Monday, June 1, 2015

Pipe Dreamers

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, texas, rain, california, drought, pipeline

In the month of May, 35 trillion gallons of rain fell on the great state of Texas, creating some significant flooding problems (and the construction of a few Arks), but also replenishing the state's previously low reservoirs.

Being a generous state, Texas would love to share some of this abundance of water with the increasingly thirsty liberals in California who suddenly seem very enthusiastic about the creation of ugly, environmentally destructive pipelines if it means they won't have to drain their hot tubs or boycott their bidets.

Sadly, no such pipeline is being seriously proposed, and not just for the reason cited in the cartoon. Rather, Hope n' Change is pretty sure that this president would never sign legislation which would expose Americans to the very real possibility of job creation.

BONUS: POSTER BOY

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, martin o'malley, mom

Hope n' Change would like to welcome Democrat Martin O'Malley to the 2016 Presidential campaign and wish him the best of luck in his quest to challenge Hillary Clinton without eventually being found in a park, toes up and room temperature, under highly suspicious circumstances.

O'Malley has an impressive political resume including being the former mayor of Baltimore - and hey, who doesn't want more of that for the whole country? He apparently can also play guitar and take his shirt off, two things which we pray Hillary will never do in public.

Frankly, we won't be surprised if Mr. O'Malley appropriates our poster design for his campaign because it's so fitting. Who else but Mom wants to care for you from cradle to grave? Protect you from bullies? Guide you through life and protect you from the consequences of your own bad decisions?

And really, who could vote against "Mom?" It would feel like voting against the American flag and apple pie! Then again, most liberals would do those things in a heartbeat. Plus, they seem to prefer the liberation of easy abortions to the "war on women" enslavement of actual motherhood.

So maybe O'Malley should pass on the whole "Mom" thing and stick with his original inspirational slogan: "At Least I'm Not Hillary."

16 comments:

Sandy said...

I just want you nice folks in Texas to know that not all Californians are liberal. I have lived in CA for most of my life, and I, along with most of my friends and family are very conservative. I know we are referred to as living on the "left coast", but that just isn't so. Please know that I believe with every day that passes, a new conservative is born of a former liberal in our fine state. Please don't generalize or compartmentalize our citizens.
On another note, we ask that everyone pray for rain to come to our drought-wrought state. The El Nino is setting up once again to give the west coast an abundant rain year. We need it as badly as Texas did, but not of the Biblical totals that you had to endure. Our prayers go out to you each and every day for a full recovery, and for the strength you need to get through the loss of loved ones and property.

rickn8or said...

It struck me if I change my party affiliation to "D", I'd have the exquisite pleasure of voting against Hillary in both the primary and the general elections.

Two fer one!

Joseph ET said...

Most of us know that the Democrats are going to get a couple their members to “act” like they are trying to run against Hillary. That’s just for show, unless she’s hit by lightning and has to drop out. I don’t know how she could win. Even without the scandals, she doesn’t have anything to run on except for sleeping with Bill at least one time. But, there are better women that have done that and they are at least attractive.

Some folks are saying that the current four year drought in California is the worst ever. I don’t know how they measure that sort of thing. We had a seven year drought here in California during the 1970s. Then in the 80s they had to use snow plows to make way for the ski lifts to get through it. Of course the Al Gore crowd blames it on Global Warming. Then you have the billions of gallons of water wasted for the Delta Smelt and the environazis that likely put the Smelt there won’t allow any new reservoirs.

Our drought may end this winter as “A brewing El NiƱo brought deadly downpours to Texas and Oklahoma, but could be just what California needs to temper its drought crisis.” This is a pipeline that Obama can’t stop.

BTW, there are many, many conservatives in California. Most of the loony liberals occupy the coastal areas between San Francisco and L.A. if you look at a map of the districts you will see a lot of red. I get angry when I hear the pundits write off California because “it’s a blue state”. California, home of Ronald Reagan and our former Governor a blue state? I try to tell these people that they can turn California red by working constantly (not just at election periods) on a few districts at a time. That and start finding a few ‘good’ candidates could get them 55 electoral votes. Wow! With that who needs Ohio? Looks like they are getting near to turning Texas blue. Watch out!

