Friday, August 31, 2012

Labor Day Break

With Labor Day coming up Monday, we're taking the weekend off (be back Tuesday morning). You should too. Get some sun, you all look so pale! But before you go, tell us some of your favorite films about the common man. You know the one... the guy who gets hassled by the striking union labor as he tries to make a living.

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

Thursday, August 30, 2012

The Grown Ups Are Back!

Today, let’s focus on a couple things that have been said by some very bright Republicans at or around the convention in the last few days. These are key points we should all remember.

Paul Ryan: Paul Ryan spoke last night and laid out pretty much what every Presidential candidate from either party should say, which is why it’s sad his words are so rare.

Naturally, he called for a repeal of Obamacare, which he described as “more than two thousand pages of rules, mandates, taxes, fees, and fines” and which he said has “no place in a free country.” He also promised 12 million jobs, which I take with a grain of salt. But more importantly, he said this:
“Before the math and the momentum overwhelm us all, we are going to solve this nation’s economic problems. And I’m going to level with you: We don’t have that much time. But if we are serious, and smart, and we lead, we can do this.”
It’s about time someone said this. As far back as I can remember, politicians have assured us that everything was fine when we knew it wasn’t. They pretended they had generations to save Medicare, balance the budget and pay off the debt. This was always a lie. The American public knows the truth, we just want to hear that our leaders understand this. And now we’ve found one. And Ryan does.

He also said this:
“Here is our pledge. We will not duck the tough issues – we will lead. We will not spend four years blaming others – we will take responsibility. . . The work ahead will be hard. These times demand the best of us – all of us, but we can do this. Together, we can do this.”
This statement packs a lot more than I think people realize. This strikes me as a declaration that Ryan intends to complete broad-based reform and will not shirk issues just because they are hot button issues that upset the public. To me, this sounds like (1) reform of the healthcare system, (2) reform of Medicare, (3) reform of Social Security, (4) education reform, and (5) comprehensive immigration reform. I base this list on the other things the campaign has spoken about in the last few months. And if I’m right, and if they achieve their goals, Romney/Ryan could very well end up remaking America in a much more fundamentally conservative, free market manner that Reagan even attempted, much less achieved. They could also solve the four glaring problems that still plague this country, outside of the black/white racial divide – education, fiscal sanity, an out-of-control medical system, and what to do about the eleven million illegal immigrants.

Ann Romney: After her rousing speech at the convention, where Ann Romney was largely seen as winning over women and humanizing Mitt, she went to the Latino Coalition luncheon, where she made a direct appeal to Hispanics on a basis other than ethnic appeals:
“I spoke to women last night and I wanted women to understand how important this election is for their children, but as I was sitting backstage listening, I thought, it's also very important that the Latino community recognize how important this election is for them. And they are mistaken if they think they are going to be better off with Barack Obama as their president. There really is only one way for prosperity, for small business, and that is, this is the simplest way I can say this: If Mitt Romney wins, America wins.”
Notice, her appeal was based on prosperity and small business. It’s about time. I’ve been saying this for a long time. Republicans need to stop seeing Hispanics as a monolithic race which needs to be wooed with promises of racial spoils. They need to learn that Hispanics are people, just like everybody else, and we need to give them they should join us. . . reasons why their lives will be better off.

Ann Romney points out that women should think about the things Mitt will do for America which will make America better for their children and now she’s pointing out how Romney offers the only path to prosperity for the Hispanic community. Compare that with the Democrats who offer only fear, hate and a lifetime of living on government benefits in poverty.

She also went further and took Hispanics to task for not being open to the truth, and the Democrats for trying to trick Hispanics:
“It really is a message that would resonate well if they could just get past some of their biases that have been there from the Democratic machines that have made us look like we don't care about this community. And that is not true. We very much care about you and your families and the opportunities that are there for you and your families.”
This is a critical message. The first step in breaking anyone out of a cycle of dependency is to stop telling them they are doing fine when they aren’t. And here Romney makes it clear that Hispanics are not doing fine and that they are not being honest with themselves. They are instead acting on bias, a bias the Democrats feed.

I think messages like this combined with Romney’s plan to bring prosperity to all corners of America in a color-blind way will go a long way to waking people up in these communities. And then they will see, as Ann Romney said, that they should “naturally be voting” for the Republicans.

This approach is so much better than Bush talking about how he speaks Spanish or prior Republicans trying to out-pander the Democrats. This is an approach that promises people the truth, a better life, and respect.

Chris Christie: The MSM is tearing Christie apart for his speech. Using the usual “unnamed Republican sources told us” approach, the MSM is claiming that everyone thought Christie’s speech was self-centered. Frankly, I just don’t see that. His speech was strong and highly partisan and went straight at Obama’s failures. For example, he said this about Obama’s leadership:
“There’s only one thing missing now. Leadership. It takes leadership that you don’t get from reading a poll. You see, Mr. President, real leaders don’t follow polls. Real leaders change polls.”
He also spoke of making the right decision, even when it’s hard, and he attacked Obama for not doing that:
“Our leaders today have decided it is more important to be popular, to do what is easy and say ‘yes,’ rather than to say ‘no’ when ‘no’ is what’s required.”
And he attacked their policies:
“Our ideas are right for America and their ideas have failed America.”
But what struck me again was the straight talk aspect of his speech. As with Ryan, he made the point that the American public is smarter than the political class wants to believe:
“They believe that the American people don’t want to hear the truth about the extent of our fiscal difficulties and they believe the American people need to be coddled by big government. They believe the American people are content to live the lie with them. They’re wrong.”
And he finished by refusing to sugarcoat what needs to be done:
“We all must share in the sacrifice. Any leader that tells us differently is simply not telling the truth.”
Ryan made these points better, but I think it’s vital that these points are being made at all. For the last 12 years, our government has gone on a spending binge, trying to buy our loyalties. They have added massive entitlement programs and drowned us in debt. They have destroyed the future to cover up the mistakes of the present. The Democrats have played a hateful, divisive strategy of race baiting and economic spite. The Republicans have gone along to placate the media. I get the sense from the speeches above, that those days are over.

