No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Archive for March 7th, 2008

This is your 94-hour warning for the March edition of Drinking Right

by @ 20:56. Filed under Miscellaneous.

This is the Emergency Blogging System. Old dumbshit Egg failed to activate it at 7 pm to make the warning 96 hours, but this is not a test.

The March edition of Drinking Right will be at the usual place on the usual date at the usual time. For those not familiar with that, we drink at Papa’s Social Club (7718 W Burleigh in Milwaukee) on the second Tuesday of the month unless otherwise rescheduled (this month, that’s March 11) at 7 pm.

Be there, or be nowhere.

This concludes this activation of the Emergency Blogging System.

If the RepubicRATs can’t support the “R” nominee,… (language warning)

by @ 20:28. Filed under Politics.

(H/T – Bill Quick)

I’ll give the standard warning for language in my response (on page 2) now. The Daily Times of Salisbury, Maryland is reporting that a bunch of RepublicRATs who are pissed that RepubicRAT Representative Wayne Gilchrest got ousted in the primary are lining up to support the DemocRAT nominee rather than the winner of the Republican nomination, Andy Harris:

Republicans unhappy with the outcome of last month’s congressional District 1 primary are wasting no time becoming activists and fundraisers for the Democratic nominee.

Queen Anne’s County State’s Attorney Frank Kratovil, who won the district’s Democratic nomination last month with 40 percent of the vote, will attend a fundraising breakfast in Chestertown on March 11 sponsored by Republicans for Kratovil. The members of this group comprises a large disenfranchised group of U.S. Rep. Wayne Gilchrest supporters, such as longtime Gilchrest aide Karen Willis.

“I’m deeply saddened that Wayne didn’t make it through the primary,” Willis said. “I’ve found lots of people who feel the same way. I’m just trying to get behind Mr. Kratovil to continue to have 1st District representation from a thinking person.”

This isn’t fleeting support from Willis. She’s worked for Gilchrest for nearly his entire career in Congress, and she doesn’t support Baltimore County Sen. Andy Harris’ more conservative views, whether the issue be Iraq or the economy.

Again, for those with weak eyes, don’t turn the page. The rest of you, please, read on.

Revisions/extensions (9:06 pm 3/7/2008) – I need a copy editor, one that doesn’t mind the occassional expletive :-)

60-seat ‘Rat majority in the Senate?

by @ 16:49. Filed under Politics - National.

(H/Ts – Sister Toldjah and Matt Lewis)

The NYT reports the ‘Rats are salivating over the prospects of getting a filibuster-proof majority in the 111th Congress to go along with the Oval Office. The numbers seem to suggest that it’s possible; while they hold a 51-49 advantage now for the purposes of caucusing, there are 18 Republican incumbents (including 2 freshly-minted ones) and 5 Republican open seats up for election, while there are only 12 Democratic incumbents up for election. It currently is unlikely they’ll actually get to 60, though it is likely they will pick up 3.

Matt says that a filibuster-proof majority would really change things. Versus the current political/philosophical situation, perhaps a bit, though I tend to believe that is more a function of whether they (or the Pubbies) get a clean sweep rather than whether one party or another gets a filibuster-proof majority. What would really change the operational dynamic is if they fail to get to 60, especially if they get the White House. Unlike the Republicans of the 109th Congress, they may well not hesitate to jettison the filibuster in order to push their agenda through, especially if they do get an absolute majority without Joe Lieberman’s caucusing help.

Conversely, if they do get to 60 (or depending on how the chips fall, simply get close), they won’t need to get rid of the filibuster to get their agenda through. Therefore, they would keep it around as a hedge against the next time things don’t go their way.

Re: Not Suffering Fools Gladly

by @ 16:16. Filed under Politics - National.

Jim Geraghty has the perfect response to the NYT/McCain spat Shoebox highlighted below:

Call me when McCain drops the F-bomb or recommends anatomically difficult forms of mating.

To that I say, that would probably make me more inclined to insert the noseplugs and vote for McCain.

I guess one legal vote per legal voter is not the ‘Rats goal

by @ 16:06. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Fresh from their shoutdown of a press conference held by Senate Republicans asking for a final legislative vote on a constitutional amendment that would require voter ID, all 18 ‘Rat Senators voted to keep said final vote from happening. Given that no less than the Milwaukee Police Department asked for this as one of their two recommendations to remove much of the odor of tainted elections, and nobody is talking about taking up the other one (elimination of same-day registration), I can only believe that the Democratic Party of Wisconsin is in favor of vote fraud.

What is exceptionally troubling is Jeff Plale, who owes his continued presence in the Senate to the fact that his opponent was accused of and ultimately convicted of fraudulent voting, is marching in lock step with the rest of the fraudsters.

I have a message for the DPW – when the worm finally does turn, and you lose power despite your desperate attempts to hang onto it, payback will be a cast-iron bitch.

Not Suffering Fools Gladly

by @ 14:41. Filed under Politics - National.

The AP, amongst others, is trying to drum up a story about John McCain and his temper.

A New York Times reporter attempted to ask John McCain questions about his conversation with John Kerry re: the possibility of being his VP for the 2004 election.   From what I can see, the reporter was trying to do a “got ‘cha” over some dates.

I’m no John McCain acolyte.   I’ve watched this, I’ve listened to it without the video and I’ve read the transcript.   Maybe there is a story here, I don’t know.   But if the reporter isn’t able to frame the question in a way other than “let me try and trip you over dates,” she needs to find another occupation.   Other than another attempt to create a front page piece over nothing, I don’t see any HERE, HERE. I’ve seen more pointed responses in church meetings.  

I think this is one time I’m glad McCain doesn’t suffer fools gladly!

From their lips to God’s ears

by @ 12:50. Filed under Miscellaneous.

I’ve heard this too many times over the past year to put much stock in it.   However, here’s an article arguing that oil is in a bubble and likely to drop fast and hard to $50/barrel once it starts down.   An interesting argument made by in the article is that the drop in oil will have a negative impact on the economy.   I find that hard to agree with.

The US uses about the equivalent of 400 million gallons of gasoline daily.   That amounts to about 4 gallons per day for each of the 110 million households.   If oil dropped to $50/barrel, that should put gas back in the range of $2/gallon.   How can reducing the cost per household by and average of about $110/month be a bad thing?

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]