'OCCUPIERS' ARE NO MYSTERY

WHO ARE THESE 'OCCUPIERS' OF WALL STREET AND OTHER PLACES?

  First, my apologies to my reader(s). It's been a long time, and I'll be sure to post more often, because, like myself, you are getting fed up and want to read the thoughts of someone else who's getting fed up.

  So let's start with who the people are who are sitting in - 'occupying' - the various sites. You know instinctively who they are, don't you? When you were in grade school you stole their lunch money and beat them up. In high school they hid out behind the shop building and did dope. They dropped out during their junior years to pursue other opportunities, often wrecking their cars to gain insurance windfalls. They went from one job to another - burger flipping, counter sales at the Party City, auto detailing and car washing, rake manager for landscapers - but were most often drawing unemployment and welfare payments or, more likely, living at home with Mommy.

  Yes, these are the people who never got over having their mommies feed them and wipe their butts. There they are, sitting in parks and sidewalks, but instead of Mommy they have George Soros and ANSWER and other insurrectionists feeding them, and the city picking up their butt wipes. They have their hands out for your money - somehow, it should be theirs if there is 'economic justice.' Not that they earned it, of course. But they're entitled to it anyway because they need it. Otherwise they'd have to learn a useful trade and become productive.

  Even worse, they have our Instigator in Chief, Mr. Obama, smiling and winking at them and assuring them that 'we are with you.' Big surprise. Guess who led 'Occupy Chicago' in 1988? Look it up.         Now try to imagine a US President backing an attempt at national insurrection. Does that boggle your mind, or what? Isn't the President supposed to help PUT DOWN insurrection? But it should be no surprise. After all, he was a 'community organizer' in Chicago, which is another name for 'rabble rouser,' 'insurrectionist,' 'trouble maker,' and 'fomenter of civil disobedience.'

  We don't have a President, but what we do have is a bunch of whining, tantrum-throwing brats holding their hands out for free food, free housing, and your money. Your Ostrich Killer's suggestion on how to deal with them? Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow . . .

HOW TO TELL A LIB FROM A CONSERVATIVE

But first, a definition of terms: A 'lib' is a liberal, a democrat, a leftist, a socialist, a big government advocate. A 'conservative' is a Constitutionalist, promotes free trade and business-for-profit, a small government strong defense advocate, a 'rightist' politically.

So, how to tell the two apart, assuming at least a little observation?

A 'Lib' decides how he / she should 'feel' about an issue, and takes that position and will not change her / his mind in the face of facts, no matter how compelling or numerous.

A 'Conservative' looks at the facts, mentally models them, and comes up with a thought-out position on the issue. A conservative re-evaluates their position when new facts are brought to light.

To summarize: a 'Lib' feels and facts don't matter; a Conservative thinks and facts are what matters.

I know most of you already knew that. But maybe someone who isn't already a fan of this blog will happen along and learn something.

You're welcome. Now, another cup of coffee . . .

GM SHAFTS BUYERS AGAIN

Hey, guess what? GM says that engineering or mechanical defects on automobiles built before their bankruptcy will not be corrected even if they are under warranty, because '. . . under the terms of the bankruptcy agreement, we don't have to. That was a different company. We're post-bankruptcy, and a different more enlightened and not responsible company."

Or similar words. Hard to believe? Read about it here.

So, if you're one of the 400,000 or so 2007 - 2008 Chevy Impala owners with defective spindle shafts, you - well, you're shafted. This is the official GM position. Oh, and the resale or trade-in value of your "old" GM vehicle? Tanked. In short, you are - I'll say it again - shafted. Who in their right mind would buy an unsupported used car that needs a factory recall that the factory refuses to recall? Who in their right mind would buy a product from any company, if they know in advance that the company has a history of not standing behind their products?

My take on the current typical GM buyer IQ is that it must be well below 100. If you're thinking of buying anything GM makes, and you're a regular reader of this blog, you're probably already thinking about what happens after the next round of Government Motors bankruptcies, coming soon to a dealership near you. If you aren't thinking about that, you probably don't read this blog very often. Welcome!

