Thursday, June 13, 2013
A Conservative Shaggy Dog Story
From a piece on Roger Ailes. Ailes told this story:
It seems a liberal in a hot-air balloon is lost and late for an appointment and descends to ask a conservative for directions. The conservative pulls out a GPS device and tells him exactly where he is.
“You must be a conservative,” the balloon man says. The man on the ground asks how he knows that. The reply: “Everything you’ve told me is technically correct, I have no idea what to make of your information, and the fact is, I’m still lost. Frankly, you haven’t been very much help so far.”
The conservative replies that the balloon guy must be a liberal. How does he know? The punch line: “You don’t know where you’re going or where you’ve been, you’ve risen to where you are on hot air, and you made a promise that you have no idea how to keep. Now you expect me to solve your problems. The fact is, you’re in the same place you were before we met and now it’s my fault!”
Friday, June 07, 2013
Obama's Work (?) Force
The Bureau of Labor Statistics released the unemployment numbers for May, and the official unemployment rate has ticked back up to 7.6%. The data provide a bleak employment picture of Obama's term in office. For example, 1.7 million more Americans are considered "not in the labor force" (and therefore not considered "unemployed") than a year ago. After 4+ years under Obama, the percentage of the population working shows a trend that is frightening, and receives little attention. Here's a graphic display of it.
It's a simple equation: Fewer people working = bad for the economy. That the official unemployment rate doesn't count these people doesn't change the reality of our situation. Obama and the Democrats are driving the American economy into the ground. And Obama has almost a full term to continue his damage.
It's a simple equation: Fewer people working = bad for the economy. That the official unemployment rate doesn't count these people doesn't change the reality of our situation. Obama and the Democrats are driving the American economy into the ground. And Obama has almost a full term to continue his damage.
Labels: barack obama, democrats, unemployment
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Other people say smart stuff, too - Part XXXVIII
Keith Riler recently wrote a column in American Thinker. The column, "Obama's Shrinking Unit of Account," paints a devastating portrait of Barack Obama and his reduced accountability -- using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The "unit of account," according to Riler, is a GAAP concept that refers to an entity for which results can be clearly distinguished and accountability logically required. It might be an operating segment, a reporting unit, the whole company, or all of the above. Whether a company comprises one unit of account or several, in the business world, executive management is responsible for them all."
For example, in 2008 when Obama connected himself with "receding oceans," his unit of account was the whole planet. When Michelle Obama said, after her husband was elected, "for the first time I'm proud of my country," that was a national unit of account.
Read Riler's article to see how small Obama's "unit of account" is in connection to Benghazi, the IRS, etc.
For example, in 2008 when Obama connected himself with "receding oceans," his unit of account was the whole planet. When Michelle Obama said, after her husband was elected, "for the first time I'm proud of my country," that was a national unit of account.
Read Riler's article to see how small Obama's "unit of account" is in connection to Benghazi, the IRS, etc.
Labels: OSSST
Friday, May 17, 2013
Democrat culture
One
aspect of the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups is worth mentioning. With
Democrats, no direct orders for such things have to be given. It’s part of
their culture. When they’re in power, everything the government touches,
Democrats own, and what they own they use for political gain. (Imagine what
they’ll be able to do with Obamacare.) Private files and independent agencies
don’t exist. Remember Hillary Clinton and the FBI files in 1993-94. (“Filegate”)
Obama will punish the ones who got caught (although cushy spots in other
Liberal organizations likely await) and replace them with different operatives
who will continue the process.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Benghazi for Dummies
Mark Baisley has written a great column, "Benghazi for Dummies," which provides a clear explanation of the confusing details surrounding the September 11, 2012 attack on the Benghazi diplomatic outpost and the deaths of four Americans. The story has been muddled, perhaps purposely, so much that it's difficult for a regular person to get a grasp on what happened. Baisley's column helps.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Other People Say Smart Stuff, Too - Part XXXVII
This certainly explains a lot:
"It
is not enough for the insecure left to deem a position wrong; if it’s merely
wrong, it needs to be argued about, and it can’t survive that. It must instead
be morally abhorrent, so that the zealot reacts to the toxin of questioning
much like a jogger coming across a decomposing body on the side of the road —
it must be internalized that the correct response to such a horror is to retch,
and faint, and call the authorities post-haste.
