Perfect It Aint

As the title indicates, perfect it aint. I'll rant and rave, maybe even curse once in a while. You are welcome to join me with your comments. At worst I'll just tear out the rest of my hair. At best, I may agree with you. Or maybe I'll just ignore it, because you know, perfect it aint!

Location: Barboursville, Appalachia, United States

Retired, Financial and Management specialist, lived all over country, but for some reason, decided to retire to West Virginia (that's the new one, not the Richmond one). Please note that all material appearing on this blog is covered under my own personal copyright as creator, except those items appearing in the Comments that do not appear under the screen name of Tanstaafl or are attributed to others by citation. No license is intended or given to copy or redistribute anything appearing in this blog unless written permission is first obtained from the author.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Vice President 'they gonna put you back in chains'


I voted five times for Opus and he didn't get snot!

I mean, after all, he was the executive assistant to Steve Dallas for a long time.  Anybody holding that job could certainly be the vice president to the pile of dogstuff that is in the white house now.

I knew that Bil the Cat was a lost cause, especially after he followed Jackson in that skin lightening bit, but I thought surely the electorate would see the necessity of dropping ol' 'they gonna put you back in chains' Biden.

And then I found out that if someone voted for dogstuff, they were voting for 'they gonna put you back in chains' too. Damn, what a letdown.

Oh, well, only 1,496 days until we are delivered from old dogstuff.

Unless the Mayans were on to something.  Then only five days!

Tanstaafl Non Grata

The following was in my Draft File.  I thought I had deleted it long ago.

It's original date was 16 Sep 2011.

I'm publishing under today's date, just to let those who never knew just what happened that I wasn't posting to the HD anymore.

Over the course of the past several months, I have had a dialog with an editor at the Herald-Dispatch concerning the deletion of large numbers of my posts on their now defunct Forums, and their current Article Comments area. These have not been pleasant items of correspondence, nor have they been elucidative of usable information.

I was accused of using a racial slur concerning the President of the US (I used the name Mutt for him - as he did himself in well-documented videos and print reports - actually published in the H-D as a matter of fact.) I was told that my post was too long (but those of another with whom I was having the discussion was some eight hundred words longer than mine and his was not deleted.)
And when I questioned that particular explanation, I was told that the editors did not know what the problem was and offered to republish my post IF I would retype it into the system.


So, the days creep slowly by.  The acrimony became more and more intense.  And I finally said to myself, "Let's get it over with."

There came a day when about six different comments were sent and all were removed by the editors, except one ,  which did not meet their "rules".  I sent an e-mail congratulating them for removing all but the one which plainly did NOT meet their rules.

I received a nasty e-mail back, and the war was on.  I knew I would lose access, but I didn't give a damn.

So I checked the paper the next day, and there was a comment on a letter which took the paper to task for boosting Tomblin as Governor and Kessler for Senate President. I sent in a comment that "One damned Democrat was as bad  as another."  Of course, it was removed, but not until it had been there for a day and a half.

I hee-hawed to myself and re-posted it verbatim.  Removed.  Re-posted.  Removed.

By this time I was tired of them not doing anything and sent a post - cannot quote exactly but gist was- "go ahead and remove it again, get it over with, ban me from posting.  Come on, do it, that is what you DUMBOCRATS want anyway."

I got my requested action.

But then I began sending in letters to the editor - and every one that I sent was published.  But I got tired of that pretty quick, and the election blarney was beginning to heat up so I just stopped.

Holy Jumpin' JHC Amighty

Just back on line, trying to get back to this blog--took about four tries, three e-mails and one broken pencil (I got a leetle teed-off!!).

I fail to understand why these geeko's think that changing everything around is an improvement.

I went through their switching to gmail, their changes related to first one thing and then the next, but I cannot say that any of those changes made anything any faster (indeed, it slowed everything up) or easier to use (contrariwise, everything is now on a hunt for a button system that only geekers are familiar with.

I don't use Undo or redo - Hell, I type it the way I want it to begin with!

I don't give a rat's red  ruby rear end what font it is I am using - just plain old typing is fine with me.  If someone wants to juggle with it, let them be the one who needs to know how!