HOW TO KNOW IF AN ATTACK IS TERRORISM

The recent attacks in Israel, of military buses and vehicles, has been labeled 'terrorism.' Read the story here. Yes, it appears there may have also been civilian casualties.

Attacking a military target is not terrorism, folks. It is an act of warfare, a military strike. It does a disservice to public opinion to label every bombing, strafing, or shooting 'terrorism' when in fact what has taken place is a fairly conventional military operation.

Terrorists target helpless and vulnerable non-military people, preferably women and children and shoppers and tourists. Blowing up a busload of soldiers, especially those that shoot back as in the above cited story, is decidedly not terrorism.

So, media: call it what it is, and spare us the inflammatory headlines.

NUTRITION FREE FOOD - STOP THE INSANITY!

The typical American knowingly buys 'foods' that have no nutritional value. Examples: zero-calorie sodas (news flash: sugar is an essential nutrient), light beer (more news: wheat, barley, rice, water, hops are all foods), sugar-free candies, fat-free this or that, meat-free burgers, etc. And then we go out and buy gallon jugs of 'protein supplement' powders, energy drinks, and so on.

Why does our personal budget contain money for foods that lack discernible nutrition? Because we enjoy putting stuff into our mouths. Why are there fat people? You know, those who have 'glandular' or 'metabolic' problems. Another news flash: everything in that spare tire around our flabby waists first passed through our mouths. So is the answer buying nutrition-free foods? No. The answer is to save the money we'd spend on those foods, and instead eat good food, but only as much as our bodies actually need.

How do we know how much we need, you ask? It's simple thermodynamics. Running a body's machinery for an average day requires a certain amount of fuel, measured in calories. Any good calorie calculator will tell us how much we need. Then all we'll need is some way to count calories as we eat, so we'll know when to stop eating every day. So now we have the tools and the knowledge. What else do we need?

Will power. There's no web page for that. We either have it and can exercise it, or we don't. Our friends, neighbors, families, and anyone who sees us knows whether we have it or not. And so do we.

Remember: we can't pack on what doesn't go into our mouths. Forget excuses like genetics, glands, metabolism, blah blah blah. If it doesn't go into our mouths, it won't show up on our thighs. Simple as that.

And that's your Ostrich Killer's public service blog for the day. Hope you found it boring and unneeded.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

Read it here first, folks. Since raising income taxes even to 100% on every dollar made by "those who can afford to pay a little more" (Obama's words) will not generate even a half trillion dollars - much less revenue than needed - it's clear what's been waiting on Obama's back burner for the right time to serve it up.

Ready?

Asset taxes.

Sounds harmless, doesn't it? We already pay income taxes, why not 'Asset' Taxes?

Many of you know of states that already do that. They tax every sofa, every refrigerator, every this or that you own. Every year. It goes by a variety of names, sometimes called 'property taxes,' with property being defined as anything you have. In those states, you don't own anything. You have something, you have to pay what amounts to annual rent to the state in order to keep it.

Now try to imagine this on a federal basis. Taxes on everything you think you own. You'll pay sales taxes to the state to buy anything, in some states you'll continue to pay taxes every year on those things, and now - you'll pay a similar tax to the Federal government.

Imagine your 401K, your IRA, your Keogh plan, your corporate-funded vested retirement plan all being taxed over and above the income tax you'll pay as you start having to rely on them for your retirement. And keep in mind that anything they can tax, they can confiscate. They can 'Federalize.'

How to counter this threat? - - buy now, with cash or trade (any check / credit / debit transaction can be traced), items that will always be of value in a barter society, because that's where this country is headed; the 'alternative' economy is about to become the 'mainstream' economy. Think essentials useful for barter, not baubles. What items are essentials?