The grown ups have returned.

[+]

Here's Looking At Me, Kid

The death of astronaut Neil Armstrong last Friday was a sad day for those who still love America and her singular accomplishments. Despite being the first human being to set foot on the moon, Armstrong was always a dedicated, honest and modest man. He had no desire to be a celebrity, even when it was thrust upon him. The tributes to him were many, and he would probably have been uncomfortable with most of them.

As I've done here, most websites which discussed his life and times led off with a picture of Armstrong himself, usually in astronaut garb. did a fine job of capsulizing the long life and great accomplishments of Neil Armstrong.

"Armstrong's heroism wasn't the lunar walk, though. It was how he comported himself afterwards that showed the true measure of the man. He was among the more famous human beings in history. Yet he retired to a quiet and private life teaching aeronautical engineering and tending to his farm. His walk on the moon wasn't a personal achievement, per se, but an accomplishment for all of humanity.

He made few public appearances. He gave very few speeches or interviews. His resignation from the public square made his lunar walk something mankind achieved rather than something Neil Armstrong achieved. His walk was the culmination of the work, not only of the thousands of engineers and scientists who directly worked on the mission, but also of the countless others throughout the ages who looked up at the skies and dreamed. Armstrong understood this."

One prominent blogger found someone more important than Armstrong to feature in the semi-tribute to the first man on the moon. His name is Barack Hussein Obama, and on his official Obama-Biden Tumblr site, he demonstrated his choice of who should be the true center of the story of Neil Armstrong--himself. Instead of a picture of Neil Armstrong, or a group of famous astronauts, or the lunar lander, Obama led off with a picture of himself staring off into space (appropriately enough).

Aside from his multitude of other flaws, Barack Obama is the most narcissistic president in my memory. His tribute to Armstrong was more about "I" than it was about Armstrong, or the space program for that matter. It was well nigh impossible for Obama to ignore the passing of an American icon without comment. But Armstrong did say a discouraging word about Obama's drastic cuts to the space program. He mused about Americans traveling once again to the moon--this time on a Chinese rocket. He questioned how Obama plans for the American space program, largely defunded and despondent, to reach Mars without the necessary intermediate steps and new, but tested technology.

So the Space-Case-in-Chief did throw something out for Americans about Armstrong: "Neil’s spirit of discovery lives on in all the men and women who have devoted their lives to exploring the unknown—including those who are ensuring that we reach higher and go further in space. That legacy will endure—sparked by a man who taught us the enormous power of one small step." But the photo accompanying the tribute really tells the story of Obama's self-centeredness.

Every time Obama pulls one of these "look at me" pieces, I am reminded of a scene in the movie Beaches. The outgoing and successful entertainer C. C. (Bette Midler) is prattling on about herself to her longtime friend Hillary (Barbara Hershey), a reserved, quiet lawyer. C. C. suddenly stops, realizing the entire one-sided conversation had been about her. She attempts to recover: "Well, enough about me. Let's talk about you. What do you think about me?"
[+]

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Scott's Links August 2012

Scott roams the internet far and wide to ply his trade as a link dealer. Fortunately, Scott provides links free to us. Check these out. . . share your thoughts! And away we go. . .

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

That’s Why They Call It Dope

Every once in a while, a story comes along that just makes you laugh. That’s the case with a new scientific study about the effects of smoking pot. Get this. . . smoking pot makes you stupid. Really? Noooo way, dude!

The study in question was conducted by an international team under an NHS grant. They followed 1,000 teenage boys and girls between the ages of 13 and 14 for twenty years. Each test subject was given a battery of IQ tests. What the researchers found was that the test subjects who smoked marijuana in their teens fell behind their non-smoking peers by 8 points on these IQ tests by the time they turned 38. That may not sound like much, but it’s enough to take someone from average intelligence to the bottom third of the population. Moreover, these same users also showed early signs of dementia, which is a very bad thing.

This shouldn’t surprise anyone however. Anyone who has known a pot smoker knows that they are, in a word, stupid. They are slow, they have poor memory recall and their personalities are like talking to mud. And that’s when they aren’t high.

No doubt the pot legalizers will dismiss this because they dismiss anything that doesn’t fit their idea that smoking pot is healthy. But this study merely confirms what anyone with a brain should already know. So the next time some pothead tells you that smoking pot is harmless, go ahead and shove them down some stairs. . . I said Dave’s not here!

Speaking of dopeheads, the left is once again out in full force polluting the airways with their intolerance and idiocy. As some of you are no doubt aware, the Republicans are currently holding a little get-together in Tampa right now. So check out these quotes from famous celebrity haters:

● Ellen Barkin, who hasn’t had a hit in forever, tweeted this:
“C’mon #Isaac! Wash every pro-life, anti-education, anti-woman, xenophobic, gay-bashing, racist SOB right into the ocean! #RNC”
Nice! She’s wishing death on her political opponents, just like a good tolerant liberal.

