Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 581

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_PageDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 600

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 699

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_CategoryDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/classes.php on line 724

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class wpdb in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 57

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class WP_Object_Cache in /home/misha/public_html/2006/wp-includes/cache.php on line 404
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » Today’s Reason Why November 7th Would Be a Good Time to Hold Your Nose and Vote

…although the RINOs surely don’t deserve it.

Missile defense.

The Democrats don’t like it. Guess what they’d do to it if they suddenly controlled the pursestrings?

Except, you don’t have to guess. Just think about Fuckface Kerry and Fat Bloated Swimmer Kennedy and their track record of voting against every single new weapons proposal to come down the pike. And that’s just two of the bastards.

And wouldn’t it just be dandy to have our ABM system de-funded and shut down just as the NorKs and the Mad Mullahs are getting ready to go nuclear?

Just a thought.

20 Responses to “Today’s Reason Why November 7th Would Be a Good Time to Hold Your Nose and Vote”
  1. Darth Bacon Comment by Darth Bacon UNITED STATES

    al-Queery thinks he deserves a second chance.

    FIRST!

  2. Naviguesser Comment by Naviguesser UNITED STATES

    At least I live in a safely Republican district, with semi-decent pols, so voting won’t feel like eating a bucket of shit.

  3. Darth Bacon Comment by Darth Bacon UNITED STATES

    voting won’t feel like eating a bucket of shit.

    And washing it down with a frosty mug of ass…

  4. Unregistered Comment by tweell UNITED STATES

    The Donks haven’t liked missile defense for a long time - even before President Reagan used the idea to bring down the Soviet Union. MAD is much more their speed. Even then MAD was madness, and with real lunatics getting their hands on the Bomb, it is immeasurably worse.

    We are going to get hit with WMD sometime, but why make it easy for them?

  5. DJ Allyn,  ITW Comment by DJ Allyn, ITW UNITED STATES

    Have they had a successful test yet?

    Just wondering.

  6. kwongdzu Comment by kwongdzu UNITED STATES

    Fat Bloated Swimmer Kennedy

    Not a swimmer!!! He’s a FLOATER - Fat Bloated Floater Kennedy …

  7. Unregistered Comment by LC + IB Gutshot UNITED STATES

    Have they had a successful test yet?

    So which city do you want to sacrifice on the chance that an untested missle is lobbed our way? I pray it’s not the one you live in.

  8. LC Wil Comment by LC Wil

    Good Morning, Dave! Hope all is well for you and yours.

    Have they had a successful test yet?

    Why, yes, three of them as a matter of fact. Three all up, the system does all the work, successful tests.

    That is, of course, the ground based long-range interceptor part of the system. The Navy’s little contribution has been successful for years, and the uprated Patriot system (and the Israeli version of same) was operational and used in the first litle unpleasantness in Iraq. The Airborne Laser system is making wondeful progress (now, it’s a question of funding, not science or even engineering) and the close range system (a 25 MM version of the Navy CWIS) is off the shelf technology (again, funding issues). The only “new” stuff that needs to be engineered is the space-based, bomb-pumped x-ray laser.

    That, and getting Congress to give up building bridges for no apparent reaason so that we can afford the system.

    Of course, all complicated systems (and this one is as complicated as anything else ever invented by man) has certain growing pains. An “unsuccessful” test will still tell you something (fer instance, what do we need to do to make the guidance module work better, or will it work better if we slow down the interceptor) and make the next test better.

    This was originally conceived as a multi-layer defense. The concept was NEVER to stop all of the missiles, despite the disparaging words from the enemies of the missile defense system. The thought was (re: Soviet ICBM attack) that if you could stop even 50% of the incoming, you could make it too damn expensive for the other side to attack us. Dealing with such states as North Korea (or, indeed, Comunist China), we can knock everything that they launch out of the air, sit back and ask “Ok, now what?”

    An impenatrable shield is indeed impossible. Ok, does that mean that if we can’t stop everything, we shouldn’t try for anything? To put it in a slightly more pragmatic way, if the Norks launch three missiles (one at Seattle, one at Los Angeles, one at Honolulu), is it better to stop two out of three, or is it better to get three smoking holes?

    And, yes, it’s expensive. What is Los Angeles worth?

  9. Unregistered Comment by irish19 UNITED STATES

    Wil,
    That’s great news. Needless to say, I haven’t seen anything about it in the MSM.

