Archive for the ‘hot chicks’ Category

The Girls on FOX News

Posted: March 3, 2013 by ShortTimer in hot chicks, Humor, Media, Music

H/T Jawa Report:

AMERICA.  FUCK YEAH.

cute girl huge eagle

HotAir has a piece today on how support for maniac cop/cop-killer & murderer Chris Dorner has gone mainstream.  But the highlight is Katie Pavlich going after some leftist crapweasel who supports Dorner.  A quick cut to those highlights:

pavlich lamont dorner 130214

pavlich dorner 130214

In a totally unrelated coincidence that has absolutely nothing at all to do with why I posted this and had no impact whatsoever on why I would make a decision to post this, it’s Valentine’s Day.

So Happy Valentine’s Day.

From SOFREP:

The following letter was disseminated and signed by over 1,000 current and former Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets) in support of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, specifically as a defensive measure against tyranny. The letter was compiled through the joint efforts of current and former Special Forces personnel over at www.ProfessionalSoldiers.com, and quietly disseminated for signatures among secure, vetted circles.

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

We are current or former Army Reserve, National Guard, and active duty US Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets). We have all taken an oath to “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.…” The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt the single greatest document in the history of mankind, codifying the fundamental principle of governmental power and authority being derived from and granted through the consent of the governed. Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression. We have witnessed the insidious and iniquitous effects of tyranny and oppression on people all over the world. We and our forebears have embodied and personified our organizational motto, De Oppresso Liber [To Free the Oppressed], for more than a half century as we have fought, shed blood, and died in the pursuit of freedom for the oppressed.

They note the Battle of Athens partway through.

So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind? The answer is “The Battle of Athens, TN”.

They finish with this:

This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set.

The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.

This is a sharp contrast to the kind of things said by retired generals.

I recommend reading the whole thing at SOFREP.

bawidamann green beret girl

Motivational Green Beret Girl by Andrew Bawidamann

Defense Secretary Leon “I Will Get Your Daughter Killed Gloriously” Panetta just opened direct front line combat MOSes to women.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has lifted the military’s ban on women serving in combat, a move that will allow women into hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando units, a senior Pentagon official said Wednesday.

I’ve already done most of this in Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4.

Over at HotAir, they have a writer, Sentry, who echoes all of my criticisms of this stupid move by Panetta and the PC idiots in the Pentagon.   And the writer is a PT stud female Marine.

I’m a female veteran. I deployed to Anbar Province, Iraq. When I was active duty, I was 5’6, 130 pounds, and scored nearly perfect on my PFTs. I naturally have a lot more upper body strength than the average woman: not only can I do pull-ups, I can meet the male standard. I would love to have been in the infantry. And I still think it will be an unmitigated disaster to incorporate women into combat roles. I am not interested in risking men’s lives so I can live my selfish dream.

We’re not just talking about watering down the standards to include the politically correct number of women into the unit. This isn’t an issue of “if a woman can meet the male standard, she should be able to go into combat.” The number of women that can meet the male standard will be miniscule–I’d have a decent shot according to my PFTs, but dragging a 190-pound man in full gear for 100 yards would DESTROY me–and that miniscule number that can physically make the grade AND has the desire to go into combat will be facing an impossible situation that will ruin the combat effectiveness of the unit. First, the close quarters of combat units make for a complete lack of privacy and EVERYTHING is exposed, to include intimate details of bodily functions. Second, until we succeed in completely reprogramming every man in the military to treat women just like men, those men are going to protect a woman at the expense of the mission. Third, women have physical limitations that no amount of training or conditioning can overcome. Fourth, until the media in this country is ready to treat a captured/raped/tortured/mutilated female soldier just like a man, women will be targeted by the enemy without fail and without mercy.

Sound familiar – like anything in Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4?

Everyone wants to point to the IDF as a model for gender integration in the military. No, the IDF does not put women on the front lines. They ran into the same wall the US is about to smack into: very few women can meet the standards required to serve there. The few integrated units in the IDF suffered three times the casualties of the all-male units because the Israeli men, just like almost every other group of men on the planet, try to protect the women even at the expense of the mission. Political correctness doesn’t trump thousands of years of evolution and societal norms. Do we really WANT to deprogram that instinct from men?

The answer, Sentry, is yes.  They want to deprogram that instinct, because to a stupid, petty, foolish human with female attributes who lives in political worlds of cocktail parties and in the ivory towers and ivy halls of academia, chivalry and chauvanism are the same.  Any acknowledgement that women and men are different not just biologically but physiologically and simply by nature; would mean that such things can be judged.

Remember “How Modern Liberals Think”?

The leftist philosophy opposes the objective judgement that women simply are inferior to men in their capacity for war.

Though I’ve said it before, it bears repeating that doesn’t mean there’s any judgement of a woman’s character or civic virtue due to physical, physiological, or other limitations.

wish i were a man us navy

Doesn’t mean you don’t have the character or virtue to stand up for your nation.  Does mean you’re going to be a liability if you want to go to BUDS.