● Samuel L. Jackson, who is quickly losing my respect, tweeted that he “was not understanding God’s plan” since God had "spared" Tampa. He said:
"Unfair Shit: GOP spared by Issac! NOLA prolly Fucked Again! Not understanding God's plan!"
Unlike Barkin, he at least apologized. . . sort of, a few hours later, saying “Apologies to God, Tampa, da GOP & Isaac! Who played the Race card?!”

Who indeed Samuel L? It sounds to me like you played the race card a couple weeks back and Obama and Chris Matthews have been playing it all week. Also, reading your quote as written, you seem to be implying that God, Tampa, the GOP and Isaac all played the race card. Stay off the dope Sam, it makes you stupid.

Perhaps we should return the favor and hope that Hollywood gets wiped out by a tsunami or an earthquake or a plague of rabid hamsters, but I’m not liberal, so I don’t wish death on my political opponents or on the people of cities where those political opponents happen to be meeting.

By the way, for those who didn't watch the convention last night, the speeches were excellent. This has been one of the better conventions I remember in my lifetime.

[+]

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Obama Will Lose The Election

Obama is losing. He’s losing badly. I’ve been sensing this for some time, but now I’m ready to say it officially. Obama has lost this election. Here’s the proof.

The Polls: Polls this far out are unreliable. They are even less reliable because we can’t trust the pollsters. Most of the pollsters are using data which suggest a greater pro-Democratic turnout than Obama got in 2008, and many have begun hiding their raw data to prevent people like me from figuring out how badly they’ve skewed the data. But certain things are obvious because they run contrary to what the pollsters are trying to make you believe.
1) Romney has a small lead, even in these skewed polls. Factor out the pro-Obama bias and add in a pro-Romney enthusiasm gap and you’re looking at a landslide.
2) Romney has a statistically significant lead in the battleground states.
3) Several “safe” blue states have become battleground states, e.g. Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico.
4) Romney’s lead is consistent as is Obama’s inability to get anywhere near 50% approval.
This tells me Romney wins 53% to 47%.

Enthusiasm Gap: The polls show a huge enthusiasm gap – up to 13% in favor of the Republicans. This is significant because it would take a Democratic-leaning gap for Obama to win and that just won’t happen. But look beyond the polls. Romney and Ryan are speaking to massive crowds. Obama can’t fill a phone booth. Romney and Ryan are drawing massive amounts of money. Obama’s running debt. All over the country, people are putting up signs saying, “I built this.” By comparison, Obama bumper stickers have gotten really rare. People are going in droves to see a documentary exposing Obama, but no one has been interested in any pro-Obama crap for years now. This is something you can feel in the air, hear at the store, and see in random places online – people are enthusiastic about Romney, no one’s even thinking about Obama.

Democratic Desperation: The Democrats are hitting the bottom of the barrel in terms of how they are running this campaign. They’ve tried everything from various “wars on ___” to flat out slander. They’ve accused Romney of felonies, of hate, and of killing some guy’s wife. They’ve appealed to black-racism. They’ve tried to attack Mormonism as a cult. They’ve tried to scare Hispanics and round up illegals to vote. They’ve accused Republicans of anti-Semitism, of hating women, and of wanting to bring back slavery. The one thing none of them have done is actually mention an issue.

What this tells me is that they are desperate. These are not attacks someone makes if they are winning. This is scorched earth with no regard for the consequences or the future. This is a party that knows it will lose and doesn’t care what it does to the political landscape on the way out. Moreover, using these tactics now tells us they see the race as essentially lost right now and are desperate to turn it around before it becomes an obvious and settled fact.

Media Desperation: Like the Democrats, the MSM is desperate. We see this in several ways. First, despite 80% of their stories about Romney being negative, they have yet to find any attack which will stick. So they keep trying wilder and wilder attacks, which is a sign of desperation and a strategy guaranteed to backfire. Secondly, they avoid talking about Obama like the plague. This is because they know he’s so unpopular that they cannot help him by giving him coverage. Instead, they need to attack Romney.

Indeed, look at the lengths to which they go to talk about anything other than the issues. The Akin controversy is the perfect example of this. Everyone except the hard-core Religious Right have repudiated that troglodyte, yet the MSM continues to cover this incessantly and continues to try to connect Akin to every other Republican. Why do this? Because they have nothing else they can talk about.

Look also at the distortions. There is no mention of real inflation. Unemployment is downplayed. The failing economy is still called “a recovery.” There is no mention that gas prices are higher than they were under Bush, when the media blasted us with the-sky-is-falling stories about gas. Are American troops still dying overseas? The media won’t tell you. How is Obamacare working? Has anyone lost their health insurance? Are doctors still taking Medicare? Have medical costs gone down a single dollar? The media sure doesn’t know. How about too big to fail? Where are the reports about the biggest banks doubling in size under Obama? Did Copenhagen result in any positive change for the environment? Who knows. . . the MSM sure doesn’t.

This is proof the MSM knows Obama is in deep trouble and that they simply can't discuss anything without making it worse.

Obama has already lost this election and the items above prove it. The Democrats know he’s in such desperate trouble that they had to waste all their ammo already, and none of it scored a hit. That means Obama has lost. The MSM is desperate to cover up his tracks and knows they can’t promote him because people don’t like him. That means Obama can’t recover. And the public enthusiasm tells us what even the doctored polls are starting to suggest, the right will turn out in force in November and the left won't.

