Say Anything Blog

Kathleen Parker, in a column in today’s Richmond Times-Dispatch, asserted that most of the promblems between the sexes in the armed forces stemed from the males resenting having to pretend that women were as good as them when they knew that they were not as good.

She implied that they should be separated to help the poor guys be able to control their testostorone and behave in a civilized manner. If I was a guy, I would take that as an insult!

Whoa! Are we reverting to the dark ages?

How much strength does it take to pull the trigger, or handle high tec weapons?

To help our soldiers maintain control of their urge to rape and pillage, shall we put frilly aprons over their uniforms, have them curtsy and demurely lower their eyes when in the presence of their male conrades-in-arms? Will that re-affirm their place and lower resentment?

In my humble opinion, the female is the deadlier of the sexes in the human species. Doubt it? Threaten their young and find out. They will kill you if necessary, with cold, dispasionate purpose, without hesitation or regret.

This disturbing paragraph from The Associated Press has me in a misery of indecision: If you economists could please tell me I am wrong and “stupid”,(ignorant, perferably), I would be grateful and free to endorse this canidate whole-heartedly.

“Democratic presidential contender John Edwards says it is more important to invest in universal health care and lifting people out of poverty
than to reduce the budget deficit.

The 2004 vice presidential nominee said in an interview broadcast yesterday that “there is a tension” between the two directions, but he has made his choice.
“If I were choosing now between which is more important, I think the investments are more important.” he said on ABC’s “This Week”.

Edward’s proposal, which includes tax cuts and a million housing vouchers for the poor, may place him at odds with Democrats in charge of the congressional spending committees.”

(more...)

President Bush has suggested that he might favor a raise in the federal minimum wage as long as it is coupled with tax breaks for small businesses. Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. Even though only 12% of the population, according to the last figures I have read, are affected, many of these people are single parents attempting to rear their children on not much of anything except the social programs conservatives so despise. Yet these same conservatives don’t want a raise that might take some of the millions away from corrupt CEO’s and give it to the bottom tier that actually, with the labor of their hands makes this profit possible. Workers are uundervalued, but let’s see their company florish without them. Not all minimum wage workers are teens and students.

After all these years, ABOUT TIME!

This is interesting from today’s Richmond Times-Dispatch by Barticles author A. Bart Hinkle. I believe it applies to all of us to some degree. Mea Culpa. But it also explains the puzzling reference to feminists, MSM, liberals, lefties, anyone not acceptable to conservatives, as liars. Not honorable people with a difference of opinion, but deliberate liars, all. Veracity and integrity would appear to be a conservative trait only. So can we conclude from this example of how our brain works that a coming together of ideology is out of the question? Fraid so.

(more...)

Now that the election is over and the Democrats have a majority in Congress, what changes can we expect?

  I believe that the new Speaker of the House, extreme liberal that she is, will nevertheless use her power to keep the extremists in check and work very hard to gain as much ground as she can through bipartanship compromise. To do otherwise would be to invite veto after veto.

  We can only hope this will be the case, because nothing else makes sense. From a liberal point of view, I’m glad that recaltrant Republicans will be forced to compromise as well if they don’t want to get stalled out completely.

  But how likely is it that everyone can put their hard feelings aside and work together to get the business of government done, or will it be a case of revenge on the Democrats side and contrariness on the Republican side?

  The President has taken the first step by letting the Secretary of Defense go, which I’m sure he did not want to do. I hope this olive branch will be reciprocated.

  How about we start a new day, concerning ourselves with what is best for the country, not any specific party? Surely there is room for agreement somewhere.