Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Thank goodness for Global Warming
I recently heard that since December 30 there have been 1,246 winter weather records set in the United States. The last two nights here have been in the 20's, and they are forecasting weekend nightly wind chills in the 5 - 15 degree range - we will very likely set modern, if not all-time, cold records this Friday and Saturday night. All I can say is Thank God for Global Warming, just think how bad this winter might be without it!!
Transparency?
This morning I heard seven sound bites of then-candidate Obama bloviating about how the health care debate under his administration would be "Transparent" and "In the public view" and "Televised on C-Span". Which of course explains why Pelosi and Ried have denied C-Span permission to cover their closed-door reconciliation hearings. When asked about Obama's promises of transparency and C-Sapn coverage, Pelosi smirked that "A lot of things are said during a campaign". Which, my friends, sums up her and her party's attitude and approach in a nutshell - say whatever you need to say to get elected,then do whatever you want once you are in there, the American public be damned. I hope I am not the only one paying attention to this.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
The following is attributed to David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D., Professor of Economics, University of Georgia. I received it by e-mail and have forwarded it several
times, but I still believe it is relevant and because of it's simplicity is the best arguement for tax reform I have seen.
Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
times, but I still believe it is relevant and because of it's simplicity is the best arguement for tax reform I have seen.
Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
More on Perception vs. Reality
Coincidentally, I was listening to Mark Levin's radio show earlier and Sean Hannity called in. During the course of their conversation they both asserted that they do not question Barak Obama's citizenship and have both said as much on their shows, which further validates the point I am trying to make - the only people who think this is an issue to Reagan Conservatives are those who get their information about Conservatives from ultra-left-wing sources.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Perception vs. Reality
I have received several e-mails and other communications that indicate that an alarming amount of people formulate their opinions about Conservatives and what we are about by how we are portrayed by extreme liberal outlets such as MSNBC, the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, and the fraudulent posturer Michael Moore.
A perfect example of this is the constant harping on the Birther topic, which attackers of the Conservative movement seem to think is sacred to our doctrine when in fact we all know that this is a total non-issue for mainstream Conservatives. The attacks that I have seen on people like Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal are completely baseless, and the constant attacks on Conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh generally involve taking short sound bites completely out of context.
Another great example is the vociferous excoriation of Bill O'Reilly, who probably has more journalistic integrity than anyone out there. I have said this before - I have seen e-mails to Bill that blasted him for being too far to the left and too far to the right on the SAME STORY. I think that if some of the O'Reilly haters actually read his books and watched his show they might find out that they have a lot more in common with him than they ever would have thought.
When the State controls the media they can force-feed the population whatever they wish to propagate. The sycophantic liberal media in this country sucks up to to those who give them access and support their worldviews. Those who reject Fox News and conservative talk radio out of hand need to re-evalaute their stance; most mainstream media outlets these days are parroting liberal talking points. The Wall Street Journal is a bastion of journalistic integrity that is ignored by the legions who get their worldview from the New York Times and/or Washington Post, among others.
A perfect example of this is the constant harping on the Birther topic, which attackers of the Conservative movement seem to think is sacred to our doctrine when in fact we all know that this is a total non-issue for mainstream Conservatives. The attacks that I have seen on people like Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal are completely baseless, and the constant attacks on Conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh generally involve taking short sound bites completely out of context.
Another great example is the vociferous excoriation of Bill O'Reilly, who probably has more journalistic integrity than anyone out there. I have said this before - I have seen e-mails to Bill that blasted him for being too far to the left and too far to the right on the SAME STORY. I think that if some of the O'Reilly haters actually read his books and watched his show they might find out that they have a lot more in common with him than they ever would have thought.
When the State controls the media they can force-feed the population whatever they wish to propagate. The sycophantic liberal media in this country sucks up to to those who give them access and support their worldviews. Those who reject Fox News and conservative talk radio out of hand need to re-evalaute their stance; most mainstream media outlets these days are parroting liberal talking points. The Wall Street Journal is a bastion of journalistic integrity that is ignored by the legions who get their worldview from the New York Times and/or Washington Post, among others.
