On a more positive note...

Tomorrow #1 son graduates from high school. He's turned out smart and strong and decent, and I couldn't be happier. Since he'll be going off to study medicine this fall, I imagine I won't be seeing nearly as much of him as now (currently every other weekend). This is a milemarker in my life: both happy and sad.

The inevitable Obama post (and probably not the last...)

No time like the present for this post, although his crimes against the Constitution have been coming fast and furious these last 17 months. Fist I though it was inexperience, then ineptitude. Now it's clear to me that our Precedent is out for nothing less than the destruction of the United States in its current form. He's such an easy target, and so many of his actions are indefensible, it's hard to know where to start my righteous bitching.

- The debt. I occasionally run up debts; not huge ones, and they always get paid off. Most everyone does. What's astounding about Obama's administration is its apparent goal of bankrupting the United States. The Stimulus bill back in January was nigh on a trillion dollars. Folks simply can't wrap their heads around these types of numbers. A trillion dollars: If you stacked $1,000 bills flat, it would take a stack nearly 68 miles high to amount to a trillion dollars. No shit. And between health care, bank bailouts, takeovers of various industries, payouts and payoffs to folks like ACORN and his union buddies, Obama's committed us to nearly 20 trillion dollars of debt within the next ten years.

- The US was always meant to be a representative democracy. You vote for like-minded individuals who'll go to Washington and do your bidding. The recent spate of Obama-led legislation (health care reform's the perfect example) is being put into force against the will of the American people. Every credible poll shows the vast majority of Americans want health care reform repealed. What does the administration do in response? Run an expensive ad campaign to show citizens how wrong they are; that they really, really need this bill. There can be only two explanations for this: either Obama is the arrogant narcissist that so many claim he is, or he is actually bent on simply destroying the country. Come to think of it, maybe both explanations are valid.

- This thing in Arizona. Obama's taken an oath to defend the borders, although during his tenure to date, he's had his minions cut back on enforcement of illegal immigration laws by almost 80%. For months he refused to meet with Arizona governor Jan Brewer, or even acknowledge her correspondence, all the while brazenly announcing to the world that he's willing to meet with each and every despot the world over, without preconditions. Apparently it's only Americans he doesn't like. Three weeks ago, Obama promised governor Brewer 1,200 National Guardsmen within two weeks to help with logistics near the border (God forbid they should be sent there to keep illegals out...). She's heard nothing since. Obama can't keep even the simplest of promises.

- Obama claimed his administration would be the beginning of "smart diplomacy". Since then, he's alienated almost every long-standing ally they US has ever had, while warming up to every tin-plated dictator who'll take his call. Along the way, he bows and scrapes in front of foreign dignitaries, just to show them he doesn't know how to behave on the world stage. Staggering.

- Gulf oil spill. This kind of thing can happen during any administration, and the blame for its cause shouldn't be placed at his feet, but his reactions to the spill are his alone to own:

- delay in taking the accident seriously.
- pure hypocrisy, saying "I will not rest until the leak is stopped." Then he's either off golfing, or throwing lavish parties at the White House on the taxpayers' dime. Brazen...
- non-cooperative attitude toward Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, a can-do kinda guy who wanted to deploy containment booms and build protective sand berms to protect the coasts of his state. Obama has done everything in his power to prevent Jindal from taking action.
- Obama's 20 billion dollar "shakedown" of BP (and that's exactly what it is!). BP is certainly liable for a fair amount of damage, and they've already said they're willing to pay. Obama's decided however they must also be publicly humiliated as well. Remember folks: if BP goes bankrupt (a distinct possibility, and an increasingly attractive option for BP), that 20 billion dollar slush fund amounts to nothing.

- "Post partisan". Heh. Nothing could be further from the truth. I read an interesting and prophetic piece from 2006 positing that Obama is merely a human Rorschach test.

Sen. Obama is a Rorschach test. I see hope! I see brains! I see a whole new kind of politician! I see an amazing life story! I see an orator! I see a natural! I see a hero!

Well, real people aren't Rorschach tests. They aren't blank slates. And by January 2008, Senator Blank Slate, D-Ill., will be a messy chalkboard. He may well be a fabulous chalkboard with cool stuff all over it. But more likely, he'll be pretty much like an American politician, though perhaps one who is a great guy, with a big brain and a powerful voice.

This is how the guy got elected; that and yuppie white guilt. A perfect illustration of what I mean from one of my sons. Upon Obama's election, #2 son proclaims how "great it is that a black man won!" I explained of course that while being black isn't a defect, it's also not any sort of job qualification or special ability either.

- The New Black Panther Party and the Department of Justice. For some reason, this hasn't gotten much media attention, but then again, most of the media seem to have rewritten their job descriptions: from accurate observation and reporting, to spin and editorial commentary. The Panther story, briefly by one of the DOJ lawyers involved who's since quit as a result:

On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers. After the election, the Justice Department brought a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and those armed thugs. I and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges. Before a final judgment could be entered in May 2009, our superiors ordered us to dismiss the case.

Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department's enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has opened an investigation into the dismissal and the DOJ's skewed enforcement priorities. Attorneys who brought the case are under subpoena to testify, but the department ordered us to ignore the subpoena, lawlessly placing us in an unacceptable legal limbo.

