Category Archives: Recent Posts

Book News, Recent Posts, Reviews

Kilo 3

I have read only one Vietnam War book in my lifetime. It was Fields of Fire by James Webb. While I did enjoy the book, the author is a POS as far as I am concerned; therefore, I am not touting his book.

Since I participated in the original “play,” I have chosen not to read someone else’s version of how he experienced the war, much of which is, in my view, a “war story” that gets better each time it’s told.; including mine LOL.

Having said that I am making an exception. Why you ask? It’s simple, I know the author very well. If you read my book, We’ll All Die as Marines, he is mentioned in it. I’ll not; however, tell you what chapter. Yeah, I know that’s mean. All I shall divulge is I was a fresh caught brown bar. That should surely take you right to the place if you still have the book. If not write me and I will sell you one. LOL.

Anyway, I digress. The book of which I speak was just released a few weeks ago. Its title is, Kilo 3. For Marines that should tell you it was Kilo Company of the 3rd battalion, of some regiment. Well, it’s the Striking Ninth, none other than the 9th Marine Regiment of the Third Marine Division, traditionally written a K 3/9.

I’ll not share any of the book with you as that would be cheating the author. I will; however, say this book makes Webb’s read seem like a child’s fairy tale. For those who have not experienced combat from an infantryman’s perspective, you will be enlightened beyond belief. As I read I could smell the cordite, feel the anger, hear the different types of explosions as he describes them perfectly, experience the sweat and intense heat, and remember the danger and fear.

However, this read is more than about the Vietnam War. It’s about leaving the blood, sweat, and horror of that horrible war and stepping into the glamour, perfectionism, and discipline of the Corp’s most famous and fabled duty station — Marine Barracks, 8th & I Streets SE, Washington, D.C. Many did exactly that during the 1968-69 timeframe, I was one of them, so I know what these Marines went through. Many did not make the cut. This read is about one who almost didn’t, but because OZ didn’t give him anything he didn’t already have, he not only made it, he made it big time!

That’s all I will tell you, except to repeat myself, I am certain you will thoroughly enjoy it. I stared reading it around noon on Saturday and finished it Sunday evening, and I am a slow reader. I could not put it down! I then called the author and congratulated him and thanked him profusely for sending me a signed copy..

 

Front Dust Cover

Back Dust Cover

Originally posted 2021-05-19 12:55:29.

Recent Posts

Our Military?

5 Comments

I have given up posting stuff about the head swamp creature. Mainly because nothing he does surprises me any more and I firmly believe  that while the slime coming from his mouth may be his voice, it’s not his words. He’s simply following the orders of the other swamp creatures. So, As one of my favorite commenters stated he simply can’t rant anymore  on what “HE” says or does.  I agree. Biden is not  my president or anyone’s president for that matter. It’s President Joe “Sanders et al.” So, I shall disregard what those fools do and post on other issues such as this one. That is, of course, until he does something really earth shattering other than just stupid, which is an everyday occurrence. 

Anyway, here is a article from the Tennessee Star on an organization we all are very familiar with — our military.

Commentary: The U.S. Military Is Just Another Woke Institution

 Admin
by Paul Bradford

Tucker Carlson spurred a much-needed reexamination of the military in March. His monologue criticizing the military’s political correctness drew a more furious response from top brass than any foreign threat is likely to do. The generals’ response only affirmed Tucker’s points about the degraded state of our armed forces. Why do generals—both current and retired—feel the need to condemn civilians who question the wisdom of putting women in combat?

The answer is that the military, along with the entire national security establishment, is at one with the Democrat-Media complex. The image we have of generals and senior officers as defenders of tradition is wildly out of step with reality.

This fact is underscored by its contrast with a letter issued in France last week. The letter—signed by 20 retired generals, 80 officers, and 1,000 lower-ranking soldiers—was stridently right-wing. “The hour is late, France is in peril, threatened by several mortal dangers,” the letter states. Though retired, we remain soldiers of France, and cannot, under the present circumstances, remain indifferent to the fate of our beautiful country.”