The Death of Common Sense, Part 1
Three Navy SEALS - who, for those who don't know, are among the very best of the very best in the American military and are more highly trained than almost anyone on earth - are about to go on trial for the supposed abuse of the prisoner Ahmed Hashim Abed, who masterminded the killing and mutilation of American contractors in Iraq.
This is wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to start, but I will open with the tidbits that 1) This guy was not in American custody for the entirety of his capture, which would violate the chain of custody rules in any (liberal) American courtroom; and 2) The Al-Quaida training manual specifies that anyone captured by Americans needs to scream that he was tortured, beaten, and otherwise mistreated by our troops, as they know that the politically correct dimwits that have been making the rules in this country would rather prosecute our own troops than see a terrorist scumbag get a bloody lip (see this case as an object example).
There are people in this country who view the unfortunate actions by a misguided few at Abu Gharave as torture. This stuff makes me sick; I will say for the first time (on this blog) but certainly not the last that political correctness will be the death of this country.
This is wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to start, but I will open with the tidbits that 1) This guy was not in American custody for the entirety of his capture, which would violate the chain of custody rules in any (liberal) American courtroom; and 2) The Al-Quaida training manual specifies that anyone captured by Americans needs to scream that he was tortured, beaten, and otherwise mistreated by our troops, as they know that the politically correct dimwits that have been making the rules in this country would rather prosecute our own troops than see a terrorist scumbag get a bloody lip (see this case as an object example).
There are people in this country who view the unfortunate actions by a misguided few at Abu Gharave as torture. This stuff makes me sick; I will say for the first time (on this blog) but certainly not the last that political correctness will be the death of this country.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Eutopia
In tonight's speech our Beloved Leader promised us Eutopia if we follow his lead on Health Care. I sincerely hope that everyone who agrees with and supports our Beloved Leader's message is still happy when the velvet gloved but iron fist of government crushes our liberty and freedom.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Friedman on Capitalism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZStCMC5bCCg
The above link is a classis clip of the late great economist Milton Friedman schooling Phil Donahue on the virtues of Capitalism. This is precisely the the kind of common sense thinking that has been missing in our society lately. I also believe this to be a good example of how two people with diametrically opposed belief systems can have a civilized conversation.
The above link is a classis clip of the late great economist Milton Friedman schooling Phil Donahue on the virtues of Capitalism. This is precisely the the kind of common sense thinking that has been missing in our society lately. I also believe this to be a good example of how two people with diametrically opposed belief systems can have a civilized conversation.
Weighing in on Health Care Reform
Once again, the President has managed to raise my blood pressure to unsafe levels. This time it was with his speech on Friday, in which he accused the detractors of his Health Care reform as being without ideas of their own - as if his plan is the only thing that anyone has come up with. The substance of Obama's message is irritating enough; his arrogant, lecturing tone in delivering it makes it insufferable.
Regarding the "lack of ideas" from Conservatives, I would be happy to throw out just a few of the more popular ones for consideration:
- Tort reform. The single biggest problem with health care in this country is the profligation of medical malpractice suits and the shameless precedents set by judges who are evidently more interested in the enrichment of their colleagues than they are in imparting justice. It is because of the fear of lawsuits that insurance companies require and doctors are compelled to order so many tests and procedures, and why the path to get to the right specialist is such a convoluted one. Malpractice insurance for some specialists, such as brain surgeons, can run into as much as a half-million dollars per year. Combine this weight with the student loan payments that many doctors have and the tax bracket they are in, and you have doctors that must gross nearly a million dollars per year before they see a profit. These costs trickle down into every aspect of health care.
- Allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. Obviously, anything that fosters competition will lower costs and increase quality.
- Allow small businesses to join together and form insurance buying cooperatives, so that they can use the strength of their combined numbers to lower their costs.
- Allow pre-tax employer contributions to personal health care accounts in lieu of employer provided healthcare, with supplemental insurance for catastrophic event care. My company probably pays about $15,000 per year for my health insurance, and I pay about another $4,200. This would add up quickly if the bulk of it was going into a personal health care account and accruing interest. It would also make people think twice about running to the doctor over every little ache and pain if they were using their own money to pay the bill.
- Make health care costs 100% tax deductible, to ease the financial burden on folks with major health issues.