This is how the leftist faith protects itself
from the infection of doubt. (Meanwhile, of course, patting itself on the back
for being so open-minded…)" - John Hawkins
Labels: OSSST
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Many Uncertainties
"Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown" was the headline for a recent Reuters story. It turns out that almost none of the climate scientists predicted the lack of warming that has occurred in recent years.
Climate science has something in common with horoscopes and fortune tellers. Confidence in their predictions is higher when the results are either so vague, or so far in the future, that accuracy can't be measured. For example, we had predictions of arctic ice melting, raising the sea level by anywhere from three to twenty feet, flooding coastlines and destroying cities. When this didn't happen, predictions got fuzzy. It turns out that "global warming" can manifest itself by extremely hot weather, or by extremely cold weather. Extreme precipitation or extreme drought. More violent hurricanes, or fewer violent hurricanes. Climate scientists making predictions covered all their bases. Except now they're struggling to come up with an explanation for the lack of global warming. And, the article says, "some experts say their trust in climate science has declined because of the many uncertainties."
"The climate system is not quite so simple as people thought," said Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg.
"My own confidence in the data has gone down in the past five years, said Richard Tol, an expert in climate change and professor of economics at the University of Sussex in England.
Labels: climate, global warming
Friday, April 05, 2013
The Liberal Mantra
The Liberal Mantra.
Can I choose a large drink? No, it is not good for youCan I choose an incandescent bulb? No, it is not good for the environment
Can I choose low cost coal? No, it is not good for the planet
Can I choose to honor God? No, that's offensive
Can I choose to eat fast food? No, it is unhealthy
Can I choose to own a gun? No, think of the children.
What can I choose? An abortion
(Hat tip to Human Events commenter TripleA60.)
Labels: liberals
Wednesday, April 03, 2013
Well, here's a good sign
Joe Klein, the not-Conservative political columnist for Time magazine recently wrote a column entitled "Obamacare Incompetence." Some quotes: "We are now seeing weekly examples of this Administration’s inability to govern....the notion of activist government will be in peril—despite the demographics flowing the Democrats’ way—if institutions like the VA and Obamacare don’t deliver the goods."
And I think we'll all agree that there's little chance of that. It's a shame we're only getting these stories after last November's elections.
And I think we'll all agree that there's little chance of that. It's a shame we're only getting these stories after last November's elections.
Labels: barack obama, obamacare
Saturday, March 16, 2013
Where does the buck stop?
Obama has been in office for more than four years. At what point is he held responsible for anything? For years it was "blame Bush." Now it's "blame Republicans," or "blame insurance companies" or "blame oil companies." Obama's policies, endorsed and rammed through during Democrat control of Congress, have created an economic environment where businesses have been terrified of moving because of mistrust of how the Obama administration would punish them for something.
Now the reports are that Obamacare -- Obama's flagship "accomplishment" -- will cost nearly a trillion dollars more than we were told, more people will pay higher insurance premiums than we were told, businesses will pay more fees than we were told, fewer people will be covered than we were told, and hidden provisions -- e.g., forcing the Catholic Church to cover birth control and abortions, against their religious teaching -- have wider and deeper impacts than we were told.
Bush & co. were wrong about Iraq's WMDs -- but so were 99.9% of Democrats and the rest of the civilized world. Much more evidence exists that the Democrat party, and Obama in particular, have repeatedly deceived and lied to the American public than that the Bush administration ever did. It's about time for Obama to face his "proper comeuppance" (to quote the Washington Post.)
Now the reports are that Obamacare -- Obama's flagship "accomplishment" -- will cost nearly a trillion dollars more than we were told, more people will pay higher insurance premiums than we were told, businesses will pay more fees than we were told, fewer people will be covered than we were told, and hidden provisions -- e.g., forcing the Catholic Church to cover birth control and abortions, against their religious teaching -- have wider and deeper impacts than we were told.
Bush & co. were wrong about Iraq's WMDs -- but so were 99.9% of Democrats and the rest of the civilized world. Much more evidence exists that the Democrat party, and Obama in particular, have repeatedly deceived and lied to the American public than that the Bush administration ever did. It's about time for Obama to face his "proper comeuppance" (to quote the Washington Post.)
Labels: barack obama, democrats
Monday, March 11, 2013
I hate to say I told you so, but...