I propose to get an idea what those essentials might be, your Ostrich Killer recommends reading a best-selling novel titled 'One Second After.' Here are some of those essentials: First, some sort of skill valuable to a small community's survival. Next, and I make no apologies for this - standard caliber guns and ammo. By 'standard caliber' your Ostrich Killer means .22, .30-06, .223 (5.56 mm), 7.62 Nato, and high-base 12-gauge shotgun ammo. This will be very sought-after barter material, especially because sales of ammo and guns will be encumbered with massive new 'limits' and Federal paperwork / approval required.

Non-perishable food and health items will be valuable. Tools, especially garden implements. Power generation equipment. Let your imagination run, and read 'One Second After.'

Your Ostrich Killer hopes even more than you do that this prediction is wrong. But your Ostrich Killer has a very unfortunate record of making accurate predictions. Read this that I put together more than 10 years ago, and see for yourself.

POLITICS? or PERSONAL ATTACKS?

I have a friend who runs a personal blog much like this one, but which deals with different subject matter. However, there is a Politics subsection. In the latest posting there, this friend commented on how nothing defines the GOP better than Trump and Palin getting together for pizza at what some natives to that area have described as the worst pizza parlor - and opened by some Polish immigrant, can you imagine?

Like most of you, I find this sort of thinking repulsive. First, where's the political connection? Surely a choice of restaurants can't rate up there with, say, their views on the American economy. Secondly, aren't we a melting pot? Don't we applaud any immigrant successes? Such as a Pole founding a successful pizza restaurant?

Yet all we hear, day in and day out, is how the left is tolerant and inclusive and reeking of the stench of diversity. So what could be more diverse than a female governor, a male entrepreneur, and a Polish immigrant's family getting together over pizza? But no. The left is inclusive, I guess, but even they have limits. Poles? Beyond the pale, it would appear, especially if they are purveyors of pizza. That sort of cross-cultural assimilation simply can't be tolerated.

In thinking further, and reflecting upon the rhetoric from the left about potential GOP candidates for office, or GOP ideas, we hear that these candidates and ideas are an uninspiring lot, and lack charm, or in other ways are not appealing. But politics is about none of those. Politics is about the value of ideas, and the election of people who will help carry out the ideas and agendae that the electorate most support. Charm and inspiration aren't there. Neither of those built this country, with the possible exception of the inspiration of the freedoms that the phrase "with liberty and justice for all" brought with it.

So expect the election to be mostly personal attacks from the left, and policy attacks from the right. As usual.

BORN THIS WAY

Yes, tonight your intrepid Ostrich Killer will take on Lady GAGA, whose hit song with the above title would lead the airheads that will (shudder) become our next generation of leaders to think that homosexual behavior is an inevitable result of genetics.

But first, a 'Hats Off' to Tom, who surprised your Ostrich Killer one day recently by addressing me as "Hello, Ostrich Killer." Living proof that your Ostrich Killer now has at least two readers who recognize me on sight. I'd better see about enlarging my server space to accommodate all the readers.

But back to Lady GAGA. First off, I'm not sure the title 'Lady' is appropriate. She seems more like a campy sleaze in expensive make-up. The lady, as the saying goes, is no lady. But hey. That's just my take. Her message in the song is she's 'born this way' (homosexual) so she has no choice but to rejoice in behaving as a homosexual. I doubt that she actually does, but the lyrics would have us believe she does.

So let's examine the intellectual vacuum in which her assertion resides: that genetics dictates how we behave, and we're helpless to do anything about it. The fact that we have a brain matters not. The fact that we can reason things out matters not. The fact that we, as thinking and rational Humans (most of us), can CHOOSE how to behave matters not. No, she would have us believe, we're slaves to those implacable task-masters, our genes.

What utter crap. All behavior is a choice. Assuming mental acuity (let's not get into a discussion over whether homosexual behavior is a manifestation of some sort of mental disorder. I already get enough hate mail.), one chooses how to behave.