Now, bold, italic and underline are usable, for most author's.  I don't use them however, but they don't get a diss from me.  Not yet, anyway.

But, strikethrough?  What in the name of good billy Hell is that for?  If I need to strike through something, I'll just edit it out completely.

Color or background color?  Useless as teats on a boar hog.

Images?  Videos?  Never use'em.  Never have, never will. 

Jump break?  Useless to me!   Alignment?  I do it myself, I'm a middlin' good typist. 

Numbered list - bullet list?  What in Hell for?  Are people REALLY that damned lazy?

Quote?  Hey, it is right there beside the internal ENTER key.

And, remove formatting?  You know, tabs, space bars, etc. have a purpose.

And even worse, CHECK SPELLING!  Jesus, if you cannot spell, your writing is not good enough to read anyway.

But the very worst was, that the system did NOT remember my correct log-in or password.  I had to remind it.

Please, if you geekies are gonna make more changes to BLOGGER, let us have a vote first.

Wednesday, May 09, 2012

Just a Word of Warning

This is an election year.

I am a deep, dyed-in-the-wool conservative when it comes to finances and political leanings, but a relative conservative when it comes to social programs.

Sometimes almost a liberal on some social programs, even.

I know. 

It is difficult to reconcile these views.

But I don't try to reconcile them.

I am not ever to be found guilty of political correctness.

I intentionally harm noone.

But the fallout can sting.

Be warned.

This is not an easy blog to swallow if you have leftist leanings.

If you are an 'occupier' by nature, you are gonna get pissed off.

I do not restrict any replies to this blog.  Say what you will.  It will be published   ---   unless I think it may harm some innocent persons.

And I am the boss on this blog.  

And there will be no religious activity here, unless it is me who leads the discussion.

And my current best candidate for president is Bill the Cat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Monday, May 07, 2012

Squt II

Now I realize just why I seldom if ever post anymore - I am getting to be an old man and do not really have the spare time to wait fifteen minutes for this  to load every time I feel like posting.  It is a heckuva lot easier to just grin and bear it.  Like all those servicemen who were asked to shoulder their own insurance costs for service -related ailments a while back.  What do you mean, you don't remember all that hoopla?  Jeez, you musta just crawled out from under a rock.

Well, anyway, to refresh your memory, our revered leader (pardon me while I puke!!), was called to task because he felt, justifiably so to himself I guess, that if you volunteered, you volunteered all the way.  When chastised for his outrageous view, here is his defense - as NBC is wont to say, "In his own words..."

"Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained.  "Nobody made these guys go to war.  They had to have known and accepted the risks.  Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice?  It doesn't compute..."  "I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their country, " Obama continued.  I wasn't asking for blood, just money.  With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history I'd have thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help  reduce the nation's deficit...I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."

You know, if every American would keep nothing in mind except the above when they step into that polling booth in November, America would have such a rejuvenation of patriotism and right thinking that the Democrat Party would be a thing of the far distant past forever.  Even hard-core liberals would shrink away from such utter idiocy as the man shouts.

But, unfortunately, only about five, maybe ten percent of the American people have even heard this diatribe, as the lame-stream media sure as heck did not publicize it.  I saw and heard it on Fox, but was unable to get it down in writing at the time.  I am indebted to another source which is unaffiliated with any media for the actual verbiage.

 Nobody made these guys volunteer for the armed services, but the line and staff of the military services DID make them go to war.  Sure, they knew and accepted the risks, because they were patriots and because they recruiting staff did such a great sales job on them, why they actually promised them that the Veterans Administration and the Federal Government WOULD take care of any medical and rehabilitation bills they might encounter as a result of their sacrifices.

NOW THEY WHINE, etc.    False
That is not a whine, you silly goose, that is the growing anger of a group of patriots and their compadres in civvies who have just about had enough of you and your idiocy.  Good God, Obama, even a kid knows how wrong you are to try to stick the very patriots who went to war for this country with the total costs of their own medical and rehabilitation expenses, especially after being promised that the national government would do so.

