Comments Posted By 2 cents
Displaying 1 To 7 Of 7 Comments


With 6 full months before the general election, there is plenty of time for the bloom to come off the rose. Obama has no where to go but down. Every new "mass" rally/rock concert will bring the natural cynicism out of the average American voter (especially the middle or undecideds) who will cringe at the site of the chosen one.

Americans are many things, including fickle mush-heads who turn on thier own idols faster than a pitbull with mad cow. Give us hell Quimby!

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 22.05.2008 @ 08:39


What about a Nhilistic view? As the world mass media seems to be cheerleading an economic collapse (economic chickens coming home to roost), I for one welcome it. Proportionally, if China is the world's workshop then the US is the world's customer.

Let the US ecomony "collapse" such that consumers buckle down, start saving, refuse to buy a new car from Japan every 1.4 years, put off or avoid buying the tons of junk from China year after year after year. Christ, even the statisticaly "poor" American families have more living space, a vehicle (sometimes two), home PC, colour flat screen etc etc. This is the "poor" segment of socienty mind you! That is what keeps Chinese workers employed and by extension, German and Italian workers who supply them with industrial machine parts, etc etc.

I say let the world discover the reality of an evil, unilateral, imperialistic so-called hyperpower who no longer spends beyond it's means. I will glady accept 9% unemployment in the US if it exposes the leftist EU politicians to the wrath of thier coddled workers who no longer have "asshole" American customers.

In a worldwide economic meltdown, the first and fastest to recover will be the US, followed by similarly structured free-market ecomonies. Followed many many painfull years (yeepee!) later by Europe, China and then decades later by the entire Middle East.

Let's see how the worldviews of the French shift when there's no wine for thier children.

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 19.03.2008 @ 04:58


I wonder what would have happened if Paris had killed herself or attempted to kill herself? I don't wish that on any parent, and after all, she is someone's daughter. However, I suspect that in the event of a failed suicide attempt:

1. Media shocked into stunned silence for 0.000023 seconds

2. Media immediately goes back in time 0.000023 seconds to make up for lost coverage

3. Media increases coverage (it's actually possible, since research has shown that Mr. Enoch Salifu of Tamale, Ghana, West Africa has never heard of Paris Hilton)

4. Media fires microscopic cameras by high speed air gun directly into Paris' head, thereby allowing unrestricted 24-hour coverage (to be broadcast on the space channel...get it? The space channel! Cause her head is, you know, empty...and like, oh forget it).

If, and God forbid (I really mean that, this is only a stupid comment on a blog for Pete's sake) she does kill herself, the inevitable reaction would be:

1. Media devotes 100% of resources to the funeral. Seriously. Not a single image and/or sound recording device will be devoted to any other event on the planet (or the solar system).

2. 4 days after non-stop coverage, Media interest dissapears to absolute zero. Historians note that the word Paris and Hilton will not be found together in any record for 1,244 years, until the Governer of the state of New New Mexico, Paris Hilton, announces her candidacy for the 3252 US Presidential elections.

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 11.06.2007 @ 05:14


"Perhaps he’d rather see Iraq disintegrate than give up on his personal dream of promoting democracy in the Middle East."

Mr. Moran,

Up to know I've been a frequent reader, but now I am afraid you have fallen for the classic leftist/movon/democratic line that somehow this is all Bush's fault.

Promoting democracy anywhere, anytime is nothing to be ashamed of. Personal dream? My God, if that's the "failure" that Bush gets the noose for, then that is all the proof that I need that he will certainly be remembered, albiet in the distance future, as one of the most admirable presidents in history.

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 9.05.2007 @ 10:18


You imply your readership is dwindling as a result of your current viewpoint. Such is the pity if true. I consider myself on the right side of the debate, but I also cannot understand why the Whitehouse isn't being more public with direct and sustained pressure on Maliki? They may be doing so in private, but in the current climate, this needs to be made public. After all, I think that even Maliki would benefit from some of the wiggle room he needs by pointing out that the big bad US is "forcing me to do this and that".

Anyway, I for one appreciate this issue being discussed somewhere on the right side of the blogosphere, if only on your site, because it certainly isn't being honestly examined by the others that should know better. They (Powerline, Captains, etc) all claim they don't support Republicans as a default on every single issue, but only the WOT. However, the lack of support for a basic requirement of benchmarks is Bush's call, and to support something that doesn't make sense is the very definition of towing the party line (a la Democrats)

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 2.05.2007 @ 08:08


Let's see, another world crisis involving the forces of freedom and democracy versus the cadres of fanaticism, oppression and hypocrisy, and another French betrayal. Let's check my watch....yup right on schedule.

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 10.08.2006 @ 05:12


Nice essay.

I admit to not being any sort of expert on the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism, but what I've read tends to identify key personae and events going back only a few decades (for the most part) with fewer details of the figures of the "movement" going back to the late 19th century.

My question is: Given the longish history of Islam (actually, among the world's major religions, it's still got that new car smell), why now? Since the collapse of the Caliphate, and in general around the world, muslims can be said to be trailing behind western or oriental cultures in many aspects. Why does this movement appear to be gaining such support and sympathy now as opposed to the period 1745-76 or 1932-37 or whatever?

Discuss among yourselves....

Comment Posted By 2 cents On 10.08.2006 @ 05:25

Powered by WordPress



Pages (1) : [1]

«« Back To Stats Page