I am sick and tired of hearing the insurance companies demonized; my insurance isn't perfect and is expensive, but it has seen me through my children's childhood misfortunes, my wife's bout with breast cancer, and my own back surgery and sleep apnea, among other things. We have always received stellar care by excellent health care professionals.
It is true that our health care system could be reformed for the better, but the ideas of Obama and the liberals in Congress are the worst possible solutions. To hear Obama accuse Conservatives of not having ideas or solutions is both laughable and infuriating.
Regarding the "lack of ideas" from Conservatives, I would be happy to throw out just a few of the more popular ones for consideration:
- Tort reform. The single biggest problem with health care in this country is the profligation of medical malpractice suits and the shameless precedents set by judges who are evidently more interested in the enrichment of their colleagues than they are in imparting justice. It is because of the fear of lawsuits that insurance companies require and doctors are compelled to order so many tests and procedures, and why the path to get to the right specialist is such a convoluted one. Malpractice insurance for some specialists, such as brain surgeons, can run into as much as a half-million dollars per year. Combine this weight with the student loan payments that many doctors have and the tax bracket they are in, and you have doctors that must gross nearly a million dollars per year before they see a profit. These costs trickle down into every aspect of health care.
- Allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. Obviously, anything that fosters competition will lower costs and increase quality.
- Allow small businesses to join together and form insurance buying cooperatives, so that they can use the strength of their combined numbers to lower their costs.
- Allow pre-tax employer contributions to personal health care accounts in lieu of employer provided healthcare, with supplemental insurance for catastrophic event care. My company probably pays about $15,000 per year for my health insurance, and I pay about another $4,200. This would add up quickly if the bulk of it was going into a personal health care account and accruing interest. It would also make people think twice about running to the doctor over every little ache and pain if they were using their own money to pay the bill.
- Make health care costs 100% tax deductible, to ease the financial burden on folks with major health issues.
I am sick and tired of hearing the insurance companies demonized; my insurance isn't perfect and is expensive, but it has seen me through my children's childhood misfortunes, my wife's bout with breast cancer, and my own back surgery and sleep apnea, among other things. We have always received stellar care by excellent health care professionals.
It is true that our health care system could be reformed for the better, but the ideas of Obama and the liberals in Congress are the worst possible solutions. To hear Obama accuse Conservatives of not having ideas or solutions is both laughable and infuriating.
Friday, August 28, 2009
More brilliant insights from a California politician
I have been hearing sound bites today from a rant by the ultra-liberal racist Rep. Diane Watson. Once she finished deriding Conservatives she went on to extoll the virtues of Fidel Castro and the paradise that he has presided over, with his brother Raul, for the last 46 years or so. She also made the insightful comment that Che' Guavera, the hero of the revolution who is so widely admired by the Left, threw out the government and ejected the rich, before turning power over to the "brilliant mind" of Fidel the peaceful lawyer.
Am I the only one who is sickened by these uninformed and downright stupid comments by a member of the U.S. House of Representatives? I would invite the Congresswoman to go make these same pro-Castro remarks in Miami's Little Havana; I don't think they would go over as well as they do in Washington or California. And she may want to look into the death of Che' Guavera, it might teach her a little something about the beneficience of the brilliant Fidel.
Who elects these idiots??? Come on, California, Barbara Boxer, Diane Watson? You should be ashamed of yourselves.
Am I the only one who is sickened by these uninformed and downright stupid comments by a member of the U.S. House of Representatives? I would invite the Congresswoman to go make these same pro-Castro remarks in Miami's Little Havana; I don't think they would go over as well as they do in Washington or California. And she may want to look into the death of Che' Guavera, it might teach her a little something about the beneficience of the brilliant Fidel.
Who elects these idiots??? Come on, California, Barbara Boxer, Diane Watson? You should be ashamed of yourselves.
Hope and Change
The coverage of the life and career of Sen. Edward Kennedy have given me reason to ponder some of the changes that we should not only hope for but push for at a grassroots level (I don't think too many of the following were what the Obama Campaign had in mind whilst running on that slogan). Among them:
- Term limits. It all starts here; Sen. Kennedy served 47 years in the Senate, longer than I have been alive. We need to eliminate career politicians and get back to people serving for the right reasons.
