Thursday, August 25, 2011

Why I am a Libertarian

I recently read a piece titled "why I am not a libertarian". It was brought to my attention by James Daniel Ross, a man I respect greatly and whose reply to said piece I have posted here. There were many faults of logic and reason in this piece, and there were many replies in support of and a few against his assumptions. I just felt the need to voice my own now here for all of you in a manner which even we feebleminded libertarians can understand.

Here is a link to the offending article for you all to read...

And now to my somewhat simple minded reply:

I am a Libertarian, because the idea of individual Liberty is the only one which will allow people such as our friend here to make such statements about other's ideas without being imprisoned or even killed for doing so. Individual Liberty is that core idea which this nation was founded upon, that no one man can be oppressed by another group. I know we have had a rather difficult time with living up to that ideal, that we have actually failed in doing so, but it is the striving to attain that which makes this nation great.

That the star trek axiom trotted out so often by the left of the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" which we as a nation hold as anathema. But rather that the rights of the individual are what is truly important, for only in defending the individual can we assure the rights of the whole of society.

Collectivism as espoused in the article in question is nothing more than a pretty face placed upon slavery. An inducement for those to strive mightily to reach the middle... er.. rather be born to the middle, and locked into it.

If you have Liberty, you can gather a group of your like minded brethren and create a commune, a socialist oasis where you can practice what you preach. If you wish to have socialized medicine, you may create and build your own socialized medical care center, you may donate as much of your money as you so choose because you have the freedom to do so. You may even choose not to do so as you also have that freedom as well, but you may not coerce or otherwise force others to act as you wish in regards to their property. The American axion of "your rights end at my nose" apply.

I believe it comes down to that particular issue, the one of "property". Under Libertarianism, property and the rights to such exist and are protected, whereas in this offending article the assumption is no such thing as property, nor the right to own it, exist.

It is also quite obvious that despite his claims to the contrary, he has zero understanding of Libertarian principles and ideas. Mr. Muder equates Libertarianism with total anarchy, which nothing could be further from the truth. Libertarians recognize the need for government, and for a certain amount of "collectivism" such as people to collect the trash, police the streets, teach our children, but we also recognize the need to limit it's powers and control it tightly. Two things which have not been occurring for quite some time now.

So, I'm assuming that my taking his wallet and raiding his fridge for my lunch... wait, our wallet, and our fridge... what was I thinking?, would be just A-OK by him.