Barring something truly unusual, this election is over and the only question now is the margin of Romney’s victory.


P.S. Don't forget, it is Star Trek Tuesday at the film site.

[+]

Watch Your Back—Crazed Vet Behind You!

I was prepared to write off the recent flap about a vet who found himself in a psychiatric ward after posting some strange comments on his Facebook page. He was put on a psychiatric hold by the local authorities after receiving information about the posts from DHS and the FBI. But after all, a judge reviewed the case, found no substantial evidence of any danger posed by the vet, and ordered his immediate release. So why should I care?

After reading the comments posted by Marine vet Brandon J. Raub, I was convinced that it was a matter of extreme overreach by the authorities, and probably a violation of his First Amendment free speech rights. He said, among other things, that “a day of reckoning is coming,” and “sharpen my axe, I'm here to sever heads.” Not exactly dinner table conversation, but I've probably said worse things right here on this blog (the most frequent being “I hate Barack Obama”). But the system worked, it was an isolated incident, and Raub is free to move on.

I'm not big on conspiracy theories, as we've discussed multiple times on this site. But that doesn't mean there aren't some conspiracies, or that like-thinking people can't act in ways that take on the form of conspiracy. One of the leitmotifs of liberal thinking is that all returning vets are either crazy or about to go crazy. They served their country under horrifying conditions, and it made them nuts. DHS has gone so far as to assert that all Iraq and Afghanistan vets should be watched carefully for signs of irrational or insane behavior since they could easily slip into madness and commit a terrorist act.

After doing some further research, I have decided that the Raub incident may not be so isolated after all. Raub was represented by the Rutherford Institute (think ACLU for conservatives). The FBI had conducted an interview with Raub, and decided that his views and his posts were “ominous.” The local authorities agreed, and acted on that information. But the judge found that there was simply nothing that fit the rules of clear and present danger, or clear and convincing evidence of a threat. He further found that Raub's comments and posts were not sufficient evidence that he was a danger to himself or others, the most basic of reasons to place a citizen under a psychiatric hold.

Except for a future civil suit against the authorities for misuse of their powers, that might seem to be the end of it. But the attorney for Raub asserts that there are twenty cases he knows of involving psychiatric holds or threats of holds just in the same county where Raub was detained. John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute says that he has been contacted by veterans nationwide who have had similar experiences with authorities attempting to have them declared mentally ill. How much of this is evidentiary and how much anecdotal remains to be seen. After all, some vets are crazy, just like people in every other stratum of society. But the numbers either harassed or “held” seem to reflect a dangerous trend.

One advocate of the religion of peace shouts Allahu akbar and opens fires on his fellow soldiers, and the liberals simply can't figure out what the underlying cause of the violence is. But angry vets who merely criticize their government's namby-pamby attitude toward terrorism and promotion of ideas foreign to American tradition in very colorful language are now subject to psychiatric holds.

In her April 2009 memorandum on the state of domestic terrorism (“intelligence assessment”), Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano specifically listed returning vets as potential terrorists. Asked about it recently, Napolitano didn't waver a bit, and said she stands by the assessment. Since that memo was issued, civil commitments of vets for psychiatric problems have accelerated rapidly. I'm far from ready to declare that there's a conspiracy involved here, but the like thinking of DHS and the FBI and the ease with which vets are detained based on “ominous mental health assessment” information provided to local authorities is certainly something for us to be concerned with. It may be coincidence, or it may be a pattern.

Genuine threats are prosecutable, as they should be. Even the First Amendment has its exceptions. But the expression of anger and frustration at the government accompanied by intemperate wording is not and should not be prosecutable. Those in government positions who wish to squelch free speech know that. Still, in at least in some cases, they seem to have taken a page out of the Soviet psikhushka program whereby dissidents were placed in psychiatric facilities so that they could be “re-educated” and their “crazy” views discredited with the public. “Crazy war vets” have already been pre-qualified by DHS as potential terrorists, so isn't this a great way to silence them?

[+]

Monday, August 27, 2012

Chicago Pols Should Listen To Their Constituents

The gun-grabbers don't listen to conservatives, the National Rifle Association, or even the United States Supreme Court. In their zeal to blame guns for the ever-increasing violence in Chicago, they don't even listen to their own constituents. The Democratic leaders and their liberal supporters still cling to their belief that if only guns were outlawed, the deaths in Chicago would magically cease. But the citizens of Chicago don't believe it anymore.

In a recent poll conducted by Illinois pollster Michael McKeon in Chicago, the locals blamed easy access to guns as the main cause of the spate of violent deaths by a whopping six percent. Yes, you read that right—six percent. Now there's a headline you're not going to see in the Chicago Tribune. Despite all the hype from former Mayor Richard M. Daley, current Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and the Rev. Jesse “Increase the Peace” Jackson, Chicagoans are still capable of separating the wheat from the chaff.

