PAC Man or: Should we put the flibbertigibbets in charge?

While listening to WILK this past week, I was treated to the stories of how Nancy Kman's and Joe Snedeker's kids reacted to their very first day of school ever. It got me to reminiscing about the first day of school for my three kids, but there isn't much to pass along. My approach to parenting small children was similar to the approach of a drill sargeant on Paris Island circa 1970. I told them what to do, or else, and they did it. There was no crying at the bus stop for my kids.

What I do find so completely horrifying about the first day of school is how it played out for some innocent Russian kids, their parents, friends and neighbors.

The latest numbers:

340 people killed

156 children killed

542 people hospitlized

336 children hospitalized

There's really no need for me to demean Islam here today. I think the 26 murderous Muslims who gleefully caused each of those casualties have already demeaned their "peaceful" religion and their demented cause enough. What a sad and needless turn of events.

So much for John Kerry's ridiculous claim that Bush was exaggerating the threat that terror poses for political gain. I have a feeling we will be reminded of that claim somewhere along the campaign trail. Once again, Kerry was wrong on the most important issue of this campaign. Dead wrong.

And in case you didn't consider it, the terrorists have crossed a rather frightening threshold with this latest atrocity. In their continuing quest to identify and later attack soft targets, it now appears that nothing is safe. They'll even blow up our schools with our children in them. And still, the Dems openly chuckle when Bush calls this a battle between good and evil. What else should we call a movement that would kill innocent children in the name of their religion, or to gain the political upperhand, other than pure evil?

What transpired in that Russian school is worst than I could have imagined one group doing to another, but it's just another day at the terror mill for the sadistic Jihadists. It's unfortunate to know that after their miserable life forces finally ebbed from their scrambled bodies that they never even had a chance to realize that the 77 virgins spiel was a lie. In effect, these are some of the very biggest chumps in recorded history. And they'll never even know it. Darn!

If Vladimir Putin sends the obviously overdue order for the Russian military to go overly berserk on some Chechyns and their willing Arab partners in crime, this will be the very first time during my life that I will be cheering those Rooskies on. Gooooooooooo Spetsnaz!!!

I don't know about the rest of ya, but I'm really pissed over this attack on a grade school, no matter where it happened to occur. I think Americans can tolerate terrorism so long as it happens somewhere else. Kind of like when you hear that a crowded 747 crashed and burned. You listen to the breaking reports and then a sigh a sense of relief when the talking head reports that no Americans were on board. Whew! Thank God. No Americans were on board...only Angolans, French and a few Dutch tourists. Thank God.

But no one should take any solace in the fact that no Americans were killed in that school. We've got our own schools scattered all over our fruited plains and our schools are every bit the soft target that the schools are anywhere else in the world. They are extremely vulnerable to this type of attack. And being that these terrorists seem to do their homework very patiently, I doubt they'd be surprised by, or subdued by a single School Resource Officer.

Maybe you're stuck in the "It-can't-happen-here" mindset as so many seem to be these days and this latest atrocity does not concern you in the least. But if it does concern you, what the hell do we do about it? Station National Guardsmen in our schools? If so, how many? Should they stow their weapons with so many children afoot, or should they carry them loaded at all times?

I still think we need to clamp down on immigration for the forseeable future, but our politicians seem totally disinterested in even securing our long borders. And if that's not annoying enough, they debate the best ways to provide for the growing numbers of illegal aliens already among us. And if they won't secure our borders and are clueless as to who exactly is crossing them; then how can they guarantee that what happened in that Russian school won't happen in Boise? Or Harlem. Or Kingston. The way I see it, they can't. Or won't. I'm not sure why they're playing loosey-goosey with our borders, but it's not very comforting, is it?

And we can't single out a politician or a political party for blame or targeting at the polls. This open borders debate has been raging for a dozen years or so. Average bloaks such as us beg our politicos to halt the flow of illegals into our country and they, as a group, simply ignore our pleas. We're told that we need the Mexicans to do our landscaping (or some other mundane and mindless work) and the Mexicans need to gain instant access to our lengthy laundry list of entitlements that we mistakenly assumed only legal Americans were entitled to.(?) As if that's not completely infuriating to the max.

So if we're going to allow border jumping to be our fastest growing full-contact sport (ask the border patrol agents about that) in this country, can any politician convince me that Yemenese, Pakistani, or Sudanese extremists did not already make their way into this country and currently have designs on blowing up a busy little school near you? I'd like to hear one of 'em try to make a case against it. That's a politician I'd go on a man crusade to unseat. (See Nimrod)

Whatever, man. Something to think about, I guess. At the very least, make sure you give little Jakey a kiss before he hops on the school bus. Ya never know if you'll get another chance while the "peaceful" religion has it's many deluded and mentally denuded followers spinning completely out of control.

Sorry. It's just that there's a whole bunch of Russian kids, living and otherwise, on my mind at this time and I am not a happy camper.