A guest blog from author James Daniel Ross

There is a post out called: Why I Am Not a Libertarian
Pretty popular in fact. You can find it everywhere, with people singing its praises. Why is a question for another day.
You see, it really should be titled differently. It's not that it's a far leftist screed, the kind of horrible bastion of half truths and outright lies that are indicative of Marxists. It is that he claims to be a Leftist, and a Progressive. He pulls these words around him like a sheepskin, seeking to use honest democrats as a shield, hoping they will rise up with him to defend against attack. This guy spins so far left he drills holes in his sleep.
He advocates the removal of all property, except for that which is delegated by a governmental body. He advocates the supremacy of the state, and its needs over the individual. He wants you to become tools in the hands of faceless bureaucrats. And make no mistake, everywhere it has been tried it has given license to monsters like Che Guevara, Stalin, and Mao. Hundreds of Millions of human beings have died - not in the name of his perfect society - but because of it. They were necessary grease that had to be applied to the treads for it to function. And he wants it here.
There is no word for how incredibly stupid this is. I am simply glad that he can stand on his roof and bellow how much of an intellectual giant it makes him, so far above us. There are very few ways to attack his arguments directly. They are easily disproven and full of lies. I have sought to point out the rats in the walls of his grand cathedral of Marxism using logic and common sense. Statistics can be faked dependant on sources, and even some sources can be disputed, but logic cannot be stopped by any armor, be it innuendo, falsehood, or comedy.
That being said, I have mocked him, and did it mercilessly. And I did it because it I am tired of being attacked by know-nothing ivory-tower intellectuals, to the point where I am ready to respond in kind to their language of mockery, plus it was fun. And I feel I should be paid - like a lifeguard - to point some of this out, so I took my filthy lucre in the form of fun.
Stripped of all the intellectual claptrap, the strawmen, and given a huge dose of honesty, it should have read much differently. It should have read like this:
Why I Am an Unthinking, Thief, Liar, and Supporter of Mass Murder.
Of all the political movements out there, Marxists have the stupidest rhetoric. No matter what the issue is, they get to talk about how you are too stupid to live with freedom, how things would be better if you just did what you were told, and how impossible it is for anyone to do anything for themselves because of what utter dullards you all are.
It’s also the perfect belief system. If you don't believe that, we will convince you as people across the world have been convinced: with gulags and firing squads. You don’t need to actually need to come up with a logical argument, you just need to spout a lot of end of the world crap
that gives people the idea that a Giant Nanny what Knows Best can come in and save you. You just need to understand the One Big Idea That Solves Everything: Despite all of recorded history Government is Not Bad. Confiscate life, redistribute property, break contracts, pick winners and losers, — and take over the means of production to ensure that the biggest donors win.
And trust me, no matter how much I call myself a progressive — a liberal, whatever — the moment I claim that I have to shake my head at how often I’m tempted to quote Marx you should know I am an idiot. What happened? Measles as an adult? Perhaps one too many drug binges. Maybe I was dropped on my head. Perhaps someone created a black hole inside my self esteem. Perhaps I'm just unable to cogitate, for more than ten seconds without someone whispering in my ear to tell me what exactly to think. After all, that's what I think of you.
Here, let me show you how badly my logic blows chunks. I will bring up specific examples about how badly I have crashed my intellectual self into a wall by telling you what I -and other horrible pimples on the ass of political thought- really think. Sometimes I will even tell you about how that will horribly fail, but only by accident. And if you call me on it I will make sure to mock you as a liar and an intellectual poopy pants. I may call you a terrorist, a hobbit, or a racist. That usually works.
First, I am going to call Libertarianism a sweeping worldview, as I argue for COLLECTIVISM. Yes, yes, I know. Pots and Kettles and all that. Still, baseless attacks are becoming harder and harder to come by. Blame my teachers for not knowing how to argue like an adult.
Now, let me give you some things to be swallowed. DO NOT CHEW. You will not like the 'chocolate' center.
Ooooh wait, progressives will think I'm cool if I sidetrack into an attack on Christianity! Grrr...bad Christians. They suck. I am so much smarter. Bible bad. Dates did not match up and suddenly my impenetrable wall of faith collapsed. The failure was obviously in the book. My faith was perfect. Grrrr. I have much better arguments. I… I just won't take the time to list them here. (Now move along!) Plague. In 1918, the Spanish flu devastated populations. The US government instituted TYRANNY. This was good, since it stopped the plague TYRANNY IS GOOD. Now, try to imagine a Libertarian approach to a serious plague. I don’t think there is one. Maybe most people would respond to sensible leadership (Oh CRAP! I just admitted Libertarianism is sensible… quick, gotta move, gotta move) but public health is one of those areas where a few people with freedom to pursue screwy ideas can mess up everybody. See? People are too STUPID for freedom.
I am tempted again to quote Marx. Wasn't there something about :DO NOT INVESTIGATE HOW MARXISM DEALS WITH ECONOMIES! I am certain there was. Marxism fails on a 24/7 basis for every facet of life, but it is PERFECT for the common outbreak of contagion that happens every 100-years or so. Ooooooh, we're due for another, right? Cling to Marxism, kids. This makes me better than you. Besides, who really minds breadlines. We can make vodka cheap, and who doesn't like a good blackout drunk? Global warming. There’s a reason why small-government candidates deny global warming: It's a fraud! Denial of data manipulation, constant ad homenim attacks, and screaming that science is about consensus rather than data, these are the best ways to confirm that you must bow down to my desires and ensure that you stay in your place. After all, I'm not giving up my car, computer, or home.
I am tempted again to quote Marx. Ah, yes: "That's for peons like you." The Great Al Gore taught us this: Mansions and private jets are for Believers. The rest of you can wallow in filth.
Property. Now let’s get to that more serious confiscation… er… reframing.
I had to live outside the Libertarian worldview for many years before I began to grasp the deeper problem with it: property. Every property system in history (and all the ones I’ve been able to imagine) are unjust. I don't get to give away your property just because I want to! I can't take it or limit it, no matter how much phony science or failed social programs I inflict upon you.
I want to take it from YOU, the person who 'earned' it to put it in greedy terms, and give it to others. Now these TOTALLY won't be given to unions, big business donators, or green jobs that turn out to be made of Imaginattium, fantasticanium, or bullshittium. They will be well spent on things you hate, and things you can't stop, because I know better than you. What you labor for belongs to EVERYONE.
I am tempted again to quote Marx. Hmmm… well… "As the self appointed leader of everyone, that means I get to spend it." Yes, that will inspire the proletariat.
