Monday, October 31, 2011

Men Are Intimidated By "X"

Dalrock once again reminded me with his post that in addition to my daily duties of Swinging Bachelorhood I have to occasionally dispense wisdom to you guys. Otherwise lord knows you would all be jumping out of tree and running into bushes. And we wouldn't want that would we?

He invokes The Word of Grerp, who should write a book (it could be like the bible! - "In Grerp's second letter to the Corinthians - "Be not a cumbersome annoyance to your husband, for he hath too much on his plate to deal witheth") which then prodded me off my lazy butt to address something I've been meaning to for a while. And that is:

"Men are intimidated by X"

"X" being one of three things that I can think of:

1. A woman taller than him
2. A "strong" woman
3. A woman that makes more money than him.

And I am here to put the kibosh on all three.

Not that men are intimidated by these factors and I somehow wish to "hide" this fact in a propagandist move. I am here to put the kibosh on it because all three are false. And nothing puts the kibosh on something better than the truth (just look at socialism, feminism, worthless degrees and the other tenets of leftism).

Here's the skinny in order of the three:

1. I don't know one guy, personally, who has said, "Oh no! Not a a TALLER woman! GASP oh GASP! You mean her legs will be LONGER THAN AVERAGE!? Horrors of horrors. How will I ever survive?"

Now, admittedly I do know of TWO GUYS in the THOUSANDS I have met in my life that did not like their woman being taller than them. This then triggered a banning of those girls wearing high heels.

But frankly, not only are these guys the minority, they are MORONS!

For the most part ladies, men care NOWHERE NEAR as much about the height of a woman as much as women care about the height of a man. Matter of fact, I think almost 40% of the women I've dated have been taller than me because frankly I want to be "that guy."

You know "that guy?" That short SOB who walks into the club with a tall drink of water that you can't get? The guy who everybody is thinking, "how the HELL did HE get HER!?"

Yeah! I'm THAT guy! It's great!

So ladies, if you think men are intimidated by taller women, eh. a REAAALLY small percent are. But otherwise, I'm sorry, if you're taller, you're just going to have to stoop to our level.

2. No, we are not intimidated by strong women. We are attracted to strong women. Women who work for a living, who support themselves. The problem is "strong" is confused in today's Moxie world with "loud, arrogant or obnoxious." Most of the girls I have dated who were truly strong simply demonstrated their strength. They didn't wave their finger, give me the hand, bark orders nor tell me every 10 minutes how strong and independent they were.

To put it in contrast in my 20's I would occasionally cross paths with a HOT young lawyer who was working at a firm a friend of mine also worked at. When invited out to various happy hours, I would have a drink or two, socialize and try to get to know this girl. It was like trying to warm up to liquid hydrogen. Every ounce of body language said, "don't you dare talk to me." She never smiled. She never would even say, "hello." The only way I would get any kind of conversation out of this girl was indirectly through group conversation. And ALL she talked about was making junior partner and how hard she worked and how nothing was going to get in her way.

Fast forward 8 years later, and I run into her at the local salsa club. This woman is now WAAAAY into her 30's. Still has that pissed off look on her face, still dressed in clothes that screamed, "I'm a super powerful woman and by god you better do what I say," and wow, is that yet ANOTHER aging 30 something woman without a ring on her finger? I didn't even bother to try to talk to her because I doubt she would have remembered me, but she sat at the bar

all alone

by herself


and not one man asked her to dance (and this was a scene where very few men are loth to approach a woman).

However, this was not because she was a "strong woman" and she "intimidated people."

It's quite simply you could tell she wouldn't be enjoyable company.

First, what guy wants to dance with a woman who isn't smiling?

Second, if you get good enough at dancing, you get kind of picky with the women you choose to dance with. I prefer women that follow. Not those that fight and can't grasp the concept of the MANDATORY lead-follow dynamics of dancing.

Third, inevitably, yes, men will want to test the waters to see if there's some dating potential. Sadly "strong" has been corrupted to mean "difficult" and "obstinate."

I'll take a strong woman, not a poser who thinks she's strong.

3. You Captain is largely poor. This is a confluence of factors including (admittedly) his impatient attitude, his inability to tolerate politics and BS, a crappy economy and largely a dying work ethic that is being replaced with enjoying the decline and the evil forces of HR that are always conspiring against us like The League of Doom. So naturally the LAST thing I would want is a woman that makes a lot of money. I mean, that's what EVERY guy is afraid of! A woman with LOT'S of MONEY! I wake up late at night, soaked in sweat because of the nightmares I have of some woman showering me with $100 bills and buying me nice things. It's horrible, I've had to go talk to a therapist several times to get my mind right. I mean, if you want to scare a man away, if you want him to run for the hills, or if you're just looking for a crafty way to dump him, don't tell him you're secretly married.


Don't tell him you have children.


Tell him you have LOT'S OF MONEY!

That'll send him packing!

Sadly ladies, this is just another example of people in the media, politics and education circles telling you what you want to hear and not the truth.

Thus behooving the question;

What is more important, your short term feelings (in which case you can tell me how evil I am and how you know this ONE girl who isn't like that, etc.), or your long term happiness (in which case you may forward this link to as many people you want)?

I'm indifferent which one you choose, because there's only one truth. I'm merely entertained by how much of a fight people put up against the truth because their feelings are so fragile.

Enjoy the decline!

Saturday, October 29, 2011

The Godfather

OK, Cappy Cappites.

I keep getting hounded to watch the damn Godfather series.

Is it worth it, or do my spidey senses tell me it's another crap production from the 1970's condoned by pot-induced 1970's Hollywood's elitists with all of its Oscar winnings and nominations?

It really just does not look appetizing.

Are You a Citizen or a Commie

For obvious reason your Captain does not necessarily believe the bottom building block, but it is still interesting to see;

Thursday, October 27, 2011

For the Patron Saint's Name of Frick

Long ago in my past there was a girl.

This girl was madly in love with me, and I say that not because I'm trying to brag, but because it's true. She was in love with me.

However, she could not reconcile her Christian beliefs with what I viewed to be a wonderful life.

My "wonderful life" I made quite clear was my future wife and I sitting on a beach, her in a french maid outfit, serving me a martini sans children gallivanting around Europe in a convertible eating at the finest restaurants and dancing in the Italian and French Rivieras.

Of course, she contested the french maid outfit thing and said and I quote, "And your views of the perfect marriage. Me just dressing up in a sultry lingerie outfit while you sit there and drink ALCOHOL! I can't think of anything more degrading."

Naturally it didn't go anywhere and she is currently engaged to what I am reliably informed to be a pansified beta male who is a "good church going Christian."

Now, lessons aside from the importance that women start to learn and acknowledge male sexuality for what it is, if they ever do decide they really want to have a serious chance at a happy marriage, the lesson to learn here is how to use Frederick's of Hollywood to your advantage men.

In short, Fredericks of Hollywood is an OUTSTANDING way to test whether a girl is worth dating or not. Understand women who like to dress up in lingerie, dress sexy, wear whatever outfits are SUPREMELY more confident in themselves and are more stable than women who view it as some kind of torture or servitude and whine and complain about it, OR use it as a means to extract resources out of you. The woman who just wants to dress up in lingerie for her own benefit, OUTSTANDING. The woman who wants to wear sexy lingerie to make you happy, OUTSTANDING EVEN MORE! You will find those women who are "pro-lingerie" are the ones you want to date (obviously), but not just for sexual reasons, but because of mental and maturity reasons.

There is however one problem with the Frederick's of Hollywood lingerie thing. You need to actually be reasonably sexy to pull it off.

Somebody tell the patrons of Frederick's of Hollywood that:

Time for Keynesians to Put Up Or Shut Up

Tracking Presidents Obama and Bush side by side and the economic growth experienced during each corresponding quarter an interesting picture is starting to form. Both inherited recessions (Obama more so than Bush), both got out of them, both experienced a marginal recovery, but right about now is where Bush got the "largest tax cut in history" passed through congress and Obama is going to flog the dead horse once again with his latest bribery/stimulus package to bail out idiot humanities majors from their student debts.

Regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum, Obama and the Keynesians have their work cut out of them. While marginally beating Bush in quarters 3-8, Bush starts to dominate in quarters 9-10. And if the graph were to be continued past where Obama is currently at, the growth doesn't slow down. It's now the 11th hour for Keynesianism.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Another 13% to Go

Down that is.