The dangers, according to the letter, are Islamism, multiculturalism, liberal state tyranny, and anti-white and anti-French cultural currents. “Today, some speak of racialism, of indigenism, and of anti-colonial theories, but with these words, those hateful and fanatical partisans seek to foment a racial war,” the letter declares. “They despise our country, her traditions, her culture, and want to watch her dissolve by tearing her away from her past and her history. Thus, by attacking statues and analyzing words from several centuries ago, their true goal is to undermine our ancient civil and military glories.”

The letter argues that if the politicians do nothing, the military “will be forced to step in and undertake the perilous mission of protecting our civilizational values and the lives of our fellow citizens.” The letter also clearly defines France as a particular nation, a homeland with its own unique traditions and heritage. It’s not merely an idea.

The contrast between the sentiments in this letter and those of our own military leadership is like night and day. Our generals support all the things the retired French commanders denounce. Our military happily resumed critical race theory training as soon as Donald Trump left office. Senior commanders essentially endorsed Black Lives Matter and its “mostly peaceful” demonstrations last year. They view too many white Americans in the service as the problem and embrace multiculturalism. The military endorses the abolition of American heritage if it offends modern sensibilities. The Defense Department vows to root out all “right-wing extremists” from its ranks. The same Pentagon that sent soldiers to D.C. to guard against imaginary threats to Joe Biden’s inauguration refused to use soldiers to curb BLM riots in 2020. Our military refuses to step in and protect any civilizational values.

Our retired generals also like to issue letters about political issues—but they sound more like Barack Obama than staunch conservatives. Retired Marine General James Mattis, one of the most recognizable faces of the American military, published a letter last summer endorsing Black Lives Matter and condemning Trump, the president who made him Secretary of Defense. He said the military should not be used to stop riots, which he claimed were nearly all peaceful. He also said that Black Lives Matter and Antifa merely call on Americans to “live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.”

After the election, Mattis wrote an op-ed urging Biden to eliminate “America First” policies. The retired general said America should instead return to globalist policies. Evidently, Mattis is not someone who considers America his homeland with its own unique traditions and character. It’s merely an “idea,” best upheld by far-Left agitators and the generals who agree with them.

Mattis wasn’t alone in publicly expressing such sentiments. Eighty-nine former defense officials signed a joint condemnation of Trump’s attempted crackdown of rioters last summer. The letter accepted BLM’s assertion that our justice system oppresses blacks.

Fifty-six retired senior officers attacked Trump for barring transgender personnel from serving in the military. “Patriotic transgender Americans who are serving—and who want to serve—must not be dismissed, deprived of medically necessary health care, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity,” the 2017 letter stated.

Granted, not all current or former generals are like this. There are those like retired Lt. General Michael Flynn and others who stand with middle America against the swamp. But the military, as an institution, is reflected in these letters. You will never see 20 retired generals issue a strong statement denouncing mass immigration, critical race theory, or the state persecution of Trump supporters. Neither are you likely to see a call from those quarters for the military to protect America from domestic threats—unless those threats happen to be white and conservative.

We can see further evidence of our military’s decline in two viral media posts from last week.

The U.S. Navy apparently made history last week when the first all-gay flight crew flew its first mission. The crew wore rainbow bandanas and proudly displayed the gay pride flag.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The pictures presented a bizarre image of the military to the world.

Additionally, the CIA recently released an odd ad that may portend to future military recruitment. The ad, titled “Humans of CIA” in a nod to the popular Humans of New York blog, shows a very different CIA from its popular image.

The agent in the ad declares:

“I am a woman of color.”

“I am a cisgender millennial.”

“I have been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder.”

“I am intersectional.”

The agent also sports a t-shirt with a raised fist. As a member of one of the most powerful institutions in the world, it’s unclear what she is raising her fist against. She is the power, not the resistance.

This is the CIA, of course. But you could see the Pentagon producing very similar ads.

Many conservatives still think of the military as an institution dramatically different from and immune to the harmful trends infecting the rest of the government. To them, the military evokes “honor” and “country,” and you can trust the troops to resist liberal tyranny. Reality paints a very different picture. While many of the troops, including senior officers, are great Americans who serve our country with honor, the institution itself no longer serves the American people as conservatives imagine. It serves the American empire controlled by liberal elites.

We can’t hope for the troops to ride in to save the day like the French military. The American military is just another corrupt institution that requires serious reform.

Paul Bradford is a Capitol Hill refugee now earning an honest living.