What? My Property? Go to hell, thief! That's mine! I get to keep it as an intellectual and an elite! I pay enough taxes. I will not donate my 401K, nor most of my earnings. I earned those dollars, and are thus worth so much more than yours. You must pay more in order to fund what I think is right.
[Aside: This is where I make a wild statement like: it's completely false to say that government programs primarily benefit the poor. Property is a creation of government, so the primary beneficiaries of government are the people who own things -- the rich. Now, I'm not going to back this up, or even if anyone has made this argument, OR if anyone could shoot it full of holes simply by saying: We don't mind giving to those in need, as long as they are in need. I'm not even going to look at what the welfare state has done to the family units of the poor. That's the best thing about being a Marxist tool. Just a second, let me quote Marx "I don't have to justify a thing to you plebeians. The proof is I use the word plebains. I even know what it means and I can spell plebeans right nearly half the time!"]
Property and Labor. It’s worthwhile to go back and read the justifications of property that were given in the early days of capitalism. The best thing is I can then use Christian charity as a reason for theft. I think Christians are idiots (see above. Grrrr…). you see, I can crap all over them when I want, and then use Charity as a reason they should believe in my crap! It's win-win. I completely ignore that charity has to be voluntary. I brush aside the fact that I just made fun of Libertarians for quoting dead white guys just a moment ago. Now I can take John Locke’s 1690 classic The Second Treatise of Civil Government out of context to prove whatever I want. Marx again: "Remember: Sources are only allowed if I can use them. Any quote that disproves me is wrong."
Oh, I am so smart.
Today, a baby abandoned in a dumpster has as valid a moral claim to the Earth as anybody else (as long as it is post-birth, I'm not going to get into pre-birth rights). But as that child grows it will find that in fact everything of value has already been claimed. All of it. There is no more gold to be dug, no more goods to be made, nothing. Nothing is made today and nobody works in the service industry (Marx blames the SEIU). And if a BABY can't find any work, what chance do you have? Yep. Nothing for you. Nothing. Do not try. GIVE UP I SAID, PEON! Do not try. ACCPEPT GOVERNMENT AS YOUR ONLY OPTION! YOU WILL NEVER BE RICH!
I mean there is no documented evidence that hard work, innovation, or education has any effect on wealth. Yes, you should still go to college. The unions need your funds. Plus, how else will you get your indoctrination? And worse yet, you have to PERFORM to get ahead. You can’t go down to the Ford plant and start working on your new car. You have to be hired first. OH the horror! You must work to gain a trade good (like cash) in order to purchase something instead of stealing it like a good Marxist.
Now, there may be a dozen car factories, and thousands of other jobs, and even the opportunity to open your own shop, store, or factory, but trust me, we Marxists are working on that. As soon as we can, we are eliminating all work, all property, and of course profit. For you. The little people. You monsters.
Marx fairly leaps from my mouth, and lo! He sayeth: "Now go eat government cheese."
Access to the means of production. In Locke’s hunter-gatherer state of Nature, only laziness could keep an able-bodied person poor, -well that or sickness, predators, inclement weather, or the common cold- but here we focus on the means of production — Nature — was just sitting there waiting for human labor to turn it into the crappiest kind of property. Now there are billions of people. These people create a massive draw for products or services, BUT THEY DO NOT EXIST! IGNORE THEM! DO NOT TRY TO FILL THEIR WANTS OR NEEDS!
Marx:"That would lead to entrepreneurialism, and thus profit, and PROFITS ARE BAD! GIVE THEM HERE!"
Today’s economic environment is very different, but our intuitions haven’t kept up. Our anxiety today isn’t that there won’t be enough goods in the world, and it isn’t fear that our own laziness will prevent us from working to produce those goods. Our fear is that the owners of the means of
production won’t grant us access, so we will never have the opportunity to apply our labor. And if you didn't fear it before, you do now! (Swish! I am so good at sewing fear!)
Marxists ignore that the elite have no right to that property, to those goods or services. It belongs to us. By us we mean me. Let me put this clearer: Marxism has been tried, and it creates misery, poverty and death even in a tropical paradise like Cuba. So you should definitely trust me when I say I should be able to talk about jobs without any kind of sources. Trust me when I promise that you will starve unless we take control of production and FORCE THEM to give you a unionized job at a fair market wage… minus all the taxes we can cut out of you.
I am tempted again to quote Marx: "Trust me, I'm from the government and I know what I am doing."
Justice. Access to the means of production should be a human birthright, as long as it doesn't belong to me. Everyone ought to have the chance to turn his or her labor into products that he or she could own, as long as it is government and environmentally sound. I don't care if you go to school for twenty years to study a dangerous or in depth job. You should be paid no more than a sausage stuffer, or ditch digger, or government sanctioned manure relocator. Me? No, I don't give back everything more than minimum wage out of my paychecks. I deserve anything I can earn. I'm better than you.
Now, I have to ignore that buying power has skyrocketed since the founding of My Country. <Note to self: Spew Marxist claptrap here. It has been disproven many times, but that just means I have to repeat it more! Bridge into class warfare…>
Just remember that there are always people who own more than you do, and because of that, you can always complain and moan that nothing is fair, because nobody deserves anything they build or work for - except me. This is called Marxism.
And despite the standard of living increasing everywhere capitalism is found, and cratering everywhere people like me hold sway, you must believe higher productivity means higher unemployment, and the average person’s standard of living decreases even as total wealth increases. Remember, history does not lie: Libertarians do!
The role of government. I anticipate this objection: “You want to go back to being hunter-gatherers. We’ll all starve.” This is what is called a "Straw man" attack. Nobody is going to say this, but I am going to CLAIM they will in order to not address any of the real complaints against my ill thought out and near religious devotion to communism. Marxists call this: Plan 'A'.
I want a modern economy. But one where property rights have been erased and all wealth is redirected to merciful government programs - no matter how wasteful - and of course, to our supporters and lackeys. And special elites. Like me.
This will both compensate those who are still shut out, and build a system where we cannot ever be voted out since everyone will require our help to survive. Marxists call this 'freedom'.
To prevent government from: taking everything you own; allowing you a pittance to survive upon; punish you for hard work and berating you for trying to better yourself; in today’s world, is no way to champion freedom. Quite the opposite, preventing the government from controlling you is what Marxists call 'tyrannical'.
Please make a note of the new definitions. There will be a test. If you have ever read what happens in Marxist societies, you know:
"the grading curve in a gulag is a real killer." --Marx