The "Beige Book," the report of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on current economic conditions, confirms a lot of what Republicans and other opponents predicted about Obamacare. The Governors report economic trends from their various Districts around the country, usually centered around a large city such as Kansas City, San Francisco, Minneapolis, etc.
From the section "Consumer Spending and Tourism" -- "Many District contacts commented on the expired payroll tax holiday and the Affordable Care Act as having restrained sales growth."
From the section "Labor" -- "Employers across the District continued to cite the Affordable Care Act and its unknown impacts as reasons for planned layoffs and reluctance to hire more staff."
From the section "Nonfinancial Services" -- "Some contacts noted concern that client companies are hiring the absolute minimum to get by due to uncertainty about the Affordable Care Act."
Remember how before the Obamacare legislation was passed, Democrats mocked opponents' predictions as "doom and gloom?" When you add the slowdown in consumer spending and business hiring to the already-more-expensive-than-Democrats-promised cost of Obamacare, it's not much of a leap to believe 1) Obamacare is going to cripple the American economy; and 2) The quality of our health care is just as likely to decline as it is to improve. So far Democrats have proven clueless in their predictions about its effects.
From the section "Consumer Spending and Tourism" -- "Many District contacts commented on the expired payroll tax holiday and the Affordable Care Act as having restrained sales growth."
From the section "Labor" -- "Employers across the District continued to cite the Affordable Care Act and its unknown impacts as reasons for planned layoffs and reluctance to hire more staff."
From the section "Nonfinancial Services" -- "Some contacts noted concern that client companies are hiring the absolute minimum to get by due to uncertainty about the Affordable Care Act."
Remember how before the Obamacare legislation was passed, Democrats mocked opponents' predictions as "doom and gloom?" When you add the slowdown in consumer spending and business hiring to the already-more-expensive-than-Democrats-promised cost of Obamacare, it's not much of a leap to believe 1) Obamacare is going to cripple the American economy; and 2) The quality of our health care is just as likely to decline as it is to improve. So far Democrats have proven clueless in their predictions about its effects.
Labels: government, obamacare
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Not-so-painful cuts
Daniel J. Mitchel wrote a column ("Earth to New York Times: Please Show Us These "Deep Spending Cuts" You Keep Writing About") that points out the absurdity of calling the budget adjustments resulting from sequestration "cuts."
I have to read the same nonsense day after day about “deep spending cuts” even though I keep explaining to journalists that a sequester merely means that spending climbs by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years rather than $2.5 trillion.
For those more visually oriented, here's Mitchell's chart illustrating the budget "cuts."
I have to read the same nonsense day after day about “deep spending cuts” even though I keep explaining to journalists that a sequester merely means that spending climbs by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years rather than $2.5 trillion.
For those more visually oriented, here's Mitchell's chart illustrating the budget "cuts."
Labels: new york times, politics, taxes
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Who owns sequestration?
Sequestration is the group of automatic budget cuts that go into effect if Congress and the White House are not able to reach a budget deal. It's part of the 2010 Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act.
What's really funny is Obama railing against the sequester even though it's a Democrat rule signed into law by Obama. The bill passed the Senate 60-40 on strict party lines. It passed the House 233-187, with 233 Democrats and no Republicans voting Aye and 172 Republicans (and 15 Democrats) voting No. Republicans opposed the sequestration, saying it was just an excuse for Democrats to raise taxes. Lo and behold, look at what Obama insists on.
When you think of politicians who want to raise taxes, which party is it that automatically comes to mind?
What's really funny is Obama railing against the sequester even though it's a Democrat rule signed into law by Obama. The bill passed the Senate 60-40 on strict party lines. It passed the House 233-187, with 233 Democrats and no Republicans voting Aye and 172 Republicans (and 15 Democrats) voting No. Republicans opposed the sequestration, saying it was just an excuse for Democrats to raise taxes. Lo and behold, look at what Obama insists on.
When you think of politicians who want to raise taxes, which party is it that automatically comes to mind?
Labels: barack obama, democrats, taxes
Who's the bully?
Associated Press writer Connie Cass, in her story "Why can't Washington compromise? They're too human," chides House Republicans for "bullying" Obama and Democrats over the cuts scheduled if and when sequestration takes effect. She even quotes Barbara Coloroso, an expert on bullying.
"Bullying is about contempt for the other person," Coloroso said. "Do you see how that fits with some of the people in Congress? Utter contempt, bullying, wanting to bring somebody down. You cannot resolve a major issue like a budget with name-calling, with disdain for the person you're supposed to be working with."
