. Watch as the Shih Tzu terrier dressed to the nines with warm clothes and booties squirts its excess liquids upon the pile of black Hefty bags stacked along the curb. The dog's owner appears to be in a trance, completely unaware of the City, only having eyes for its loved one as it fritters about the frozen dirt of the street.

Turn left and try to not to gasp as a courier bicyclist avoids instant death by dealing a hearty slap on the fender of a cab moving right toward the curb. How does a person live with such encroachment? The cabbie brakes and waits for the tender soul to pass: there is a respect even here for the fragility of human tissue versus money-making metal.

There is no bell curve of beauty here. Like Paris, the inhabitants are either beautiful or ugly. And even the ugly have a beauty all their own.

Turn left on 56th and it's more of the same. Activity breeds activity. The buildings seem to be packed full of people who can't wait to hit the streets. After watching a continuous stream of people issue forth, it is natural to assume the building is now empty. But that assumption would be wrong wrong wrong. There are always more people inside.

Turn left on 3rd and try to resist the urge for a warm bagel at the vendor's stand across the street. The swirling winds waft aromas over the yellow cabs and you resist because you've got half of a sub from Toasties waiting at the apartment. An out-of-towner sizes you up as you approach and asks for directions to the subway and you purposely put on native airs and direct him a couple of blocks behind you to the E train. Yes you can get to Penn Station from there. Pad softly past the news stand with the invisible vendor snuggled down into an unknown depth of glossy merchandise. Oh, there is a young man who desires to make a purchase and up pops the man of the store. The stand is inhabited and all is right with the world.

Turn left and stroll past the HSBC bank as floor-to-ceiling windows show young professionals still ensconced in their offices - there is a recession going on after all and it wouldn't do to leave too early. How do you work in a fishbowl like this? People walking past watch as you update your blog, shop at Macy's, and get some work done.

Back to the apartment building now, nod thanks to the doorman and let your eyes take inventory of the lobby. See the business man with the sun tan that only comes from flying a window seat above the clouds. See the model, see the immigrant twice-removed, see the energy of charmed lives living in a City that moves.

BIG BROTHER 2009

I apologize to my reader for another boring political post, but I will be brief; this blog functions as a note-to-self at times. Some might say all the time.

In terms of fiscal responsibility, the formerly-reigning Republicans during President Bush's time in office did poorly. The tax cuts were nice, but they were not accompanied by any decrease in government spending: so Big Government got bigger while the taxpayer got poorer. The GOP gets a grade of F.

You ain't seen nothing yet.

The Democratic Party regained control of Congress in November 2006, and their anti-business and anti-profit policies brought about the current recession that started in December 2007.

When Obama takes office in a few days, you can expect any and all revenue streams to be subjected to confiscatory taxation. The triumphant marketing machine that has made all things labelled Democratic uber-cool will continue to crank out its messages: Americans must pay more taxes, and a growing Big Government with Democrats at the helm is a Kind Government. Notice the headline from an AP story published today (see picture at top of today's post)...Motorists' Habits Spur Call For Tax Increases. You see? To Democrats, YOU are the problem. You buy too much gas and you don't buy enough of it. The motorist is caught in a heads Big Government wins tails Big Government wins dilemma.

Remember during the summer of 2008 how Democrat's flat-earth environmental policies caused them to cheer as gas prices increased and you, the ignorant motorist, were chided for wasting gasoline for recreational vehicles and other frivolous uses? Well, you lost as the coin flip saw gas prices go through the roof.

Now, as gasoline prices have declined, Democrats will make sure that you lose again. With gas prices so low, they can increase the Federal tax on gasoline all the way up to approximately $4.00 to generate revenue for the bloated-but-happy Big Government. The recent summer gas price spike provided real-time insight into the demand curve for gasoline and it looks like $4 is the magic number. A recent article in Time by one of its miseducated Marxist reporters stated the case quite clearly: Big Government could tax gasoline back up to its $4 price and reap two Democratic policy victories. Victory number one would be the free "found money" of tax revenue estimated at as high as five hundred billion per year, and victory number two would be less fossil fuel use.

Never mind the massive destruction such policies would wreak upon the free market and our economy.

Even more distressing is the incroachment Big Government will make upon its citizenry under Democratic leadership. In the same article already cited, read this juicy tidbit and think about how Kind and Wonderful a growing Big Government can be:

"According to a draft of the financing commission's recommendations, the nation needs to move to a new system that taxes motorists according to how much they use roads. While details have not been worked out, such a system would mean equipping every car and truck with a device that uses global positioning satellites and transponders to record how many miles the vehicle has been driven, and perhaps the type of roads and time of day."

Now that's CHANGE!