Monday, August 15, 2011

I am rarely angry, but wow

From the AP... 

Associated Press
JERUSALEM (AP) - The U.S. will cut $100 million in American aid money to Palestinians in Gaza if the territory's Hamas rulers continue with "unwarranted audits" of local American nonprofit organizations, a state department official said Friday.
The American threat came in response to a growing attempt by Hamas to exert control over the international organizations that support the many impoverished Palestinians among Gaza's population of 1.5 million people.
This week, Hamas shut down the U.S.-financed International Medical Corps after it refused to submit to a Hamas audit.
The State Department informed Hamas on Thursday that aid worth $100 million would be halted if the International Medical Corps were not allowed to operate freely.
"If they are not allowed to reopen and operate then obviously we are looking at USAID to suspend all operations until the IMC is allowed to reopen," said a state department official in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. "These are unwarranted audits and amount to an increase in harassment of humanitarian relief staff."
The U.S., which considers Hamas a terrorist organization, does not have direct contact with the group.
Hamas has told nonprofit groups that they must be registered with the Gaza government and provide financial records.
Mohammed Awad, the Hamas minister of planning in Gaza, said the organizations had agreed to have their accounts vetted through a Hamas-appointed accountant.
"We are not saying there is corruption in these organizations but we are trying to put things in order and to ensure that these organizations are providing services to citizens," he said. "These organizations entered this land on this basis."
Hamas - an Islamic group backed by Iran - has been slowly spreading its influence to local groups that had remained outside its control, possibly viewing them as a political threat.
No significant, organized opposition to Hamas exists in Gaza, which came under the group seized in a violent takeover from rival Palestinians in 2007. That takeover followed a Hamas victory in Palestinian elections the previous year.
Most of the international community views the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, which now governs only the West Bank, as the Palestinians' legitimate government.
One such group, a non-governmental organization called the Sharek Youth Forum, was shut down outright last month.
Rizek Abdul Jawad contributed to this report from Gaza City.

