club soda
Club Soda is a penny lover and a recovering liberal. His most unique talent is connecting every topic to communism. As part of his penance for once being a liberal some 15 years or so ago, Club Soda has vowed to read every book by David Horowitz. Unable to escape his past, Club Soda is haunted by the fact that he’s originally from Houston, Texas. Club Soda now resides in Denver and has a chronic illness that requires him to miss a lot of work and ride ski lifts in the winter months.
Posts by club soda
Where’s My Bailout?
Mar 3rd
I suppose this will be the Climate Change Project Manager's office. Nice six-figure BS job if you can get it.
With the economy still in the tank and unemployment continuing to hover around ten percent, a lot of people are starting to wonder, “Where’s my bailout?” Well, if you look at the salary and employment stats in the public sector (city, county, state and federal government) you’ll see exactly where your bailout went.
Your bailout – or at least your hard-earned tax dollars that are partially funding the corporate fat-cat bailouts (the other portion being financed by the Chinese, among others) – is also being used to create make-work six-figure nonsense jobs, such as Climate Change Program Manager at the National Park Service. This ridiculous job, with a pay scale between $103,000 and $155,000, is just the tip of the iceberg (pun intended). According to the Dec. 11, 2009 edition of USA Today:
Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months — and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted. Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector… When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.
Moreover, the New York Times reported in August of 2009 that while the private sector lost 6.9 million jobs, state and local governments added 110,000 new jobs. All of this data – and it goes on and on and on, if you care to look into it – strikes me as horribly backwards.
I’m no economist, but if deficits are skyrocketing and companies are looking for relief so they can begin hiring again, wouldn’t logic dictate that government cut jobs, siphoning those people into the private sector, while providing tax incentives to individuals and private sector companies?
In December of 2009, 382,758 federal employees were making $100,000 or more annually. That’s more than $38 billion in what is largely bureaucratic largesse. Last I checked it’s the private sector that actually produces our GDP, not government jobs that essentially produce nothing. That’s a lot of nothing we’re getting for our billions.
Why we’re headed down the same road as western Europe, California, Massachusetts, New York, etc., etc., which ultimately leads to economic crisis and bankruptcy, I’ll never know. Or, maybe I do know…
It’s all about power and payoffs. The more the private sector and citizens cede to the state, the more power and money that’s funneled to the state and its dependants. It’s simple mathematics with the additional wild card of human nature (it’s corrupt, by the way).
While some see this as a Utopian system, rational people recognize that an all-powerful, controlling state destroys liberty and freedom. The explosive growth of public sector payrolls and jobs is simply another data point in a trend line that shows America headed toward the abyss. If you’re not concerned about it, you should be.
The New Climate Change Strategy: Contradiction and Confusion!
Feb 14th
Back in the good old days, the sun was the primary culprit of Climate Change and our ancestors adapted by migrating to warmer, more hospitable areas.
In the not-so-distant past (defined here as three months or so ago), every time the weather changed Climate Change-ocrats and Global Warm Mongers (a.k.a., True Believers) would remind us that these were the signs of the coming climate apocalypse. Whether hurricane, tornado, blizzard, drought, or even drizzle, any deviation from San Diego-like weather was an I-told-you-so moment.
Now that the climate worm has turned, the tune has changed. With the earth in a cooling phase and much of the climate change “science” thoroughly debunked as pre-conceived political ideology, fear not! The True Believers are now here to remind us that “weather is not climate.”
In other words, an unusually cold winter does not indicate a cooling trend; it’s just the weather! Still, thanks to man-caused climate change or global warming or global cooling (wording dependent on the current trends) we can expect more severe snowstorms! Confusing? Contradictory? Sure it is, but confusion and contradiction are fuel for the progressive fire. It’s how progressives try to trick the average American into believing the unbelievable. It applies to any topic, from economics to sociology, but is most prevalent in the environmental movement.