For Minnesota's real housing prices.

Steve Driehaus Another BA Idiot

Steve Driehaus, a congressman who just lost his congressional seat is suing his opponent for "loss of standard of living."

Well Steve, when you're so damn stupid to get a BA and then an MA in "Public Administration" you, just like every one else, is shouting out to the world;

"I don't want to work a real job. I want to have a cushy government job or political career and tell other people what to do AND have other people pay for it."

You know no calculus.

You know no computer programming.

You know no accounting.

You know nothing.

You are a worthless human that has nothing to offer society or this economy.

And you know it. That's what's funny. You know that you can't support yourself, you can't be a real man, and so you must resort to suing people to get the money you need to support yourself. You could take your efforts and learn a skill or a trade and create something useful that society wants, but no, you're going to be an OWS spoiled brat and bitch and whine and hold your breathe till your face turns blue.

A question I ask my readers:

Is the "worthless degree" starting to show itself for the genuine threat that it is? And not only the genuine threat that it is, but how it can be used as an identifier as to who is not trustworthy to be in government, let alone any other position in the US bar a waiter at MacDonald's?

I Feel Bad for Ed Kohler

Let me explain to you an element of the Minneapolis population.

They are good people.

Hard working people.

But they wedded themselves in their late teens and early 20's to staying out of the suburbs and staying in the city.

Which is like saying, "I'm not getting on that preppy suburban life boat! I'm staying on this hip Titanic where it's "real."

This unfortunately puts good people like Ed and others I know in the cross-hairs between wanting the benefits of city culture and paying for what is essentially a corrupt municipal government.

Ed has been championing the fight against government financed stadiums in Minnesota for a while now. I usually mock the state as a whole because they keep voting to tax themselves more. But it's particularly ironic when a city that is known to have property taxes increase at over 500% in a decade is now going to help finance the new Viking's stadium.

If you Minneapolitans thought your property taxes were high before.


You my fine hipster friends, have no idea how much you're going to be forced to enjoy the decline!

Hope the Sebastian Joe's ice cream is worth it.

Monday, October 24, 2011

John McClane for Halloween

So I was perusing the traffic and noticed I got a "#1" hit from the Google Search;

"John McClane for Halloween."

"That's odd," I thought.

Then I clicked on the link to find it and was starkly reminded of this vintage Cappy Cap post.

It still is amazing how no more than 20 years ago you could carry a fake REAL LOOKING gun to school AND have a fake cigarette. It's also amazing I ever got my bench press above 20 pounds.

Regardless, remember kids, it's OK to emulate strong, Alpha male role models this upcoming Halloween, though I'm afraid most of you don't even know what "Die Hard" is.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

No They Can't Take That Away From Me

Education, for all of its bubbly goodness, does have one advantage.

It isn't taxable and it cannot be confiscated.

I've often thought about this in that while I don't trust 401k plans or IRA's until there's a balanced budget, I try to find other investments that are not "confiscatable" or "taxable." Consumer items like bullets, booze, even cars are starting to provide more of a store of value than an investment, but education is also one of these "investments" that not only will maintain its value, but unless you convert it into earnings, it cannot be confiscated or repossessed. This allows you to mete out however much labor you wish to maintain however low a tax rate you want.

A point made more clearly here (replete with charty goodness).

Now "Logic" Is Abuse

I like how natural human behaviors when agitated (yelling, loud voice, cursing, etc.) is also considered abuse.

But yes, "using logic" on women is abuse. And just when you thought feminism has jumped the shark.

Worthless Degrees

You've been had.

And not only have you been had.

You got screwed out of $50,000 in tuition on top of it.

So what do you do now? Can't find a job. Have to live at home?

Well how about you retrace your steps and re-evaluate what you were told in your youth about "the great career" you would have. Or how you'd "go on to do great things!"

Or (and here's where you really have to open your mind), maybe accept it was an orchestrated scam that separated you from your money and all those teachers and professors really didn't give a damn about you and just wanted your money?

I can't convince you, but maybe this will.

Paperback version
as well for those without Kindles.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

A Swift Belt of Adulthood

But now, that would go and hurt their feeeeeeeeelinnnnnnngs.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Welcome to the Party Pal!

I love it when people, on their own, through logic, thought, and studying come to the same conclusions I did, albeit years ago. It not only boslters our ranks, but confirms that there is a logic and reason behind the thought for separate people to come to the same realization or conclusion.

Today's newest member to the (very important) Battle Against Worthless Degrees is Gucci.

And we welcome him to the fight with our honorary John McClane salute!

I figured I'd post this as a reminder where you can send the OWS kiddies when they complain about their degrees:

Candidate for Future Rationalization Hamster


I wonder how powerful her rationalization hamster will be 20 years from now trying to rationalize;

1. Forfeiting a good, paid-for life from a working husband
2. The poverty she will no doubt inflict upon herself for the rest of her life
3. What I will predict will be her children disowning her
4. How giving up Steady Joe for a 2 week trist with Kashmir Ala Fabio

And you people all wonder why men "go ghost" or stay in Peter Pan mode forever.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Wrong to Fire Lisa Simeone

Lisa, is no doubt a communist leftist, with a spoiled upbringing and a degree that when she declared it she essentially shouted out to the world:

"I don't want to work a real job and I want other people to pay for a career where I can pretend I'm a self-supporting and independent adult."

However, I do have to go to bat for her in that we once again have aging administrators, managers and leaders of this country thinking somehow they have the right to discipline or fire somebody for having political views. The reason I disagree with this is two-fold;

1. Obviously people should have the freedom of speech AND that includes being able to partake in the public debate on whatever and (unless it somehow directly affect their employers) they should not have to fear about losing their jobs or being disciplined for exercising that right.

2. Not necessarily a "disagreement" on my part, but more of a "wake up and smell the facts Jack." Older people have to realize the internet and the technological ability to put everything and anything up there is the PRIMARY MEANS OF COMMUNICATION AND SOCIALIZING FOR THE NEWEST GENERATION. Disciplining or firing employees because they have something on public record that an employer may disagree with politicially is not just wrong, but it is akin to eavesdropping on a conversation you were NOT invited to.

One could perhaps draw an ironic parallel here. Just as the common "feminists are standing there asking where all the good men have gone, while the blood of the men they slew is still moist on their swords" analogy, you could also say, "retirees, AARP members and older people are standing there, asking where all the taxpayer money is to pay for their social security, nursing homes and medicare, while the blood of the careers of millions of youth they slew is still moist on their swords."

Keep throwing those hurdles up for those young people trying to start a career or land a job. Oh, and also mislead them about education and make sure they indebt themselves for a worthless degree so they're off on the wrong foot. OH! And make doubly sure to crush any innovation with the constant fear that if they rock the boat or question the status quo, they'll get fired. Because remember, "the children are the future."

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

The Minneapolis Business College

Hey, don't take my word for it.

Read the reviews.

When the Real World Crushes the Hippies

I'll say it again for the cheap seats;

EVERY GENERATION has its Volcker Recession. ie-when the little kiddies who were spoon fed flowers and puppies and unicorns and socialism all of the sudden are adults and have to grow up. Oh sure they go through a temper tantrum, protesting Vietnam or Wall Street or whatever bogeyman is to blame for their laziness and sloth at the time, but in the end it basically boils down to the real world hitting them upside the head and telling them they have to produce or sink.

What we have today is largely my generation and "Gen Y' throwing their tantrum. When they either have kids, realize whining doesn't pay the bills, etc. etc., or even go so far as to have an epiphany about economics, they may have a Reagan Revolution that ends this current Great Recession just like the real Ronald Reagan ended the Volcker Recession.

Until that happens you can expect there to be a gap between what my generation is capable of and what we actually produce, just like the Baby Boomers back in the 70's;

I put it in terms of percentages because the above data was not in real terms, this shows the difference between real and potential more clearly;


Your Captain of course knows the value of a good chart and will let the picture speak for itself. He also did the added benefit coloring the 15% INCREASE in red so you can see it.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Escape LA

Net migration out of LA

I wish they have a state-wide chart to see how many producers (er...sorry) "people" are leaving the "golden state."

regardless, platinum hat tip to the boys who pulled together that chart.

Remember, the Captain is pro-"Charty Goodness."