The leftist philosophy has an ulterior motive, though.  It also supports the idea that an “empowered” woman will, to be very blunt here, put out to an inferior man.  A sniveling, cowardly toad academic, or a womanizing rapist politician who has his state police procure conquests for him – these are the kind of “men” whose actual character is no longer called into question when their behavior is viewed as normal, and when men and women are to be treated as “equals”.  They subjugate women by destroying the privilege that women used to enjoy as part of their nature; all while decrying it as “chauvanism”, “antiquated”, “anti-feminist”, or other such nonsense, and claiming that those who would put women on a pedestal are in fact engaging in a “war on women”.  (Contrast GirlWritesWhat’s comments about bonobos.)

A woman may well find that society (depending on region) has stigmatized her virtues as a provider and protector of life, traditions and values that she sticks to in order to give better chances for success at providing and protecting life.  Why is “women’s rights” synonymous with destruction of infants today, rather than protection of infants, children, and all life?  Why is “women’s rights” about a woman being denigrated to the point that she is just a few “parts”?  Is she a mother or a “breeder”?  What is really being supported with these ideas?

One could dissect the destructive nature of leftist philosophy that denigrates women – and also denigrates men’s roles – but that’s a broader (no pun intended) topic than could be looked at in any single blog post.

If you want a very intelligent analysis of modern feminism and the leftist philosophy that denigrates both women and men, consider Girl Writes What (you could start with this most recent video and go from there if you’re not familiar with her very intelligent critique of the modern feminist movement).  You’ll note her own analysis has changed as she went on, but it’s all a series of very fascinating opinions and reasoning.  Her look at it is from a fairly utilitarianist point of view (at least as it seems to me).

I’ll finish this section with this quote from Thomas Sowell:

For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before.

Many things are done for a reason, and throwing women into combat because it feels good to some limousine liberals who will never see the two-way range is a violent idiocy, stupidly rejecting billions of years worth of human lives that said no.

On the radio today, I heard this line of weapons-grade stupid trumpeted by some dumb plane driver:

WASHINGTON — The nation’s first female combat pilot yesterday defended the Pentagon’s decision to allow women on the front lines of war, dismissing an argument that the genders shouldn’t be blended into the same battle environment.

“So that’s like saying Pee Wee Herman is OK to be in combat but Serena and Venus Williams are not going to meet the standard,” Air Force Col. Martha McSally said on “Fox News Sunday.”

I know not all Air Force pilots are imbeciles, but this one is.  If they were all three to try out, Paul Reubens has to meet the same standard as all of the current men.  If standards at boot camp are held, he doesn’t go.  If he fails an indoc for a unit, he doesn’t go.  Serena and Venus maybe could meet one physical standard, but they’re exceptions that prove the rule.  Also, tennis is not combat.  Tennis does not last for 10 months in cramped, nasty conditions with poor sanitary facilities and if you lose at tennis, you don’t end up in the hands of jihadis who will behead you after mutilating your body.\

But there’s another dimension to this – how simply out-of-touch the comparison is.

Guess what, Colonel?  Paul Reubens is 5’10”.  He ain’t exactly a small guy.  He’s also 60, and more an example of how she confused Reubens’ character name with him actually being small, as well as naming someone who was popular decades ago.  Why not compare Billy Barty to Allison Hayes?

allison hayes billy barty

Or someone more modern like Verne Troyer and Carmen Electra?

M. Caulfield

Or how about a more apt comparison of wannabe badass couch-jumper Tom Cruise to the much more badass Claudia Black?

Claudia Black

Tom Cruise wasn’t tall enough to get into the picture even when he wore elevator shoes, so you’ll just have to pretend you can see him.

The Air Force Colonel doesn’t know what she’s talking about.  She is not a subject matter expert on groundpounders any more than a “leg” is going to know about Immelmans or the Thach Weave.  Air Force pilots do not endure the same conditions that infantry or any other land or sea combat unit does.

military sucks comparison

Note that SERE, arguably some of the most difficult training for pilots, already had the standard lowered.

As a last note, for some unfathomable reason, unplanned pregnancies are very high in the military.  What’s usually ignored (outside of those who deal with women in the military) is that it’s a free pass out of a deployment.  A young woman who’s already given special treatment in the military environment (anyone who says they aren’t doesn’t have a clue) has an easy out.  On top of this, there are financial incentives as well as personal incentives.  The military, in effect, has enabled the use of the female agency against it.  A female servicemember can’t be hit with malingering because they created a medical condition that prevents deployment.

Shakira & Danzig

Posted: January 4, 2013 by ShortTimer in hot chicks, Humor, Music

Just for fun.

It’s my Friday.

Congress and the $1 Bill

Posted: November 30, 2012 by ShortTimer in Democrats, Economics, Government, hot chicks, Music, Republican
Tags:

From the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) — American consumers have shown about as much appetite for the $1 coin as kids do their spinach. They may not know what’s best for them either. Congressional auditors say doing away with dollar bills entirely and replacing them with dollar coins could save taxpayers some $4.4 billion over the next 30 years.

Vending machine operators have long championed the use of $1 coins because they don’t jam the machines, cutting down on repair costs and lost sales. But most people don’t seem to like carrying them. In the past five years, the U.S. Mint has produced 2.4 billion Presidential $1 coins. Most are stored by the Federal Reserve, and production was suspended about a year ago.