Thus, while any change in the climate is sure to bring catastrophe, it is also acknowledged that regular climate change has been part of the earth’s natural cycles for the past four billion years. Moreover, while progressives are hard-line Darwinian evolutionists, all adaptation to the environment has apparently come to a halt. Now, when the climate changes we will not migrate to higher ground or more temperate areas as our ancestors did. Instead we will stubbornly refuse to move, and drown… very slowly.
Desperate times call for desperate measures, and the True Believers are officially desperate. Pay special attention to the messages being disseminated by the True Believers, namely that “weather is not climate” yet “weather is climate.” The more contradictory their messages become, the more fun it will be to watch.
Countdown to Fascism: The Butter Police
Feb 12th
In Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton argued that the Constitution was “merely intended to regulate the general political interests of the nation,” not, as Hamilton put it, “the regulation of every species of personal and private concerns.”
Founding Father Alexander Hamilton was a smart guy, but he should have avoided Aaron Burr.
Contrast this philosophy, which guides the spirit of the American people’s compact with the federal government (the Constitution), with this gem from the good people at Smart Balance (they make some kind of delicious buttery spread): “Denmark is the first country to legally ban artificial trans fats. The Danish people seem to be doing just fine without it… Sounds like a pretty good law.”
You know what, Smart Balance people, whoever you are? You can have my trans fats when you pry them out of my cold, dead hands. Apparently, if the Smart Balance people had their way, the feds would be regulating how much fat, or what kind of fat, I decide to eat each day, a.k.a., regulating “every species of personal and private concerns.” Even Doctor McCoy is saying, “Good God, Jim, I’m a doctor, not a Constitutional lawyer!”
You don’t have to be a Constitutional lawyer to see plainly that the Smart Balance people (whoever they are) are perfectly fine with violating the rights of every American in order to benefit their business. The term “fascism” is typically associated with murdering tyrants, but in the early 1900s it simply described the state’s relationship to the individual. It did not have the connotation it does today until the very nature of the system made it easy for tyrants to be tyrants and start murdering their people en masse.
And, in such a system, the government has a very cozy relationship with corporations, favoring certain ones over others, as well as certain industries over others. So, at one time it was called “fascism”, but in today’s topsy-turvy, girls will be boys and boys will be girls, mixed-up, muddled-up, shook-up world they call it “progressive”.
Countdown to Fascism: The Green Police
Feb 8th
Each year at this time I hope to be dazzled by the fast-moving action on the field and the non-stop hilarity and/or profundity of the commercials that play in between. And each year any hopes of a memorable Super Bowl Sunday are dashed to bits in a hail of chips, queso and New Belgium beer (this year’s choice was a dark one called 1554; therefore, my stupor was a particularly stupefying one).
By the end of each year’s Super Bowl I’m left counting the cost to my body, my soul and my mind, and the reckoning is horrible. This year was worse than most, thanks in large part to the unending litany of crappy commercials. The agencies that created the spots all seemed to be trying far too hard to amuse. By doing so, any attempt at humor is usually forced and unnatural. And so it was.
There was one commercial, however, that stood out. Not because it was particularly clever, but because it was prophetic. I’m writing of course about Audi’s Green Police ad. I won’t bore you with a description of it; watch it below and let me know in the Comments whether or not you agree with my assessment, which follows the ad…
Okay then. Here’s why this ad is so prophetic… At first, I thought it was a satirical political ad aimed at Cap and Trade and the Climate Change-ocrats who would have each individual subject to draconian environmental rules and taxes. Come to find out the ad was for what I guess is a “socially responsible” car company called Audi. All Audis will simply pass through the fascist roadblocks that are sure to be part of our Utopian future because they’re so “green”.
Though the ad is obviously meant to be amusing, as in, “Ha ha ha. Wouldn’t that be funny if you were ticketed for having Styrofoam on your person? Hilarious!” It’s so absurd, you see, that it’s funny. But something tells me that Audi and the agency that created the ad would love to see this really happen.
It’s humor with an edge of truth in it; the scenes of constant harassment from the authorities regarding your personal consumption would actually happen if the environmentalists and their lackeys in Congress had their way. Of course, all those who spearhead the environmental regulation of the individual will be exempt, but everyone else (that’s me and you, by the way) will be subject to the microscopic bureaucratic meddling portrayed in the ad. The Green Police are funny (I guess) in the abstract, but less so in reality, kind of like the Gestapo and the KGB. Hilarious on paper, but rather authoritarian in person.