Some thoughts:
Obama's and other Democrats' contempt and disdain -- bullying -- of Republicans was on fine display the last four years. Like "bipartisanship," such terms only get tossed around in the media when Democrats don't automatically get everything they want.
"Bullying is about contempt for the other person," Coloroso said. "Do you see how that fits with some of the people in Congress? Utter contempt, bullying, wanting to bring somebody down. You cannot resolve a major issue like a budget with name-calling, with disdain for the person you're supposed to be working with."
Some thoughts:
- Barack Obama to Republicans questioning his stimulus plan, 2009: "I won."
- Barack Obama to Republicans, 2009: "Shut up and get out of the way."
- Republican input into the Obama stimulus plan and Obamacare, orchestrated behind closed doors and rammed through by Democrats when they controlled both houses of Congress: Zero.
Obama's and other Democrats' contempt and disdain -- bullying -- of Republicans was on fine display the last four years. Like "bipartisanship," such terms only get tossed around in the media when Democrats don't automatically get everything they want.
Labels: barack obama, democrats, media bias, politics, republican
Gripey Blog Readers
Both the readers of this blog have griped at me about not posting. I'm gonna start posting the webpages I write for the drug treatment center I'm working with.
That'll show 'em.
That'll show 'em.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
A Political Solution
Here's
a thought:
Why don't we take all the proposed solutions such as thorough
background checks, mental health screening, severe penalties for providing
false information, etc., and apply them equally to both gun ownership and
voting?
1. More harm has been done with votes than with guns.
2. Law-abiding, honest citizens would have nothing to fear.
3. What's good enough for one constitutional right ought to be good enough for another.
1. More harm has been done with votes than with guns.
2. Law-abiding, honest citizens would have nothing to fear.
3. What's good enough for one constitutional right ought to be good enough for another.
Labels: politics
Monday, February 04, 2013
Paying for tax cuts
Just a thought: In recent years, politicians have argued about tax cuts having to "pay for themselves." In this view, people keeping more of their own money is considered an "expense" to the government. Every nickel of their own money that taxpayers get to keep constitutes a debit on the government's account sheet. What we get to keep ("take-home pay") adds to the federal deficit, so anyone who wants to keep more of what they earn must want to increase the national debt. This philosophy comforts politicians who insist on raising taxes to pay for government spending. It's much easier than dealing with the paradox of telling Americans they have to get by on less money because the politicians refuse to.
Labels: taxes
Friday, January 11, 2013
I hate always being right
FoxNews headline, January 11, 2012: "Millions noticing paychecks lighter today, due to payroll tax hike"
Whattaya know, two months after the election, and almost two years before the next one, our taxes go up. Remember that "nobody making under $200,000 will pay more in taxes" promise? Remember how many of us were saying that was just a flat-out lie?
For anyone who voted Democrat in the last four years, congratulations, you're reaping what you sowed.
Whattaya know, two months after the election, and almost two years before the next one, our taxes go up. Remember that "nobody making under $200,000 will pay more in taxes" promise? Remember how many of us were saying that was just a flat-out lie?
For anyone who voted Democrat in the last four years, congratulations, you're reaping what you sowed.
Labels: barack obama, congress, democrats, taxes
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
I'm not dead...just reading a lot
With the presidential election over with, behind us, & done...I've tried to lay off of politics for a while. (Not that Obama-caused disasters aren't still happening, I'm just tired of reading and discussing them.) So I've taken advantage of my Kindle Fire and have been reading a lot. Books by Bob Newhart (ghostwritten, ahem,) Asmiov, Lawrence Block, Doyle, and several more have provided me with a lot of mental fodder.
The latest book I read was by Trent Zelazny, son of Roger Zelazny. Zelazny the Younger is from Santa Fe, and writes fiction in the genre(s) which I happen to delve into with my own fiction writing. The book, Too Late to Call Texas, really hits home as it's set in southern New Mexico, and the city of Seminole, Texas plays prominently in the plot. (He also mentions, in passing, Andrews, Lubbock, Abilene and San Antonio.)
Not to give too much away, but the protagonist, a white trash* cowboy type, happens upon a pile of drugs and drug money, goes back to his trailer house and his white trash wife, then runs when the owners of said drugs and money chase after him.