It is such an article of faith for politicians like Emanuel that guns are the cause of violence that he can't even be bothered with addressing the true underlying causes. He is too busy trying to keep the evil folks at Chick-fil-A from coming into town. Rahm: Stop talking and start listening. Here's what your electorate thinks about the accelerating murder-by-gun root causes (aren't Democrats supposed to be deeply concerned about root causes?):

20% blame gangs.
13% blame lack of parental guidance.
12% blame lack of economic opportunity.
8% blame it on the need for more police officers.
7% blame “young people having nothing to do.”
6% blame easy access to guns.
(the remaining 34% blamed various causes at a rate less than 6% or had no opinion)

Even if you add gangs (with guns) and young people (with guns) to guns (alone), you still have only 33% of the population of Chicago blaming guns for the murder rate. But 100% of Chicago Democratic politicians and liberals blame the guns rather than the people using them. Jesse Jackson correctly identifies most of the victims of the violence as black, but is somewhat silent on who most of the perpetrators are. It's easier to blame guns than admit most of the perpetrators are also black. Says Jackson: “Far more African-Americans are killed on our streets than on foreign battlefields. If a foreign foe took these lives, we would mobilize armies and armadas to stop them.” Like Emanuel, Jackson is ignoring the opinion of the 60% who think gun violence is a symptom, not a cause.

Let's get the racist element out of the racial calculation. The numbers in the urban war zones are largely African-American. But it's not from some innate black tendency toward violence. It is covered rather by the “root causes” that the Chicago citizens listed (37% of whom are African-American), and which are encouraged by Democratic/liberal policies—government-dependence, the disintegration of the black middle class and the black family unit, welfare incentives, ungodly high unemployment rates among black youth, and over-tolerance of misbehavior based on white guilt stemming from past racist policies.

The simple fact is that Chicago continues to have some of the toughest gun-ownership laws in the nation, and yet remains a leader in gun-related violence. Chicagoans have figured out that outlaws don't care about gun laws (or any laws, for that matter). More restrictive gun laws won't solve the problem in Chicago. Respect for law will. Enforcement of laws already legitimately on the books and in accord with the Supreme Court Second Amendment rulings is the strong right arm of respect for the law. As long as law-abiding citizens are restricted in their ownership of guns while outlaws are not, the violence in Chicago won't end. Chicagoans have figured that out. The Chicago politicians haven't.

[+]

The Republican Platform: Fringey Stupid

Oh boy. I’ve gotten a look at the Republican platform and let me tell you, while the common sense folks of the Tea Party are making progress all over the country, the fringers who make up the inner sanctum of the Republican cult remain safely ensconced in their bunker. . . untouched by reality. Check this out.

Priority Number One: The Economy! Well, no. Of the 18 “ideas” listed, not one of them involves improving the economy. Why? Because the retarded chimps who put this platform together don’t care about the economy. What do they care about? Read on.

Priority Number One: Repealing Obamacare! Well, no. That’s number six on the list, after such high priority issues like “making the internet family friendly.” Yes, you read that right. These dipsh*ts think it is more important to let people know that the Republican Party wants to censor the internet than it is to repeal Obamacare.

The Homosexual Menace: So what is the first priority listed? This year’s most important priority, apparently, will be stopping gays from marrying. Why? Because “studies” show that children from married couples stay off drugs, get married and don’t commit crimes. Ergo, gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry. Don’t worry if that makes no sense, just accept the idea that Jesus hates gays. By the way, this same group of the self-righteous is opposed to civil unions too because gays are yucky.

Fix Welfare. . . Somehow: Next our slow friends have decided that welfare doesn’t work, especially because Obama wants to discourage people on welfare from working. So they want someone, somewhere to fix the current system somehow to encourage people to work. . . which it already does.

Internet “Freedom”: Apparently, the platform will include some highly technical sounding, yet utter nebulous plan to support internet freedom. Reading the definition will make your head spin, but the lawyer in me had to laugh at all the caveats and interest group sops already obvious in the definition. It sounds like the Republican “internet freedom” platform will be about protecting ISPs (who support Republicans) over net companies (who support Democrats). Any freedom resulting from this will be purely coincidental.

And just in case some freedom should accidentally result, the platform makes sure you can't misuse your freedom because it includes a nifty little section on censoring the internet to make it “family friendly.” See, the internet is EVIL. Apparently, “millions of Americans suffer from . . . pathological gambling” and “the Internet must be made safe for children.” So it’s time to shut down gambling sites, ban sex offenders from the internet, and force ISPs to save the children. . . all “while respecting First Amendment rights.” No, I’m not making this sh*t up.

Americans with Disabilities: Forget the economy, it’s more important that we make sure Americans with disabilities are included in all aspects of our national life. Well, not all aspects. In fact, all we really care about is two things: (1) we need to force insurers and doctors to treat people with disabilities (I’m told doctors in particular like to tease the disabled with fake cures), and (2) when will somebody finally stop the government from taking children away from people with disabilities? Seriously! This national crisis just dominates the news and it's time someone had the courage to address this! Be brave Platform monkeys, be brave.

Oh, we should also support some nebulous sounding employment programs which we didn’t have the time to examine, but their titles sound nice.

Repealing Obamacare/Abortion: Finally, we come to repealing Obamacare. Why repeal it? Well, because it’s not right. Also, “Through Obamacare, the current Administration has promoted the notion of abortion as healthcare. We, however, affirm the dignity of women by protecting the sanctity of human life. Numerous studies have shown that abortion endangers the health and well-being of women, and we stand firmly against it.” Yep, they talk about repealing Obamacare because it promotes abortion.

Fixing Our Healthcare/Abortion: So how do we fix the nation’s healthcare? Simple: “health is an individual responsibility” and people need to take better care of themselves. That means you fatboy! “Chronic diseases [are] related to lifestyle [and] drive healthcare costs.” So we need to “promote healthy lifestyles.” No doubt, these will be based on being abortion-free and internet porn free. And lest you think I’m joking, two paragraphs into this one, they call upon states to stop “subsidies for abortion.” I guess abortion makes you fat.