    “Ok, does that mean that if we can’t stop everything, we shouldn’t try for anything?”

    That would be letting the quest for the perfect get in the way of achieving the good.

    “What is Los Angeles worth?”

    Aside from the fact that my youngest brother is living in the area, not very much.

  10. Emperor Misha I Comment by Emperor Misha I UNITED STATES

    What is Los Angeles worth?

    I may have to ask you to rephrase that question. The temptation is just too great :wink1_tb:

  11. Unregistered Comment by tweell

    Being a retired squid, I can trumpet the Navy’s ABM work. :)

    http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001409.html

    That test I linked was a boost phase test. The idea is that our ships sitting off the coast of North Korea would shoot down long-range missiles launched at Japan or the US.

    Would the Aegis ships be able to shut down anything Kim sent up? I don’t know, depends on how many missiles he has and would use. Is it worth it? Definitely. This is where you want to knock down enemy missiles - on their real estate or in the ocean - not on their final approach (although that’s preferable to the actual impact).

  12. MoMinuteMan Comment by MoMinuteMan UNITED STATES

    I it would be worth the investment to park a geo-stationary spy-sat over NoKo and three or four Aegis ships off Lil’ Kims coast, 24/7/365. I watched the Fox News special on NoKo the other night and saw a photo Rummy has of a night-shot taken from space of Korea as a whole.

    South Korea is lit up like a xmas tree, and the ONLY light visible from NoKo is Pyongyang. Spotting a launch would be child’s play. Lil’ Kim only has a couple of launch sites to use. Just shoot down anything that idiot puts up in the air.

    I wish somebody would grow the balls to tell Lil’ Kim that if he keeps fucking up and starts a shooting war, his holidays are gonna look like this…

    (Dammit, wrong button…)

  13. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    Hey DJ, a mere stroll through the Yahoo search engine produced lots of results for successful missle defense tests… I think I found the first successful test story and the most recent one…

    Missile Defense Test Results in Successful “Hit To Kill” Intercept
    06-NEWS-0018 - 22 June 2006 -

    ==============================

    Pentagon says key defense test was ’successful’ - July 2, 1997

  14. TPCrasher78 Comment by TPCrasher78

    Let’s see, what have the Dummycraps voted against…..

    Missile defense shield
    The Stealth Fighter
    The Stealth Bomber
    The B-1
    F-15
    F-18
    F-22
    M-1 Abrams Tank
    The M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle
    Pershing Missiles
    Patriot Missiles
    Poseidon Missiles
    Kevlar Armor
    Kevlar Helmets
    M-16s
    AR-15s
    M-4 Carbine
    M-14
    And fucking toilet paper.

    Remember, while the RINOs suck, they aren’t soooo stupid as to sacrifice our safety in defense. Albeit they’re soft on immigration and McCain is against any Jack Bauer treatment of terrorists.

    It’s the lesser of two evils, vote on Nov 7 and pray to God we don’t have to endure Nancy Pelosi as Speaker Of The House for a minimum of 2 fuckin years!

  15. LC Wil Comment by LC Wil

    I may have to ask you to rephrase that question. The temptation is just too great

    Ok, Ok, maybe a poor example. How about:

    VEGAS, Baby!

  16. Cheapshot911 Comment by Cheapshot911 UNITED STATES

    The laser has enjoyed success since 05-2000.
    The technology has definitely not stagnated.

  17. Cheapshot911 Comment by Cheapshot911 UNITED STATES

    Arrgh,Sorry folks, ‘meant to say The Anti-missile technology, hasn’t stagnated,,
    Here’s some laser news

  18. juandos Comment by juandos UNITED STATES

    TPCrasher78 (#14) says: “Let’s see, what have the Dummycraps voted against…..“…

    Ahhh, damned good comment…

    It reminded me of this Rich Lowry commentary from way back in July of ‘01: The deeper question is why a tax cut made defense spending more difficult, and the answer is: the Democrats. Specifically, the rules governing the surplus that will be rigidly enforced by the Democrats and have been foolishly acquiesced to by the Republicans. These rules bear no relation to reality, and make budgetary politics in Washington an insane exercise…..

  19. LC RobertHuntingdon Comment by LC RobertHuntingdon

    “At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

    RH

  20. LC HOGHEAD Comment by LC HOGHEAD UNITED STATES

    this guy says it better than me.