Sometimes we hear something like "I'm homosexual, but I know that to live a normal life I have to pretend to be straight, so I got married and have kids." News flash: we are how we behave. That's the ONLY criteria anyone has to determine what sort of person anyone is. Words mean nothing, what goes on between our ears is invisible to everyone, so only behavior matters. So to those out there who think they're really homosexual, good news: you're not, if you're not behaving like one.

Look at it from the other perspective: can you imagine a straight pretending to be homosexual, up to and including behavior? Most of us, if we could even get it up, would puke at the idea. So too, one might think, would a homosexual when trying to pretend to be straight. How would a guy even get it up for a woman, if he didn't feel desire? But most (about 85%, according to a recent survey) so-called homosexuals have had both straight and homosexual experiences. Complete without puking.

Hmmmm . . . .

So what's operating?

Behavioral choices. Not genetics.

Maybe Lady GAGA can record another hit single, "I Behave This Way."

OPEN LETTER TO MITT ROMNEY

You aspire to be President, sir, but you are evasive on your own record. As one who measures a man by his actions rather than his words, I have not seen you demonstrate any disappointment, remorse, or other evidence of second thoughts about Romney Care.

The state of which you were governor, and which implemented your health care plan (Romney Care, it's commonly called), is now in a financial shambles because of that care. Medical professionals are fleeing your state by the trainload. Every measurable patient satisfaction index is down dramatically. Wait times have become a joke.

Yet you remain silent.

What's going through your mind about this? I read your plan for improving health care for the nation. I have yet to hear or read of you repudiating your own state's health care system. So I have to wonder if we're going to trade in Obama Care for Romney Care, on a national basis? I mean, it wouldn't appear that you are bothered by the impact your health care plan is having on your home state. Can we expect that you'll care on a national scale?

If it's you or Obama, I'll vote for you. But the Primaries are another matter altogether. There, we will have several conservative candidates to select from. If I don't hear from you one way or another on Romney Care, you probably won't get my support in the primaries.

One last thought: health care is not a right. Check your US Constitution.

OBAMA AND LIBYA - - POLICY? WHAT POLICY? (posted April 11)

Let's see . . . paraphrasing him, we have (in chronological order):

1. "We're going to fire a s--tpot full of cruise missiles, but we're not going to put troops on the ground. No sir, we're not going to put troops on the ground, and that's my final word on the matter. Our objective is to stop the slaughter of innocent rebels by slaughtering Kadhafi military forces."

2. "It's American policy that Kadhafi has to go."

3. "This very limited military action does not have the removal of Kadhafi from office as an objective. But it's our policy that he has to go."

4. "Yes, that was a U.S. Air Force F-15 that crashed in Libya. It had mechanical problems. Sorry I didn't mention we'd be using Air Force and Navy aircraft in this effort."

5. "We apologize for the strafing of friendly rebels by the door gunner on the rescue aircraft retrieving the U.S. Air Crew from the crashed F-15."

6. "We are not going to put American troops on the ground in Libya. Nor is it our objective to force Colonel Kadhafi out of office. That is my position, and I'm sticking to it."

7. "The use of Special Operation troops in Libya will be temporary."

8. "The U.S. has withdrawn all its aircraft from operations over Libya, as the NATO forces have assumed responsibility for all operations including the No Fly zone."

9. "U.S. Air Force fighters under NATO command are being used to help enforce the No Fly zone."

April 15: This just in:

10. "On second thought, we're going to keep bombing until Colonel Kadhafi leaves office. Oh, and those U.S. Air Force fighters helping enforce the No Fly zone in the air? They are also being used to enforce a No Tread zone on the ground, as well as a No Artillery or other Libyan Military Assets zone on the ground."

Does anyone know what American forces are supposed to accomplish in this 'effort?' Can anyone identify just why we're involved at all? Can anyone explain how anyone can believe anything that comes out of Obama's mouth?

Let your friendly Ostrich Killer know.