Then they give the usual sop to insurance companies (big Republican contributors), which is the worst thing we could do other than what Obama did, and they want science to save us by making record keeping cheaper. Maybe we should ban 16 oz. drinks?

More Abortion: Then we do two more “healthcare” related points – “supporting” research and protecting individual conscience in healthcare. The first involves banning stem cell treatments and stopping abortion, and the second involves stopping abortion. Are you starting to see a pattern here?

Reforming the EPA: Oops, sorry, the EPA is cool. . . everybody likes the EPA. We need to reform the FDA. Why? Because drug companies are Republican contributors and they are having a hard time with the current EPA.

Oops, forgot, more Healthcare: Yes, we’ve mentioned healthcare several times, but we forgot to mention that we want to reduce costs through tort reform. That should fix everything, even though Andrew pointed out that tort reform will only cut a couple billion dollars in a multi-trillion dollar system. Yep. . . problem solved! (Especially once we stop fat people from getting abortions.)

Education: We’re opposed to “the crippling bigotry of low expectations.” Hell, who isn't?! So how do we fix that? We want reform! But we don’t believe in one-size-fits all, so we can’t really tell you what we want, but it must involve traditional values.

“Fixing” College Costs: College costs suck. They are “unsustainable.” We should get private companies to issue student loans (fyi: they already do) and we should tell people more about what they are paying (fyi: they already know). Also, maybe not everyone should go to college? Problem solved!

Prison Reform: Yes, this issue which just dominates the nation’s headlines day after day after day finishes this amazing platform. Basically, we support what we’ve been doing because liberals oppose it and that makes it reform. Yay reform!

Other Points: Also, while we're at it, let's keep them dirty Mexicans out and let's think about the gold standard because the 500% inflation in the price of gold in the past decade sure makes gold seem awfully stable!

There you have it. A declaration of idiocy. This is the kind of document I would have written if I wanted to lampoon the Republican Party as being dominated by cultists. Gays, abortion, abortion, abortion, some stuff nobody cares about, abortion, stupidity and the status quo described as reform. Not only has this gang of fornicating monkeys completely missed the issues of the day, they’ve proven that (1) they remain obsessed with gays and abortion, (2) they are obsessed with controlling everyone’s private lives, and (3) they know NOTHING. At least they didn’t include Islamophobia or suggest that women get pregnant and stop taking jobs that belong to men. I guess that's something.

It’s time to purge the party of its moronic fringe and force the party hierarchy to at least join the 20th Century, if not the 21st. Fortunately, Romney doesn’t believe any of this crap and is more likely to wipe his butt with this document than he is to read it.

As an aside, if you want to know what the platform should have looked like, how about this:
1. Replace Obamacare with free market healthcare.
2. 10% across the board cut in federal spending and federal wages.
3. Flat tax.
4. Strict anti-lobbying/graft laws.
5. Repeal of all regulations not necessary for public safety.
6. Comprehensive immigration reform.
7. School choice using vouchers.
8. Internet Anti-Censorship Law plus Privacy Rights.
9. Banning government funding for abortion, imposing reasonable restrictions and otherwise leaving this decision to the individual.
[+]

Sunday, August 26, 2012

The Great (film) Debates vol. 51

You don't have to be a romantic to enjoy a good romance film now and then. . . but it helps.

What is your favorite romantic film?

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms
[+]

Saturday, August 25, 2012

Fasten Your Seat Belts...well you know the rest.

Wow, the summer is almost over and the kids will be back in school soon, if they aren't already. Maybe it's time to take a step back and reflect on the last eight months. Let's see...

Since January, we've witnessed about 400 Republican debates (well, it seemed like it anyway), the rise of potential candidates, the fall of damaged candidates (though not enough of that - yes, Mr. Akins I mean you!) and 10's of millions of dollars spent. We have discussed, laughed, cried, screamed, and finally sighed with relief when the least damaged was left standing. So, now we have the the field set and Romney/Ryan go from "presumptive" to "official" candidates next week (barring weather complications). Believe it or not, NOW is when the real campaigning starts and the real money will be spent. As bad it has been leading up to now, it is about to get much, much worse. So, to steal phrase from All About Eve - "Fasten your seat belts, it's gonna be a bumpy ride!"

In anticipation of the coming weeks, let's discuss what we hope to see, or not see, from our candidates (their spouses, their children, the media, etc.) in the weeks leading up Election Day on Nov. 2nd if you are Michelle Obama, and November 6th if you are the rest of the country.

Don't hold back because we know they won't...
[+]

Space Cadets

Or maybe I should have said “cavemen in outer space.” The Iranian government has announced that its Imam Khomeini Spaceport will be operational by spring of 2013. Missiles for peace and exploration are the focal point. Nothing offensive, of course. Just science for the advancement of mankind. Iran says its goal is to launch manned space flight by 2020, and a manned moon landing by 2025.

I'm reminded of Wernher von Braun's book I Aim For The Stars. Shortly after its publication, comedian Mort Sahl said it should have a subtitle: “But Sometimes I Hit London.” In this case, we could add “sometimes we hit Tel Aviv.” It's a little hard to believe that Iran has peaceful intentions, though the arrogance of the whole program has a small ring of truth. Planting the Iranian flag on the moon would be one helluva big deal.