- Drastic reduction in the compensation and benefits of elected officials. Once again, we want people who choose to serve for the right reasons, not so that they can enrich and empower themselves at the public trough.
- Campaign reform and the repeal of McCain - Feingold. This legislation is unconstitutional and Bush's failure to veto it is, in my opinion, one of the major stains on his legacy. Right now the rules are rigged to favor the two-party system and the encumbents, who are typically much better funded than their challengers (the average, based on numbers I have seen, seems to be 300% - 400% better).
- Eliminate the gerrymandering of Congressional districts. Lines should be drawn in a manner that make sense geographically while at the same time providing for equal representation of all members of the population. I have seen some crazy districts in, specifically, the Chicago area (what a shock!!) and Nevada; I'm sure that the redrawing of districts to protect - or even damage - the encumbent is probably a problem to some extent almost everywhere.
These reforms would help to ensure the fairness of elections; empower independents and third-party candidates; force candidates to gain support of a broader constituency; and help to elect more responsible representation by people who want to serve and help better their country.
- Term limits. It all starts here; Sen. Kennedy served 47 years in the Senate, longer than I have been alive. We need to eliminate career politicians and get back to people serving for the right reasons.
- Drastic reduction in the compensation and benefits of elected officials. Once again, we want people who choose to serve for the right reasons, not so that they can enrich and empower themselves at the public trough.
- Campaign reform and the repeal of McCain - Feingold. This legislation is unconstitutional and Bush's failure to veto it is, in my opinion, one of the major stains on his legacy. Right now the rules are rigged to favor the two-party system and the encumbents, who are typically much better funded than their challengers (the average, based on numbers I have seen, seems to be 300% - 400% better).
- Eliminate the gerrymandering of Congressional districts. Lines should be drawn in a manner that make sense geographically while at the same time providing for equal representation of all members of the population. I have seen some crazy districts in, specifically, the Chicago area (what a shock!!) and Nevada; I'm sure that the redrawing of districts to protect - or even damage - the encumbent is probably a problem to some extent almost everywhere.
These reforms would help to ensure the fairness of elections; empower independents and third-party candidates; force candidates to gain support of a broader constituency; and help to elect more responsible representation by people who want to serve and help better their country.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Enough Already!
I have wanted to publish a post about Guantanamo and the "torturing" of detainees for some time; I had backed off because the issue seemed to have (finally) gone away. But the latest announcement that Eric Holder intends to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and potentially prosecute CIA interrogators has finally generated the steam to blow my lid off.
Where to start? With the numerous Marines that I have heard interviewed who said that the detainees lived better than their guards and that interrogations would be halted to allow them to say their 5-times daily prayers? How about the fact that former CIA director George Tenet said that enhanced interrogation techniques produced more useful intelligence than all other sources combined? Does it even matter that some of those who were interrogated were the masterminds of an attack on America that killed over 3,000 innocent people?
What is "torture"? If we perform the same techniques on our own people at SERE school is it really torture? If there are a doctor and a psychologist present at all times to protect the well-being of the detainee is it really torture? I suspect that the victims of the Japanese before and during WWII, the Nazis, and Saddam Hussien and his brutal sons, among others, would skoff at the notion that anything we did to any of these detainees amounted to more than a minor inconvenience. You were probably fortunate if any of the above killed you outright if you got on their bad side. Assuming you can find anyone alive who survived capture by the Nazis aiding the French Resistance; or the Bataan Death March; or one of Hussien's torture rooms, ask them their opinion of the "torture" at Guantanamo.
If you want a glimps of REAL torture, watch a movie like Body Of Lies or Taken, or read an account of the treatment of the Iraqi National Soccer Team under Saddam's regime. Or, if you can stomach it, find an internet video of the terrorists beheading a terrified Westerner.
Why are there people in this country who's main purpose seems to be to villify their country and it's security agencies? To "take down" the CIA? I know that paranoia and conspiracy theories abound (The U.S. Govenment blew up the World Trade Center!!), but are the lunatics really running the asylum?