THE OSTRICH KILLER'S BUDGET SAVER

All of us have our favorite ideas on how to bring spending in line. Let's face it - in our personal budgets, we either have to cut spending to match our income, or increase our income to match our spending. At the federal level, that means either less spending, or more taxes.

We all love taxes, don't we? As long as it's the other guy who gets taxed, not me. I'm no different. But since we can't all go untaxed, maybe we should look at how to cut spending.

So here's my list:

1. Entitlement programs: First, any entitlement program not funded by its beneficiaries are scrapped. Gone. Done. Including all those federal employees who work on those programs. Close the offices, sell the buildings. You get the idea. Next, any entitlement program funded by its beneficiaries are kept apart from the general fund and may NOT be used as collateral or otherwise leveraged for any purpose other than paying its beneficiaries. Further, only those who pay into these sorts of programs - such as Social Security - may receive benefits from it, and then only in proportion to their participation in funding their personal accounts. Personal accounts may be willed to beneficiaries other than oneself in the same manner insurance policies can. This means NO DEADBEATS, ILLEGALS, OR NON-PARTICIPANTS WILL GET A DIME OF FEDERAL MONEY. Productive citizens will, non-productive won't. Yes, that's social Darwinism. This will save in excess of a trillion dollars a year, all by itself.

2. Welfare programs: Hey, didn't you read paragraph 1, above? No federal welfare. Of any nature. If the states want to provide any form of welfare, more power to them. But they can expect productive people to leave those states for states where there is no welfare.

3. Social Engineering Programs: We're talking things like Planned Parenthood, NEA (both types - National Endowment for the Arts and the National Education Association), PBS, "cultural awareness and appreciation" brainwashing in public schools, any affirmative action programs, etc. Elimination of these programs will save more billions.

4. Foreign Aid: You may be surprised to read this, but I'm not opposed to foreign aid. I'm just opposed to how it's done, although it doesn't amount to many billions. In the Ostrich Killer's budget, all foreign aid would be in the form of in-kind help, targeted to specific non-politically affiliated organizations in the various countries meant to receive such aid. For example, aid to Ethiopia would likely include drilling and irrigation equipment, farming equipment, seeds, etc. But no dollars. And any in-kind materials sent to these organizations would be built or grown in the US. Further, those countries who are not whole-heartedly pro-American would receive no foreign aid of any type. Nor would we allow imports from those countries.

5. The Space Program: They need a lot more money if they're going to reduce the chances of killing more astronauts and still do meaningful exploration. The Ostrich Killer is a big fan of space exploration. So I'd start by doubling their budget. That might almost bring their budget up to an amount roughly equal to the annual pizza expenditures by our citizens.

6. National Defense: This is an area where the question is not "how much can we afford?" but "how much is required?" Without a decisively dominant military, we don't continue to exist as a country. We hear that we have a 25-year technology lead on the rest of the world when it comes to defense items. Well, let's make that 50 years. Sitting on our collective asses and enjoying that technological lead won't keep us safe.

7. Other Programs, Agencies, etc: A deep review of every government agency - dept of agriculture, education, commerce, interior, etc - will be undertaken with the abiding question "does this agency or organization benefit the country more than it costs?" at the top of the list of questions. Any who are doubtful will be canned. Doors closed. People fired.

Do you like the above? Send a copy to Obama. Don't like it? Send a copy to Obama.

IPAD AND IPAD2 REVIEW

Yes, you're reading a first for the Ostrich Killer's blog. A techno-review of a popular product type. Why? Let me tell you a story.

My kids gave my wife and me an iPad for Christmas. Naturally, we were impressed and pleased. But once we got it home we discovered the truth about this gadget. Here's what we found:

1. No USB port into which to plug anything useful - unless you went to an Apple store and bought one of their items. The port is of a proprietary sort, and can only fit Apple things.

2. No additional memory card slot.

3. No productivity programs - not even if you could use the non-standard keyboard displayed on the screen.

4. Anything you wanted to load into the iPad had to come from or through iTunes. We would have to open an iTunes account.