From the forum:

Bush -- Oz, 21:18:12 09/03/04 Fri [1]

Remember one thing. Not long after Bush took office we had 9-11. The stock market was falling apart 6 months before Clinton left office! The economic boom was declining. Is that Bush's fault? HOw come when somebody loses a job around here its Bush's fault? What about when leslie fay closed was that Clinton's fault? Nooooo, Not Slick WIlly!!! Give me a break!!!

Question: When did the stock market which was so robust during the nineties begin to correct itself? And when did the dot coms begin to implode causing the Nasdaq to melt down?

When Bill Clinton's justice department decided to sue Microsoft for monopolistic practices. And why did he order the witchhunt against Microsoft?

Because practically all of Microsofts jealous direct competitors met with Al Gore in Silicon Valley asking for intervention in the free markets and promising hefty donations to both Gore and Clinton. Hence, Microsoft was instantly added to the growing "BIG" list of companies to be shaken down by Clinton's gaggle of cash hungry lawyers. Big oil is evil personified in the eyes of much of the general public to this day. Big pharmaceuticals. Big tobacco. Doctors. McDonalds. Clinton, the lawyer, thought nothing of turning his counterparts loose on our economy. Now, we, the taxpaying public, and you, the goofs who reelected him, are desperately trying to figure out how and why everything got so damned expensive. Thank Clinton. The shifty lawyer.

Then, he had the bright idea to shake down the general public by introducing sin taxes. Taxes on cigarettes? Who cares, other than those freakin' smokers. Taxes on alcohol? See cigarettes. What the dipwad failed to realize was he was taxing one segment of the population and asking the other to cheer him on for having done so. Where does that end? If I don't chew tobacco, should I license the feds to go after the wallets of the people who do? Clinton even added a sin tax to the boating industry. The rationale was that if you can afford some giant of a pleasure craft, you can also afford to pay higher taxes. Straight out of Communism 101. And some of us that can't afford a yacht even cheered the stupid f**ker on. The result? A steep decline in yacht sales and lay-offs in that industry until the prohibitive sin taxes were removed a year later. Apparently, yachts are not nearly as addictive as cigarettes or alcohol.

And yet, some people still mistakenly believe that Democrats are somehow better at managing the economy. That is a highly dubious belief. Speaking from a strictly economic standpoint, Clinton was the luckiest president ever. The internet and personal computers drove the economy into overdrive for a decade and he sucked up the credit for it. That's fine. Every president gets praise they don't deserve and conversely, blame they don't deserve.

But isn't it interesting that right before he left office, Clinton managed to destroy the economic bubble that he had nothing whatsoever to do with creating. I've always wondered whether the decision to muck with the free market and the resulting disaster brought on by that decision was a product of his and his advisors abject stupidity, or a deliberate act to sabotage the high-tech stocks and help to cement his legacy.

Anywho, now we've got John Edwards, ambulance chaser extraordinaire, seeking the second highest office in the land. His claim to fame? He used some junk science to singlehandedly drive the cost of health insurance through the maternity ward roof. Does he deserve our votes? Or how about a good, swift collective kick in the ass. He preyed on our country's economic health to better himself, and now he up and promises us a better economy??? And he comes to us with a straight face no less. Whatever. He's right where he belongs. In the democratic party.

And now we've got John Kerry huddling with Clinton's former assorted and sundry advisors and promising pie-in-the-sky results if elected. Based on what transpired during Clinton's term, what the hell do his past advisors know about anything other than shooting, or burning innocent Americans to death (Reno)? We need safer guns and safer bullets? We need to teach masterbation in our schools (Elders)? Our varied governmental entities should sue the biggest and most profitable of our corporations to augment their general funds (Reich)? This is a motley and scary team here.

Maybe tomorrow we should recap the complete disaster that was the Carter economy. Or what was left of it. We already alluded to LBJ's having personally invented the phrase "national debt." Were there any democrats in our lifetimes that knew anything about how to drive our economy anywhere but into the ground? It doesn't appear so.

I'm not quite sure what it was in the first place that got me going off on this tangent, but you can all blame Oz for it. I'm finished.

Gage Andrew and I...

...racked up 30 miles on the Stomper over the weekend. All of them within the city's limits. I know it doesn't count for too much amongst the populace these days, but it's nice to wander through our streets and not have to contend with months upon months worth of muck built up along our curbs. And no trees or weeds growing out of the collected silt either. Whatever.

Some fellow from the Voice approached us on Public Square and took a few glossies of Gage for a story he was doing on the Labor Day weekend. At first, I assumed that the photog/writer approached us because Gage is such a cutie. But after he sauntered away and I panned my head a bit; I realized that Gage and I were the only people in the Square's center that didn't look as if we had escaped from Belleview. Anyway, Gage, and maybe even myself will be staring at ya from the paper tomorrow. Put that on your freakin' dartboard, why dontcha. That's assuming you have a dartboard. If not, you can blame that on Bush.