It Never Gets Old

Buddy of mine sent this to me. He knows Voyager Bank. He also knows that I approached them several years ago to pitch my independent underwriting services to them. What's great about my particular pitch to this bank however was that day I was pretty tired of hitting pavement to no avail so I was in a foul mood. So when I walked in, I had their financials printed off when (I think) they lost $7 million in one quarter. My sales pitch to the middle aged man was not one of honey, it was one of vinegar;

"If you had me, you guys wouldn't have lost $7 million in this one quarter."

He was visibly pissed off. He face was red, he refused to shake my hand. No doubt he was partly to blame for some of those losses.

It made the trip worth while.

Regardless, I improved the chart to remind the Board of Directors of Voyager Bank about when I paid their Eden Prairie office a visit.

Oh, and you should see the office. Marble, fancy furniture, a big screen TV with CNBC going on it and oak all over the place.

You see kids, that's the sign of a successful bank. When they spend more on leasehold improvements than they do hiring talent. As long as they have a flat panel TV going with Bloomberg, then you know your money won't need to be reimbursed by the taxpayer!

And hey, you crazy cats over at Voyager, you enjoy that decline!

Monday, October 17, 2011

The Captain Protects the Royal Saudi Family Story - Part I

The more I thought about this post, the more I realized it is a very all-encompassing post, so I will try to be brief and make my observations very bullet pointy, however, it will ultimately be broken into a three part series.

I have a friend.

He owns a security company. It does everything from boring old desk security to prisoner transport.

Regardless of the gig, the reason his security firm is unique is because you typically need to be armed and you can't be of the usual loser "security guard/mall cop" variety. You need to have your head out of your ass and know just because you carry a gun does NOT make you a cop. Given my background working in the past for security (over 18 years ago!) he would occasionally call me with gigs knowing I wasn't some hot headed kid that just wanted to carry a gun when he had a gig or two open up.

So I get a call from him one night and he says, "What do you have going on this weekend?"

"Not much, why?"

"I need armed security for one of the Saudi royal princes down in Rochester when he visits the Mayo Clinic."

Kind of thrown back, I said, "What!???? Saudi Prince??? Shouldn't the Secret Service or CIA or some federal authority be involved?"

"No, unless their intelligence believes there's a real threat, they apparently outsource to private contractors."

Again, my curiosity, not to mention common sense knowledge got to me and I asked;

"Yeah, but, don't they have their own guys? Why you? Why us? I mean, no offense, but you're just some small time security operator."

And then I get the real skinny.

"Well, you see, there are 36 princes in the Saudi royal family, and this one is more or less on the bottom of the totem pole. He has no political significance and is more or less the loser of the Saudi royal family. But he has money and he's willing to pay."

Now given the WONDERFUL economy at the time brought about by our beloved leader (not to mention I do actually enjoy the occasional work with a little risk) I agreed to pick up whatever shifts were available. He tells me to bring "everything I got" in terms of armament, ammo and armor.

"Why?!??! I thought there was no threat!"

"You never know."

So somewhat concerned I pack up my 1990 Chevy Caprice Classic with an AR 15, a scoped rifle, a 9MM pistol and a 357 revolver with enough ammo to last the decade.

I arrive at the Kahler MOTEL (not the HOTEL, there IS A DIFFERENCE), meet with his contact and we are directed to a wing of the MOTEL that is dedicated to the security operations to protect the lowest-totem-pole member of the Saudi royal family.

Of course, he's not there yet. He has yet to fly in. Which means we get to transport his royal highness from the Rochester Regional Airport to the Mayo Clinic.

Now understand that I (in my foolish, American upbringing) thought "OK, one guy. Mayo Clinic. We might send a limo and there will be an SUV trailing the limo while the limo itself is packed with armed guards.

Oh no.

These guys travel in style.

Even the lowest-on-the-totem-pole-losers.

Apparently this prince (who ranks 36th on the 36 Saudi princes) needs an entourage of (are you ready????)


His WIVES (plural) his children, his support staff, his "armed guards" his consultants, his cousins, his neighbors, his relatives, his associates.

120 freaking people to transport ONE MAN TO THE MAYO CLINIC.

Let me explain this again,

One man needs the medical attention.

But he needs to haul 119 people with him.

I'm sure a convoy 3 miles long won't bring attention.

The transport was a nightmare and on a scale you couldn't imagine.

First, of the 120 people in his entourage, at least 50 needed their own personal vehicles. I was not made aware of this until we arrived at the airport and saw 50 separate limos. I asked "WHY THE FREAKING LIMOS???? Don't they just need ONE!!?"

No, all of the family members (which numbers many when you have 6 wives) need their own limo.

The remaining 70 people were support staff and were to be herded into buses.

So when me and the security team show up at the Rochester Regional Airport at 3AM it's a MILE LONG CARAVAN to pick up his royal highness and support staff (again, what terrorist genius could possible identify this as a possible target!?)




Now, you have to understand this is not the peak of hubris or arrogance at this time.

No, it gets much worse.

For I started to notice that they actually did have 50 limos pulling up. And these limos were not your average limos. They were top of the line Mercedes limos. 2010 models. NOTHING OLDER. WHY?

because his royal highness had ORDERED ALL LIMOS IN THE THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF MERCEDES MAKE AND NO LATER MODELS THAN 2010 BE SENT THERE TO PICK HIM AND HIS ENTOURAGE UP. None of which were in Minnesota. To amass this hoity toity caravan, they had to pull across from the entire US.

These poor limo drivers (most of which were Somali or Ethiopian drivers) had HAULED ASS ACROSS ALL POINTS IN THE COUNTRY TO GET THERE ON TIME TO PICK THIS ASSHOLE UP. Plates were from New York, New Jersey, Florida, California, Nevada and only the states at the time that had vehicles such as this to even provide to his royal eminence. These poor guys drove over 2,000 miles to get to "Rochester Minnesota" to pick up this schmoe.

The insanity did not stop there.

Apparently there was a problem with our security detail. There were too many men.

HOW, OH HOW, were they to transport all the women without our evil American lusting male eyes on their homely dressed and homely-looking women? We could NOT have any males riding in the same cars with the females according to the "holy and wise word of Islam."

Of course Mohammed in his infinite wisdom back in 650 AD didn't fathom the possibility of Minnesota women who are so brainwashed to be so commie liberal leftist that they hate guns. So at the time we had no more than MAYBE 5 women with carry conceal permits to handle over 60 Saudi females.

Let the "musical chairs game begin!"

Their advisor started telling us to move some men from one car to the other. No, a man cannot be in that limo because princess #483 would be in that car. Wait?? We don't have enough women? Take your uglier men and move them to those cars with the aging Saudi females. Perhaps they won't abuse the women like we were told they would because of their America biological directives. Do you have any effeminate men that would be disinclined to approach our females? Put them in the car, but in order rank from least effeminate, with the least related females of our quite-extended Saudi royal family.

Damn Cray super computer couldn't figure it out.

45 minutes of moving around based on archaic, obsolete, head up its ass, Islamic doctrine, that just didn't jive with security realities, I was starting to think I might just shoot the damn Saudi prince myself. Apparently we played musical chairs enough that our advisor was satisfied we would not violate the laws of Allah (even though security was completely compromised).

Sure enough, the "prince" lands and chaos ensues.

His "security general" turns out to be his cousin who was a worthless idiot that only got the position because he marginally spoke English. He can't tell us anything.

The caravan of limos and buses circle the "Saudi Air" plane that just landed.

We can't make heads and tails of who is who because the Saudi youth disembarking the plane are all wearing crappy American clothes to emulate the Amber Crombie and Fitchites in this country.

And all the time we (namely 80% of the American security force) are NOT TO LOOK AT THE SAUDI WOMEN BECAUSE IT MIGHT INSULT PEOPLE!

The poor sleep depraved limo drivers tried their best and after about an hour of chaos, we finally got everybody loaded into their cars and headed to the Kahler Hotel.

You would think this would be the worst of it, but it doesn't get any better. Matter of fact, it only gets worse.

But the reason I'm writing this story is not to complain about my experience, but rather because in the end there is going to be a vital AND VERY IMPORTANT economics lesson that even I was surprised to learn.

And beyond that there is a fringe benefit lesson that our regular Saudi national friends (who must suffer under these people) could benefit from.