Big Satan, Little Satan and the Left
Jan 28th
A growing meme amongst the progressive crowd, and closely related to the Truther movement (Truthers being those who believe 911 was an inside job by the American government), is the audacious accusation that America brought 911 on itself. This Blame America First trope is the direct result of left-wing politics being force-fed to youngsters through America’s “educational” system.
A growing number of academic programs in the university system across this great country are thinly veiled ACORN-like recruiting centers for budding progressive, social-justice activists from a pool of blissfully ignorant, beer-guzzling, medical marijuana-smoking young whippersnappers.
These precocious youngsters are taught by seemingly scholarly academic types that America (sometimes spelled with a K, as in Amerika, or the KKK of Amerika) is an imperialist, racist nation bent on subjugating people of color the world over, and that anyone to the right of Michael Moore is a fascist. The mass media relentlessly reinforce this message with constant propaganda that Joseph Goebbels would be proud of (see also: Cameron, James. Avatar, et al).
Ironically, many progressives reared in such a system find themselves in common cause with global Jihad. Of course global Jihadists, if they reach their goal of a world caliphate, are likely to frown upon the myriad of causes most dear to progressives, such as a homosexual marriage free-for-all and abortion. By “frowning” I mean “putting the infidels to death by stoning.” Mark Steyn put it as only Mark Steyn can: “A little girl born today will be unlikely, at the age of 40, to be free to prance around demonstrations in Eurabian Paris or Amsterdam chanting ‘Hands off my bush!’”
So very true, yet progressives seek to undermine any attempt to squelch this particularly virulent strain of the peaceful religion, Islam. I suppose they’re too busy re-hashing America’s shoddy treatment of Native Americans and blacks (can we move on, please?) to realize that justifying Jihad – in effect, collaborating with Jihad – may very well lead to some dire circumstances.
Still, I’m struggling with this concept; that is, how America is ultimately to blame for 911. Usually, the response to the question of how America brought 911 on itself is, “America’s global policy.” Okay. What about America’s global policy?
What is it, exactly, about America’s policies in the past 100 years that ultimately led a bunch of Islamic fanatics to fly airplanes into buildings with hundreds of terrified passengers on board with them? And, regardless of America’s policies, this is justified? Put yourself in the airplane with Mohamed Atta, amigo, and then tell me if that deranged idiot was justified in his actions.
It’s easy to sit safely in Middletown, USA and pontificate in abstract about how Muslim countries have been subjugated by Europeans and Americans and quite another to come face to face with someone who’s preparing to put the infidel (you) to death. And I tell you what, if I had lost a loved one on 911 and some hipster dufus made a crack about blaming America for 911, there would be hell to pay.
But I digress, as usual… Typically, our progressive friend cannot answer the follow-up question. Sure, they may rattle on about the division of Muslim countries after both World Wars or America’s policy during the Iraq-Iran war, and so on and so forth. But there’s one particular piece of land that’s the sticking point here, and which has driven U.S. policy since 1948. That’s right. It’s all the Jews’ fault!
Why, ultimately, do the Islamic radicals hate us? Primarily, it’s our association with Israel. Secondarily, yet related, is the fact that most of us are infidels of one stripe or another. Progressives don’t care to delve very far into the actual messages coming out of the madrassas and media in Muslim countries.
Instead, parroting the popular progressive line about poverty, they simply close eyes and ears to the truth being shouted from the rooftops… er minarets. The message is not, “We’re desperately poor, so we’re going to strap explosives to ourselves and blow up amongst the infidels!” No, it’s: “We hate the Jews and the Christians! In fact, we hate the Buddhists, the Hindus, the atheists, the agnostics… Heck, anyone who’s not Muslim, especially those who ally themselves with the Jews!”
