March 30, 2006

PFM

A while back I stole a term from Iron Bear over at Denita's. It was PFM. Well it's time to use it again. Yep! The Dimocrats have come out with what they are gonna run on and it's gonna take a lot of PFM.

The Dimocrat's National Security Plan

Please excuse me while I laugh about using Dimocrat in the same sentence as national security. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Rebuild a state of the art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower so that we can project power to protect America whereever and whenever necessary.

Poof! PFM! When you consider that Dimocrats consistently try to cut the defense budget dontcha wonder how they're gonna accomplish this? I do. When you consider it is the Dimocrats who want to keep military recruiters off college campuses and out of high schools dontcha wonder how they are gonna increase the size of our military? I do. When you consider that the Dimocrats still idolize Bill Clinton, who loathes the military dontcha wonder how they are gonna improve the military? I do.

Eliminate Osama bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaeda, finish the job in Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the Taliban.

Poof! PFM! That's it. Find and destroy Osama bin Laden. Why the fuck didn't we think of that? The GWOT would then be over and we could bring the troops home and get back to doing what Dimocrats do best: Cut defense spending and gut intelligence agencies. So how are they gonna find bin Laden?

Double the size of our Special Forces, increase our human intelligence capabilities, and insure our intelligence is free from political pressure.

Poof! PFM!. I wonder how many Dimocrats would vote to increase our Special Forces? And remember, it has been Dimocrats who have consistently gutted our intelligence organizations and it was during the Clinton administration that the wall was put up between the FBI and the CIA to prevent sharing of intelligence. Holy crap! Is this a going to Damascus moment for the Dimocrats?

Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive; yadda yadda yadda blah blah blah

Yeah the old "root cause" bullshit. The "root cause" is these savages hate us. The Dimocrats do not understand that we are fighting radical Islam. These assholes will only be satisfied when we are all good little Muslims or dead infidels. The bullshit is getting real deep!

Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons development in Iran and North Korea.

Poof! PFM! I got an idea. Let's let Jimmah Carter deal with North Korea. He did a bang up job last time. And with his successful track record with Iran, he would be a natural to negotiate with them.

The only thing that will stop North Korea is the Chinese or the collapse of their gummint. The only thing that will stop Iran is bombing by either us or Israel.

Howza 'bout energy? Yep! They got an answer for that.

Achieve energy independence for America by 2020 by eliminating reliance on oil from the Middle East and other unstable regions of the world.

Poof! PFM! I guess we could just conquer Venezuela. Here's a novel idea. Mexico has to give us a barrel of oil a week for every illegal Mexican in this country or we round 'em all up and ship 'em all back. That's 11 million barrels of oil a week. Who's gonna do the work of the Mexicans? Simple. Abolish welfare and we can let all of the poor people actually work for a living.

But wait! Here's the Dimocrat's magical solution:

Increase production of alternate fuels from America's heartland including biofuels, geothermal, clean coal, fuel cells, solar, and wind; (Just make sure the windfarms are nowhere near Nantucket. Don't want to block the Kennedy's views...GOC) promote hybrid and flex fuel technology and manufacturing; enhance energy efficiency and conservation incentives.

All of that in 14 years! Poof! PFM! We've pretty much wrung all we're gonna get out of energy efficiency. Solar? Still needs a lot of work to make it viable. Wind? The trouble with that, outside of the Kennedys, is all the birds it kills and you know how that pisses off PETA. Biofuels? Doesn't show much promise or bang for the buck.

Now what do we not see in these magical things? I don't see anything about nuclear power plants. I don't see anything about additional oil drilling. I don't see anything about building additional refineries. That's right. These are real world solutions and are not in the realm of PFM!

You can read the rest of their wonderful magical solutions and after you finish reading, click your heels together three times and keep repeating, "There's no place like home." You'll be back to reality in no time.

Poof! PFM!

Posted by denny at March 30, 2006 08:38 PM  
Comments

Geez, GOC, you are right. Dems do believe in the PMF! Pure fucking magic.

I don't.

Maybe I should add I live in St. Paul.

Look us up.

We are so fun.

Dave Thune. Easter Bunny.

Out of work people because of Dave Thune. Well, to be fair, not yet, give me a week.

Smoking ban.

Taxes will rise.

Yeah, we are a great town to move to.

Just ask me. I have stories to tell.

Yup yup.

Posted by: Gina on March 30, 2006 11:45 PM

As sad as it is, yes, that's the gist of it.

Now, political slogans are well, historically inane. "Tippacanoe And Tyler Too!" ring any bells? But this isn't a _slogan_ it's a _PLAN_.

And then... a miracle occurs

Now more recently recycled by South Park's Underpants Gnomes. Step 1: Collect underpants! Step 3: PROFIT!