So now Eric Holder, who recommended the pardon of the truly evil Marc Rich, wants to prosecute CIA personnel and members of the Bush Administration? The Democrats should beware - prosecuting members of the previous administration over political disagreement is a slippery slope. The fact that this is a diversionary tactic intended to appease the radical Left and shift attention away from National Health Care makes it all the more despicable.
Where to start? With the numerous Marines that I have heard interviewed who said that the detainees lived better than their guards and that interrogations would be halted to allow them to say their 5-times daily prayers? How about the fact that former CIA director George Tenet said that enhanced interrogation techniques produced more useful intelligence than all other sources combined? Does it even matter that some of those who were interrogated were the masterminds of an attack on America that killed over 3,000 innocent people?
What is "torture"? If we perform the same techniques on our own people at SERE school is it really torture? If there are a doctor and a psychologist present at all times to protect the well-being of the detainee is it really torture? I suspect that the victims of the Japanese before and during WWII, the Nazis, and Saddam Hussien and his brutal sons, among others, would skoff at the notion that anything we did to any of these detainees amounted to more than a minor inconvenience. You were probably fortunate if any of the above killed you outright if you got on their bad side. Assuming you can find anyone alive who survived capture by the Nazis aiding the French Resistance; or the Bataan Death March; or one of Hussien's torture rooms, ask them their opinion of the "torture" at Guantanamo.
If you want a glimps of REAL torture, watch a movie like Body Of Lies or Taken, or read an account of the treatment of the Iraqi National Soccer Team under Saddam's regime. Or, if you can stomach it, find an internet video of the terrorists beheading a terrified Westerner.
Why are there people in this country who's main purpose seems to be to villify their country and it's security agencies? To "take down" the CIA? I know that paranoia and conspiracy theories abound (The U.S. Govenment blew up the World Trade Center!!), but are the lunatics really running the asylum?
So now Eric Holder, who recommended the pardon of the truly evil Marc Rich, wants to prosecute CIA personnel and members of the Bush Administration? The Democrats should beware - prosecuting members of the previous administration over political disagreement is a slippery slope. The fact that this is a diversionary tactic intended to appease the radical Left and shift attention away from National Health Care makes it all the more despicable.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Talk radio
I heard today that the new policy at CNN is to no longer have talk radio personalities on their programs. This doesn't surprise me, for a number of reasons; ultimately it is just one more attempt to silence the Conservative voices.
One of the biggest ironies right now is that the people who vilify and rail against Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Bill O'Reilly, etc., are people who never have (and never will) actually listened to their shows. I have heard the most hateful things said about Bill O. by people who have never heard him, have never picked up one of his books, and don't have the first idea of what he stands for. Bill frequently reads (often hilariously) letters and e-mails from people calling him a huge liberal and a right-wing nut job who are talking about the SAME STORY!! I've seen it over and over and it never fails to crack me up.
This morning I heard Glenn Beck quoting an article in which he was taken completely out of context and misrepresented - it has become commonplace for Rush to replay segments of his show from which he has been misquoted and/or misrepresented. Which brings us to the "I hope Obama fails" brouhaha. I got an e-mail from someone who wrote an indignant letter to Michael Steele about this and the divisiveness of the far right. I have great respect for this individual, but it is obvious from his writings that he heard the left-wing media's version of what Rush said, not the actual statements in context. What Rush actually said was that he hoped Obama's policies failed; or that he hoped Obama failed in implementing his policies. This might seem like semantics, but Rush, like many of us, realized early on that Obama's policies were going (and have proven) to be disastrous for this country.
I have my own feelings about Rush, Sean, Mark Levin, Bill O., and others, some of which would undoubtedly surprise those who think that we conservatives are all automatons that are spoon-fed our opinions and information by these folks. Anyone who has followed my responses to feel-good e-mails over the years (I have been accused of curmudgeon-like behavior) knows that I don't take much at face value and research the things that I question. It is not hard to spot the hypocrisy of the Left or the Chicago strong-arm tactics of the current administration if you simply open your eyes and ears.
One of the biggest ironies right now is that the people who vilify and rail against Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Bill O'Reilly, etc., are people who never have (and never will) actually listened to their shows. I have heard the most hateful things said about Bill O. by people who have never heard him, have never picked up one of his books, and don't have the first idea of what he stands for. Bill frequently reads (often hilariously) letters and e-mails from people calling him a huge liberal and a right-wing nut job who are talking about the SAME STORY!! I've seen it over and over and it never fails to crack me up.