5. There was nothing of any value in iTunes when I went looking for productivity software. There were simple, micro-versions of word processors and spreadsheets that required using the useless, klutzy non-standard keyboard on the screen, but that's it. There were hundreds of apps that were mostly novelties and games, and that wouldn't work in an environment where one was not connected to the internet.

6. To do anything - even games - one had to download - and usually pay for - them from iTunes. To send a file to yourself, you first had to send it from your laptop to your iTunes email, where you could then get it for the iPad.

7. There was plenty of memory for a full-fledged operating system, but instead they had a non-compatible, minuscule reduced instruction set type of OS. There was plenty of RAM for installing actual programs, but there was no provision for that.

I suppose that, in the interest of full disclosure, I should report that I have little respect for Apple zombies. You know what an Apple zombie is - the guy who stands in line overnight to be sure of getting a new Apple gadget on the first day it's released. They're living proof that P.T. Barnum, or whoever, was right about there being a sucker born every minute. So far only Panasonic (Toughbook) and Itronix have come close to creating a useful tablet-type PC.

An iPad and other current generation tablet devices, such as the Motorola Xoom, have a long way to go yet. They won't be there, from the Ostrich Killer's perspective, until they:

1. Allow for the plug and play connection of standard peripherals (keyboards, mice, speakers, ethernet, etc.) through standard ports;

2. Allow for loading actual programs, not just cute little apps (why not an Apps window, all by itself, available through an icon click on the desktop, while the rest of the desktop is used for 'traditional' computing stuff?)

3. Enough environment headroom to allow for running real programs and storing their resulting files;

4. Built-in G4 or better cell connectivity;

5. Built-in GPS;

6. Grey scale option switch in lieu of color to free up RAM and prolong battery life;

7. Ability to switch OFF wifi and cell connectivity and operate in true stand-alone mode;

8. Weatherproofing, or at least the option of buying a true weatherproof case that will still allow operating the device.

Your Ostrich Killer says that Apple could give the iPads away and make money on everything people have to pay for from iTunes in order to make the iPad do anything fun or even marginally useful. Realizing that, the logical definition of an iPad is: a hand-held portal to the iTunes store. That's all it really is.

Nope. Tablet devices aren't there yet. Who'll be first to make something useful? Apple? I truly doubt it. They're into toys. And so are their customer, who delude themselves that they're 'cutting edge' or some other euphemism meaning they're visionaries among the blind.

THE FRIEND OF MY FRIEND

My mother told me once: "People will judge you by the company you keep." She meant if I hang out with losers, people would consider me a loser. Or if I fly in clouds with the fast movers, I'd be considered a fast mover and shaker too.

The same goes for international alliances. Sometimes political alliances are made up of pretty stinky parties. Which brings us to the topic above.

Who is this muslim brotherhood that is neck-deep in all the uprisings in the middle east - Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Jordan, Libya? News flash - the Libyan rebel forces include Al Qaeda troops.

We blew up a couple hundred million dollars' worth of cruise missiles to help the Libyan rebel forces. Our men and women are at risk hourly in that conflict. Fighting on the same side as the Al Qaeda troops.

What do we know of the fighters in Libya? We know that they are being helped by Al Qaeda. So I wonder: is it just true that the friend of my friend is my friend, which makes Al Qaeda our ally in this conflict, or is it also true that the friend of my enemy is my enemy - which means we should switch sides and bomb the crap out of rebel forces, in hopes of killing a few Al Qaeda?

Your Ostrich Killer, who can never be accused of 20/20 hindsight, said from the very first day that our involvement was not based on adequate knowledge of just who we were helping. I guess the proof of that is becoming more obvious. We are fighting on the same side as Al Qaeda.

I understand that Wal Mart is now selling snowballs from hell. I saw a flock of pigs flying over the house yesterday. And I lived to see a President violate the Constitution by sending US forces to fight in a conflict that had no national security overtones, without first gaining the consent of Congress.