Yes, you were.  For money is the very lifeblood that keeps this country, and by extension, all its citizens healthy.  When you ask for money. you are asking for the butter on the jam on the jelly on the peanut butter on the toast that sustains the American economy.  You know, for a street organizer, you just aint got too many smarts, here, Obama.

You did.  But the selfishness is not with your fellow Americans, it is with you.  I know, Jeremiah Wright told you different.  But he was wrong.  Just as you are wrong on so many things.  Indeed, I haven't forund one single thing that you have been right about since you first popped on the scene.

Look, Obama may be a great Dad, a good husband, an all-round good fellow, BUT, he is also the worst walking disaster that the USA has ever known, at least among all those that I have had any current knowledge of (read that as while I have been alive.)  Great God Almighty, FDR was bad, Carter was worse, and Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton were no great shakes, but this, this, this, poseur of as President is going to take the whole darned country to Hell with him, unless the American people do wake up and carry such diatribes as that posted above with them, discuss such idiotic ravings, understand what it means to the American public as a whole. 

Remember that the president represents you in all foreign countries as well as here at home.  Are you proud of America as it is today?  Can you project four more years of this dedication to American destruction?  Could you actually go into the voting booth and vote for him?

I am only one who is pissed off.  Wonder how many more agree?

Monday, December 05, 2011


Interesting e-mail I received this past Sunday from my brother.

It is a forward and has been making the rounds for a few months. I was beginning to wonder if I was going to get an unexpurgated copy, after receiving expurgated ones.

So I pass it on via this blog, giving full credit to the original editorial author, Matt Patterson.

Quoth the e-mail>>>>>

Amazing that the Wash Post would actually print this re Obama.

The Washington Post

August 18, 2011


by Matt Patterson (columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact, nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present") ; and finally, an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations; the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: How on earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protestors against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard -- because of the color of his skin.

Podheretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself has said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podheretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon -- affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.

Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; He was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that's when he has his TelePrompter in front of him; when the Prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever been issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short; our president is a small, and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.

When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.


Monday, November 07, 2011

What an Obummer

I note with some alarm that most of the e-mails I have been receiving lately have concerned themselves with our current president. Further alarm is triggered by the fact that none have placed him in a favorable light. This, of course, is probably due to the fact that all my previous liberal contacts have faded away into the night as it has become more and more apparent that he is so far in over his depth that it would be laughable if it were not so disruptive to our joint common sense.

The latest e-mail is a forward from the former mother-in-law of my daughter. A few samples---

If any of our former presidents had doubled the national debt in one year, would you have approved?

If any of our former presidents had criticized a state law that he admitted he had never even read, would you have approved?

If any of our former presidents had reduced your retirement plan holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

I don't know about you, but these are very serious charges to me, and, yet, each is very provable. There are about three dozen of these charges levied in the e-mail, and I cannot find a single one that does not have an actual basis in fact. Yet our liberal friends seem totally unconcerned about them, and in point of actual fact, seem to approve.

I recognize that our country is in serious, serious trouble, and yet this president seems, like his supporters, to be totally unconcerned with the mockery he has made of the presidency. It would seem a small thing that he bows to the king of Saudi Arabia, that he presents a set of videos of himself to the queen of England, that he has consistently downplayed the role of the US in the governance and well being of the entire planet - if it were not for the fact that he really honestly believes that he is performing his duties in a wise manner.

His buffoonery is intolerable to any thinking American. He is what he is, a street organizer; and that is all he ever will be, whether he holds higher office or not. He is simply incapable of understanding that his actions are deleterious not only to himself, but to all persons upon this earth. He is, after all, the leader of the free world - or his position commands that he be. At present, he is the leader of only the Democrat Party and its coterie of far left ultra liberal loonies.

He has been unable to form any kind of coalition between the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and in the country at large. Indeed, he has been disruptive to that entire process. He has failed utterly to lead, but has relied upon his gang of 32 czars to formulate policy and given them their head to place such policies into effect by regulation, thereby bypassing any Congressional review. He has forced legislation to be passed without any review by the 600 plus members of Congress. The leadership of the Senate cannot get anything passed unless the matter is decided by a 51-49 vote. The House does pass numberless bills but the Senate will not even bring them to the floor.