AND EVEN BEYOND THAT there are some VITAL security lessons the CIA, FBI, and Saudi protective forces MAY BE SLIGHTLY INTERESTED IN, because frankly, the whole damn Mayo Clinic is a soft and super cake easy target for any slightly competent terrorists to take out royalty from ANY middle east country.

Naturally, therefore, we can all benefit my experience, and you will all tune in for part II of the Captain's wonderful exploits with protecting the Saudi Royal family!

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Your Weekend Read

An outstanding piece once again by Dalrock.

You must understand that to enjoy the decline via schadenfreude, you must treat these events like sunsets. Sit back, pour yourself a drink, light up a cigar and enjoy.

Saturday, October 15, 2011

Bad Economist! Bad Bad BAD Economist!

"Yahoo Finance's economics editor."
Epic Fail on par with David Lereah.

You just have to love pseudo intellectual web sites like Yahoo News!

Friday, October 14, 2011

99% Morons

Sadly, I wanted to mock these people, but they do such a good job of it themselves.

These people really are that stupid that even the mockery I set forth below cannot do justice because they ACTUALLY BELIEVE taking 7 years and going $150,000 into debt to get a worthless degree is something that other people should pay for.

Anyway, here's my attempt to be as stupid as the Flea party. Please feel free to e-mail your self-pitying sobfest of Occupy Wallstreet stupidity to captcapitalism -at) yahoo dut com;

PS- IT chicks are hot.

Update - New addition

Update New addition. Can't tell if it's real or fake. The sad thing is these children are so brainwashed, even if you tried to spoof it, it could be just as real.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Escape Minnesota

In Minnesota you do NOT have to show ID to vote. You merely have to have somebody vouch for you that you are allowed to vote. Naturally when legislation is tendered to make people show ID when they vote, the left immediately rallies against it with the lamest of excuses knowing full well they rely on illegal voters to win elections. It is therefore no shock this has happened.

Hey, What Makes You Canucks So Special?

Sent to me from Craig Kamman, realtor extraordinaire.
In short Canadian housing permits. My question to my Canadian friends is how did these permits recover so quickly?

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

What Would We Do Without the Harvard Business Review

Honest to the Patron Saint's Name of Frick.

I have a buddy whose brother went to Harvard to get his MBA. This is the same guy who said that he didn't learn a damn thing, but knew full well he was going there for connections. Providing further evidence that the Ivy League has essentially jumped the shark and no longer produces innovators or industrialists or entreprenuers, but instead has just become a rent-seekers club, he sent me this.

You just have to be kidding me.


Oh, DON'T make decisions that waste time?!

Oh, I'm sorry, I went to the Carlson School of Management where they told us to make decisions that DID waste time. But then again, that's why Harvard is so much better than your average Big 10 University.

You see kids, this is one of those important differences that will set you apart from the rest of the morons when you go to a Yale or a Harvard and not one of those braindead "public" universities. You get pearls of wisdom like;

"Don't make decisions that waste time."

You aren't going to get that at the U of Florida or Penn State.

No, you have to go to the Ivy League to get that wisdom.

Does ANYBODY in the non-corrupted private sector hire these morons any more? And if so, why????

Sunday, October 09, 2011

Herman Cain the Real Conservative

Anybody who is intellectually honest knows the real racists in the country are liberals and leftists. And I don't say that to be accusatory or a partisan. I say it because it's true. The reason why is liberals and leftists are obsessed with race. You have to fill out EEOC forms, declare what race you are, when reporters interview people "race" is always a factor.

Race race race race.

Whether they are NEGATIVELY or POSITIVELY disrciminating does not matter, the definition of racism is treating somebody differently (for better or worse) based on their race.

So when polls like this one come out, it once again shines a bright light as to who the real racists are (not to mention hypocrites).

The reason Herman Cain is very popular amongst conservatives is not the color of his skin. It's his character. He is the only non-politician out there. He is a real man who has had a real job. He didn't inherit the world like Romney. And he speaks bluntly and truthfully and doesn't sugar coat anything. He is honest. And it is because of these things he SHOULD be the Republican nominee.

He just happens to be black.

And it doesn't phase one conservative.

It does however show who is judging people by the color of their skin and not their character. It also belies the hypocrisy of anyone using the insepid term "Uncle Tom."

Saturday, October 08, 2011

We Will Be the 99%

So Grerp sent me this.

I am now accepting your own "99%" photos and we shall post them here. Make sure they are as ludicrous as the real ones...which will be hard.

You can send them to CAPTcapitalism (at) yahoo dot com

Projected Marriage Rate

Them is pretty strong correlation coefficients. Though I believe the trend is linear and not exponential.


Friday, October 07, 2011

Unemployed Unicorns

Once again, going to point out that until the housing market recovers, you can expect unemployment to stay high.

By the way, how's that 9.1% unemployment treating you democrat-voting youth?

Maybe you can go and "occupy" something. That'll turn the economy around!

On a related note "after receiving a masters degree in literature."

Thursday, October 06, 2011

Recession Medicine

This song makes it almost impossible to NOT enjoy the decline. And I'm not a fan of country;

Heteronormative Whiteprivilage Unicorncentricism

When Sinfest starts mocking it, you know these things have failed to permeate into the mainstream and everybody realizes it for what it is.

Wednesday, October 05, 2011

Old Man Learns to Enjoy the Decline

"Old man" meaning a guy who is maybe 45. Though his post spoke to me and it confirms once again you should be enjoying the decline.

My good friend Marty with a good post.

And I don't think these ladies majored in Anthropology.

Hey, it's property tax time in Minnesota! I wonder if they're going to go up?!

Me is Mine, Your is Yours

Tuesday, October 04, 2011

You Started It, But We'll Finish It

Warning - this is a long one, so pour yourself a martini or a Rupmie.

As I age I get more and more of this thing called "hindsight."

Commensurate with this I also gain confidence when I look back and realize that, yes, though I made many and horrible mistakes in my past, for the most part I played it straight, played by the rules and was a good guy. Even more so when you consider what information I had available to me at that time and what environment I was in and sometimes the outright lies I was told were "truth." Whether my decisions panned out for me or not is irrelevant. I tried my best and sometimes am amazed I even succeeded this much.

Regardless, you combine these two traits, hindsight and confidence, you get authority. The authority to look back at life and start making claims that aren't opinion, they're fact. Facts like HR is a worthless profession that has caused more damage than helped. Facts like just because they're older than you does NOT mean they have more experience or intelligence (matter of fact, they're just more prone to corruption, age does not command respect). Facts like democrats play on the ignorance and feelings of well intentioned people as well as fan the flames of jealously and merely bribe people to vote for them with other people's money. These are facts. Not opinions.

But the fact I'm going to talk to you about to day is a fact about the "war of the sexes."

Oh yes, there is a war. That's a fact that I don't even have to defend. But who started it in its most recent form? Some will claim that is a matter of opinion, but sadly once again hindsight and confidence permit me to authoritatively state it was women. Hands down, and that's a fact.

It is here that the "enemy" in this battle of the sexes will now go into knee jerk hyperdrive reaction. Claims of sexism, mysoginy, blah blah blah. We've heard it all before for the past 40 tiresome years. They will ignore my claim it was women who started it (let alone be open minded enough to ask why I've come to this conclusion), in part because they're rank and file enlisted soldiers, brainwashed not to think, but react immediately to protect the hive and the ideology. There are others, let's call them "officers" who know full well what they were doing, but will still feign ignorance and act appalled, because if they didn't, then it would belie their ulterior motives.

But again, I'm not some 18 year old rube who is fresh off the assembly line. I'm not some "nice guy" anymore who was brought up by a single mom in a very asymmetrical manner when it came to the sexes. I'm not that honorable guy why kept on thinking "what's wrong with me" and never developed the courage to say, "what's wrong with society." And I'm certainly not the guy who is going to take it personally when I start pointing out genuinely inconvenient truths and am called a bigot or a racist or a misogynist or pick any term from the communist/feminists playbook.

No, I'm the experienced guy who went through the meat grinder and amazingly has found himself in Bayeux alive, intact and only strengthened because of the experience. And given the hell I had to go through, you damn right I know what's going on. And like hell my experience isn't going to help the boys landing on the beach right now, because nobody, absolutely nobody deserves to go through that hell again.

So let us start out with a very simple question - why is there a battle in the first place?