So far, the Iranian space program has been fairly successful. It has launched a communications satellite. It has sent rats and turtles into space. Unfortunately, the monkey they tried to launch didn't make it. How much more it will be able to accomplish within the time frames it has set itself remains to be seen. The step from sending rats and turtles into space and sending live human beings into space and bringing them back safely is a very large one, even if the program weren't facing huge opposition from the outside.

Unfettered by internal restraints or external sanctions, China has experienced setback after setback in its space program. At the same time, Iran is hampered by moderately effective Western sanctions and opposition to its nuclear program. Before Iran can aim for the stars and “accidentally” hit Tel Aviv, it faces the very likely possibility that Israel will strike at both Iran's nuclear facilities and its missile launch sites.

As recently as this past week, Iran has reaffirmed its position that Israel must be wiped off the face of the map. It is unlikely that Iran would carry out that threat by flying Sopwith Camels over Israel and dropping bombs by hand. The Iranian air force is at best pathetic in comparison to the Israeli air force. But missiles, ah, missiles. Even with the best technology available, short range and intermediate range ballistic missiles are hard to stop once they've been launched. The difference between a missile launching men into space and a missile launching nuclear weapons at a nearby target is minimal.

Even the United States has to take notice of the fact that a missile which can launch men into space has intercontinental capabilities as well. New York, DC, and Los Angeles may be safe now, but for how much longer? During the days of the Cold War, America and the Soviet Union raced into space for national honor and scientific achievement, but were also honing their military capabilities. Still, even the hardliners in the Kremlin weren't suicidal, and mutually-assured destruction (MAD) kept both sides from thinking the unthinkable.

The same is not true of national leaders who believe that to die in the cause of jihad is an automatic entry into paradise, complete with seventy-two virgins awaiting their arrival. Vile, but not crazy described the Kremlin hardliners. Vile and crazy describes the Teheran hardliners. The Iranian people may not be in sync with the leadership on self-immolation, but the ayatollahs look at them as collateral damage.

So far, Iran's missile program has proceeded more successfully and more quickly than that of its Asian counterpart, North Korea. China is highly suspicious of North Korean missile capabilities, but both China and Russia have been exporting missile technology to Iran, in spite of and in defiance of international sanctions. It isn't just Israel and the United States who are leery of Iran's advancement in the missile field. Britain’s Foreign Office said the [most recent Iranian] launch underscored “our serious concerns about Iran’s intentions” and “sends the wrong signal to the international community which has already passed five successive UN Security Council resolutions on Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile program.” Of course, the UN is big on resolutions and nasty notes to crazy tyrants, but lagging seriously in actual action.

So someday soon, somebody is going to decide that Iran's space program is really an earth program and will take action against it. If Iran can't be persuaded to abandon its missile and nuclear programs, the result is not going to be pretty, nor is the outcome certain.

[+]

Friday, August 24, 2012

Film Friday: Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

When a film appears with a fantastic concept, a solid cast, and a great look. . . and then it bombs. . . you know something went very wrong along the way. That’s the case with Cowboys & Aliens. Only in this instance, everything went wrong. Put simply, no one associated with this project had any idea what to do with this concept.

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

When Is An ATF Agent Not An ATF Agent?

When he's a J. P. Morgan six-figure employee. Or at least that's what the Obama administration claims. In fact, Bill McMahon is drawing his full salary from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF, ATF) while working as a top security official at J. P. Morgan. Bill McMahon was the assistant director in the Phoenix office of ATF, and he was up to his neck in Operation Fast and Furious.

But now he's “on leave, drawing his full salary while awaiting complete vesting of his federal pension, medical and retirement benefits. Is this illegal? Maybe. Is it unethical? You bet your bippie it is, and at the same time it's another example of the favoritism and coverups being perpetrated by Barack Obama and Eric Holder.

One whistleblower in the Justice Department disputes the Department of Justice's conclusions about the dismissal of charges against the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia, and he's sent to the DOJ equivalent of Siberia. ATF Special Agent John Dodson gives testimony before Congress that points the finger at McMahon's involvement in Fast and Furious, and he is told that he must wait until the Inspector General's report is complete before the DOJ can consider retracting the false statements made about him by McMahon et al during testimony and in memos from DOJ to Congress. McMahon, on the other hand, gets sent to the Fountain of Wealth.

I should note that the Inspector General's report is now complete, but we can't see it, nor can Congress, because it is currently “under review” by Attorney General Holder and his political lawyers. These are the same people who time and again stonewalled Congress and/or simply refused to provide information requested by committees in both the House and the Senate. There is little doubt that McMahon was fully-involved and active in Fast and Furious, but it's unlikely to look that way when DOJ gets done tampering with the Inspector General's report

Billy Boy is doing just fine, making big bucks at J. P. Morgan while hiding from Congress and enjoying his “leave” from ATF. Committee head Darrell Issa in the House, and ranking committee minority member Chuck Grassley in the Senate are both demanding answers as to why McMahon is being allowed to double-dip and at the same time use his private employment as a shield from Congressional investigators. If for no other reason, shouldn't the Obama administration be miffed with McMahon for taking a job with one of those evil Wall Street corporations (sarcasm off)?

Hard evidence, including e-mails to and from McMahon were presented to Congress which proved conclusively that McMahon knew about Fast and Furious, and was actively involved in its planning and subsequent coverup. Yet McMahon continued to claim he was just a low-level agent who knew nothing about any of the details of Fast and Furious. In doing so, he also maligned the character and veracity of agent John Dodson and other ATF agents who testified clearly about McMahon's involvement. Right up until the heat was getting too great and he took his “leave.”