The latest projection from the Government Accountability Office on the potential savings from switching to dollar coins entirely comes as lawmakers begin exploring new ways for the government to save money by changing the money itself.

How about telling the Federal Reserve to stop printing it, geniuses?  Or how about you stop spending it on everything, inflating the currency, and devaluing that dollar bill to begin with?

$4.4 billion over 30 years is meaningless for several reasons.  First, it’s projected savings that’s contingent on other economic policies staying the same.  With inflation, that $4.4 billion could be higher or lower.  Second, that’s $146 million per year, which won’t amount to a drop in the bucket, but will have extensive costs for consumers to adjust; as well as setting us up for greater inflation where $1 is a coin and not a bill.  There’s a tangible feeling in how going from coins, which are fractions of the dollar, to a dollar being a coin is showing that the money is devalued.  Third, that’s projected savings… that Congress is just going to spend elsewhere.

It’s like a fat guy saying “well, I’m going to cut out Twinkies since Hostess is gone, so now I’ve got an extra 500 calories a day”.  Y’know what the fat guy is going to do?  He’s going to eat 500 calories worth of something else.  Congress is going to change something for the sake of changing it, subtly contribute to inflation of goods and services (think pumping meaningless $1 coins into a vending machine for an $8 soda like in The Running Man).  Coins are fractional accouting of bills.

Also, it’s not rocket science why vending machine operators want to change over to coins.  It’s their pet industry.  It means they can charge more and it’s more convenient for customers to use the new coins to pay higher prices.  A 20 oz soda for $1.25 is 5 quarters… that is, 5 small fractions of a real unit of currency (the dollar) in the form of 5 physical coins.  A 20 oz soda at $3 is 3 dollar coins, that is, 3 real pieces of a real unit of currency in the form of 3 physical coins, but perceived as 3 meaningless fractions of real currency.

Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., affirmed that Canadians have embraced their dollar coins. “I don’t know anyone who would go back to the $1 and $2 bills,” he said.

While I’m not averse to pointing out good things Canada has done, Canada has also done some stupid things, and what works for Canada doesn’t necessarily work for the US.  The reason dollar coins fail in the US is because folks in the US view the split between dollar bills and coins as something that is substantive.  Paper money carries value – it’s a note indicating its value (no matter how devalued it may be now).  Coins are for fractional accounting.

Rep. Lacy Clay, D-Mo., said men don’t like carrying a bunch of coins around in their pocket or in their suits.

This will be one instance in the future where I’ll have to go back and cite myself as agreeing with a Democrat.  I don’t know Clay’s other policies – they may well be abhorrent, but I’ll agree with the representative here.  No one likes carrying coins.  And no one wants to get change at McDonalds for a $5 bill in the form of a bigger pile of change.  Coins are often inconvenient and obnoxious, and they don’t fit in wallets, and even folks who carry a change purse or pouch will get very sick of carrying around a pocketful of $1 coins.

Even bored D&D players who really liked to pay for things in gold coins when the Sacajawea dollar coins came out found the novelty wore off rather quickly.  Not that I’m speaking from direct, personal experience.

And Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., said the $1 coins have proved too hard to distinguish from quarters.

And we’re back to Democrats being idiots.  No, they aren’t hard to distinguish, unless you’re senile, handicapped, or a Democrat congresswoman.   But they are obnoxious.  Maloney goes on:

“If the people don’t want it and they don’t want to use it,” she said, “why in the world are we even talking about changing it?”

Hey, we said the same thing about Obamacare, the bailouts and Stimulus, and a dozen other issues and you didn’t listen!  Can you figure this out, Maloney?  NO MEANS NO!

“It’s really a matter of just getting used to it,” said Diehl, the former Mint director.

No, it’s not.  We don’t want it, we don’t want to get used to it, we don’t like it, we don’t want or like your changes, leave us alone!

Rep. Steve Stivers, R-Ohio, said a penny costs more than 2 cents to make and a nickel costs more than 11 cents to make. Moving to multiplated steel for coins would save the government nearly $200 million a year, he said.

$200 million which out of a $1.6 trillion dollar deficit and a multi-trillion dollar budget will mean almost nothing, but will make things more difficult for the public, will give a physical indicator of the devaluation of the dollar, will piss off the public, and is only embraced by people who want to be more like the basketcase of Europe.  Historically devaluation of currency was also done by mixing cheaper metals with issued coins.  Maybe it’s more important to figure out why the coins are devalued first.  Though if he’s just talking penny, nickel, dime, and quarters, and not talking about changing the $1 bill over to a $1 worthless obnoxious coin, I could see Stivers’ point.

A working man’s dollar cannot be changed into a coin.

And coins and strippers don’t mix.

Nursing school?

Update: Looks like HotAir just got wind of this story.  They point out there’s one company that gets all the bill paper contracts.  Doesn’t change any of the practicality arguments against it, or the way it psychologically devalues currency by turning a full unit (the dollar) into a denomination that acts like a fractional unit (the coin); and how it enables higher prices for vending machine operators – who of course favor it.