women-drivers




This week The Stu Pitt Award goes to ...

Extreme Liberals in America



for not appreciating living in America

Compliments of the Wall Street Journal, Oct 26, 2013 ...

"Dozens of Saudi Arabian women took to the roads around Saudi Arabia on Saturday, defying a new surge of warnings from the government, mosque pulpits and radio channels to drop their challenge to a de facto ban on driving by women.

Although no law explicitly prohibits women from driving in Saudi Arabia, the government has refused to give them licenses.

Meanwhile, many women heeded warnings from Saudi Arabia's Interior Ministry Thursday and Friday that the government would "fully and firmly" enforce the country's ban against women's driving.

The day before Saturday's driving day, many Saudi clerics used Friday's weekly sermons to condemn the idea of women motorists. Lifting the ban, and increasing women's freedom of movement, would lead to increased premarital sex and adultery, some worshipers quoted Saudi clerics as saying.

Radio news channels amplified the government warnings Friday and Saturday. Broadcasters spoke of a "conspiracy" behind the women's driving campaign."


Stu Pitt says, "Yeah, according to extreme liberals, America is a bad place. Go spend a year as a woman in Saudi Arabia and then come back and tell us how horrible America is."

Congratulations you idiots who think America is such a bad place, and don't appreciate living in the U.S., you deservedly earned this week's Stu Pitt Award!







Cal-energy




This week The Stu Pitt Award goes to ...

The State of California


For stupid spending


From the LA Times, October 13, 2013 ...

"California is spending nearly $15 million to build 10 hydrogen fueling stations, even though just 227 hydrogen-powered vehicles exist in the state today.

It's a hefty bet on the future, given that government officials have been trying for nine years, with little success, to get automakers to build more hydrogen cars.

The project is part of a sprawling but little-known state program that packs a powerful financial punch: It spent $1.6 billion last year on a myriad of energy-efficiency and alternative-energy projects.

Even as California has scaled back education, law enforcement and assistance to the disabled in this era of financial stress, the energy program has continued unrestrained and is expected to grow significantly in coming years.

State agencies have invested in milk trucks that run on cow manure, power plants fueled by ocean tides and artificial photosynthesis for powering vehicles and buildings.

The spending is drawing increasing scrutiny. Some of the energy investments have gone bust, electricity costs have soared, and some economists have disputed the benefits. The legality of some consumer fees that fund the programs also is being challenged in court.

The alternative-energy projects are largely financed by small charges on electricity bills or obscure consumer fees that are seldom noticed. The hydrogen fueling stations, for example, will be financed by a $3 fee on license plates ..."

Stu Pitt says: Really? Milk trucks that run on cow manure? $15 million hydrogen fueling stations ... for 200 vehicles? Financed with taxpayer dollars? Really? Are you kidding me??? Here is what I have to say to the State of California regarding it's spending taxpayer's money on stupid and crazy energy programs ...



STOP WASTING

OUR MONEY!



Congratulations to the State of California. For your stupid and arrogant spending on RIDICULOUS energy programs, this week you deservedly earned the Stu Pitt Award.





"It is the duty of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."

- Thomas Paine, American patriot (1737 - 1809)




washing machines




This week The Stu Pitt Award goes to ...

The U.S. government



for regulating my laundry

The U.S. Department of Energy determines the standards for washing machines in America. In a misguided effort to save energy, the federal government mandated front loading washing machines for the American consumer.

Here is my firsthand experience with the front loading washing machine. My apartment complex provides community laundry rooms, with front loading washers only. To use the washer I have to stoop or kneel down or bend over to load my dirty clothes. What about elderly senior citizens or people with back problems? Many of them can't stoop down or kneel down or bend over to load their clothes. Or, if they do stoop, kneel, squat, bend, to use to load their clothes into a front loading washing machine, they may risk a serious back, neck, hip, or knee injury. Not to mention that loading a large amount of laundry (a full load) is frustrating. When washing a full load you try to put one more pairs of socks or one more pair of underwear in but they keep falling out the open front door. Then, finally, you start the washer. Oops, you forgot to add a dish towel or wash cloth or other item. Too bad, unlike the top loading washing machine, once the front loading washer starts up, you CANNOT add any items to the wash. Finally, your wash is done. Once again, to remove the clothes, you have to kneel down or bend over (ouch). You open the door and ... clothes fall out.