(I suppose the usual PC disclaimer should be inserted here. Yes, most Muslims are peace-loving, law-abiding folks, depending on the law to which they’re subject. Still, the volume of officially-sanctioned anti-Jewish, anti-infidel material coming out of Muslim countries with nary a peep in dissent is disconcerting, to say the least. Plus, if you’re not Muslim in a Muslim country you’re a second-class citizen. You can’t even own a Bible in most Muslim countries.)
This Jew-hating thing has been going on for a long time, at least since the Jews were identified as Jews. It’s the oldest trick in the book, and progressives buy it hook, line and sinker. My guess is that progressives, since they believe in the goodness and ultimate perfectibility of human beings, figure the Muslim world will come around once they recognize the esprit de corps they shared with Jihad. My other guess is that they will be sorely disappointed in the outcome.
There were a lot of people back in the 1930s who figured Hitler was someone they could deal with. The problem was they never bothered to read Mein Kampf, or if they did they skipped the parts about world domination and getting rid of the Jews.
So, while the Jihadists and Iran’s Ahmadinejad and his ilk lay out their plans plainly for all the world to see (destroy Israel, kill and subjugate the infidel), progressives rattle on meaninglessly about America’s complicity for global terrorism. Oh well, at least Howard Zinn would be proud that progressives reared in our university system will continue to mindlessly regurgitate his Marxist nonsense masquerading as scholarship.
I’m a Homophobe
Jan 27th
Very true, because I oppose gay marriage. When I use the phrase “gay marriage” I mean the type sanctioned by the state. Maybe the state shouldn’t be involved in marriage at all, but that’s a different topic for a different time.
Fact is, homosexuals can get married. Just march yourself down to the local Unitarian, Episcopal or mainline Protestant church and do it. I don’t care. I’m certainly not in the minority here. Most people are like me; live and let live and don’t tell me about your sexual idiosyncrasies.
I’m neither scared of nor angry at homosexuals, so give me a break. I’m so freaking tolerant it’s ridiculous. But I am not tolerant of the state endorsing homosexual marriage as somehow equal to marriage between a man and a woman.
The foundational issue here is the family and what properly constitutes a functional family. The left would have us believe that any family arrangement is fine as long as everyone “loves” each other. Here again, the left takes us into the realm of unverifiable emotion devoid of facts or logic.
The fact is that children thrive in a household with a husband and wife. Single-parent homes are a statistical disaster, especially in homes where men are absent, yet the left is constantly cheerleading for this harmful construct. I don’t know what the results are of homosexual couples raising children, probably because it’s too early in the game and the data is spotty at best.
Still, society should encourage what is obviously and quantifiably the ideal, rather than constantly trying to destroy it. Some will argue that heterosexuals haven’t done much to strengthen the family, what with all the divorce and dysfunction manifest in the modern family. But this is the typical leftist “two wrongs make a right” argument. So if I understand this argument properly, we should make something bad worse. That’s a great idea! It’s so brilliant that the left has adopted this approach to the current administration’s spending spree. “The Bush administration started this by getting us so heavily into debt,” they say with a straight face. So, once again, let’s make it worse!
Anyway, I’m going off topic here and probably belabored the point, but it should be crystal clear that we need to shore up the family for a health society and a strong nation rather than look for ways to undermine it.
What you’ve just read was written by Club Soda, a semi-regular contributor to The Daily Plunge. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of its host, Henshaw.
I’m a Misogynist
Jan 25th
Another way to put this would be that I hate women because I oppose abortion. Plain and simple, “feminism” has radically shifted from an equal rights movement to a special interest lobbying group for the abortion industry. It is especially galling that “feminist” groups like NOW and NARAL oppose any restrictions on abortion, including the horrific procedure known as partial-birth abortion.
In fact, our “above my pay grade” president opposed a law in Illinois that would have protected babies who survive a “botched abortion.” Nice. Do I oppose Obama’s position on abortion because he’s black? You be the judge.
This is less a religious issue than it is a simple human rights issue. Choice is actually something that happens before conception. I shouldn’t need to spell it out, but it should be rather obvious to any sentient being. But “choice” has been turned into a propagandistic euphemism for wholesale slaughter. Does that seem harsh? Sorry, but the “procedure” itself is harsh.