A simple question, but one that needs answering. What did men do that was so horrible that we deserved the ire, the hatred and the war that was waged against us? The reason I ask this is at least in the beginning, I did nothing to offend or hurt women. As a boy and a young man, I did everything I was told. I was nice, I was kind, I was sweet. I did PRECISELY what they women told me to do. And not only did I not succeed in dating any of the women I pined after, I was actually ridiculed, berated and demeaned. I remember girls acting like they were going to go on a date with me or show up to a dance with me, only to find out it was a joke. I remember getting slapped in the face no less than 4 times before graduating from high school and for reasons that were so innocuous the only one I could remember was flirting with a girl and rummaging through her purse (which obviously earned me a slap across the face). Not once in my entire life have I ever struck a woman.

Now, if it was just one guy, one lousy nerdy guy out of 150 million American men with these experiences the evidence could be considered anecdotal. But it isn't. You ask the majority of men who are essentially NOT of the WWII generation or older and I guarantee you the majority of them (not all) were the exact same way and had the exact same experiences. Started off nice, with the best of intentions, tried their best, maybe even bought a girl flowers and probably have a score of 0-4 when it comes to slugging the other sex, all of which resulted in a big fat zero when it came to courting success.

Of course at the age of 18 or 19, your average man is still too clueless and lost to know what's going on. It's like they landed at Omaha and just got pounded by some German 88's. They're dazed, they're confused, they aren't even cognizant enough to ask "why." They're just taking a beating.

Of course that is the question. "Why?" What on god's green earth did we do to you to deserve this in middle school, let alone the following decade? We came with flowers and innocence and kindness and with the best of intentions and asked you on dates, only to get slaughtered.

I personally cannot answer the question why. I can only guess. And if I had to guess I'd say it was because feminists from the 1960's had so indoctrinated you as children via the schools or even feminist parenting you had a predisposition to view men as the enemy. Never mind the then 13 year old boys of our generation and successive generations never did anything to "oppress you" or "keep you down." Never mind for that matter the men of the WWII generation and Baby Boomers didn't do anything to oppress women either. No, you just were programmed to view men as the enemy, as your oppressors. Dirty disgusting boys that "you should throw rocks at" if I recall the t-shirt logo correctly.

Perhaps it was because of a lack of fathers or father figures given the new penchant women have for divorce. No man in the house to teach you how to treat boys, or perhaps there was a man in the house, but he too is still being shelled by his wife into submission and becomes the complete beta male incapable of providing a decent male role model.

Media? 90210 anybody? Melrose Place? I'm trying to think of other demented shows targeted towards young girls that would warp their formative years in how to treat boys, but I'm grasping at straws as my memory fades. To quote Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca, "Perhaps it was a combination of all three."

Ultimately though, sadly, the reason "why" is moot. It doesn't matter why Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. It doesn't matter why Islamic-nutjob assholes bombed the WTC. And it doesn't matter why boys received such a hostile reception upon hitting puberty. All that matters is what happened.

Second, along the same lines of "why" is something more fundamental to men and women and courtship in general.

Shouldn't we like each other?

I mean last I checked men and women were kind of designed for each other a little bit. And I ask this one question as it applies to a whole bunch of different levels.

Isn't dating supposed to be fun? Shouldn't we go out and have a good time? No, there has to be drama, chaos, crying, rules, stipulations, rule changes and that's just assuming the poor guy can navigate the mine field and actually land a date. And oh goodie! Look what he gets to look forward to!

Sex anyone? Is it not enjoyable? Why "hold out?" Why attach strings to it? What evil possesses you to use it as a bargaining chip whether you're married or not? And dare I suggest using sex to extract resources is the definition of prostitution? Or is that cutting it too close to the truth?

And the ultimate one that will confuse me till I'm dead, marriage or committed relationships. Aren't you supposed to SUPPORT your husband? I don't mean financially, but emotionally, aren't spouses to support each other? You know, be there for each other. If there is empirical proof that the war was started and continues to be waged by women, this is it. The reason why is it is the EXCEPTION when a wife actually supports and takes care of her husband. He comes home, beleaguered from his work. And she dons some heels and a little outfit and pours him a martini. That's what I'm talking about! Unfortunately, the VAST MAJORITY of marriages the women AT BEST slightly nags him or leaves him alone. Most of the time the women are harassing, berating, lecturing, complaining or just plain fighting against their husband. Why on god's green earth did you get married in the first place??? Better yet, why should men get married at all if instead of supporting them you are constantly fighting against them, if not just simply wearing them down? What's the upshot? And again

WHY???? What did we do to you?

Third is a very shrewd observation on my part. You already know about me getting hit 4 times in high school because the girls at the time liked the power trip. But there were other instances of what was completely unacceptable or idiotic behavior on the part of women/girls, primarily in their teens and 20's. One that is a bit innocent is the "I have a boyfriend in Brazil." This was a popular one when I was in middle school and high school and it was amazing how many girls had real boyfriends in different continents. Another more dangerous, if not psychotic one was suicide threats. I had no less than three women threaten suicide while I was dating them. Temper tantrums were also very popular. I remember trying to drive on 35W (just south of where the bridge collapsed) when my girlfriend at the time just started screaming (she was from California). Another girl from California punched me because I refused to have sex with her. I remember third throwing her phone and pictures and everything around her apartment (the argument of which again I can't remember). And I cannot fully recall the infinite number of head games, mind games and flake outs I suffered in my 20's.

"Pick me up, I'm ready!" 30 minutes later, "Oh, I'm sorry, I have a headache."

"Let's meet at Mancini's!" "Well my morbidly obese friend decided to show up with us, you don't mind do you?"

"Here's my number. Call me!" .......................

But isn't it interesting...

very interesting....

(can any of you guess where I'm going with this?)

(I'll give you a couple more guesses)

(it is quite shrewd an observation)

how after the age of 28, 29 30 or so, all that drama goes away?

I haven't had a girl threaten suicide on me since I was in my twenties.

I haven't had a girl throw a temper tantrum on a busy interstate since I was in my twenties.

I haven't had a girl hit me in quite some time.

And you know, there's been a shocking lack of mind games and flake outs since I passed the 30 year old mark.

Could it POSSIBLY be that this was nothing more than FULLY CONSCIOUS self-created drama to get attention? And could it be that they fully well knew what they were doing? And it is NOT that they "grew up" all of the sudden when they hit 30. That they KNEW FULL WELL it was wrong to hit men at the age of 10. They knew FULL WELL throwing temper tantrums were wrong at the age of 10. They knew FULL WELL threatening to commit suicide was wrong at the age of 10. And they knew FULL WELL it was wrong to lie at the age of 10.

They just had no problem using it till the age of 30 because they knew us men/boys were naive enough to think it wasn't on purpose. That there might have been something psychologically wrong with them, or worse, we blamed it on ourselves.

But again, I'm not here to lecture people about such stupid behavior. I'm just asking the question WHY?

What in the Patron Saint's Name of Frick is the purpose in doing that or employing such tactics? It certainly wasn't "well intentioned." It certainly wasn't "in our best interests." It's like using biological warfare against orphans. It was an act of war.

And finally (though there are many examples more) is something that I will intellectually honestly admit I do not believe women do consciously or maliciously, but still has an effect (and this is actually a matter of opinion, so I will grant you that). And that is your voting preferences.

Not so much in a "republican" or "democrat" sort of sense, but rather how you vote or what governs how you vote. You vote with your heart. Admirable. Honorable. But sorry, stupid and naive. Not because of your aims to help out the children or help out the poor, but there are no brain cells in the heart! ie-You only look at the intended consequences of policies and politicians you vote for, but so poorly think through the unintended consequences and ramifications, let alone what ulterior motives politicians and their political donors might have.

Hidden behind the socialist agenda of "helping the children" or "helping the poor" is a huge and financially IMPOSSIBLE price tag. It's not feasible, but nefarious politicians know how to tug at your heart strings and make you vote for them. And since federal and state government finances are not as exciting as The View of People Magazine, you fail to understand how the true costs of making everything free to everyone are simply masked and deferred with debt (if you don't understand that last sentence, then I strongly suggest reading more Cappy Cap and watch less Sex and the City). With the right to vote comes the responsibility of being an informed voter. And just "going with your heart" or "voting for the little guy" without bothering to look up the budget or the finances of the country/state/county simply destroys the nation and your future AND the future of your kids (which is an argument for another time).