That is what the current president has provided to the US populace. Gridlock.

I thought the country under Carter was a travesty. Under Obama, it isn't even that good. Under Carter we were dealing with a man who could not make up his mind what it was he thought would move the country forward. Under Obama, we have a man that doesn't know and apparently doesn't care what he does to the 330 million, only what is best (in his eyes) for him. And that surely is not what is best for this country.

This country WILL survive his ineptness. I have no doubt of that. He WILL go down in history as the worst of all so far. But the travail that he leaves in his path will take decades to erase.

And in the meantime, we talk of entitlements (which aren't, by the way, as dedicated taxes have been and are being paid for Social Security and Medicare, for Unemployment and Workers Compensation, etc.) We talk of cutting federal expenditures, we talk of raising taxes on the rich, we talk of a 'super committee' which will do nothing, we battle over the debt ceiling, and we talk ad nauseam. The real description of gridlock. Talk. Talk. Talk.


The time has come to get off our collective asses and DO. The malaise that has overcome us has to be ended. And the only way to DO that is to vote for anyone other than this popinjay that is holding the office now. I don't see a lot of difference between the current crop of Republican hopefuls. But I'd vote for Bill the Cat if it would ensure that Obama is removed from the presidency.

Friday, November 04, 2011

Occupying My Mind

There is nothing new under the sun.

Recently, and now, and for the foreseeable future, the protestors that title themselves as Occupy anything will be with us. They are similar in many ways to others we have seen marching the streets of America, and yet there is a rather dramatic difference in them.

In the Thirties we had Cox's Army and their fringe in the streets of Washington. In the Sixties we had the Civil Rights marchers and their fringe all over the country. In the Seventies and Eighties we had the Vietnam War protestors and their fringe all over the country. Today we have the Occupiers all over the world, but centered primarily on Wall Street.

Similarities? Well, each of these movements were pretty well organized - except for the current Occupiers. And each of them were centered on a specific issue - except the Occupiers. They each prevailed in their goals -it remains to be seen what will happen with the Occupiers.

The Occupiers are not organized, they have no specific issue. And until they do they will remain disorganized and will not prevail.

My favorite songwriter, Tom T. Hall, seems to have had the right idea, long before the Occupiers arrived on the scene. In looking at the human condition in the United States, Hall wrote "We got too many do-goods and not enough hard working men, we have too many hands out and not enough lending a hand..."

A few weeks ago I read a blog that excoriated the Occupiers, and answered their demands point by point, a great entry, and it got me to thinking about this rag tag group. At the time I also wrote a dissertation about them that went much deeper into their demands and answered each one. I will not bore you with it, if you want a copy get in touch with me through this blog and I'll send you a copy - just give me your mail address (postal address please, I'll not place it on e-mail.)

The upshot of my response was as I have just indicated, they are too disorganized for anyone to take them seriously, have no set of specific demands but the ones they have put forward are simply impossible or too darned stupid to even be considered. I'll pick just one for discussion here (and a short discussion, too.)

According to the published demand, the Occupiers feel that it is a must that ALL debt be cancelled. Immediately. Personal debt, student loans, municipal debt, state debt, federal debt, interbank debt, IMF debt, country to country debt - the entire gamut of debt, as they say "planet wide" must be obviated NOW.

Well. That is a pretty big demand. And wouldn't it be wonderful - if it were possible!!

They assign no responsibility for who is to do this, only that it be done, with no regard to the obliteration of every economy in the world. It just won't play in Peoria or anywhere else in the world, and specifically within the US. Just think, if General Motors needs $3 billion to have steel on hand to produce the autos and trucks that the world needs, they would have to pony up that $3 billion upfront - and the question immediately arises, where are they going to get it since all personal and corporate debt has been eliminated and all those millions indebted for $25,000 for that car or truck and GM won't get it. They could not even say they would pay upon delivery, as that in and of itself creates debt. Taken as a demand that one falls so far short of any reality it is laughable.

As is the whole 'Occupier Movement."

Any person with a reasonable grasp of basic economics must understand that their whole movement is being prodded by those who do not have such a grasp. Indeed, I was unable to find a single one of their demands (these were just the ideas of one person, by the way, God knows what others may be thinking) that have any basis in reality.