REM1875 said...

We are well aware there is a different world just behind l.a. and a short distance from nyc, and dallass, and austin. Sadly urbanintes like to make decisions for those wild uncontrollable county folk to 'bring them into the fold'. Leave us the hell alone seems to be a hard thing to understand.
We hope many gentle long soaking rains arrives for California so that buildings stay in place but the drought is relieved.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Sandy- It wasn't my intent to categorize all Californians as liberals, but I can see how my wording could have been read that way. I have friends and family in California and I don't want anyone to be suffering from the effects of this drought. I'm hoping the state will soon get that much-needed rain...and get it a little less dramatically than we did here in Texas!

@rickn8or- It's tempting, isn't it?

@Joseph ET- I think O'Malley may be a legitimate candidate (in the sense of not being a Clinton stooge) who has accurately figured out that if the Clintons are overwhelmed by scandals, the candidacy will be his by default.

And although you say Hillary slept with Bill once, I'm not entirely convinced. Monica's dress definitely had Bill's DNA, but I'm not sure Chelsea does.

Again, sorry if it sounded like I was tarring California and not just the "increasingly thirsty liberals in California" who regularly put questionable environmental goals ahead of the well-being of their fellow citizens. I definitely want the state to get the rain it needs and, if the state can be turned red, the reign it needs.

@REM1875- Good points. Austin, Texas is a liberal stronghold which is second to none in its wackiness.

And yes, I'm hoping California gets gentle sustained rains that won't be causing landslides and other problems. Between drought, floods, wildfires, and earthquakes, California gets more than its share of problems.

Cat Whisperer said...

Governor Jerry Brown doesn’t want to pollute the precious bodily fluids of Californians with un-fluoridated Texan rainwater.

Geoff King said...

Being stuck between California and Texas, we here in Northern Arizona pay special attention to weather in those states. Thus far, our weather seems totally unrelated to either the drought or floods experienced by our neighbors. We had less snow than normal this last winter (Flagstaff, historically, is the 5th snowiest city above 50K population in the entire country including Alaska), and we have had a cooler and wetter spring than normal.
Generally, by June, our forest fire danger jumps up to high or even extreme and they talk of possibly closing the woods down completely until the Monsoon Season hits sometime in July. At present the danger level is low to moderate and all looks well.
This does qualify as climate change in my mind, but is no more human caused than the large increase in earthquakes and volcanic activity much of the planet is now experiencing.
As far as our generally west to southwest prevailing winds are concerned, they appear unaffected. We here in Arizona have a saying about those winds: "California blows and Texas sucks"....sorry about that one, but I didn't make it up.

Anonymous said...

You really hit the ball over the fence with this 'un!
- BarbaCat

Anonymous said...

I am certainly pleased that "that every day that passes a new conservative is born..."
The problem is that thousand and thousands of new liberals are created by colleges that fail to educate and a media that will never tell the truth apropos socialism.

Wayne Shook said...

"At least I'm not Hillary" hopefully will be the feeling going forward, even though the "war on women" continues unabated! In the news lately are more and more scandalous items concerning the Clinton Foundation, plus the dynamic duo as well, not that it will mean anything to those poor females who are cowering in foxholes as grenades and 88's shower down upon them in the right's unjustified attack on the girls!

John the Econ said...

For one thing, California already has access to plenty of water without having to go to the trouble and expense of importing it from Texas, like it now does for a large percentage of their electricity. California's problems are that by the end of the '70s, the environmentalists had stopped almost all water projects, California's population has nearly doubled since then, most of its residents don't realize that they're living in the middle of a desert, and they are intentionally flushing a large percentage of their fresh water to the sea in order to "save" a bait fish that they kill more of researching than they do by taking water and moving it elsewhere. And instead of spending the money necessary to upgrade their water infrastructure to support 40-million people, they're instead "investing" the better part of a trillion dollars on a high-speed train to nowhere. Such is the current state of affairs in a state that has been totally run by Democrats for a generation.

