No, no anxiety here! Why do you ask?
* * *
Okay, a Harley in a storage shed or shipping container or something made it all the way to Canada after being washed out to sea by the tsunami.
Jalopnik post with pic of bike. A year's worth of salty sea air? Not good for aluminum and chrome. There's a reason sailors always have to polish, scrape, or paint everything on a ship, and it's not just because the captain thinks they need to stop playing so much Xbox and get some fresh air, sunshine, and exercise.
* * *
Test-firing of Falcon 9 spacecraft will be webcast this afternoon. Woohoo!
If everything goes well, they're launching the thing on Saturday. GO, SPACEX!!!!
* * *
Over at DPUD Veeshir talks about the "Jon Lovitz gets himself hated by his liberal buddies for telling the truth about Barack Hussein" story.
* * *
Moral of this story: don't burglarize a Marine's home. Especially active-duty Marines. Your dreadlocks won't be enough to save your ass.
* * *
Also from Boortz: Obama's main accomplishment in his first term was to yank off his shirt, tie a bandanna around his head, put on a couple bandoliers of .50 caliber rounds, grab his M60, and go shoot Osama Bin Laden dead.
Eh? Oh. I have just been informed that all Obama did was to give other people permission to go shoot bin Laden.
Well, that counts, right? He can say "I got bin Laden! What other President can say that?" And it's all he's got, other than:
Thus far his campaign has consisted of two elements. (1) The economy is “turning the corner,” (more on that in the next item), and (2) The Republicans want to end all education, shut all hospitals and end all medical care, fire all police officers and firemen, and barricade all federal highways.Which, as I'm sure you'll understand, is wearing a bit thin since it's been the primary Democrat platform in every election since 1860.
* * *
Can John Cleese sue these folks? C'mon; naming your hotel "Fawlty Towers" is a bit much, isn't it? And turning it into a "clothing-optional resort"...well, Basil Fawlty wouldn't like it.
Here's a hint: in Fawlty Towers it was supposed to be a clusterfuck of a hotel--sometimes due to the failings of Basil Fawlty, sometimes due to things beyond his control. (I prefer the episodes where it's not his fault, but they're all funny anyway.)
And at least one resident of Cocoa Beach experiences pants-shitting hysteria over this hotel turning "clothing-optional": "The motel is only three doors down from Shepard Park, which will be filled with children every day as soon as summer hits."
OH MY GOD THERE WILL BE NAKED PEOPLE JUST A FEW HUNDRED FEET AWAY FROM CHILDREN. The children won't be able to see the naked people or anything, but THEY'RE GOING TO BE SO CLOSE WHAT IF THEIR NAKED COOTIES SOMEHOW WAFT OVER THE CHILDREN ON A BREEZE OR SOMETHING??????//
* * *
I like how in these kinds of stories they take a government spending plan and say "everyone in [state] will have to pay $X."
No, we don't. In fact, if the Peoples' Idiokratik Republik of Illnoistan sends every man Jack in IL a bill for $3,400--over and above peoples' income taxes--they're going to be sorely disappointed at the outcome.
The IL government made that promise and they didn't ask me what I thought of the matter. Just because the politicians can't keep their spending within the state's income does not mean I am on the hook for making good on their pie-in-the-sky promises.
The idea is, of course, to demonstrate how serious the debt problem is--but I think stating the whole number (which is about $81 billion) is more impressive.
Illinois is an object lesson in why firms are starting to pay more attention to the long-term fiscal prospects of communities. Early last year, the state imposed $7 billion in new taxes on residents and business, pledging to use the money to eliminate its deficit and pay down a backlog of unpaid bills (to Medicaid providers, state vendors and delayed tax refunds to businesses). But more than a year later, the state is in worse fiscal shape, with its total deficit expected to increase to $5 billion from $4.6 billion, according to an estimate by the Civic Federation of Chicago.So here we go: first off, the huge tax increase we got thanks to Pat Quinn and the Democrats? It actually reduced tax revenue, because a bunch of employers threatened to leave IL and got corporate welfare to keep them here. (Motorola, for example, got a huge tax break. Just Motorola, though--not Motorola's employees, you know, or Bob's Bait and Gun Shop down by the Kankakee river.)