I saw the front page...

...of the Voice this morning and was quicky dismayed by what I saw. I knew it. I freakin' knew it. The Griffith PAC is targeting our next election cycle for some more of their sinistrous claptrap presented to the voters as democracy in action. I wouldn't know from personal experience, but they tell me hemorrhoids are really, really difficult to gain relief from. How in the heck do you go about convincing a not so well-intentioned hemorrhoid to give it up already?

Just when we're poised to make the big comeback here in Wilkes-Barre, the sad sack of Wilkes-Barre politics will not relent from his retaliative and vociferous quest to further discombobulate his less than well-read fellow residents. Candidate/Activist Flibbertigibbet: Leader of the insolubrious and downtrodden schnooks. Just what we don't need as prepare to turn the corner.

At this very moment, we're not 100% sure how many council folks we'll have a scant few months from now. And we're not sure if the gerrymandered striped districts are coming to town. Will I vote in the same district as the folks on Willow Street? I sure hope not. Do we need more referendum hanky-panky coming from folks that can't connect a few voter services dots while they preach to the rest of us about how local government should work? We've got the dingleberry wagging the dog here folks.

Wait. That'll never work. Try this:

dingleberry-(noun)-a piece of dried fecal matter clinging to the hair around the anus.

How's that? Got it?

Anywho, there are some among us who pay attention to detail and think that delivering a bit of payback to our elected officials is much needed at this time. I wholeheartedly disagree and yes, I live here too. My oxe is being gored to some degree. But can't you see this referendum for what it really is? This is a class envy contagion that will serve no practical purpose other than to further distance the misinformed, and less than informed hoi polloi from their elected officials and further cement the plentiful seeds of discontent in their minds.

The average yobbo knows about as much as Gage does whereas the operation of our city government is concerned. And they know not of what longterm effects slashing the salaries of our elected folks will have. Neither do you. And neither do I. But I don't see it as a productive move as it pertains to our immediate and long range future. We've got no shortage of willing flibbertigibbets hoping to bring their particular brand of helter-skelter to City Hall, but will $50,000 attract nothing but professional people to the mayor's office for the foreseeable future and beyond? I wonder.

The actual ins-and-outs of our city government are as mysterious to your average resident as why they were born minus an exoskeleton. Ask your garden variety voter what they think about the mayor's latest TAN and they're likely to say that he's still too pale. Ask them if we should use some liquid fuel funding to fix our streetlights and they'll probably come away thinking that those lights are powered by lamp oil. Inquire as to whether we should use OCD funds to guarantee a bond and they'll probably be fine with that so long as they are assured that their school taxes won't go up. They don't know. Neither do they care in most instances. So should we have these people voting on an endless stream of referendums every time some weisenheimer or some publicity whore schizoid gets a vindictive bug up their ass?

I'm tellin' ya. I am funkin' tellin' ya. At this particular and increasingly exciting juncture, this referendum craze is neither healthy, nor is it productive. If some of us need to rule, then they should run for elected office. And if the rest of us don't shower those folks with votes, then they need to get over it, return to obscurity and go right back to bitching about their sciatica, or whatever else may be ailing their lower regions. Or...they could retool and run for elected office at a later date like most adults would do.

If you honestly think that by allowing every Walt, Dick and Christine that comes along to tamper with our city charter willy nilly nothing but positive results will be achieved, by all means, have at it. But please, please, first consider both their motivations and their qualifications before you allow them to set about converting by referendum the Gomorrah they always see into the Xanadu they always promise.

If the usual unrelenting activist suspects were such toothsome candidates when they ran for elected office, why is it that not one of them have garnered any?

You know why. Because they're flibbertigibbets. That's why.

And consider this. PAC Man's original utopian plan was to have our elected folk's raises determined by the federal cost of living index. The PAC Man with the ultimate plan he was.

But me and the boys shot that plan to sh*t.

So now PAC Man is accepting checks and he's back with a new plan. New and improved, if you will. Now...the new plan is that every time council feels they deserve a raise, we'll need another referendum question to be voted upon. In the space of three short weeks he has managed to scuttle his original utopian plan and replace it with an even better utopian plan. Yes, sir! And the new plan? Believe it or not, more freaking referendums. Franky, I don't see a plan at all. I see near chaos amid a total lack of continuity so long as we continue to encourage the yet to be elected to lead us into further uncertainty. I see only more vexatious flibbertigibbets preaching to the less than informed, but easily volatilized choir.

PAC Man and the rest of the activist Genies need to be put back in their bottles before they do us great harm.

Bill Clinton is facing heart surgery? I certainly don't wish the guy ill now that he's out of office, but there has got to be a way to blame this on Bush and those dastardly neocons. Whatever.

Wifey went to bed. I got a hot date with a Strat.