O'Malley: You beat me to it, but then again, I guess it was pretty obvious. Only hard-left Democrats could possibly think of claiming responsibility for Baltimore as a resume enhancement. So America, if you want higher taxes, even bigger and less competent government, billions more spent on "urban decay" with no discernible positive effect, and thugs ruling your streets, MOM may be your guy.

Personally, I don't take him seriously. My guess is that the guys you see jumping in now are looking for cabinet positions in a supposedly inevitable Clinton2 administration. Perhaps secretary of HUD?

Speaking of hard to take seriously: The young, hip, with-it, "diverse" Progressive left takes great joy and pride in attempting to portray the GOP as the party of "old, fat, white people". And yet, what kind of people is it that seem to exclusively represent those who are excited about Bernie Sanders?

(do take the time to read the tweets in the link above; they're hilarious)

And finally, I noted this meme emerging over the weekend. Seems the memo to the mindless left has gone out and they're instructing their followers to point out how absurd it is that there are currently 16-or-so GOP candidates for voters to filter through. My simple response? At least the Republicans get a choice. I guess Democrats feel, like Bernie Sanders does that Americans simply have too many choices, and we'd be far better off in a simple, planned and controlled economy and political establishment, perhaps like they have in Venezuela.

John the Econ said...

Re Californians: If it makes any of you feel any better, I too was once "a Californian". I attended public schools, and a very liberal public university. Decades-long exposure to such high doses of Progressive radiation did not damper my conservative tendencies a single bit. In fact, it only hardened them. Whereas today's typical weak-minded Progressive is actually sheltered against having to think about, much less confront challenges to their ideology, I had to fight for mine every single day. As a result, my biggest muscle, my brain, became stronger while the typical leftist's have become weaker from lack of use. That's why in today's academic environment, they have "trigger warnings", "safe spaces" and classes where anything that challenges the comfortable romper room of leftist theory is outlawed in the name of "being offensive". To a modern academic Progressive, the best debate is the one that never takes place, because they know they in the cold reality of honest debate, they're losing their ability to defend their own ideology.

You who say there are plenty of conservatives left in California are correct. There are, and like with other left-coast states, conservatism is far more pronounced the further away you get from the coast. It's just that they are outnumbered and out-voiced by the loud popular culture. California's problem is that they have been working overtime over the last 40 years to increase the number of net-consumers of state services while doing everything possible to offend the net-producers. Back in the late-80's when the mass exodus of net-producers was picking up, the state said that this wasn't a big deal, since the overall population of the state was, in fact, increasing. My point was, "How well it it work out for California over time when a worker who makes $100,000-a-year leaves, only to be replaced with one who makes only $10,000?" They are now starting to find out. Today, California's state budget is buoyed almost exclusively by the presence of a handful of tech billionaires. But what happens when the next tech bust hits, or enough of them get tired of the BS and head off to a cheaper place? And it's a lot easier to move a tech company than it was to move a lot of the industries that used to be the mainstay of California's economy during the golden years, like aerospace. (Most of the worlds aircraft were designed and build in Southern California. Today, California's last aircraft factory is being liquidated)

As for "running against Hillary": It's interesting to note that Bernie Sanders so far has taken a decisive hand-off approach regarding the Clinton Foundation scandals, and the fantastic wealth of the Clintons. Considering that the foundation of Bernie's shtick is "income inequality", "corporate greed", and big money corruption of politics, this seems quite strange. Does he actually intend to imply that a CEO who makes a couple million a year running a large company is inherently immoral and corrupt, but the Clinton's who make hundreds-of-thousands of dollars a night just for showing up and run a "charity" that spends 90% of its intake on lavish living and employing political cronies is not?

It will be hard to take his candidacy seriously until he's willing to take on Hillary. Otherwise, morally he's just as bad as she is.

Rod said...