Check out the link below for a letter signed by  120 retired generals and admirals warning the admiration’s policies are a serious threat to national security. As a Marine, I am glad to see some names  who I know, worked for, and respected.  But sadly there are some I had much respect for who are missing. Shame on them; they know who they are! And then there are those I had  little respect for and they are on the list e.g., Krulak, Mattis, Kelly, Allen, Hagee, Jones, and more. The letter is a good read and look and see if your heroes or villain’s are on the list.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/05/over_120_generals_and_admirals_warn_that_administration_policies_are_national_security_threat.html

Originally posted 2021-05-12 10:18:45.

Recent Posts

A Star-Spangled Misfire

2 Comments

I have been remiss from posting any gobbly gook from the swamp creatures of late, but with good reason. We just returned from a weekend in Tuscaloosa, Alabama to witness our granddaughter graduating from the University. WOW.  Impressive is an  understatement! I’m sure some of you attended a university as large and impressive, as Alabama, but I had not. I was awestruck. At my granddaughter’s suggestion, I even had a “Yellow Hammer,” actually I had three, and I might add suffered the entire next day. LOL

But then I digress. Great article from my favorite presenter. Although growing up only 30 miles from D.C., and having been stationed there for two years, I must admit I really did not know much of  its history. Oh I knew it it was not a state, but beyond that I have to claim ignorance. Just in case you fall into the same category, please copy and paste the link below for a very good explanation of D.C. and why it is not a state from the Encyclopedia Britannica. 

https://www.britannica.com/place/Washington-DC

Then read Greg’s excellent article about Biden’s attempt to simply expect Congress to make it a state.

By Greg Maresca

In May 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama announced during a campaign stop that he had been to 57 states. Such an embarrassing blunder was glazed over like a Crispy Cream donut. In retrospect, it was perhaps a Freudian slip. Provided Democrats get their way, they will get closer to 57 by adding Washington D.C. as the 51st state with Puerto Rico waiting on deck.

As president, Obama must regret not going for broke with the whole socialist agenda when he had the chance. President Biden has certainly wasted no time in picking up the slack in his first 100-days in office.

Provided you need to be reminded: elections have consequences.

In Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers created a special federal district for the sole purpose of not being a state. Writing in The Federalist No. 43, James Madison clarified that without a separate federal district, the federal government “might be insulted and its proceedings be interrupted with impunity.” It is obvious the Founders did not want to subject the federal government to the sway of any state government.

Moreover, D.C. statehood would violate the intent that states have substantial land mass. Aside from the original 13 states, no state was smaller than 30,000 square miles until Hawaii entered the union in 1959. However, with a total of 137 islands and over 10,000 square miles, Washington D.C. does not even come close.

If that’s not enough, the 23rd Amendment enfranchised D.C. residents in presidential elections with three Electoral College votes, tenured its venue and size, designating it as the “seat of Government.” The amendment established that the only way to repeal a constitutional amendment is with another amendment.

It was no oversight that the nation’s capital is not a state, but rather an exclusive territory under the absolute authority of Congress, where elected representatives and senators from every state in the union could meet on neutral ground to conduct the nation’s business.

The nation understands D.C.’s unique constitutional status. A 2020 Gallup poll said 64% of Americans opposed DC statehood vs. just 29% in favor. Sorted by party and region, there were “no major subgroups of Americans voice support for DC statehood.”

If the city’s denizens do not appreciate their longstanding historical significance, they can always vote with their feet and move. This legislation symbolically labeled H.R. 51 would turn the District into exactly what the Founders rebuffed.

In a dichotomy of the times, Democrats desire to localize what the Constitution explicitly has federalized, while at the same time trying to federalize everything else. The statehood push is ultimately a power play for Democrats who want to turn D.C. into a city-state as the deep blue District will guarantee them two seats in the Senate changing the chamber’s partisan composition in their favor. With the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee wanting to pack the Supreme Court, adding two additional Senators via D.C. is a Democrat two-fer.

Democrats’ carry-on like this because they know Republicans will not put up a fight. Here is yet another version of Democrat unity and healing where the end goal is a one-party totalitarian centralized state.