Most people – me included – prefer to close their eyes to what abortion really entails: the dismemberment and destruction of a human being. If you can’t handle seeing what an abortion looks like (go to YouTube and search for “silent scream” if you think you can), then you’re admitting how horrible it really is. I know I can’t watch it, and won’t, but that tells me everything I need to know about where to stand on this issue.
Even the most ardent pro-choicer would rarely refer to their unborn child as a “fetus” or a “clump of tissue”. No. They refer to it as their “baby”. But when it’s someone else’s child, particularly a poor minority woman’s child, it magically transforms itself into something less than human.
But this is no surprise really, since the pro-abortion movement is based in eugenics, which originally sought to sterilize the “unfit” and control the human population as if we were a bunch of rats. But that’s how many leftists see the human race, as a parasite or virus on the earth to be controlled (excepting them, of course). It doesn’t take much imagination to see where this leads if the people who control the government believe that some people are more worthy of life than others.
BTW… As mentioned in my previous post, I’m a Racist, the views above do not necessarily represent the views of its host since this was written by me, Club Soda. Next time, we’ll explore my homophobia.
I’m a Racist
Jan 21st
Let’s make one thing very clear right away. What you’re about to read, if you haven’t given up already, is written by Club Soda, a semi-regular contributor to The Daily Plunge. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of its host, Henshaw. Though I’m not fond of disclaimers or prefaces like this, it’s a necessary evil since many regular readers have blamed Henshaw for some of Club Soda’s most outrageous posts.
But let’s get to the core issue here; that Club Soda is a racist, misogynist homophobe. Guilty on all counts, at least according to people like Keith Olbermann and similar ilk. But I’ll leave it to you, loyal Daily Plunge readers, to decide whether or not the accusations are true. I’ll start with my racism in this post and move on to my misogyny and homophobia in subsequent posts…
There are two primary reasons I’m racist: One is that I’m against affirmative action and the other is that I’m not an Obama supporter.
To paraphrase Martin Luther King, Jr., people should be judged based on the content of their character, not the color of their skin. To single out specific minority groups for preferential treatment is inherently unfair to everyone. Plus, it dehumanizes those singled out. It says, in effect, you’re not smart or good enough to make it on your own merits or abilities because you have none. It creates a parent-child relationship between the state and certain classes of citizens, here based purely on external factors. If that’s not “racism straight up,” to quote the ever-tolerant Janeane Garofolo, I don’t know what is.
As mentioned in a Club Soda post last year, Star Parker, a black woman who herself was enslaved by the state in a cycle of welfare and abortion, calls it Uncle Sam’s Plantation. Parker is living proof of how the state has usurped the dignity of the individual just because that individual has dark skin. She is also living proof that the individual trumps the state in an America that lives up to its founding principles, not those espoused by America’s left.
I understand and sympathize with the argument that blacks were treated as second-class citizens and much worse for most of America’s history. However, Jim Crow is dead and buried along with the systemic racism it represented.
It’s long past time to move on, embrace a colorblind society and finally live out the truth that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Unfortunately, the Olbermanns, Maddows, Garofolos, Pelosis, Boxers, Sharptons, Jacksons and Rev. Wrights of the world would rather we didn’t, and continue to play racial politics in order to maintain their power and fill their coffers with the ill-gotten gain of continued racial division. If we weren’t divided by race these people wouldn’t have a job and they know it. In fact, we probably wouldn’t be divided by race if it wasn’t for this group of charlatans and others like them.
As for Mr. Obama, I disagree almost entirely with his ideology. It’s that simple. I don’t care if he’s black, white, orange or purple; his race has nothing to do with it. If race played a part in my logic, Thomas Sowell wouldn’t be my favorite economist and Clarence Thomas wouldn’t be my favorite Supreme Court justice. Oh, but I forgot! They’re Uncle Toms, according to the race-baiting left, so they don’t count! Let’s see, so I’m not supposed to take race into account when judging people and their ideas, just as long as they hold certain beliefs. Typical leftist paradox.
the fonzie solution
Nov 9th
I received an email from one of my esteemed U.S. Senators the other day, Mark Udall. Mr. Udall’s email urged me to sign a petition telling credit card companies to “stop taking advantage of their customers.” In other words, to stop jacking up their rates in response to a credit card “reform” bill President Obama signed, which Udall co-sponsored.