    No thanks, we’re stupid
    By Tony Blankley
    October 18, 2006

    John Stuart Mill once famously called the British Tories “The Stupid Party.” From time to time since then, the Tory’s American cousin, the Republican Party, has also earned that moniker. Now may be one of those moments. If current polls and anecdotes are to be believed, there may be a million or two conservative Republicans who are planning to not vote this November.
    Of course, Mill also said that : “A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but also by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.”
    Apparently, these anticipated conservative non-voters are annoyed with Republican imperfection. They are disheartened, disappointed, disillusioned, distempered, dismal — and thus plan to dis the party that better advances conservative principles in government.
    They appear to have fallen victim to the false syllogism: 1) Something must be done; 2) not voting is something; therefore, 3) I will not vote.
    Of course the fallacy of the syllogism is that the second category could be anything. For example, number two could as well read “eating dog excrement is something.” I rather suspect that they will feel about the same afterward, whether they chose the non-voting option or the scatological one. They are both equally illogical — and repulsive — and would deserve the moniker, “Stupid.”
    Here are some tell-tale signs of the sort of person who would vote (or not vote) to cause the election of a party which would act to defeat every value and interest he holds dear (merely because the party that will at least try to advance most of those issues has not done as well as he might have hoped):
    1) When offered by a car dealer 25 percent off on a car, he insists on paying the full factory recommended retail sticker price — because he is damned if he will accept 25 percent when he deserves 30 percent off.
    2) When the prettiest cheerleader asks the nerd to take her to the prom, he turns her down — just because he can.
    3) When stopped for doing 70 in a 65 zone, he tells the trooper that’s not possible because he had the cruise control set on 90 — he just resents being falsely charged.
    4) When diagnosed with a serious illness, he promptly cancels his medical insurance — in order to save the cost of premium payments to help pay for the upcoming hospital stay.
    A conservative would have to be just that stupid to stay home on Nov. 7.
    I have heard it put around that the Republicans need a couple of years in the wilderness to regain their conservative bearings.

    While turning over the Congress to the Pelosi/Kennedy mob for even two years would be recklessly irresponsible — particularly during a dangerous war — there is no assurance the wilderness years would last only twenty-four months.
    In 1954, the Democrats, led by the great Sam Rayburn, retook the House after control had see-sawed back and forth for ten years (1944 — Democrat; 1946 — Republican; 1948 — Democrat; 1950 — Democrat; 1952 — Republican; 1954 — Democrat). Mr. Rayburn (one of the shrewdest politicians ever to play the game) was so sure that the Republicans would take back the House in the Eisenhower re-election year of 1956, that when he became speaker after the 1954 election, he didn’t even bother to move his furniture back to the better office suite occupied by Joe Martin (the Republican speaker who returned to minority leader status after the 1954 Republican loss.)
    They decided to keep their previous office spaces rather than go through the bother of moving across the hall.
    As it turned out, the Republicans didn’t re-take a majority of the House for forty years (the Gingrich-led election of 1994). So for forty years the Republican minority leaders got to keep the better office space (that looked out over the majestic National Mall), while the Democratic Speakers for forty years got a view of the parking lot.
    I don’t care who has the better office space in the future, but any conservative ought to be very concerned about who has the political power in Washington. The Democrats have virtually promised to scandalize the Republican administration (with subpoena and impeachment-seeking oversight hearings) for the next two years — in preparation for defeating the 2008 Republican presidential nominee.
    Moreover, every Democrat who beats a Republican in three weeks will have two years to feather his or her nest, and use the powers of incumbency to defeat his 2008 Republican challenger.
    Even more important, in a closely fought 2008 presidential election, every extra Democratic incumbent senator, congressman and governor makes it just a little more likely that the Democratic presidential candidate may win that district or state. All those freshly tuned new Democratic machines will help get out Democratic Party votes for the top of their 2008 ticket.
    This current conservative petulance — if it actually occurs on Nov. 7 — will increase the chances of electing Hillary or worse (if such a thing is possible) in 2008.
    There is no rational policy or political basis for conservatives not voting. I’m not sure the country can take the current Democratic mob in power for long.
    A realist once observed that the history of mankind is little more than the triumph of the heartless over the mindless.
    The Democrats are obviously heartless. Conservatives must guard against falling into the category of the mindless. Ignore your heartfelt peevements, use your brains and vote.