"Achieve energy independence for America by 2020 by eliminating reliance on oil from the Middle East"

Except that's not even PFM. That's just Real Stupid. We're not _reliant_ on oil from the ME. We're just reliant on _oil_. Now, this glosses over the real science involved in refining, and the science and efficiency involved is _staggering_, but basically, oil is oil. Refineries make what you need out of what you get.

Oil from the Artic National Refuge ~= Saudi Light Crude. And if we don't buy from the ME... someone else does. But now's not the time to get into basic Econ 101 on elasticity or substitution.

"Solar? Still needs a lot of work to make it viable. Wind? The trouble with that, outside of the Kennedys, is all the birds it kills and you know how that pisses off PETA. Biofuels? Doesn't show much promise or bang for the buck."

Basically, none of these are worth the money. Oil's cheaper. Oil's DAMN CHEAP for what we get.

That's not to say that there aren't things we can do. Some people are too negative on the alternative fuels/ideas. The biggest problem is that oil works just too well. It's too cheap, too easy to transport, too stable.

But lest we forget, 100 years ago, a oil-based world was unimaginable.

I think that ethanol will be a big fuel in the future - just not made by the insane indirect solar method. (aka, growing corn, harvesting, fermenting, distilling). Hydrogen has a future, with some new tech. But those things will come *when they're more economical than oil*. Government mandating their use won't have the technological effect that competition will.

Now, I'd like to build a house that *could* live off-grid if necessary. And for instance, if many houses had solar and large batteries, and more effiecient appliances, there could be huge savings in energy production. (Remember, the big cost with energy is scaling for the peak times). Have basically, a big-ass UPS at each house, and evens out the peaks and valleys. *That* could be a huge advantange. *But*, the problem is the classic tragedy of the commons. It realistically requires goverment incentive to make that work.

But until the Republicans realistically make American Values part of their real platform, meaningless slogans will be useful. (A stronger America? Gimme a break).

Denny: to burn some of your bandwidth.... Everybody should read this by Peggy Noonan.

We used to do it. We loved our country with full-throated love, we had no ambivalence. We had pride and appreciation. We were a free country. We communicated our pride and delight in this in a million ways--in our schools, our movies, our popular songs, our newspapers. It was just there, in the air. Immigrants breathed it in. That's how the last great wave of immigrants, the European wave of 1880-1920, was turned into a great wave of Americans.

We fought a war to free slaves. [Addison - actuallly, no, but it's Conventional Wisdom now]
We sent millions of white men to battle and destroyed a portion of our nation to free millions of black men. What kind of nation does this? We went to Europe, fought, died and won, and then taxed ourselves to save our enemies with the Marshall Plan.

And now those people we saved, when we were at no risk, now feel free to berate and insult us. And to insist that we are childish, and immature. And what assholes we are, and where's my check, you childlike asshole?

And you know what? ( - Prosper), we shrug, and take it as just the American Burden. Noonan is onto something there.

I don't mind _immigrants_. Hell, if you want to work, if you want to invent, if you want to be free, and want me to be free, c'mon over. We'll braindrain the rest of the globe. But when you want to come to America, and refuse to become _American_... No. There's a problem.

Posted by: Addison (the other one) on March 30, 2006 11:50 PM

... Whoops.

Continuing.... :)

If you want to live in a quasi-fascist country, you can move to Paris. Well, you can try, it's damn hard, since there are so many people not working. But there are many places you can go that have all the things that people claim to want.

But if you want freedom, if you want belief in the people... there's nowhere else to go. We're *it*.
We're the one that laid out, for the first time, the belief that given power, government would misuse it, and so defined a government restricted more than enabled.... Who specifically mandated that men be armed to protect against enemies foreign and domestic.

Now the EU (for the latest example) tries to better our 11 page Constitution with a 250 (depending on language) translation. With "rights" such as the "right to a job". (No. A right implies no obligation on anyone else). And it's doomed to failure, because it's given in to human nature. It doesn't understand what is so brilliant about the US Constitution. The people who wrote it never will, I'm afraid. The US Constitution is written to ensure freedom. It's written with human nature in mind. It's written to make sure that government is the servant, not the master.

Sure, it's sometimes out of whack. But that's the goal, the intent. And you can't show me anyplace where it's better. There are some places, outside the reach of other, poorer governments. Where money buys you freedom. But those, as all others, will fall in a short time.

And that's what the Democrats will either continue to fail at the ballot box, or will win when the Republicans lose sight of it. That's what the US is. That's what it stands for. Want "Free" health care? Go to your airport, take your passport, plenty of countries to pick from. Of course, you're leaving the one with the most fair, the most accessable, the overall best... But no. You go THERE. Don't mess up the system we've got even more, don't distort it. You go THERE. Not bring the mess here.

Here, we're good. Freedom. That's what government is supposed to ensure for all of us. When it doesn't, it's failed.