But that's not the worst of it (at least as it applies to the battle of the sexes).

The worst consequence of your voting patterns is the replacement of men with government.

And, frankly, it's already done.

You really don't need us.

You have affirmative action, tons of social resources at the state and local levels, welfare, WIC, EBT and a legal system that is pretty slanted towards your side when it comes to divorce and the divvying up of a couple's assets. You have a public school system that is progressively taking a larger and larger role in baby sitting...errr....bringing up...ummm... "educating" your children and more and more laws passed governing and regulating how children are to be brought up. If you don't have a husband but want children you can adopt, have an IV fertilization, surrogate, etc. etc. Society is on your side because no individual is more celebrated than the single mother or the single woman "living in a man's world." In other words you have voted in a system where the only role men play is that of a tax payer and not that of a father or a husband or a lover, leaving us to ask once again the question, "why, what did we do to deserve financial slavery?"

Now, of course, some of you like that idea. Which only proves my point further because it shows some of you really just wanted men as financial slaves. But there is a consequence to this. There is a cost. And you may be starting to notice this. That there is a price to pay for all the mind games that were played. The dates that you flaked out on. The tantrums, the drama. The dishonesty and lying to men about what you wanted and what you didn't want. The divorce, the alimony the child support. And myself, along with every other guy who made it to Bayeux alive can see it now in beautiful hindsight.

Some of you in your 40's, 30's, even upper 20's are asking "where are all the good men?" Some of you have given birth to BOYS and now you have disadvantaged-skin in the feminist game you may have helped create. Some of you, fresh off divorce and enjoying "post-marital bliss" are realizing the men are not knocking at your door like they were in 1981. So continuing with our "battle of the sexes" analogy, perhaps I can describe what is happening and the consequences for waging an uncalled for war on us.

There is a battlefield. On one side are the girls and on the other side are the boys. BOTH of us have been told by society, media and nature or "genetics" to go and find somebody from the opposing team. It is a strong urge, arguably the strongest biological force there is, and thus the attempt to meet ensues. If this was 1940, the battle would look something like this.
Girls liked boys and welcomed them over.

Men were happy to oblige. Not really a battle.

Of course, that's too easy and remember, our WWII grandfathers were of course abusive, misogynistic sexists. So the sexual revolution of the 1960's was absolutely necessary so we could punish future, unassuming, innocent generations of boys for the evils of our WWII generation grandfathers. The Baby Boomers beget Gen X and beget Gen Y so that when teenage boys hit the NEW and IMPROVED battlefield today it looks like this:

It is a veritable battlefield.

One sided, but veritable.

Now, let's ask ourselves a simple question. "How long will the dismembered stickmen boys stay on that battlefield?"

And the answer actually varies depending on the stickman. I got out at 25. I know some men left the battlefield as early as 18. I know men in their 60's who are still wandering around on the battlefield just as dazed and confused when they first landed 42 years ago. Some never get it together and stay on that battlefield till they die in the real world. But I would say on average 15 years.

So by the time a young man hits 30 or so, he starts questioning why he is there taking a pounding. He starts to question why he is even trying to date one of these girls in the first place. He starts to remember his parents getting divorced or a friend's parents getting divorced or ONE OF HIS OWN FRIENDS GETTING DIVORCED. He even starts to question whether he should follow his biological imperative or just get a vasectomy and live the bachelor life forever. And it is at that point he crawls over the hill, stumbles over all roughshod and shot up with holes and joins us in Bayeux.

Sadly here the battlefield analogy ends, because unlike real soldiers thrown onto the Normandy beachhead, we have the option to stop fighting. We have the option to stop participating in the battle. We can give up. Unfortunately I don't believe that is the same for women. Oh, sure, some women can throw in the towel and go on and lead happy lives, but whereas I would think only 5-10% of women can genuinely override their genetic hard-wiring, I would say nearly 60-70% of men can do it. Besides, you've been giving us great practice and incentive to do so since we were 14. So it's not that hard of a jump.

Naturally, when men declare they are leaving the battlefield or women find out they are leaving the battlefield the question of "what??? You're just going to give up?" follows.

And then comes the textbook fear-mongering questions that REALLY are a sign of desperation from the "enemy." I've been so kind to answer them too;

Q - "So don't you want to ever get married and have kids?"

A - No, like my freedom and my money

Q- "Do you want to die ALOOOOOONE in a nursing home?"

A - No, i won't die alone, I presume there will be other people there my same age and as I always have done I will make friends there. Additionally, if I make it to a nursing home, because of the fact men die 10 years before women, I will be a mack daddy and will have multiple women chasing after me. Besides, isn't it pretty arrogant to marry some one, let alone have children for the sole purpose of them providing you entertainment when you age?

Q - "Who's going to take care of you when you get older?"

A - Well, thanks to your voting patterns all health care and social security is free. In short, your children will be taking care of me. Additionally, again, are my children to be slaves to take care of me? Is THAT why I should have children and get married? To have slaves? Thankfully I had a vasectomy while you had 4 children from 3 different guys and you voted democrat all the time. Tell them I say "thanks for being my unwilling and unwitting slave."

and so on and so forth.

The reason for the questions is women (and people in general) can't really understand or believe you're giving up. They can't believe you're abandoning your primary biological motive and just up and going. People, but particularly women, can't fathom what would be better than a life with them and can't imagine a place where you'd be going once you leave the battlefield. But here ladies is where the men are going:

You see, they are leaving the market. And the reason why is that yes, as youth we had these dreams of meeting a beautiful cool, intelligent woman. We had dreams of finding a really neat girl and maybe settling down with her. And yes, the biological drive was very strong. But when our entire youth was not just wasted, but a negative experience, nay a PUNISHING EXPERIENCE you realize around the age of 30, that is was all just a lie. That or a bill of goods somebody was trying to sell you. At this point most men go through a depression (notice how suicide in men jumps around age 34 and then drops), but most of us look at life and say,

"OK, maybe I'm not going to find that really cool chick I wanted to meet, and maybe I did waste my youth at bars and clubs, and maybe there is no need for me as a role of a husband or a father, but now I'm no longer wasting my time. I'm doing what I want."

And BOOM! They enter Bachelorland.

Bachelorland is a magical place. A place where you get to keep the majority of your money. A place of true freedom where you get to do;

what you want
when you want
how you want
say what you want
hang out with who you want
do what you want
say what you feel

and there's no guff or nagging about it.

Once we pay our taxes to subsidize other people and other people's children, we still have the majority of our money to spend on ourselves. More importantly we have the majority of time to spend on ourselves. And better than that, society has advanced to the point there are LIMITLESS intellectual, physical, video, artistic and other pursuits to pursue and enjoy a happy, fulfilling life. We got our pals, we got our friends, we got a life.

And that (and you need to sit down for this) IS WITHOUT YOU!

No nagging, no crying, no drama, no divorce, no child support, no "my child comes first" BS, no jumping through hoops for sex, to abuse, no slapping, no flaking, no psychotic behavior, no mind games, no half my assets, no nothing.

You're gone, you're outta here, you're irrelevant.

Congratulations! You "won" the battle and men have surrendered! Now leave us alone.

Now who are the winners and who are the losers in this? Well, unfortunately there's more losers than winners.

The losers number many. Notably the women who continue fighting on the battlefield when there's nobody left to fight. Be it because society, media and feminists constantly barrage them with images of Sex and the City or EPL or they can't override nature or they just plain can't believe there are no more men left on the field, they continue to fight essentially no one. Ironically "fighting" against men while trying to attract one Enjoy the cats!

Also in the losing category are the men who had to suffer such BS for most of their youth, and worse, those men who never realize they're being shelled. They wander through life confused and befuddled about something that must not only take an inordinate amount of brain power obsessing about, but something that certainly must lower their life expectancy. They never achieve true happiness because they think it lies through the battlefield instead of getting off the battlefield and living their own life.

But, third, is the biggest and most innocent victims of them all. Admittedly this post has been very broad with the brush. I talk about women and men in general because it's impossible to have a conversation about it if you don't generalize (of course feminists and liberals love to use this technicality as a means to accuse you of sexism, but as I pointed out before, we know their political incentives and I plain don't give an ef anymore). However, there are obviously women who do not fall under this category and are not the malicious or warring types. These are the innocent and most undeserving victims.