Rising pension costs will eat up much of the tax increase. Illinois borrowed money in the last two years to make contributions to its public pension funds. This year, under pressure to stop adding to its debt, the legislature must make its pension contributions out of tax money. That will cost $4.1 billion plus an additional $1.6 billion in interest payments on previous pension borrowings.
The "Civic Federation of Chicago" is underestimating the state deficit, too. It's over $6 billion already, and I've seen figures as high as $9 billion.
Property taxes are ridiculously high, too; as the article points out they're already reaching the point where they are cutting into the salability of real estate. When a machine Democrat is warning you of the dire consequences of raising a tax you know that motherfucker is already too goddamned high. Shit.
And this is particularly true when it comes to communities that border a state with sensible taxes. Okay, about six miles east of here is the Illinois/Indiana border. If you had a choice between about $5,000 in property taxes and $1,000--all else being equal--which house would you choose? Even if it meant another ten minutes of drive time to work?
* * *
This is what the Democrats want. Because I can guarantee that the welfare recipients in England don't vote for the conservative party over there (whatever it is these days). They vote for whoever promises not to reduce the dole, and elections become arguments over how much the benefits will increase in a particular time frame.
Time and again I read stories about perfectly able-bodied people over there who don't have to do a damn thing but breed and they live as well as someone who works his ass off. It's not at all surprising that people on the dole will prefer not to work if they don't have to.
I remember the story about the woman who wanted some ungodly number of kids, who kept squeezing out a kid every year or so, complaining because the welfare check wasn't enough to support all her sqwaling podlings in luxury. They wanted to take a vacation once in a while, you know, and move into a larger house, and maybe buy a new car! It's not fair that they couldn't have 15,000 children and live like kings, damn it!
But England's government has an answer to this! We'll deny them medical care if they smoke or weigh too much! Oh, they'll get emergency treatment, but that's it! No more visits to the doctor for anything other than emergencies!
Oh, yeah, that'll work wonders. So instead of ending smoking and obesity, you'll be setting up the exact conditions needed for an epidemic, because it's primarily low-income folks who smoke and are overweight, after all. They won't give up their fags or their bacon butties, after all, and if they can't go see a doctor about that cough, well, it's just a cough, innit?
How about drug-resistant tuberculosis? Let that get started in your "council housing" and you'll be burying more people than you'll be saving even if you do classify treating it as an "emergency procedure".
* * *
Or, hell, you know, maybe it's not so stupid. Policies like that worked well for Lenin, Stalin, et al. If you need to be rid of your welfare class, setting up the conditions for a rampant epidemic of an uncontrollable and fatal disease would be very clever, and unquestionably deniable: "Hey, it's just an unintended consequence! We didn't imagine anything like this could happen! We were just trying to get people to lose weight and stop smoking! Our intentions were good!"
* * *
And you may say that I'm wrong or exaggerating when I say that England's welfare state is what the Democrats want for us.
Denninger shows that I'm right. I didn't need Denninger to tell me this, though.
Some people do. Not me.
* * *
I'm still not at 100% but I feel a lot better than I did yesterday. So I'm going to clean the house a bit--vacuum, try to make some sense of the bathroom, and so on.
Then I need to hit K-mart for Pepsi--it's on sale there this week--after which I need to decide what to eat and when today; Bible study tonight and I don't want to miss it since I missed it last week.
I feel kind of worn-out, but at least I'm not sitting here with my heart trying to leap through my rib cage, and the "worn-out" feeling could probably be attributed to spending the entirety of last week on edge. And residual effects from the Xanax and sleeping so much.
But this is the first day in quite a while (a week or so) that I haven't gotten up, had some food, and subesquently felt like my chest was going to explode. That's part of what convinced me it was just anxiety; I'd be fine until I got out of bed. I am not straining myself any more sitting here than I am in bed, after all.
Having an anxiety disorder sucks and I'm starting to wonder just how disabling this damn thing actually is--or is going to be. It certainly does not seem to be very enabling when I can't even be in a kids' musical without freaking the fuck out.
But the last half-tab of Xanax was from an RX which was filled in October; using 30 tablets in 7 months is not exactly quick and that probably means I am not nearly as freaked out as I think I am.
On the plus side, April is over! This has been a perliously long April, for various reasons, and I'm not sad to see this one end.
* * *
Well--that cleaning ain't gonna do itself, and since I've got the gumption to do it I might as well move like I've got a purpose.