As Hall said, "...we have too many hands out and not enough lending a hand." My basic instinct tells me these wild-eyed pie in the sky Occupiers would do better to go home and grow up - and go to school and learn some of the facts of life. No one has a debt to these people who refuse to better themselves. Personal responsibility has been the guiding quality of Americans for three centuries. I expect it will remain so for any successful people throughout the life of our republic.

I view the Occupier Movement as no more than a hair on a pimple on a wart on the otherwise fair face of this country. If they want all these things, then the answer is to go out , get a job, make the money required and then put their ideas into effect.

But - they won't. they are too much into gimme, gimme, gimme.

But Hall also wrote about that, too. In one song he relates the story of an old man who told him, "Folks will tell their kids, now I don't want you to have to work the way I did. They don't - and folks will tell you it's a shame. But you've got to think - before you place the blame."

Yeah. You've got to think before you place the blame.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Fortieth & Plum

Man, that's way out in the country.

Back in the Dark Ages when I was a kid of nine or ten, we lived out on Savage Branch (now called Merritts Creek, by virtue of a mistake by the State Road Commission.) Our house was a board and batten of four rooms sitting on the hillside above the sand and mud road that wound up the hollow for about a mile and a half or two miles. Heat was by two coal heating stoves and a small wood burning cookstove in the kitchen. There was no insulation, and the bathroom was a privy on the hillside out the back door.

We got electricity in about 1947 or 1948, telephone ( a twenty-five or so party line) in 1955, a drilled well that never provided much water in 1954 (prior to that and after that we used a dug well about eighty feet deep that was located out back on the path to the backhouse,) and a television in 1951 or 1952 (we were the first family up the hollow to get one.)

We did not have an automobile until my brother graduated from high school in 1956 and got a job in town. After he bought his car, our father decided to go ahead and get one too. He bought a six year old Ford sedan, eight cylinder, automatic--and learned again how to drive. He had driven when he was a young man, but had not done so for over twenty-five years.

Up until then, we rode shank's mare whenever we wanted to go somewhere. Or got a ride with a neighbor, or thumbed a ride down on the highway, or rode the Logan bus (Consolidated Bus Lines, or Trailways Bus Lines, or a Greyhound - for about a month.) The bus was really pretty cheap - for an adult, about forty cents one way to Huntington, for a kid up to twelve about a quarter. Fortunately, the busses ran about every hour and a half during the day and then there were three night runs - about 9 pm, midnight, and 3 am. But that was when it was Consolidated. When it moved to Trailways, it was about every two hours during the day and two runs at night - about 9 pm and midnight. At the end when it was a Greyhound route, we had two inbound daytime runs and two outbound daytime runs and no night service.

Yeah. We lived out in the country.

Now we live seven miles closer to town, and still consider ourselves to live in the country. But it aint like back then. We still live eight miles from town center (Courthouse), but the Interstate is only four miles one way and three miles the other way. There are four separate entrance ramps we can, and do, use when we are going on trips, or from one end of town to the other, or to Ohio or Kentucky.

But, when we go to see one of our kids, we say we are going out in the country, just as we did when we visited my inlaws before they died. They all live or lived out near Salt Rock, one about two miles from where I grew up and the other just up on Tyler Creek on the other side of Salt Rock.

And the really funny thing is that when we were young and living at Savage Branch, we thought trips to Hickory Ridge and Heath Creek were 'out in the country.' And if we were going up Madison Creek or over on Bowen Creek or up Raccoon Creek, that was really going out in the country.

It's all a matter of your current perspective, I reckon. I tell my friends that I live just south of Melissa, and no one knows where I live. I tell them that I live on Route 10 just south of the intersection of 10 and Alt 10, and they can pinpoint my home with real precision. I have even directed people in to my house from as far away as Princeton here in WV, and they never had a problem finding the place, and they had only been in Cabell County once before in their life.

So maybe being way out in the country isn't way out in the country anymore.

But I still like that old song about "...way out in the country, at Fortieth and Plum."

And for those of you who still don't understand, that is, forty miles from town and plum back in the sticks.