If that sounds familiar, it's because the main plot is very similar to No Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy, which I read (and very briefly reviewed) back in 2006. If you watched the movie (or even - gasp!- read the book,) you already know how that story plays out.
The main difference in the two stories is that Zelazny gives it the more genre fiction treatment. Lots more cussing and sex, and even, if you can believe it, more action. Without trying to ruin the book for any of his potential readers -- stop reading now if you are afraid of inadvertent spoilers -- I finished Zelazny's book to see how far he was going to follow NCfOM's storyline.
I'll be danged if he didn't follow it all the way to the bitter end. A bit of a disappointment, but it makes me feel better about those times when my own stories seem too derivative.
* I can call people "white trash" because I are one. Substitute redneck if that soothes your hurt sensibilities.
The latest book I read was by Trent Zelazny, son of Roger Zelazny. Zelazny the Younger is from Santa Fe, and writes fiction in the genre(s) which I happen to delve into with my own fiction writing. The book, Too Late to Call Texas, really hits home as it's set in southern New Mexico, and the city of Seminole, Texas plays prominently in the plot. (He also mentions, in passing, Andrews, Lubbock, Abilene and San Antonio.)
Not to give too much away, but the protagonist, a white trash* cowboy type, happens upon a pile of drugs and drug money, goes back to his trailer house and his white trash wife, then runs when the owners of said drugs and money chase after him.
If that sounds familiar, it's because the main plot is very similar to No Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy, which I read (and very briefly reviewed) back in 2006. If you watched the movie (or even - gasp!- read the book,) you already know how that story plays out.
The main difference in the two stories is that Zelazny gives it the more genre fiction treatment. Lots more cussing and sex, and even, if you can believe it, more action. Without trying to ruin the book for any of his potential readers -- stop reading now if you are afraid of inadvertent spoilers -- I finished Zelazny's book to see how far he was going to follow NCfOM's storyline.
I'll be danged if he didn't follow it all the way to the bitter end. A bit of a disappointment, but it makes me feel better about those times when my own stories seem too derivative.
* I can call people "white trash" because I are one. Substitute redneck if that soothes your hurt sensibilities.
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Apologies not accepted
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Today's the day
I don't like political polls. Pollsters ask uninformed people that don't vote who they think will be elected, and the results dominate the national discussion. Ask them about soap or soda, and the results will be remarkably accurate. The only poll that matters is the one on Election Day.
Nonetheless, polls are everywhere, both in their findings and in the media. Nobody ever seems to remember which polls were accurate last time, so for posterity's sake I created a table with the most up-to-date poll results I could find. For kicks I also created one showing various pundits' predictions of the final electoral vote.
Oh, and go vote Republican, early and often.
Nonetheless, polls are everywhere, both in their findings and in the media. Nobody ever seems to remember which polls were accurate last time, so for posterity's sake I created a table with the most up-to-date poll results I could find. For kicks I also created one showing various pundits' predictions of the final electoral vote.
Oh, and go vote Republican, early and often.
Labels: election, politics, polls
Monday, October 08, 2012
More about polls
Most of the mainstream polls have had Obama in the lead for the last several weeks. However, one significant poll is one in which Romney leads -- the enthusiasm measurement.
The Battleground Tracking poll shows that Romney has a 13-point lead among voters who are "extremely likely" to vote. What's more, Romney's leads are significant among elderly and white voters, who have traditionally been high turnout groups. Meanwhile, Obama leads among young voters, blacks and latinos, who -- except for 2008 -- are not traditionally energized to vote, and their enthusiasm is down significantly from their 2008 highs.
So, although polls which ask random Americans or even registered voters may show Obama with a big lead, those likely to vote favor Romney. However, as I've said before, the only poll that really matters is the one on November 6.
The Battleground Tracking poll shows that Romney has a 13-point lead among voters who are "extremely likely" to vote. What's more, Romney's leads are significant among elderly and white voters, who have traditionally been high turnout groups. Meanwhile, Obama leads among young voters, blacks and latinos, who -- except for 2008 -- are not traditionally energized to vote, and their enthusiasm is down significantly from their 2008 highs.
So, although polls which ask random Americans or even registered voters may show Obama with a big lead, those likely to vote favor Romney. However, as I've said before, the only poll that really matters is the one on November 6.
