This is Post No. 1,500

Our modest site is racking up the blog mileage.

This is No. 1,500.

It took us from October 2004 to January 15, 2009 to write our first 1,000 posts. It's taken less than six months for the next 500.

Who'da thunk?

You'd think we were trying to keep pace with Congress or something.

At least we read our stuff before we pass it.

Why There Were No Posts Monday

Don't exactly know why but Monday I felt like hammered sausage. Every time I had a great -- okay, that's stretching it a bit; let's just say "acceptable" -- idea upon which to opine, I couldn't seem to keep my brain engaged for longer than about 15 seconds.

Naturally I assumed the worst, as in H1N1(A), based solely on the fact that I was in Lloyd Noble on Saturday with thousands of contagious hoo-mans. Just enough time, I thought, to be feeling the effects.

But today is much better, so I guess it was just allergies.

Also, yesterday I was supremely torqued by Windows Media Player's ongoing reluctance to give me more than 10 seconds of continuous Glenn Beck Show. That's what I get for upgrading to WMP-11, when the old WMP-6 never failed me and had a couple of extra features the new version omitted. The only thing, in fact, that the new player does is try to catalog the music I bought on CD and transferred to my computer for backup.

There is only one thing I can say about Bill Gates and his Microsoft hordes right now: Piss ants!

I know I will feel bad about this later, but right now I don't care if President Obama taxes Mr. Gates of 95 percent of his fortune.

My solution this morn was to go ahead and fully install RealOne, of which I'm not really one of its fans, but it handles GB with no hiccups and so far hasn't tried to download any other spammy snot.

I don't ask for a lot in life these days: just programs, and brains, that work reliably.

The Only Thing Between Bankers & Pitchforks: Obama?

This is from The Politico. How does it sound to you?

The bankers struggled to make themselves clear to the president of the United States.

Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House state dining room last week, the CEOs of the most powerful financial institutions in the world offered several explanations for paying high salaries to their employees — and, by extension, to themselves.

“These are complicated companies,” one CEO said. Offered another: “We’re competing for talent on an international market.”

But President Barack Obama wasn’t in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation and offered a blunt reminder of the public’s reaction to such explanations. “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that.”

“My administration,” the president added, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”

How would you interpret this?

Is this the new politics of inclusion?

Is it hope, or change? Or neither?

Since when has it become a crime to pay, or receive, high salaries?

Since when is it a political tool to threaten American citizens with pitchfork-toting mobs?

If this is true -- and no one has come forward yet to deny it -- as an American I must say I am appalled, and ashamed.

If this is true -- and the anecdotal evidence of a trend is beginning to lean in that direction -- we have allowed the barbarians inside the gates. They are not those bearing pitchforks, but those with security passes inside the White House.

The fresh details of the meeting — some never before revealed — come from an account provided to POLITICO by one of the participants. A second source inside the meeting confirmed the details, and two other sources familiar with the meeting offered additional information.

The accounts demonstrate that despite the public comments on both sides that the meeting was cordial, the tone in the room was in fact one of mutual wariness. The titans of finance — men used to being the most powerful man in almost any room — sized up a new president who made clear in ways big and small that he expected them to change their ways.

We elect a president to run the executive branch of government and be commander-in-chief of the armed services. He can propose legislation and national policy, and the Congress can follow along or dispose of his ideas. Tell me, is threatening to unleash the pitchforks against the bankers very presidential?

He is not Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. economy.

But he's acting like it.

We know that someone paid ACORN "volunteers" to demonstrate in front of the homes of the AIG executives, and chartered and paid for the buses that carried them. Many of the execs were in fear of their lives, and the lives of their innocent spouses and children. Even though they had worked for $1 for the past 12 months, many returned their bonuses.

Who orchestrated and paid for this demonstration? Who do we know who has previous ACORN and community "organizing" experience?

Now that ACORN is firmly funded with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, are we going to see stronger tactics including, perhaps, pitchforks?

To Fight Global Warming, U.N. Will Steal Our Wealth, Jobs

Are you ready to live under global government?

If Tim Geithner's slip-up on being open-minded to a one-world reserve currency wasn't enough to convince you that we have turned off on the road to hell, consider the implications of a 16-page "note" being circulated by the United Nations to those who will attend a "mammoth negotiating session" on global climate change in Bonn, Germany, next week.

A United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an "effective framework" for dealing with global warming.

The 16-page note, obtained by FOX News, will be distributed to participants at a mammoth negotiating session that starts on March 29 in Bonn, Germany, the first of three sessions intended to hammer out the actual commitments involved in the new deal.

Consider the points:

1. Trillions of dollars in wealth transfers. You don't transfer wealth from poor countries to rich countries. That means we are the targets of this U.N. scheme.

2. Millions of job losses, and gains. Who loses and who gains? See point No. 1.

3. New taxes (see point No.1).

4. Industrial relocations (see point No.2)

5. New tariffs and subsidies and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes under the supervision of the world body (U.N.)

All of this openly discussed in a memo we weren't supposed to know about.

There is nothing in the United States Constitution that would permit our Congress or President, or any group acting in their name, to agree to this. Even if man-made global climate change were real -- and it isn't -- we would have to amend the Constitution in order to surrender our sovereign rights, and most Americans would say no to this.

Please, people, wake up! The world-wide socialist movement is hiding itself in the environmental revolution, no longer "red" but "green." Don't let them enslave you in exchange for false security for a threat that does not exist.

A Personal Observation

Blog maintenance.

Is it just me or is there simply too much hitting the fan right now for any one of us to operate efficiently?

There are Oklahoma issues that get bypassed.

There are national issues that fall through the cracks.

You prioritize your efforts as a blogger and at the end of the day you feel like you just didn't get as much done as you should.

And yet a few months back I took an extended sabbatical because things seemed slow.

Interesting times, indeed!