I wouldn't wish "the big one" on anyone but if it must happen,,, just IF,,, let's hope Nancy Pelosi is home in CA and also out of a far west beach when if slides off into the Pacific Ocean. Apparently her home is on the land side of San Andreas fault but there's water out there as well. Make lemonaide of a huge lemon.

The little bit I worked in California they were very particular about air & water but allowed land to be trashed. And they're huge users of both energy and water but don't care to have infrastructure in their state; selfish & misguided. Of course there are nice people there (after all, nice people are everywhere) but CA is a state I wouldn't even consider for a home and hardly to visit. Sandy (first poster today) seems very nice; ever considered Texas?

Joseph ET said...

After Howard Hughes moved to Las Vegas and purchased six casinos on the Las Vegas Strip in the late 1960s. The big joke at the time was the reason that Hughes made those investments is because he expected the ‘big one’ would hit California soon and he would own “beach front property.” I guess Hughes was incorrect at least as far as the timing goes. That may still happen of course. It’s best to live in the northern part if one must live in California.

BTW My Dad came from Olney Texas, still have family there and around Fort Worth. I have been to Texas many times and was stationed at Fort Hood for nine months. Texas is nice, but gets too hot and has too many insects for me. Mom’s family traveled bit by bit across the nation with many landing in Oregon. Still have family there too. We were thinking about going to Oregon until the 2008 crash killed our equity. Now it’s too late for a move. Oh well!

John the Econ said...


Martin O’Malley has said something I totally agree with:

O’Malley calls climate change “the greatest business opportunity to come to our country in 100 years.”

Yes, "climate change" represents the greatest opportunity ever for crony capitalists and their taxpayer funded supporters to divert resources from those who produce the goods and services that the global marketplace demands to those who otherwise have little to offer a free marketplace. Never has slavery been so successfully sold to a formerly free people.

John the Econ said...

Here are some cartoon ideas: "Pro-Choice"

The left says they're all about "choice". (at least as long as it's not about individual and corporate freedoms outside of the sexual realm)

So as I mentioned yesterday, Democrats are mocking the fact that there are over a dozen Republicans probing for the nomination, versus the "choice" they offer, Hillary Clinton.

Well, they might try to argue that there is a "choice" in the form of Baltimore success story MOM, and Bernie Sanders, aka, "Left and Lefter".

For the moment, the heat is off Hillary has the DC media machine goes all in on the Hastert scandal. Yes, it looks as though Hastert may have been a perv, and it's certainly ironic that he was a part of the whole Bill Clinton impeachment show. But at the same time, it's history; Hastert is done and no longer has any political power.

On the other hand, we have a genuine weirdo running for President, socialist Bernie Sanders. Seems that 43 years ago, Bernie fancied himself a fiction writer with strange notions of what turns women on. "'A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy, A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused." Speak for yourself, Bernie.

Later on, "A woman enjoys intercourse with her man - as she fantasizes being raped by three men simultaneously..."

Sounds more to me as if Bernie is a lousy lay, and his partners can only relate to their relations with him as rape. But that's purely a guess; another dysfunctional liberal totally unaware that the dysfunction is his, and so arrogantly assumes that everyone else is just as dysfunctional and the real problem is society et-al. It's not a surprise that he's a socialist; socialism is built upon the conceit that everyone is, or should be exactly the same, both in function and dysfunction.

As if this would be a viable defense, he called his prose a "badly written 50 Shades of Grey", as if that makes things any better. I haven't read "50 Shades" and can't claim to be an expert on the phenomenon, but what I do understand is that it's hardly material that promotes healthy sexuality or the respect and well-being of women.

Remember, these are the people who argue that it's the GOP that is conducting "The War on Women". Yeah, this was written by an immature sexually retarded 30-year-old for one of those out-there libertine independent papers 43 years ago. Is that relevant today? Maybe, maybe not. But what I do know is that it takes little imagination to visualize the $%@*storm that would be taking place if anything remotely like this were to be unearthed by any of the GOP hopefuls.

For Sanders, I'm sure this will pass. His small following will shrug this off like the brain-dead feminists shrug of the misogyny of the Clintons. The Democrats own the sewer, and are proud of it.