Labels: polls
Saturday, October 06, 2012
About those unemployment numbers
The government's official unemployment numbers came out Friday, and they showed an unemployment rate of 7.8%, falling below 8% for the first time in 44 months. This obviously gave Obama a boost and a chance to discuss something other than his no-show at the debate.
The unemployment numbers caught everyone by surprise. Thursday's reports had predicted a rise to 8.2%, due to several economic factors. Obama's Labor Secretary was forced to come out and defend the numbers, falling back on the "we're all professionals" defense. Convincing, except for a few anomalies.
A summary which accompanies the announcement of unemployment figures is the "Summary of Recent Trends." It's not as boring as it sounds, because of charts like this one:
A bit of explanation is in order. The official unemployment numbers are based on the "Household Survey," based on census figures. Using that figure, the economy apparently added 873,000 jobs in September. Another metric surveyed is the "Payroll Survey" of businesses, which literally speaks to businesses to see how many jobs they've added.
Over the entire last year, the difference between the number of jobs reported between the two is 850,000 jobs. (Nothing sinister there, they use different measurements.) However, 759,000 jobs of that difference occurred in the single month of September.
September was quite a month. October's "revisions" should be interesting.
The unemployment numbers caught everyone by surprise. Thursday's reports had predicted a rise to 8.2%, due to several economic factors. Obama's Labor Secretary was forced to come out and defend the numbers, falling back on the "we're all professionals" defense. Convincing, except for a few anomalies.
A summary which accompanies the announcement of unemployment figures is the "Summary of Recent Trends." It's not as boring as it sounds, because of charts like this one:
A bit of explanation is in order. The official unemployment numbers are based on the "Household Survey," based on census figures. Using that figure, the economy apparently added 873,000 jobs in September. Another metric surveyed is the "Payroll Survey" of businesses, which literally speaks to businesses to see how many jobs they've added.
Over the entire last year, the difference between the number of jobs reported between the two is 850,000 jobs. (Nothing sinister there, they use different measurements.) However, 759,000 jobs of that difference occurred in the single month of September.
September was quite a month. October's "revisions" should be interesting.
Labels: unemployment
Friday, October 05, 2012
Why Obama seemed distracted at the debate
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
It's worse than Democrats think
Mitt Romney has been hounded by Democrats for most of 2012 because he had not released enough of his previous years' tax returns. Romney fulfilled the promise he'd made to release his 2011 return. Predictably, Democrats jumped on the fact that although Romney contributed over $4 million to charity in 2011, he only claimed about $2 million of it as deductions. Democrats howled that Romney did this so that his tax rate would match what he's said it was in the past. (Yes, that claim is as ridiculous as it seems. A politician's actions matched his words, and Democrats criticized it.)
However, this serious violation of all things good goes deeper. There are stories that Romney has tried to keep from the public. Lurid tales of Romney helping charities and individuals out financially -- then asking them to keep it to themselves. Not only that, but he has also physically helped people with his time and his efforts. John Hawkins has discovered the truth about Romney, and exposes Romney in his column "7 Incredible Personal Stories About Mitt Romney That You May Not Know."
However, this serious violation of all things good goes deeper. There are stories that Romney has tried to keep from the public. Lurid tales of Romney helping charities and individuals out financially -- then asking them to keep it to themselves. Not only that, but he has also physically helped people with his time and his efforts. John Hawkins has discovered the truth about Romney, and exposes Romney in his column "7 Incredible Personal Stories About Mitt Romney That You May Not Know."
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Other people say smart stuff, too - Part XXXVI
Derek Hunter wrote a
powerful new column titled "The Media's Rape of Reality." In it he
articulates the points (and more) that I've made about how much the in-the-bag media
covers for Obama. After one of the worst weeks in his term of office -- and
there have been many -- this week we saw:
- the storming of American embassies,
- the killing of an American ambassador and some of his staff,
- more killings of American soldiers by supposed Afghan allies,
- another downgrade of America's credit rating,
- the snub of the Israeli Prime Minister while Iran threatens to nuke his country,
- gas prices nearing the $4 mark again,
and what does the media
cover? Mitt Romney’s statement about
the embassy attacks and Obama’s foreign policy. Read Hunter's column.
Labels: OSSST
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Spinning, Spinning
In what must be the bravest attempt ever by the media to spin a story that I've ever read, the AP and Yahoo News headlined a story "Foreign policy at forefront is a Romney hurdle."