The reason why is that the bad girls ruing it for the rest of the good girls. And it doesn't take a lot. It just takes one bad woman to divorce one good guy, and that good guy is off the market for good. I have PHENOMENAL, WONDERFUL, LOVELY women in my life who would make a great wife for any guy willing to get to know them. They ARE the ones who want to make a man happy. They'll cook, they'll clean, they'll not only dress sexy, but stay sexy because they WANT THEIR MAN TO BE HAPPY. They are the ones who not only claim to be independent, THEY ARE INDEPENDENT working REAL JOBS, producing REAL WEALTH. They want REAL MEN and when they vote, they think. They think not just for themselves, but are actually good, educated and informed stewards of democracy, thinking of society as a whole. The LAST thing they want is what feminists to them they should want. They want to be happy. Matter of fact, feminists HATE them and would call them "female Uncle Toms," but that is because they are jealous that my friends have better lives and are happier than these feminists could ever be.

However, sadly they are all in their 30's and 40's. And by that time the men who are left are either;

1. Confirmed bachelors
2. Divorced men who have no incentive to go back
3. Jerks and #%%holes that they don't want to date.
4. Desperate effeminate men that had too much single mother upbringing or too much brainwashing in the schools and frankly don't turn them on.

Did they do anything to deserve this?


Did they sling a single arrow at the boys on the battlefield?


But they are the ones paying the price for their fellow "feminists" sisters" assault on boys/men.

So ladies, or rather should I say "girls" because it's too late for the ladies, you have a choice.

You're either with us or against us. If you're with us we can ALL enjoy great lives which is what I really think we were programmed to do. We can enjoy each others company. We can go out on dates. We can get married and raise families. We could just jet set around the world getting drunk, eating good food and having great hot monkey greasy sex. We can work, we can play, we can HELP EACH OTHER OUT IN A MUTUAL BENEFICIAL RELATIONSHIP.

However, if you want to be unnatural, if you want to fight your biological drives and subscribe to feminism and make yourselves men. If you want to be childish. If you want drama and chaos and put attention above meaningful relationships. If you want to ruin it for other girls by destroying men through mind games and psychological "drauma." If you want to "dominate" over men or make them pay for some injustice at the age of 14 that they were completely incapable of doing, or if you just want to toy with the hearts and minds of men and boys, go right ahead and declare war. Because in the end, you won't win the battle of the sexes. And it won't be because men will ultimately counterattack and "win this round."

We'll just forfeit the battle

and in doing so win the war.

ht to Dr. Helen for the inspiration for this post.

Monday, October 03, 2011

The Circular Reference of Worthless Degrees

I've mentioned this before. Matter of fact, I think the writers of Archer have plagiarized me.

Help a Cappy Cap Sponsor Out

VouchSafe is one of our advertisers here on Cappy Cap. And what better way to support capitalism and freedom by visiting our sponsors?

Actually, matter of fact, you don't even have to buy anything, just "Digg" this link and that is all he asks.

Man from UNCLE

So I'm watching the Man from UNCLE Series which is phenomenal. Not just a good plot with lots of action set in the cold war, but HOT chicks carrying guns at UNCLE headquarters.

However, since it is from 1963 I believe you see a TON of young actors before they became big. This clip as Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock and Colonel Klink all together within 2 minutes of each other.

Saturday, October 01, 2011

The Bubble and Burst of Ballroom Dancing

Tonight was an epiphanal night for your Captain, and he wishes to share it with all your fine upstanding junior, deputy, aspiring, official or otherwise economists, and that epiphany is about the realm of ballroom dancing.

I am often faced with a quandary when middle aged women ask if their young, teenage sons should learn ballroom dance. Understand this is a quandary for me because my experience has both pros and cons to it, neither of which (until tonight) has edged out one over the other.

The battle between learning and not-learning basically boils down to two things.

1. When I was literally the best swing dancer in the entire state of Minnesota in the late 90's and early 2000's, it was grand. Swing was hot, I was hot, and I think I racked up over 200 dates alone in that 3 year time span. Dated the hottest (and most psychotic and dumbest) girl on the scene. Icing to the cake was the Salsa craze that followed. I wasn't necessarily the best dancer, but any "gringo" who wasn't all hands and didn't have a green card as an ulterior motive to dance with the ladies came at a premium. Again, life was grand.


2. Inevitably all good things come to an end, and they come to an end in an eerily similar pattern. First there is the craze. Everybody wants to do it, hot people, ugly people, people who climb on rocks. Then the skill level of everybody increases. Some people get better than others and this insults the former "kings and queens" of the dancing world. Cliques form in a very middle school manner, and of course, there may have been some dating going on, not all of which ended successfully. Sure enough due to failed relationships some people leave the scene, one clique won't dance with the others, and it all goes to pot. But worse, hastening the "goes to pot phase" is the entrance of two very different types of men, but PRECISELY identical effects on the dance scene - Green card searchers (latin dancing) and Single Christian Middle Aged Males (swing/ballroom scene).

These men, desperately incentived by ulterior motives, ABUSE ballroom dancing and essentially scare all the women away. Women now can no longer just "go out dancing" and enjoy a good night of it. They are now harassed by illegal aliens looking for a green card or desperate middle aged men looking for a wife. The dancing no longer has merit unto itself. It becomes a tool for desperate men.

This, more than anything else, scares the women away in droves and leaving the dance scene a nerdy-remnant shell of its former greatness.

Thus the cycle is complete, boom to bust, and ballroom dancing returns to where it "normally trades at."

The question then becomes, should the young man ever bother learning to ballroom dance? Does he learn in the hopes he times it right like I did, and with the added benefit of timing two ballroom bubbles and avail himself of (literally) limitless romantic opportunities? Or does he just pursue other pursuits and move on with his life?

I'm happy to tell you I've found the definitive and correct answer;

Do not learn ballroom dancing until you have a girlfriend or wife you dearly love.

The reason I say this is because of the "stable market value" of ballroom dancing.

Understand, though in the past I was a big proponent of ballroom dancing, that is only because I was lucky enough to live through two bubbles. Bar the great 90's swing dance craze and the early 2000's salsa craze, inevitbaly these things come to an end. And if you look back at the past 100 years, maybe, MAYBE 7 of them cumulatively were ballroom dance crazes of any time.

Regardless, that's what they precisely were.


They weren't "normal."

They weren't "the base line" of society.

These were fleeting, ABNORMAL phenomenons in society.

And if you timed them just right, fine, all was well and good (pretty great actually).

But if you got on the bandwagon too late, it was single Christian groups and green-card potlucks.

So you have to determine whether you should learn to ballroom dance based on the other 93 years or 93% of the time when ballroom dancing is "trading" at its normal market value and is not in a craze or "bubble" stage. And it is most decidedly NOT worth it.

The reason I say this is because of my experiences tonight. I went to about the only place in all of southern Montana to do some ballroom dancing. The venue was actually quite large. The band was quite good. And there was no less than 300 people. I walked in thinking I hit gold.

But the a couple observations.

1. NOBODY knew what they hell they were doing. Bar the SCARCE old couple who genuinely knew how to two-step, the remainder of the dancers were just flinging each other around and faking it about as bad as you could. Pockets of "woo-girls" filled the center of the floor as they danced with their beers in hand, and not one man on that floor could have ever been called a "leader" because the women were just turning themselves. I've seen mosh pits more organized than that.

2. Because of #1, even if you KNEW how to ballroom dance it wouldn't matter because no women knew how to follow. And conversely for the Lady Cappy Cappites, it wouldn't matter if you knew how to dance, because none of the men could lead, let alone keep the beat. So again, you could be the best dancer in the state (and I'm not joking when I say, I think I quite literally was), but it won't matter because you ultimately need a partner who knows what they're doing.

3. A reminder that suburbanite princess mentality transcends all rural, suburban and urban broders: There was one time I was at The Times Cafe in Minneapolis. I was in a suit, Vic Volare and the Volare Lounge Orchestra was playing. They had a GREAT floor open and martini's were pouring. It was probably the single best dance floor/joint in the entire Twin Cities and you could not ask for a better floor or band. After getting shot down 4 times in a row, I just decided I would plum ask every single looking lady to dance in the joint. After 30 minutes, I was summarily shot down by every girl in the joint. The floor remained open, until a cackle of woo girls decided to go out on the floor and dance with each other.