If Clinton can get impeached by lying about getting a BJ, what should happen to a President who knowingly and willfully sends American Forces into harm's way without Constitutionally required Congressional approval?

WHY DEVOUT MUSLIMS ARE SO GRUMPY

You've noticed it. They blow up airplanes. The kill thousands. They wage wars on themselves, and aspire to wage wars on the rest of us.

They are a truly grumpy group of people.

And now I know why. Yes, your Ostrich Killer will share that truth with you, my faithful readers, and the rest of the known universe.

First, a quote from none other than Benjamin Franklin: "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."

Knowing that, can you figure out the rest? Yes? Okay, but I have to explain for those others who aren't as bright as my average readers. So here goes:

The Koran forbids beer or any other alcohol. No exceptions. None.

Now, according to various authorities, there are 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, most of whom either cannot read or are allowed to read ONLY the Koran. Not all of them are devout (meaning not all of them deny themselves a beer now and then,) but many of them are. It is from this devout (non-beer drinking) group that we get the terrorists, the homicide bombers, the ranting lunatics who are always looking for someone else to kill. Clearly, they are not happy people. They are downright grumpy. And what can usually cheer up even the most grumpy of grumps? A chilled liter of beer, or two. It works for me. It works for you. It works for everyone else I know. Why not the followers of Islam?

So your Ostrich Killer has a new recipe for peace in the middle east: millions and millions of cans of beer, dropped out of high-flying airplanes into major cities and other densely populated islamic areas throughout the world.

Yes, one could call this foreign policy the Buy Them a Beer initiative.

Some of you are thinking "This is stupid. It can't be that simple."

Wrong-O! Reflect a moment on history. What civilizations invented numbers? Massive architecture? Huge libraries of knowledge? Yes, that's right: Arabs, mostly Egyptians. Egyptologists tell us that the going rate for a lowly pyramid laborer, back in the days of the Pharaohs, was a gallon of beer a day. Hell, no wonder those pyramids got built! Makes one wonder whether these laborers were really slaves after all. Maybe they just liked beer and volunteered, having little else more interesting to do.

But then along came Mohammed, and the Koran, and the "No Beer and No Fun" rules.

And the world of Islam instantly stopped innovating and inventing, and became stuck in the Bronze age and grew ever more grumpy. And they've been that way ever since. Doubt this? Point to ONE innovation benefiting mankind from followers of Islam in the last 1500 years.

The Beer Initiative. Think it over, then write your congress people. Email the white house. Set up a beer stand outside your local mosque, if you can find one.

THE CUBANIZATION OF EGYPT

Sorry for the invention of that word above, o Faithful Readers. Let your friendly Ostrich Killer define it for you, especially if you're less than, say, 65 years of age: 'Cubanization' refers to what happened in Pre-Castro Cuba, during the time Castro was staging a revolt. In the US during that time, we didn't know what to do: Castro seemed to be a popular revolutionary who offered some promise of a freer Cuba, although we also knew he had 'leftist' leanings. So as a country, our leaders elected the Ostrich approach to dealing with him: we stuck our collective heads in the sand and pretended all was well.

Of course history shows us that it wasn't.

History also shows us that we knew it wouldn't be.

But doing something would have been difficult, so we put our most optimistic faces on and applauded.

Just like we're doing in Egypt.

The outcome is very likely to be an Iran-like Islamic state that hates Western culture and thinks of us as enemies. That may very well spell the end of Israel's peaceful co-existence with Egypt, and will almost surely result in Egypt openly running arms and other supplies into Gaza so that the idiots living there can resume rocketing and otherwise provoking Israel.

So now you know what recent history hints may be the outcome.

Do you think that Barack Hussein Obama knows this? Two possible answers: Yes, he knows, in which case he is on the wrong side. Or No, he is unaware, which makes him ignorant and / or stupid.

You choose.