This morning I heard Glenn Beck quoting an article in which he was taken completely out of context and misrepresented - it has become commonplace for Rush to replay segments of his show from which he has been misquoted and/or misrepresented. Which brings us to the "I hope Obama fails" brouhaha. I got an e-mail from someone who wrote an indignant letter to Michael Steele about this and the divisiveness of the far right. I have great respect for this individual, but it is obvious from his writings that he heard the left-wing media's version of what Rush said, not the actual statements in context. What Rush actually said was that he hoped Obama's policies failed; or that he hoped Obama failed in implementing his policies. This might seem like semantics, but Rush, like many of us, realized early on that Obama's policies were going (and have proven) to be disastrous for this country.
I have my own feelings about Rush, Sean, Mark Levin, Bill O., and others, some of which would undoubtedly surprise those who think that we conservatives are all automatons that are spoon-fed our opinions and information by these folks. Anyone who has followed my responses to feel-good e-mails over the years (I have been accused of curmudgeon-like behavior) knows that I don't take much at face value and research the things that I question. It is not hard to spot the hypocrisy of the Left or the Chicago strong-arm tactics of the current administration if you simply open your eyes and ears.
Duplicity Part II
President Obama, in his New Hampshire speech this morning, talked about how a single-payer system is impractical and is not the goal of the health care bill. This position directly contradicts statements he made to the SEIU in 2007 (where he identified single-payer as a long term rather than short term goal) and the AFL/CIO in 2003 (where he identified single-payer healthcare as a specific agenda item). I don't pull this stuff out of thin air; I have heard the sound bites and they are not out of context.
What the people of this country need to realize is that the far left is not looking for an immediate legislative grand slam - they are trying to pass legislation that will give them the foot in the door to leverage these policies into bigger and bigger Federal programs while eliminating private sector competition. What it all boils down to is Federal power and control over our lives and how we live them, and it is downright scary.
What the people of this country need to realize is that the far left is not looking for an immediate legislative grand slam - they are trying to pass legislation that will give them the foot in the door to leverage these policies into bigger and bigger Federal programs while eliminating private sector competition. What it all boils down to is Federal power and control over our lives and how we live them, and it is downright scary.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Duplicity
By the way - President Obama has been good about telling the American people what they want to hear while allowing Pelosi, Ried, et al to do his dirty work. If you doubt this, read the House version of the Health Care bill and then listen to what Obama has said in his speeches.
This man is a professional politician who was schooled by Saul Aulinski, Jerehmia Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn, and others of their ilk. While it was OK for 8 years for the left to say the most vile things about George Bush, it is unacceptable to question or criticise this leftist radical who wants to "transform America" - and transform it into something that our Founders and indeed my parents would not recognize or condone.
This man is a professional politician who was schooled by Saul Aulinski, Jerehmia Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn, and others of their ilk. While it was OK for 8 years for the left to say the most vile things about George Bush, it is unacceptable to question or criticise this leftist radical who wants to "transform America" - and transform it into something that our Founders and indeed my parents would not recognize or condone.
Current Events
There are a lot of things that I want to vent about right now - the health care bill that most congressmen have not read (and Obama admitted during questioning that he did not know what it contained) that will destroy health care in America; the White House web site where we can report in an Orwellian manner those who oppose the socialism of our country; the many similarities between Obama and the Left's policies and programs and those of Hitler and the Nazis (and no, I am not a nut job; the comparisons are real and valid); the insanity of Cap and Trade and our current energy policy; the inevitable tax increases that are coming to support the lunatic spending; etc. My lack of postings has more to do with my frustration and the overwhelming nature of the challenges we face than inattention on my part - I do intend to try to address some of these issues. However, I would like to see folks do their own research and see what is really going on - I don't expect people to change their minds based on anything I say, but I would at least like to see some who disagree with me expand their horizons beyond the State controlled mainstream media, leftist web sites like the Huffington Post, and liberal publications like Rolling Stone (who, to their credit, recently ran an article about how Wall Street will benefit from the Cap & Trade legislation).