This legislation is nothing but a power grab in the first-degree. If it were truly about statehood and the fabricated mantra of “taxation without representation,” Democrats would introduce legislation for D.C. to become part of Maryland from which it was initially ceded. But that doesn’t work as it would not obtain the desired two additional Senate seats.

Without missing an opportunity to race bait, New York Democrat Rep. Mondaire Jones, called arguments against D.C. statehood “racist trash.” Naturally, if you oppose D.C. statehood on any level be it Constitutional, historical, you name it; you are to be smeared as a racist because a majority of its residents are black.

With the Senate filibuster requiring 60 senators to advance any legislation, the odds of D.C. statehood are formidable. Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia said he will not support the legislation or efforts to eliminate the filibuster. “If Congress wants to make D.C. a state, it should propose a constitutional amendment,” Manchin suggested.

Manchin is one Democrat who actually gets it.

Perhaps more will join him.

What  did surprise me was the  29%  who were in favor of making it a state. I wonder how many of those were ignorant, as I, about its history?

Originally posted 2021-05-06 14:13:55.

Recent Posts

Punishment

LOL, this is so funny. Some may have trouble understanding what Mr. Lindsey is saying in this article. Heck I had to read it again slowly to get the full drift. The bottom line is simple, raise the tax and get less revenue. LOL Makes sense to me, What an idiot this president is. That is unless he is doing it as Mr. Lindsey thinks, to punish the rich and the hell with revenue. OMG.

 

And if anyone is qualified to talk on this subject it is certainly Dr. Lawrence Lindsey, former Governor of the Federal Reserve System for six years.

The Biden administration last week proposed to increase the capital-gains tax rate—currently 20% for most assets held for at least a year—to 39.6% for people making more than $1 million. Since capital gains are also subject to the 3.8% Medicare tax, the new capital-gains rate would be 43.4%.

What makes this unusual is that 43.4% is well above the rate that would generate the most revenue for the government. Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, which does the official scoring and is no den of supply siders, puts the revenue-maximizing rate at 28%. My work several decades ago puts it about 10 points lower than that. That means President Biden is willing to accept lower revenue as the price of higher tax rates. The implications for his administration’s economic thinking are mind-boggling.

Even the revenue-maximizing rate is higher than would be optimal. As tax rates rise, the activity being taxed declines. The loss to the private side of society increases at a geometric rate (proportional to the square of the tax rate) as rates rise. The government collects more revenue, but its gains slow as the taxed activity declines. The revenue-maximizing rate is the point at which the government starts losing from higher taxes. Tax rates above the revenue-maximizing rate are punitive: The government is giving up revenue simply to punish the rich.

Punishing the rich is distinct from redistribution. Higher taxes on the rich to finance spending, or to transfer money to lower-income people, may be good for society’s welfare. Economists express this idea in a “social-welfare function,” which weights additional income received by different people, usually based on income. The same sum is considered less valuable if it goes to a high-income person than a lower-income one. The weights are subjective and different analysts will choose different weights.

Still, economists can agree that the ideal is to make someone better off without making someone else worse off. The simplest case is a voluntary exchange of goods for money, in which the buyer values the purchase at least as much as the price, while the seller values the money at least as much as the item being sold. Economists call such an exchange Pareto-optimal after Vilfredo Pareto, the Italian economist who formally framed the concept.

There is no choice in paying taxes, and usually the government is better off and the taxpayer is worse off. But above the revenue-maximizing rate, even the government is worse off. This is called Pareto-pessimal.

Generally, the government can raise tax rates and transfer the money to lower-income people, thereby improving social welfare. The government can do this even after incurring the economic burdens caused by higher rates and the costs of transferring money (known as the “leaky bucket”). The trade-off depends on how much tax rates distort the economy, how big the leaky-bucket effect is, and how one evaluates the difference in value of money going to people in different income groups.

As indicated by other proposals, the current administration rates money going to lower-income people extremely highly relative to higher-income people—higher than has traditionally been the case in U.S. economic policy. It also seems to put little weight on excess economic burdens and leaky-bucket costs. The wisdom of those choices will be tested at the ballot box.

But to an economist, a Pareto-pessimal choice is unwise by definition. There is no set of “weights” one can devise to justify this proposal, because there are no highly prized winners to offset the losses to the low-weighted losers.