None of these added annoyances happened with the top loading machines. None. The government mandates front loading washing machines primarily because they save energy. OK, by all means, let's save energy. But who is going to save my back!? Will any energy cost savings be offset by a large increase in medical treatment for back pain, caused by front loading washing machines? According the federal government's National Institute of Health, acute back pain in the U.S. already costs $100 billion. Annually.

Hmm. Front loading washing machines. Is this yet another "slippery slope"? Does it mean that the government can once again dictate to the private sector what products are produced and marketed for private consumption? If so, that is yet another dangerous precedent ... one that brings Americans ever closer to the end of individual freedom.

Now the government is in our laundry rooms. Is there ANY area of American life where the government has NOT intruded? They are already in our

living room (light bulbs)

bathroom (low flow toilets and shower heads)

bedroom (mattress tags)

garage (mpg standards)

schools (funding)

bodies (Obama Care)

sex lives (free condoms, morning after pill for 15 year-olds, abortion)

electronics devices (phone taxes et al)

communication (collecting everyone's phone records, email records, et al)

garbage (recycling batteries, banning plastic bags et al)

Taxes on practically everything: gas, cigarettes, liquor, income et al

Is there ANY area where the government can not, or will not, intrude? No.

Welcome to the New America. Where government decides what you can and cannot do and your individual freedom and independence are no longer guaranteed under the founding documents of America, the United States Constitution and the Bill Of Rights.

Welcome to the New America, where the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of laundry, is no longer a right, it's an illusion. Controlled by the government.


Congratulations to the U.S. government, you now control America's laundry. And for that you deservedly, once again, earned this week's Stu Pitt Award!




"It is the duty of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."

- Thomas Paine, American patriot (1737 - 1809)




Los Angeles streets




This week The Stu Pitt Award goes to ...

Los Angeles, California

for having the worst streets in America


From myfoxla.com:

"Pot holes and uneven streets, in LA they're almost as bad as being stuck in traffic.

Motorist Joel Stallone says, "lots of pot holes, the tar seems to be built up there's lots of ditches the lanes are not very well marked so it's tough to get around."

He's right, Los Angeles, Long Beach and Santa Ana rank first in the country among large cities for the worst roads and high costs to motorists according to a new study by the National Transportation Research Group, TRIP.

The study says 64 percent of major roads are in poor condition, and drivers are forking over an average of $832 dollars a year on maintenance since bad roads mean more pot holes and wear and tear on cars.

Streets may only get worse. Federal funding is expected to scale back for highway improvement projects starting next year.

Cal-Trans (a governmental department of transportation) is well aware of the problem.

"We have made significant progress in improving our pavement we have plowed in about 4 billion dollars in repair projects, but we do need to have 3.5 billion in funding every year for the next ten years to keep up with our pavement needs. This year we only have 1.5 billion."

Stu Pitt says, What did they do with all the billions of tax dollars that were earmarked for L.A. road/street repair and maintenance? They probably spent it! On other stupid crap they thought was more important. Meanwhile, millions of Los Angeles drivers (and tourists) have to deal with permanent potholes, deadly ditches, and sagging streets.

Now, in Los Angeles, besides the worst traffic congestion in the nation, we have the worst streets too?!

Does all this make Los Angeles a second-rate city, with third-world roads? You decide.


Congratulations, City of Los Angeles, for your gross negligence and mismanagement of local traffic and local streets, you deservedly earn this week's Stu Pitt Award!



"It is the duty of the patriot to protect
his country from its government."

- Thomas Paine, American patriot (1737 - 1809)