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Terrible Ted
No not Kennedy, although that would also be an appropriate title for a post commemorating the 40th anniversary of Ted's getting away with murder at Chappaquiddick.
No, in this instance it's Nugent, displaying his usual reticence in sharing his opinion about the Second Amendment. Here is the link:
http://biggeekdaddy.com/miscvideos/TedNugent.html
I had thought about putting up a post on the Second Amendment, but there is not much I could add to Ted's comments. Besides, the entire thing is one 27-word sentence - what is so hard to understand? Has the meaning of the words "The right of the people..... shall not be infringed" changed since the last time I consulted a dictionary?
Anyhow, the liberal conducting this PBS interview has a noticably distasteful reaction to Ted's answer, which I find amusing. Credit to the guy for hanging in there though.
No, in this instance it's Nugent, displaying his usual reticence in sharing his opinion about the Second Amendment. Here is the link:
http://biggeekdaddy.com/miscvideos/TedNugent.html
I had thought about putting up a post on the Second Amendment, but there is not much I could add to Ted's comments. Besides, the entire thing is one 27-word sentence - what is so hard to understand? Has the meaning of the words "The right of the people..... shall not be infringed" changed since the last time I consulted a dictionary?
Anyhow, the liberal conducting this PBS interview has a noticably distasteful reaction to Ted's answer, which I find amusing. Credit to the guy for hanging in there though.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Barbara Boxer Part Dieux (as in Duh)
For those who don't listen to talk radio or watch Fox News (funny, this seems like Deja Vu), California Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer once again disgraced herself last week with her racist, elitist responses to Henry Alford, head of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, who was testifying about the economic disaster that the Cap and Trade (AKA Tax and Kill) legislation will be. I am not going to post a link because the exchange is 6 minutes long but I'm sure it is readily available for anyone who cares about the direction these liberal nitwits are taking us in. How much $$$ did it require to get a brainless elitist moron like Boxer into the Senate? Two words, America: TERM LIMITS!! Learn them and love them!!
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Thoughts from the Road
As I mentioned, I was travelling all week; here are a few of the things that I pondered during that time...
Joe Biden - ya gotta love Joe, he's a walking malaprop - said that during the campaign "we misjudged the economy". Really? That would be the same economy that Barack (inaccurately) portrayed as the worst since the Great Depression? How can you misjudge it if it is the worst since the Depression? (It wasn't, but they are working on it)...
Speaking of stupid Democrats, I heard Nancy Pelosi bloviating about "protecting God's beautiful creation". Unfortunately, she was bucking up the Cap and Trade bill, not commenting on the millions of unnecessary abortions that are performed in her state...
Speaking of Cap and Trade, India and China once again made it clear at the G8 that they have no intention of adhering to whatever insane policies the U.S. adopts; this means that the unintended consequence of Cap and Trade will be to INCREASE polution when industrial, manufacturing, and energy jobs flee this country en mass...
Michigan unemployment is up to 16%... hey Governor, maybe another tax increase will do the trick!!...
Since I was in hotel rooms all week, most of which had a very limited selection of TV channels, I got blasted with the "All Michael Jackson, All The Time" networks - which was pretty much all of them. Thankfully, I am back home to my DirecTV and its 800 channels, so I can find some relief on the Martian Polar Ice Cap Network (turns out it is receding - we need to talk to those irresponsible Martians about their carbon emissions!)...
Yes, I had way too many mindless hours behind the wheel!
Joe Biden - ya gotta love Joe, he's a walking malaprop - said that during the campaign "we misjudged the economy". Really? That would be the same economy that Barack (inaccurately) portrayed as the worst since the Great Depression? How can you misjudge it if it is the worst since the Depression? (It wasn't, but they are working on it)...
Speaking of stupid Democrats, I heard Nancy Pelosi bloviating about "protecting God's beautiful creation". Unfortunately, she was bucking up the Cap and Trade bill, not commenting on the millions of unnecessary abortions that are performed in her state...
Speaking of Cap and Trade, India and China once again made it clear at the G8 that they have no intention of adhering to whatever insane policies the U.S. adopts; this means that the unintended consequence of Cap and Trade will be to INCREASE polution when industrial, manufacturing, and energy jobs flee this country en mass...