Really? We give 100 million dollars to palestine? Which is under Hamas control? Hamas?, whom we have designated a "terrorist organization", and yet we still give 100 million? 

Heeeyyyy... Now, I may be off base a bit, I'm certain I'm missing something... But, I have an idea where we can start trimming some of that whole budget thingy. Is anyone else with me on this?

I must say that it's my instinct to say let them sort themselves out and we'll deal with the survivors. That may seem a bit isolationistic of me, but I believe a certain amount of pullback from our MASSIVE expenditures in both treasure and blood in the rest of the world's affairs is in order here.

I am tired of being the world's arbiter

I am tired of being who the world looks to for rescue
I am tired of being the world's police force
I am tired of us pouring untold billions into the money pit that is everywhere else.

Let's take that capital and invest it back into OUR infrastructure, into OUR schools and OUR hospitals. 

Let's build a rail infrastructure second to none on earth. 
Let's return our dilapidated highway system to the envy of the world. 
Let's turn our education system back into the envy of the world. 
Let's upgrade our power grid until it is again the the envy of the world. 
Let us abandon our status as a debtor nation and return to being a creditor nation.

Let the rest of the world pound sand for a decade or two. We have family to care for before we start helping the neighbors.

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Way to go San Fran!!!.

I just read this little gem of a news item from the great people's republic of San Francisco.

"By PAUL ELIAS, Associated Press – Sat Aug 13, 3:52 am ET
SAN FRANCISCO – Transit officials blocked cellphone reception in San Francisco train stations for three hours to disrupt planned demonstrations over a police shooting.
Officials with the Bay Area Rapid Transit system, better known as BART, said Friday that they turned off electricity to cellular towers in four stations from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Thursday. The move was made after BART learned that protesters planned to use mobile devices to coordinate a demonstration on train platforms.
The tactic drew comparisons to those used by the former president of Egypt to squelch protests demanding an end to his authoritarian rule. Authorities there cut Internet and cellphone services in the country for days earlier this year.
"BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak," the Electronic Frontier Foundation said on its website.
The American Civil Liberties Union criticized the tactic, saying on its blog that it was the "wrong response to political protests."
BART officials were confident the cellphone disruptions were legal. They said in a statement that it's illegal to demonstrate on the platform or aboard the trains, and that it has set aside special areas for demonstrations.
The demonstration planned Thursday failed to develop. "We had a commute that was safe and without disruption," said BART spokesman Jim Allison.
The demonstrators were protesting the July 3 shooting of Charles Blair Hill by BART police, who claimed Hill came at them with a knife. Several people were arrested when a July 11 demonstration disrupted service during the rush-hour commute and prompted the closing of BART's Civic Center station."

Three cheers to you San francisco!! It's about time someone cracked down on that stupid 1st amendment with a little preemptive action! Well done! That will show those layabout ne'er-do-well jackanapes just exactly who has the authority in your town! Protesting a shooting indeed, I have never heard such shocking disrespect for authority in all my days.
 And to plan a demonstration which clearly disregards the "special areas" which you have so graciously set aside for demonstrations so any such demonstrations cannot disrupt even for a moment the orderly and controlled flow of workers to and from their assigned duties. To have a demonstration cause a disruption or inconvenience simply goes against everything that you have been so long trying to ingrain into their minds. Everyone knows that disruption of the planned routine is antithetical to order and control. I mean really, who do these protesters think they are? It's not like San Francisco lays claim to any kind of tradition of free thinking, where do they think they are Haight-Ashbury? Wherever that is. 
Well! What other choice could you have possibly made than to shut down everyone's ability to communicate, thus snipping the strings of their anarchistic puppet masters before they could ever make them dance their disruptive, and therefore dangerous dance. 
"BART officials were confident the cellphone disruptions were legal. They said in a statement that it's illegal to demonstrate on the platform or aboard the trains, and that it has set aside special areas for demonstrations."
And the proof of it is that there was no such protest. The quick actions of BART have also assured that there were zero lion attacks and bear maulings. Their quick actions of shutting down everyone's ability to communicate has also prevented a repeat of the 1914 assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, thus preventing us all from the hell of yet another world war which would have no doubt resulted in the deaths of untold millions, possibly even billions of innocents. Thank you San Francisco. 
"The demonstration planned Thursday failed to develop. "We had a commute that was safe and without disruption," said BART spokesman Jim Allison."
See, the ends justify the means, just look to San Francisco from now on for order and preemptive action. 