Tonight was a repeat. New to the venue I asked a lady sitting next to me at the bar if the band "ever played anything danceable." She said it was her first time there, but her friend from across the bar had been there plenty of times and would know. So we BOTH start beckoning her over and she yells across the bar, "But I don't want to dance with him!' We roll our eyes, continue to beckon and inevitably she comes over. I asked her, "Do they ever play any danceable music? Let alone does anybody here REALLY know how to dance?"

No, not really, she said, and I thanked her for the information.

Of course, fresh in my mind was her presuming I wanted to dance with her. Yes, who else would I want to dance with besides her and her fellow 40 something, aging women friends, with 1980's clothes and noticeable aging physical features? Brushing it off, I could brush it off no more when 10 minutes later I see these same women, acting like veritable 14 year old girls as they start dancing with each other on the dance floor. And I'm not talkign the jump up and down, wiggle butt dance. I'm talking they're trying to swing dance with one another, while there is literally over 100 genuine, tall, good-looking cowboys of their same age.

In short, it was tonight I realized just what a bubble ballroom dancing is when women would just plain prefer to dance with themselves than perfectly capable guys.

So the lesson to learn here gentlemen of the Capposphere is that unless there's a ballroom bubble, there's no point in learning how to ballroom dance. Most women, in a stable market of ballroom dance, will have no interest in dancing with you. Most women will shoot you down. And most women, would actually prefer to dance with each other than a clean cut, good looking guy 10 years their junior who is a stranger. And if you do enter the ballroom world, you can be prepared to join a world of middle aged to elderly single folk looking desperately for some kind of edge or skill that will give them game.

The conclusion is obviously not to learn ballroom, but I will provide one caveat.

Ballroom dance is worth learning if you have a signficant other. THe reason why is it is a currency for men. Just like flowers, poetry, buying drinks, paying for dinner, all of that is WASTED on girls you are merely dating or trying to date. All of those, including ballroom dancing should be reserved for a special girl that actually DESERVES those things. Do men REALLY like ballroom dancing? Sure some, but even I tire of it. Did I like writing funny, witty poems to impress the girls in college? No, but I thought it would work, of course it didn't. And how much money did you waste buying soon-to-be-dead flowers, soon-to-be-eaten-chocolates, or soon-to-be-drank drinks?

You will soon realize ballroom dancing is merely one of many forms of what is ultimately categorized as ATTENTION.

And all men, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow will soon realize you don't use attention to get women (that's where indifference, ignorance and lying about your income come in). You use it to reward the nice sweet ones that treat you nice and don't play games and like you for you.

Therefore, the Captains' new official policy on dancing (as well as poetry, buying dinner, paying for drinks and any other form of attention) is reserved for those special women you are either seriously involved with or married to, or good female friends you really do like and respect.

Wasting these talents or efforts on women as a means to cajole them into dating you, is simply that. Wasting talents and efforts.

The Captain's GE Interview Story

This was no more than about 4 months ago.

So desperate was I to get out of Minnesota I was applying for jobs that were paying as little as $9 an hour. I didn't care. I just wanted to get out. Minnesota was a veritable prison where it claimed to have a major metropolitan metro and it seemed it would have the ability to provide younger adults a promising career, but it just wasn't happening. The banking sector was helplessly corrupt. The overall economy was infested with nepotists and cronyism to the point you couldn't land a job unless you knew somebody or your last name was "Dayton" or "Cargill." And to top it all off 50 years of socialist liberalism was driving any real economic growth and entrepreneurship to the Dakotas or Mexico.

And so despite my impressive track record of hard work, academic achievement, ability to predict economies and general super-awesome economic genius, it was nothing but a day in and day out to eek out some living in this dying economic entity for the past 4 years.

4 years is a long time, and the 12 before that were at best described as "hostile." Inevitably this wears on a man and I was quite depressed. Not suicidal, but the days ended up becoming things to live through, not necessarily stepping stones to a greater future.

Inevitably, I had enough. I knew that if I stayed another year, I would be pushing that suicidal line. Besides which, my "Enjoy the Decline" philosophy was starting to cement and my own naturally derived logic told me to get out. At any cost, because, well, working as a Wal-Mart stockboy for $8 an hour in Rapid City during the dogshift would be infinitely better than working in the Cold Detroit for what inevitably end up being about the same.

So I started applying for jobs.

Any job.

Long as it was in the Rapid Citya area.

Park ranger, stock boy, chief risk officer, police officer I even applied for a pawn broker position.

Anything I could simply "do."

Inevitably, I came across a "sales rep" position at GE Capital located in Rapid City. It paid $10 an hour and no benefits. This didn't matter to me because I did have ancillary income from online classes, books, etc. (thank you Cappy Cappites!) and could afford catastrophic insurance. All that mattered was I was in Rapid City, would be out of Minnesota and be among the mountains and more or less saner more conservative people. The pay cut would be worth the mental health.

And to my luck I received a call from their HR department. She gave me the regular rigmarole of stupid HR questions. I was answering in boiler plate form. But when she asked why I wanted to work for GE, I (stupidly) answered truthfully.

"I want to move to Rapid City, always wanted to live there and I inevitably want to settle down and retire there."

Then came an odd question from her. One that stuck in my mind;

"But you want to work for GE too, right?"

I answered, "Uh, yes, of course."

I must have answered correctly because a month later I was at an actual in-person interview. Two middle aged men sat across from me. One overweight, the other with a beard. Both leaning over as if they were eager to meet me.

The questions ensue, I answer them, and I quickly realize that because this is such a low-paying job, their primary problem is not just retention, but alcoholism and drug use. More than 4 questions about my use of drugs and alcohol and can I manage the simple and expected task of showing up on time and not hung over.

I look at them as if they never looked at my resume and kind of laid it on the line for them, "Look, guys, I'm 35. I've owned rental property, ran my own business and have worked in the financial service industry for over 14 years. I'm not some 21 year old kid out of college who is still partying. I'm going to show up on time and be sober. That's the minimum I can promise."

Their concerns seemed assuaged by my mini-speech. They then asked why I wanted to work at GE and I gave them the same response I told the HR gal.

"I've always wanted to live in Rapid City, blah blah blah."

And eerily enough, they asked the same question,

"But also because you want to work for GE, right?"

"Uh, yeah, right."

2 weeks later I got the rejection letter.

Now I'm not bitter (they only were paying $10 an hour), but let me explain something here to those of you at GE, or any other firm that is looking for some kind of "sworn allegiance" to your firm or your company.

Screw you.

Are you kidding me? $10 an hour and you think people WANT to work for you?

Is this a joke, or just another baby boomer derived sh!t test to see if you can get people to lie and tell you what you want to hear, thereby another sick and twisted "test" of loyalty?

I am literally speechless at the fact you expect people to parrot or make some comment of allegiance to a firm that pays $10 an hour. Do you think anybody WANTS to work at GE? Let alone a crappy call center position? Let alone WORK AT ALL?

The answer to your most inane question of "why do you want to work here" is a simple one;


You are going to pay me.

Expecting another answer is simply testing out ability to kiss ass and brown nose.

Now, if you want that, ask that question.

"How much are you willing to brown nose, kiss our asses and bend over?"

There are people out there who will answer truthfully. Matter of fact, I think most of the US civilian labor force is so desperate, not to mention fed up, they'll tell you right off the bat.

But Jesus H Christ, to think you're being "sneaky" or "really clever" about asking us why we want to work there and think somehow our answer, if ass-kissing or not, will determine our level of loyalty and efficiency is only the pure bunk that can come out of the aging and decrepit HR "profession."

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the public sector is the primary threat. But since this is a democracy, the public sector and government we have is merely a reflection of the general population that voted them in there. And while the government is the single biggest threat, that doesn't mean the idiots that voted this latest moron into office don't infect the private sector either. And so infectiously stupid are they, not only do they ask you stupid questions like "why do you want to work here," they then go out of their way to suggest, "but it's also because you want to work at GE, right?"

Right, just so I might have the off-chance of meeting your rent-seeking CEO so I can shove a lightbulb up his....nostril.

You enjoy filling those alcoholic, drug addict $10/hour jobs with automotonic "GE cheerleaders."

I wonder if they interrogate the Chinese laborers they hire so intensely as they do the American ones?