Monday, September 3, 2012


It’s the STENCH, Stupid!

PHEW!!!



An old sea story tells of a ship's captain who inspected his sailors, and afterward told the first mate that his men smelled bad.


The Captain suggested perhaps it would help if the sailors would change underwear occasionally.


The first mate responded, "Aye, aye sir, I'll see to it immediately!"


The first mate went straight to the sailors berth deck and announced, "The Captain thinks you guys smell bad and wants you to change your underwear."


He continued, "Pittman, you change with Jones, McCarthy, you change with Kowalski, and Brown, you change with Schultz."


THE MORAL OF THE STORY:

Someone may come along and promise "change," but don’t expect that things are necessarily going to smell any better.


PHEW!!!


28 comments:

  1. This knife cuts two ways, FT. That's my objection to Mittens.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Did the joke make a specific reference to any particular party or candidate?

    Methinks not. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Awful Aura of the D'Rat Party:


    Mendacity
    Idolatry
    Acidity
    Speciousness
    Malignancy
    Asininity

    ~ FT

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thersites,
    Actually, my first thought was that the post DID refer to Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not trying to say that there won't be a "temporary" economic boost from a Romney presidency. I'm only saying that it will exacerbate our economic and liberty problems for the future.

    We need to get away from LARGE corporate conglomerates and too big to fail banks. We need to establish some "limits" for them that will benefit the "small" and "entrepreneurial" business classes with more "owners" and fewer "major stockholders". Corporations should not be allowed to hoard money to buy each other out and grow ever larger. They should pay dividends to stockholders instead. And their charters should be limited so that they CANNOT compete with small businesses and dominate local markets.

    THAT is what I'm onto about the problem with Romney... that the "changes" won't be in the "right" direction.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FJ,
    I'm not thrilled with Romney. Not by a long shot.

    BUT if I can catch a temporary economic boost and sell this old house, I'll take that advantage. "Take the money and run."

    Furthermore, if Obama gets another 4 years, the economy will be permanently damaged to the point of not even a temporary boost, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The problem with that approach, AoW, is that all it does is postpone the inevitable collapse. And I'd rather deal with it now than die, destitute.

    ReplyDelete
  8. And if four more years of Obama speeds the process, I can live with it.

    The RNC is not even remotely concerned about the problem. The DNC is aware, but offers the wrong remedies.

    And ne'r the two shall meet UNTIL it all collapses.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thersites,
    Postponement might not be a bad thing. Frankly, with the situation in this household and my age, I don't see how we're going to deal with it at all. So, later is better, IMO.

    This, from a person who always prepares in advance and has never gone in for postponement.

    I don't particularly love life anymore, anyway. I'm just stepping in place. Sorry to be so personally negative.

    Anyway in my view, the entire world is in uncharted economic territory. I see no way out of this that will not leave many of us destitute.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As I have opined many times, nobody in a leadership position or a potential leadership position has any real plan for dealing with the coming tsunami of aging and ailing Boomers.

    Of course, part of what I said above is typed in precisely because Mr. AOW and I have no children. In that sense, he and I have no future. Hence, we aren't particularly worried about later generations -- generations who are going to have it incredibly difficult no matter what.

    The bubble has not only burst. Even its very fragments have been obliterated!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Postponement is not a bad thing. Where there is life there is hope.

    If we did crash, the same bastards who crashed it would scare the American people into following their lead to put it all back together, their way.

    I do agree with FJ, but we may differ on implementation.

    Ending special political favors would go a long way towards leveling the playing field. And making the top 200 people in a corporation financially liable would be a fairly strong brake on malfeasance.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did you see the Daily Caller article on Obamas involvement in helping cause the mortgage bubble?

    We could avoid a collapse if either party had a clue... but they're too vested in the current business model... an industrial vertical integration model.

    Tofflers Third Wave is the direction we need to move...and the longer we delay, the deeper the hole we'll fall into.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I tend to agree with Therites, waiting until later will only make the collapse much worse. UNLESS, real major change happens very soon. I guess that's the point.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If everything truly collapses as it did in '29, I will have no choice bit to slit my throat.

    At 72 with serious visual impairment, and arthritis it's a little late to try to get back into the work force.

    I did my best, but the dirty bastards are stronger than I by far.

    I am SO glad I never had children!