Michigan unemployment is up to 16%... hey Governor, maybe another tax increase will do the trick!!...
Since I was in hotel rooms all week, most of which had a very limited selection of TV channels, I got blasted with the "All Michael Jackson, All The Time" networks - which was pretty much all of them. Thankfully, I am back home to my DirecTV and its 800 channels, so I can find some relief on the Martian Polar Ice Cap Network (turns out it is receding - we need to talk to those irresponsible Martians about their carbon emissions!)...
Yes, I had way too many mindless hours behind the wheel!
Sarah Palin
Someone recently asked me via e-mail what I thought about the soon-to-be-ex-governor; I decided to share my reply here.
I think Sarah Palin IS exactly what this country needs; she was a real breath of fresh air in the campaign and probably swung a lot of conservative votes to McCain. She seems to want what is best for the country and to be willing to take on both parties as well as big business. Despite the constant blathering by the left, she is very smart and a very astute, able politician. I believe that the amount of hate that the left and the mainstream media direct at someone is in direct proportion to how much that person scares them, and therefore that Sarah is the left's worst nightmare. As far as her vacating the governor's seat, I believe she had valid reasons:
- she would have been a lame duck as she had no intention of running again; this gives her lieutenant gov. a chance to step in and prove himself before he runs for re-election;
- she was under constant attack, mainly from the left. She has had to defend herself - successfully - against something like 15 or 16 corruption charges;
- defending herself has not only cost her personally some $500,000 but has probably cost the state millions, not to mention all of the time that it has wasted;
- she has endured personal attacks and attacks against her family that would be enough to make anyone nuts.
It cracks me up to no end that people said she was underqualified to be the veep but those same people seem to think that the community organizer and professional campaigner we have in the White House is eminently qualified to be there. The double standard will never cease to amaze me. I heard some elitist bimbo yapping that she was "uneducated" because she went to a state school whereas Barack is "educated" because he was brainwashed... I mean indoctrinated.... I mean "educated" at Harvard. Barack the "brilliant Constitutional lawyer" who, as far as I can tell, either never actually read it or else dismisses it as passe.
I don't know what she plans to do next - neither a book nor a lucrative speaking tour would surprise me a bit, and she deserves to make some $$$ - I have my doubts about whether she plans to run in 2012 though; if anything I would expect here to run for the Senate. Hopefully she will continue to be a force for positive change, we definitely need people like her.
I think Sarah Palin IS exactly what this country needs; she was a real breath of fresh air in the campaign and probably swung a lot of conservative votes to McCain. She seems to want what is best for the country and to be willing to take on both parties as well as big business. Despite the constant blathering by the left, she is very smart and a very astute, able politician. I believe that the amount of hate that the left and the mainstream media direct at someone is in direct proportion to how much that person scares them, and therefore that Sarah is the left's worst nightmare. As far as her vacating the governor's seat, I believe she had valid reasons:
- she would have been a lame duck as she had no intention of running again; this gives her lieutenant gov. a chance to step in and prove himself before he runs for re-election;
- she was under constant attack, mainly from the left. She has had to defend herself - successfully - against something like 15 or 16 corruption charges;
- defending herself has not only cost her personally some $500,000 but has probably cost the state millions, not to mention all of the time that it has wasted;
- she has endured personal attacks and attacks against her family that would be enough to make anyone nuts.
It cracks me up to no end that people said she was underqualified to be the veep but those same people seem to think that the community organizer and professional campaigner we have in the White House is eminently qualified to be there. The double standard will never cease to amaze me. I heard some elitist bimbo yapping that she was "uneducated" because she went to a state school whereas Barack is "educated" because he was brainwashed... I mean indoctrinated.... I mean "educated" at Harvard. Barack the "brilliant Constitutional lawyer" who, as far as I can tell, either never actually read it or else dismisses it as passe.
I don't know what she plans to do next - neither a book nor a lucrative speaking tour would surprise me a bit, and she deserves to make some $$$ - I have my doubts about whether she plans to run in 2012 though; if anything I would expect here to run for the Senate. Hopefully she will continue to be a force for positive change, we definitely need people like her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