I'll shut up now and get back to my pottery. 

Thursday, July 28, 2011

food food food

Hello everyone, Joe Wahler here again for some more of my opinion, I recently read this piece in the NYT by Mark Bittman and thought how thoroughly condescending and at the same time naive of him.

If you tax soda the only thing that will be accomplished is that you will take more money from poor, uneducated people. They will not stop drinking soda, it's loaded with caffeine, and sugar.

The answer is to do something effective, educate don't legislate, and if the people choose not to participate... well that's their choice, not anyone else's.

The point of good food is not to attempt to feel superior to, or to pass judgement upon, or to impose your will upon those so less fortunate that they don't know the difference between pork injected with a solution to enhance flavor, and a proper piece of old breed loin. That condescending attitude will only serve to alienate those whom you are trying to reach.

It's like placing a tax on soda, "We know what's best for you, and will punish you for this behavior", that attitude is smug at best, and it may fill you with a self satisfied sense of superiority, but it's a false one because in the end, you want those whom you are punishing with your taxes as your allies, not your underlings.

These people are your fellow citizens, they are not your charges to care for because you know best. They have the exact same rights to do with their own bodies as you have. This debate is actually a political one, it's the age old battle between collectivism on the tax side, and individualism on the other. Barring a completely and totally irrefutable argument from the former, I shall always choose the latter. Because the latter always allows one to participate in the former if he so chooses, while the former by it's very nature precludes the latter.

Friday, July 22, 2011

What a strange trip.

I just read an article by Paul Krugman in the New York Times titled "The Lesser Depression", and it reminded me of the time when a moving sidewalk malfunction at one of our safe and secure airports deposited me in our "mirror universe". A place where the people are all the same, but something about them is different. Paul Krugman as an example, in that alternate universe he was an actual economist, was well versed in history, and could quite literally grasp basic mathematic concepts. Oh yeah, and he didn't have a beard.

That Krugman would have never blamed the crash on corporations not falling upon their swords by way of extravagant spending in order to save the economy, and he certainly would have never made any such statement which implied that the "stimulus" plan was anything but a cash grab for the FOOB, or "Friends Of OBama". Where did all that money go by the way? Does anyone know?.... anywhere?

I lost my shirt investing in a "job ready" shovel company.

PS. Obama is the president over there as well, but he got there by having Hilary killed in a shooting accident with his now cyborg VP Dick Cheney. They both have beards. Joe Biden had to close his hot dog and foot massage stand due to some questionable practices we won't go into here.

So anyway, someone got me to say my name backwards and here I suddenly find myself, where Krugman is an idiot, and all is right with the world.

Till next time;

relhaw eoj

Monday, July 11, 2011


The logic barrier, after years and years of attempts, has finally been shattered completely. People as far as 100 miles away were able to hear the "reason boom" as our great leader Barack Obama was able to outpace the nearest national competitors Kim Jung Il and his Venezuelan rival mr. saggy face.

The key to this triumph it seems was not in the mere absurdity of any one claim, as this only generates random directional bursts of ridiculousness which die out rather quickly and never really threaten the logical thought barrier. But rather the gyroscopic "spin" which has become the hallmark of this great administration's efforts with the cutting edge "bamboozle drive" Without the "spin" as it were, the "bamboozle effect" would never have been able to achieve sufficient "anti logic" for long enough to even attempt to shatter the heretofore impervious barrier.

We are all to be applauded, for without the tireless efforts of all those years of federally controlled public education, a feat such as this could never have even been dreamed of, let alone actually accomplished. I say, 3 cheers, and a hip hip huzzah!

Where's my gin and tonic, I'm going to the pool now. CHEERS!!