It seems obvious that DOJ's decision not to pursue the Panthers is politically motivated. While shocking, it doesn't seem out of character at all for Obama: member of a hate church for 20 years, clearly pursuing anti-Israel policy, and some of the stuff in his 2(!) biographies concerning "white folks" is nothing short of hate speech.


Alright: that's a start. You'll be sure to see more on Obama here in the future.

Holland: Nation of Losers

I've lived here in the Netherlands over 20 years. I've stayed not because I liked it, but because early on I produced two wonderful sons who I felt (and still feel) obliged to grace with my "Daddy duty". While I have no regrets on that point, I've suffered many indignities at the hands of the local population. They advertise themselves as free-thinking and tolerant, but nothing could be further from the truth. Their version of free-thinking means spitting in the face of common sense, and the local definition of tolerance would be unrecognizable to the rest of the world. Some examples:

- Zwarte Piet, or "Black Pete". He's Dutch Santa's bumbling, ne'er-do-well slave. He's black with big red lips and an Afro. Here's a picture of him:



Nice, eh? The locals love him dearly, and don't see anything offensive about ol' Pete. I theorize it's this same mindset that allowed the Dutch to lead the world at slave-trading for centuries. They're unapologetic sociopaths.

More examples of local NL tolerance and free-thinking:

- Recent local elections where party platforms included lowering the age of sexual consent to 12 years of age(!) and decriminalizing sex with animals. No fooling.

- Euthanasia. The Dutch see themselves as world-leaders on this front, although the UN has criticized them numerous times for their vague rules concerning this. Some of the complaints: Doctors informally give life-ending drugs to patients who come to them with complaints as petty as being "tired of living". Jeezus H. Christ! Who amongst us hasn't had a bad week or month where living wasn't a whole lot of fun? And given the convenient opportunity to stroll down to your MD and easily end your life? Bad idea. Also: it turns out that euthanasia isn't always dispensed at the patient's or his family's request. Apparently doctors here occasionally decide that the guy in room 27 doesn't have much to live for, so we'll just surreptitiously slip him a little something to ease his passing. The family doesn't really need to play a part in the decision...

- Liberal drug policy. As nice as potheads the world over might think a drug abuser's paradise like Holland would be, it's created several 'lost generations' here: folks who spend the entire day in the coffee shop, doing nothing but getting and staying high. And don't believe those who say dope doesn't lead to harder drugs. A high percentage of locals walk around with that "meth face" look.

- Back in the 60's, liberal politics began to rule Holland; right when the North Sea oil and gas fields were being discovered. All of a sudden the government coffers overran with money from these mineral royalties. The Dutch Parliament was rife with rhetoric amounting to "work = slavery", so an extensive welfare state was formed, with overly generous provisions for almost everyone. Of course, once the cork is out of that particular bottle, it ain't going back in. A significant portion of the potential work force here has decided to call in sick and stay home forever on the public's dime. Obviously this can't be sustained forever, and NL finds itself in a huge budget crisis. Of course cutting back the existing social programs (which amount to nothing more than 'redistribution of wealth') is unthinkable.

Of course, every country has its problems and a segment of unreasonable people, but Holland takes the cake as far as folks who are simply unwilling to recognize what's right and what's not.

Awright: 2nd post.

Like most folks online, I have a Facebook presence. I see it as one of those odious adult responsibilities, done not because it's fun or rewarding, but mainly because that's just what folks do nowadays. I've made peace with that reality, but I also see there's a whole no-win protocol that comes along with being on Facebook: People you don't know who want to be your 'friend', or folks from back in college who were never friendly at all, or professional colleagues who are sometimes downright hostile; all wanting to be chummy online, but not so much in the real world. Fine: they send a 'friend' request, and it demands attention on your Facebook page. "Ignore"? Hmmmm; that's seems rude, even towards someone who's pretending we're actually 'friends'. "Accept"? Then the circle gets larger, causing even more unknown- or quasi-hostile acquaintances to shuffle forward, asking for proof of our 'friendship'. Arghhh! There's no winning it.

I've also observed a certain type of Facebook personality who seems to be in a frantic rush to see how many 'friends' they can accumulate. It's apparent it's almost all about professional networking: they hope to get gigs or claw their way into a higher echelon of freelancing by having lots of 'friends' in the professional community. That looks so cheap. Be honest: a classical musician with 4,000 'friends' the world over? Not likely. Those who do this, be aware: your motives are transparent, and you look like the smarmiest type of hand-shaking, joke-making, back-slapping used car salesmen on the planet.

First Post

Here's the first post of my blog. I'm starting this because I seem to rant much lately, and sometimes at the expense of the patience of my loved ones and innocent acquaintances. Surely this is a safer and more cathartic way for me to rage at the world ... right?

About me: I'm an American expat living in the Netherlands. I've lived here 20 years, but it'll never ever feel like home to me (don't worry: you'll eventually get to hear my frustrations with this 'perfect' land). I'm a professional musician, and have the worst employer in the world (who shall of course remain nameless!). I've got some great kids, and an incredibly smart and beautiful wife for whom I'm grateful every single day.

So: what gets written here is entirely for me, but should you care to read along, you'll eventually see some fine rants about American politics (how unique!), life abroad, petty frustrations of everyday life, and whatever else happens to come along.