The disasters in foreign policy of the last week, and it's Romney's hurdle?? Not only the actual events themselves, which highlight the failure of Obama's softness toward Islamic extremism, but then the administration's response(s), which included a veiled condemnation of free speech. Add in the purposeful snub of Israel's Prime Minister at a time when Iran is on the verge of developing and deploying nukes toward that country. (These two aspects go together; if America were still perceived as a strong Israel ally, Iran's bravado might not be as blatant.)
If anything, this past week should destroy anything that could possibly be perceived as Obama's foreign policy "expertise." Consequences of his policies and actions ought to matter. Yet AP and Yahoo News spin it 180° so that -- once again -- Obama's blunders are invisible.
Which is a more apt description, a comparison to "The Emperor's New Clothes" or "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining"?
The disasters in foreign policy of the last week, and it's Romney's hurdle?? Not only the actual events themselves, which highlight the failure of Obama's softness toward Islamic extremism, but then the administration's response(s), which included a veiled condemnation of free speech. Add in the purposeful snub of Israel's Prime Minister at a time when Iran is on the verge of developing and deploying nukes toward that country. (These two aspects go together; if America were still perceived as a strong Israel ally, Iran's bravado might not be as blatant.)
If anything, this past week should destroy anything that could possibly be perceived as Obama's foreign policy "expertise." Consequences of his policies and actions ought to matter. Yet AP and Yahoo News spin it 180° so that -- once again -- Obama's blunders are invisible.
Which is a more apt description, a comparison to "The Emperor's New Clothes" or "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining"?
Labels: barack obama, media, media bias
Friday, September 07, 2012
Obama's unemployment
The U.S. Labor Department announced today that the unemployment for August was 8.1%, down from 8.3% in July. However, that number is lower only because more people have given up looking for work, and only those looking for work are considered "unemployed."
"The truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over the decades," Obama said in his speech at the Democrat National Convention last night. However, the increasing number of people not looking for work (and not counted as "unemployed,") is not a decades-old problem.
As you can see, under Obama the "labor force participation rate" -- the percentage of the working-age population who are either working or looking for work -- started its sharp decline when Obama took office. The latest number is 63.5%, down from 63.7% in July and 65.7% in January 2009. It is not a longtime problem that every President has had to deal with, nor a common occurrence.
However, this horrible participation rate has occurred before, in our lifetimes. The last time the participation rate was this low was in September 1981, as Reagan brought America out of the Carter recession. At that time the participation rate was on its way up. Today, it's on its way down. Four years of Barack Obama's policies have moved more and more people out of the workforce.
"The truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over the decades," Obama said in his speech at the Democrat National Convention last night. However, the increasing number of people not looking for work (and not counted as "unemployed,") is not a decades-old problem.
 |
| Labor Force Participation Rate |
However, this horrible participation rate has occurred before, in our lifetimes. The last time the participation rate was this low was in September 1981, as Reagan brought America out of the Carter recession. At that time the participation rate was on its way up. Today, it's on its way down. Four years of Barack Obama's policies have moved more and more people out of the workforce.
Labels: barack obama, unemployment
Monday, September 03, 2012
We've heard it all before
The media, esp. NPR, are the Liars
The media have piled on Paul Ryan for his speech at last week's Republican National Convention. While analyses of such a speech are to be expected, a large number of journalists have done everything but use the word liar to describe Ryan. This fact was rammed home as I was driving last Saturday. I happened to tune in to an NPR talk show/roundtable featuring Washington journalists. The host made the statement (paraphrased): "Never has a vice presidential candidate made a speech with so many things that are factually untrue."
I already addressed the Janesville GM plant. The rest of their points centered around nothing that was "factually untrue." Not a single thing. Not one. This is how their arguments went:
RYAN: "You see, even with all the hidden taxes to pay for the health care takeover, even with new taxes on nearly a million small businesses, the planners in Washington still didn't have enough money. They needed more. They needed hundreds of billions more. So, they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama."
NPR: "So does Ryan's plan." (Note: They never disputed the fact that Ryan stated. They merely equated it with Ryan's Medicare proposal.)
RYAN: "He created a new bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report. He thanked them, sent them on their way and then did exactly nothing."
NPR: "Paul Ryan was a member of the Simpson-Bowles Commission and he voted no on that report." (Note: They once again don't dispute the fact that Ryan states, but instead mention how he, one member, voted. And his vote would have made no difference.)