The concept of social-welfare maximization has been a cornerstone of economic thinking across the political spectrum for the past century. It dates back at least to Adam Smith in the 18th century, and arguably to the 17th, when Jean-Baptiste Colbert, King Louis XIV’s finance minister, declared “the perfection of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to procure the greatest amount of feathers with the least possible amount of squawking.”

That’s why it is shocking that this policy got past the economists in the administration, many of whom have had long and distinguished careers. The Biden administration is blowing up one of the key concepts that has united the economics profession: maximizing social welfare. It now believes in taxation purely as a form of punishment and is even willing to sacrifice revenue to carry it out.

Mr. Lindsey is president and CEO of the Lindsey Group. He served as a Federal Reserve governor (1991-97) and assistant to the president for economic policy (2001-02).

Originally posted 2021-04-26 15:14:18.

Current Events, Recent Posts

Back to Chinese Checkers

1 Comment

LOL,  Can you name the above group?  LOL Another barn burner from Mustang. I just love this one! Read and enjoy, and if you like it go to his website and say so. He has a great website, well researched, thought out, and usually with a tad of humor, such as this one.

Back to Chinese Checkers

by Mustang

April 13, 2021 — bunkerville

A few interesting developments among the so-called China watchers.  There is nothing for you to do about this, of course, but I thought it would provide at least some amusement.  So, there is this fellow named Sandeep Dhawan who writes advice to the US State Department suggesting what they ought to do about China.  I’m sure the State Department appreciates this advice — the Lord knows if anyone needed advice, it’s the US State Department.  Sandeep’s bona fides include the fact that he’s a former commander in the Indian navy.  I found this curious, so I did a few minutes of G-searching and could not find one single incident where the Indian Navy ever distinguished itself in a combat role at sea.  Well, it may not matter.

Russia, India, and China

Sandeep is concerned because, as the United States withdraws from its foreign outposts, China is moving in to “fill up the vacuum.”  Moreover, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s latest visit to the Middle East seems to indicate (to Sandeep) that China is definitely “moving in.”  Now, maybe it’s just me, but … so what?  Yi’s vow to “work with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman to “help protect their core interests against foreign interference” doesn’t bother me in the least.  More to the point, if Iran invaded Saudi Arabia tonight at midnight, I couldn’t care less.  Remember, I have long advocated that the solution to the petty tyrants in the Middle East is to convince the Saudis that the Iranians are good to eat.  Sorry, my friends, but I don’t care if China spends all of its silver taels on Algeria, Egypt, Palestine, Eritrea, or on Huey, Dewey, and Louie.  In fact, I think China should spend all their money in the Middle East.  We American taxpayers need a break.

Note:  I wonder if China realizes that all those countries hate each other almost as much as they hate us?

What does concern me, however, is that given America’s hunger for Chinese-made plastic bowls, it will be OUR spending at Wal-Mart that will actually fund China’s mischief in the Middle East.  Painfully, we all know that the average female shopper at Wal-Mart would trade in her first born son for a set of eight plastic storage bowls if they come in multiple colors.  Yeah, patriotism is important, so long as it doesn’t interfere in plastic storage ware.

Meanwhile, Russia’s Putin and China’s Xi are forming a mutual support arrangement.  They didn’t do this when Trump was president, of course … they know what a war hungry maniac Trump was.  But now that Joe Biden’s in the White House … well, off come the gloves.  Truly, this IS the danger of electing a nitwit to the presidency, and a former prostitute as his Vice … do you think anyone in the old country will respect America’s leadership, or will they take advantage of the opportunities handed to them by the American voter?

Note:  I don’t know for a fact that Kamala Harris ever was a prostitute, but that’s what Peter, who comments here, said — and it may all boil down to how one defines prostitution, but for the record I trust Peter, and this should go a long way toward reducing what I owe him.

But let’s be optimistic … even assuming that China and Russia “divide the world” among them, so what?  At some point in the future, the American dim-bulbs who voted for Biden will be called away and we’ll end up with a president with cajones.  After this new president nukes everyone one who is friends with China or Russia, the world will belong to us.  Then we can start fighting among ourselves, which is what we like to do almost better than anything (except Wal-Mart shopping).

LOL, What a great post for today, Thank you Mustang!!!

Originally posted 2021-04-13 14:39:04.