Posted by: Addison (the other one) on March 31, 2006 12:01 AM

Sorry, there Denny. :) Got on a rantroll. :)

I'll go to bed now. :)

Posted by: Addison (the other one) on March 31, 2006 12:02 AM

FYI, if anyone wants to see the video of Rush Limbaugh interviewing Joel Surnow, the creator of "24", and Howard Gordon, the head writer, on his show thursday, email me by clicking on my name and I'll send it to you.

Posted by: Rob Cooper on March 31, 2006 12:27 AM

If they called this what it is - a list of objectives - and then developed a plan for each objective, prioritizing them, they might actually have something and be able to convince some people who are reluctant Republicans.

Unfortunately for them, they're Democrats, and they don't think that way.

Posted by: Dave on March 31, 2006 08:16 AM

"When you consider that Dimocrats consistently try to cut the defense budget dontcha wonder how they're gonna accomplish this?"

not to ruffle skirts, but what was BRAC? Weren't those cuts?

But I have to admit, the Dem idea of keeping troops in the ME but out of Iraq sounds like a weird version of hokey-pokey
...you put your left foot in, you put your left foot out... everybody sing !

Posted by: the other Rachel on March 31, 2006 09:04 AM

Here's the thing about base closings: The military always, always, always wants fewer bases than the congressional leadership does. Congressmen view military bases (especially Army forts and the Air Force 50000+ servicemen superbases) as a free lunch. But the military sees the extra bases as taking away money that could've been spent on more F-22s, better body armor, 6.8mm SPC rifles, etc etc.

So yeah, BRAC is a cut. But it's a cut that the Pentagon wants.

Posted by: pdb on March 31, 2006 10:19 AM

*Sigh* I miss Bear... He still patrols the art forums, smiting the unrighteous, and he calls me from time to time...but he suffered tremendous blog burnout shortly after the election hoohah finally died down, and retreated to the shadows of obscurity. I wish he'd do another post again soon.

We all know what the Dems are doing. They're saying what needs to be said to make them look good, to make them look like they're actually concerned for the country's security. It sounds wholesome and civic-minded, you can fairly well hear the Anthem playing in the background as you read it and hear the snap and crackle of the Flag as it whips in a patriotic wind.

But anyone who actually BELIEVES this heap of horse apples is welcome to come to me. I have a bridge, a collection of authentic Rolexes, AND a genuine 20-carat diamond ring to sell 'em.

--TwoDragons

Posted by: Denita TwoDragons on March 31, 2006 10:45 AM

Also the largest part of BRAC by far is the 'R' - Re-allocation. Moving stuff around to make it more efficient.

Posted by: Dave on March 31, 2006 11:29 AM

The U.N. is their 'State Of The Art Military". Let's see now, we'll use U.N. conscripts and Chinese equipment then Ted Kennedy is going under cover to find and destroy Osama, (picture that!!!).

Meanwhile Chuckie from New York is going to legislate all other terrorist organizations out of existance, he's a well known lawyer, you know.

With Jimmah and Bubba at the head of the U.N.'s intelligence we can replace the feckless CIA, then Vincente Fox can take over and provide border security.

McCain and Kerry can coordinate the Chinese logistical agenda, since they have the experience with Communism.

The Queen Bitch can take over the IRS and the Federal Bank, they need to fund this too, the can call the new currency the 'Marx'.

Clean fuel? Didn't the pioneers use dried Buffalo shit when they crossed the prairy? We've got more Democrats than Buffalo, why not!!!

Looks like a plan. Hell I'm convinced Denney.

Posted by: Jack on March 31, 2006 11:55 AM

Yeah the old "root cause" bullshit. The "root cause" is these savages hate us. The Dimocrats do not understand that we are fighting radical Islam.

Denny (and anyone else), if our enemy is "radical Islam" then do you think we should go to war with all of radical Islam? While the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, there are radical Islamists all around the world. There are significant numbers of radical Islamists in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Indonesia. Taking out the radical Islamists in each of these countries would lead to war with each of these countries. They would not take it laying down. Are you in favor of going to war with all of those countries to cleanse them of their radical Islamists? Don't you think that would radicalize a lot of peaceful Islamists? How many American lives are you willing to sacrifice for this war against at least 10 countries?

Posted by: Scott on March 31, 2006 06:20 PM

Scott - you do realize that "radical Islam" in all 10+ of those countries already is at war with us?

What Bush has been trying to do, is avoid having to enter shooting wars with 10 countries at once by working a domino theory.

If it comes to the point that we cannot afford to go one country at a time (assuming the Left hasn't already gotten us to surrender too far), there probably will be no sacrificing of American lives, just sheets of glass appearing, one mushroom cloud at a time, where countries used to be.

Posted by: Dave on March 31, 2006 06:33 PM
Post a comment