RYAN: "The first troubling sign came with the stimulus. It was President Obama's first and best shot at fixing the economy, at a time when he got everything he wanted under one-party rule. It cost $831 billion – the largest one-time expenditure ever by our federal government...What did the taxpayers get out of the Obama stimulus? More debt. That money wasn't just spent and wasted – it was borrowed, spent, and wasted."
NPR: "Ryan himself asked for stimulus funds shortly after Congress approved the $800 billion plan." Ryan did write letters requesting stimulus funds for Wisconsin entities. Here's his explanation: "After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled.” One of his aides said it better: “If Congressman Ryan is asked to help a Wisconsin entity applying for existing Federal grant funds, he does not believe flawed policy should get in the way of doing his job and providing a legitimate constituent service to his employers.” (Final note: Once again, NPR indicates no point of Ryan's statement which can be called "factually incorrect.")
The stance of NPR and the rest of the media -- "Well, we can't actually show anywhere that Ryan actually lied, but nonetheless he lied."
I already addressed the Janesville GM plant. The rest of their points centered around nothing that was "factually untrue." Not a single thing. Not one. This is how their arguments went:
RYAN: "You see, even with all the hidden taxes to pay for the health care takeover, even with new taxes on nearly a million small businesses, the planners in Washington still didn't have enough money. They needed more. They needed hundreds of billions more. So, they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama."
NPR: "So does Ryan's plan." (Note: They never disputed the fact that Ryan stated. They merely equated it with Ryan's Medicare proposal.)
RYAN: "He created a new bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report. He thanked them, sent them on their way and then did exactly nothing."
NPR: "Paul Ryan was a member of the Simpson-Bowles Commission and he voted no on that report." (Note: They once again don't dispute the fact that Ryan states, but instead mention how he, one member, voted. And his vote would have made no difference.)
RYAN: "The first troubling sign came with the stimulus. It was President Obama's first and best shot at fixing the economy, at a time when he got everything he wanted under one-party rule. It cost $831 billion – the largest one-time expenditure ever by our federal government...What did the taxpayers get out of the Obama stimulus? More debt. That money wasn't just spent and wasted – it was borrowed, spent, and wasted."
NPR: "Ryan himself asked for stimulus funds shortly after Congress approved the $800 billion plan." Ryan did write letters requesting stimulus funds for Wisconsin entities. Here's his explanation: "After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled.” One of his aides said it better: “If Congressman Ryan is asked to help a Wisconsin entity applying for existing Federal grant funds, he does not believe flawed policy should get in the way of doing his job and providing a legitimate constituent service to his employers.” (Final note: Once again, NPR indicates no point of Ryan's statement which can be called "factually incorrect.")
The stance of NPR and the rest of the media -- "Well, we can't actually show anywhere that Ryan actually lied, but nonetheless he lied."
Labels: media bias
Friday, August 31, 2012
Ryan's Right
The media wasted no time essentially calling Paul Ryan a liar after his recent speech at the Republican National Convention. Salon and Yahoo both ran "fact checks" -- Salon even had the gall to call theirs the "definitive fact-check" -- that highlighted points where they (and their masters the Democrat Party) disagreed with Ryan. I'm focusing on one example of the egregious malpractice of the Liberal media. They, along with Democrat carnies such as Al Sharpton, claim that Ryan's comment on Obama and the Janesville, Wisconsin GM plant is either "a lie" or "factually incorrect."
Here's Ryan's comment: "My home state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it, especially in Janesville, where we were about to lose a major factor. A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: "I believe that if our government is there to support you. this plant will be here for another hundred years." That's what he said in 2008.
Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year."
The various media and Democrat outlets claim that the GM plant shut down in December of 2008, before Obama took office, so he couldn't be blamed for its closing. Even without any defense at all, this point is light years away from showing where Ryan's comment was incorrect.
Here's the bigger problem. From the Janesville Gazette, dated April 21, 2009:
The plant shut down three months after Obama took office. He could have taken some action if that was what he wanted to do. Ryan was correct, the people who disputed his point were wrong, they owe him an apology, and they should swear never again to use the words fact or lie.
Labels: democrats, election, media bias
Sunday, August 26, 2012
A couple of movies to see before November
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Based on a comment in another forum...
This ain't your daddy's August