I’m not a big fan of credit card companies, the bait-and-switch tactics they employ and the usurious rates they often charge, but I’m also a firm believer in caveat emptor. Apparently, our left-wing politicians are not very familiar with this versatile Latin phrase.
The progressive politician’s answer to everything is more government. Then, when government causes the inevitable litany of unintended consequences (rising credit card rates in this case), the government is “forced” to come back in and fix what it broke in the first place. Then, the “fix” is worse than the first one and I get to pay for it. Thanks a lot!
I sure wish this logic worked for me, like the time I hit a patch of ice and spun into the back of another car. I had a beauty of a dent in the passenger-side door. In progressive la-la land I could have magically fixed that dent by backing up and hitting that car again instead of taking it to a repair shop (I foolishly took it to a repair shop). Unfortunately, I’ve tried this approach before, usually with golf clubs, and it actually doesn’t work.
Progressives approach public policy as if they were Fonzie; you know, the lovable character from Happy Days who could make anything work just by slamming his fist on it, usually the juke box at Mel’s Diner. Unfortunately, Arthur Fonzarelli was a fictional character on a sitcom made in the ’70s and set in the ’50s. Fonzie’s magic touch does not translate to the real world, especially to government.
When progressives take the Fonzie approach, the hapless citizen gets saddled with a second-rate spin-off, like Joanie Loves Chachi.
The Heather Graham Plan
Oct 30th
Have you seen the new commercial with Heather Graham promoting universal health care? In it, Heather races a bunch of fat, lazy people in what appears to be the 100-yard dash. The lovely and lithe Heather represents The Public Option (it says so on her race tag). The lovable but lazy fat people represent the private health insurance market.
I love this commercial produced by MoveOn.org, for both the obvious and more subtle reasons. But let’s get right to the subtle reasons since they’re, well… subtle.
MoveOn got the symbolism backwards, which is always awesome. In my dealings with government at the local, state and federal levels, I’ve never had the “Heather Graham” experience. I’ve certainly had the “Jabba the Hut” experience, and I don’t expect that will change in the near future.
Has any government program ever conjured up the image of a fleet-footed goddess? I’ve repeatedly encountered this figurative goddess in the private market, but never in the public sector, where I always run into the bloated Star Wars figure… Boonowa tweepie, Han Solo! Ha ha ha ha ha!
I’m also huge fan of the old “do as I say, not as I do” mentality, particularly when it comes from pampered, filthy rich celebrities. In this case, Heather promotes the idea that we – “we” being the unwashed, non-celebrity masses – should be part of a rationed system in which we may or may not get the treatment we need.
Meanwhile, Heather and her peers will still receive the finest health care the world has to offer. Having loads of money tends to shield you from the consequences of your pet social engineering projects. “Let them wait in line!” will join “Let them drive clown cars!” as the rallying cries for our 21st Century Marie Antoinettes.
How I enjoy being told by celebrities to grin and bear it while they merely grin it! They know what’s best for us… and for them. I may not get that MRI for two years, but I should feel so much better that I’m being forced by the state to make sacrifices for the common good as we edge ever closer to Utopia.
Though we all know Utopia is really a small town in Texas, Heather Graham’s Utopia includes making sure that I can’t have what she has. Nor does any American, other than those who are Graham-approved, have the opportunity to have what she has.
Socialists from the beginning have always pitted the haves against the have-nots; it’s how they agitate for socialist “reform” and revolution. The great irony of this tactic, that’s maybe less ironic and more purposeful, is how power and wealth tends to accumulate in fewer hands in these Utopian systems. Oh well, at least I’ll be able to stand in line with the rest of the proletariat.