    It would be MORGAL SIN to allow new life to enter THIS world as it has been ever since The Bomb blew up Hiroshima.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well, I understand why you all want to delay. but I have no idea how much longer things can continue... we can't can't go on borrowing 40% of annual expenditures indefinitely. At some point, all economic credibility disappears, and the nakedness of the emperor becomes apparent to everyone. And the day that happens, it will likely be '29 again, if not worse.

    Thing is, it's no one-party's problem OR fault... and the "correctives" are unlikely to be applied until AFTER events expose the weaknesses to all (this is a democracy, after all). In fact, we're much more likely to continue to "double down" on failed government directed "centralized" economic models (ala Obamacare to single payer), which will completely destroy what remains of the current "bundled" and "risk pooled" but yet still "free market based" economic infrastructure...

    ReplyDelete
  16. Think of the collapse of the USSR in '89 for historic parallels.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If anybody thinks 4 more years of Obama won't smell THAT BAD, think SUPREME COURT..Eric HOlder, lifetime position.
    That ought to do it, huh?
    I'd have thought so..........

    ReplyDelete
  18. How many Republican Appointed SCOTUS. nominess went rogue... and how many Senate Judiciary Committee members?

    nuff said.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thersites, very few. And did ONE Republican go so "rogue" as HOlder would? :-)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hard to say... will Romney be appointing her?

    ReplyDelete
  21. And if four more years of Obama speeds the process, I can live with it.

    -------
    If you want the coup de grace as soon as possible, Mittens is your man.
    He is going to do you raw, pilgrims.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ducky "do us raw"? you warning us?
    Obama's done so much damage that nobody could do anybody RAWER. 16 TRILLION on Tuesday. GOOD FOR THE LEFTWINGERS! Keep borrowing, keep spending........go for it. (what are you thinking?)

    Thersites..if you are addressing me re Holder, it's a HIM and do you think Romney'd pick a leftwinger for the SCOTUS? REALLY?

    ReplyDelete
  23. What am I thinking?

    The income discrepancy will continue to widen. it will widen more quickly under Romney.
    Take a look at the income discrepancy. That's what is going to tear s apart.

    Deficit? HE'S BORROWING AT A LOWER INTEREST RATE THAN THE INFLATION RATE, BEAVIS. Damn you people are slow.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thersites,
    Did you see the Daily Caller article on Obamas involvement in helping cause the mortgage bubble?

    Yes, I saw that.

    What a set up, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Duck,
    The income discrepancy is a matter of concern, and I say that as a conservative.

    Mobility upward has become a significant problem here in America.

    But there's more to it than that.

    In my own family, I have tried to give a few a leg up. And what did these relatives of mine do? Squander the chance and contract more debt! Debt that didn't return anything to them.

    My family isn't unique in that regard. Many, many Americans has, for decades, lived beyond their means.

    The credit card may be the most vile invention on the planet. And our nation has been running on a credit card for a long time now. Those bills come due. Then, what?

    ReplyDelete
  26. FT,
    If everything truly collapses as it did in '29, I will have no choice bit to slit my throat.

    At 72 with serious visual impairment, and arthritis it's a little late to try to get back into the work force.


    I understand exactly what you are saying! Just a decade ago, I wouldn't have understood why you have taken that stance. I do now!

    Back in the 1970s, when there was a serious downturn, Mr. AOW and I coped by working harder. Well, we can't physically do that now. We'd end up on the dole of friends and family -- if they survived, that is.

    Frankly, I'm not sure that people really understand what an economic crash would do to them on a personal level. Cash, stocks, and bonds become as worthless as that of the Confederacy of the 19th century, and home values plummet, too. What stays stable? Precious metals, of course. But it would have to be the physical gold, etc. And you have to get to someone who will buy that gold (Would they even have anything to buy the gold with? So many in gold exchanges have all transactions only on paper) or someone who is willing to barter.

    I repeat:

    WE ARE IN UNCHARTED ECONOMIC WATERS WORLDWIDE!

    For one thing, we are not an agricultural society. All "recoveries" since the domination of the Industrial Age have been paper tigers. Most people who are not Third Worlders don't have the skills or the knowledge or the physical ability to be self-sufficient.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Z,
    Here's something crazy that I read....If Obama loses in November, one of his like-minded Supreme Court justices will step down, and he'll appoint himself to the SCOTUS,.

    Now, I don't think that will happen.

    But if he gets a second term, he WILL be appointing at least one justice to the SCOTUS. Maybe more than one justice. Likely, in fact. Then, it's "Goodbye, America, and welcome to the gulag!"

    ReplyDelete

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.

We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.


IN ADDITION

Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.