McMahon and his shysters at DOJ now claim that the “leave” means that McMahon is no longer technically a federal employee, and has every right to assert “no comment” to any questions posed to him as a private employee of J. P. Morgan. The final Congressional Report nevertheless found that McMahon's fingerprints were all over Fast and Furious. He was a high-level supervisor in Phoenix where the Fast and Furious operation was launched during his tenure.

His records and e-mails clearly show that he knew that straw purchasers had bought over nine hundred sophisticated weapons which ended up in the murderous hands of Mexican cartel members. At the hearings, McMahon even admitted that he rubber-stamped Fast and Furious documents without reading them, but that his actions were negligent rather than intentional. As if that matters. Either way, he is at least partially-responsible for a serious breach of national security and the duty to protect American citizens. He was a vital link between the Phoenix field office and ATF headquarters in Washington DC.

McMahon claimed that it was not his duty to as a mere supervisor to ask questions about operations in the field. Sounds a lot like “I was only following orders.” He did admit that it was his duty at least to review the documents in front of him, but that failure to do so was a minor failure, not even a dereliction of duty. If carefully monitoring agent activities was not his major duty as a supervisor, what was?

In the long run, McMahon's actions and inactions, followed by his lies and coverups, have left hundreds of innocent victims dead in Mexico and perhaps dozens on our side of the border. Poetic justice would require that McMahon and Holder be required to submit to a face-to-face confrontation with the loved ones and relatives of the dead, specifically including the family of murdered Border Agent Brian Terry. But that won't happen, because McMahon is busy performing his duties at J. P. Morgan and Holder is busy re-writing the Inspector General's report.

[+]

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Democrats Want To Eat The Rich--It's Cannibalism

With all the talk of Republican candidate Mitt Romney not releasing his income taxes to cover up his millions, I'm reminded of a story. Andrew Carnegie, like Romney, gave considerable sums to charity. Upon his death, the public found out just how much. With only a few million left in Carnegie's personal estate, John D. Rockefeller is reputed to have said at Carnegie's funeral “why, he wasn't even rich.”

Compared to some of the biggest Democratic donors and politicians, Romney is a piker. But somehow, the mainstream media have avoided pointing out that Barack Obama's big donors are some of the richest individuals and corporations in the world. The big three who favor Obama and the Democrats are Bill Gates of Microsoft; Warren Buffet, the prairie magus; and Larry Ellison of Oracle fame. Sixty percent of the individuals on Forbes's Top Twenty List are Democrats. Consider “family wealth” where one individual enriched all his relatives (like the Kochs and the Waltons) and the ratio becomes 75% to 25% Democrat.

The contributions from megacorporations tend to mimic those of the Democrat-leaning individuals. In both cases, the Democrats have more and give less than Republicans. Romney himself showed that if he had not contributed to non-profit charities on the tax filing he has released, his tax bite would have been close to twenty-three percent. That's about comparable to what the “middle class” is paying, at least until Obama finishes with destroying the middle class.

Within that Top Twenty, Democrats not only outnumber Republicans, but they also have a decided edge in their wealth. Democrats out-wealth the Republicans on the list by $263.1 billion to $143.9 billion, or about two-to-one. But when it comes to charity, Republicans contribute more than Democrats. Sure, it's a tax deduction, but the money goes directly to the charities rather than passing through multiple layers of federal bureaucracy and misuse of taxpayer funds to get to the same people needing help. The Democratic presidential team of Obama and Biden is notably cheap in giving to charity. The team of Romney and Ryan is much more generous, and both give freely to their respective churches.

So—the mega-rich Democrats must be spending money to support their belief in the Democratic Party, right? Well, no. At least nowhere in the same proportions as believing Republican billionaires. From that Top Twenty, the Democrats in this cycle so far have spent $2.1 million in direct contributions to either the Democratic Party or a Democratic candidate, where the Republicans have spent $5.2 million of their party or their candidate. Figures on spending on the much bigger PACs are harder to calculate, but appear to reflect direct contributions.

Again the Democrats never mention these discrepancies between what they say and what they are. The mainstream media play right along, attacking the Kochs and Waltons for not paying their “fair share” while never making a peep about George Soros. Democrat Jon Corzine made so much money at Goldman-Sachs and MF Global that he was able essentially to buy the governorship of New Jersey and then its Senate seat. When MF Global came up billions of dollars short, Corzine basically shrugged his shoulders and said “s**t happens.”

I have no resentments for rich people regardless of their party. I wish I had as much, but I don't and that's life. I don't want to take their money away from them to equalize my wealth. What I do resent is a political party which claims to be the party of the poor and middle class having so many mega-wealthy members while using lies and the mainstream media to paint the Republican Party as the party of the undeserving and uncaring rich.

If you can't blow the picture up enough by clicking on it, the words at the bottom say "you are what you eat."
[+]

Polls and Captions

Let’s discuss more interesting polling data which is beginning to show serious trouble for Obama. Then let’s finish with a group activity. . . captioning an hilarious image from the AP!

First, the polls: The AP just released a poll purporting to show that Obama is ahead of Romney nationally by 1%. . . one little percentage point. But at least he’s ahead, right? Well, maybe not. This poll was biased toward the Democrats by +8%!!! How significant is this? In 2008, the electorate was +7% for the Democrats. So for this poll to be accurate, more Democrats and fewer Republicans would need to turn out than turned out in the Democratic-wave’s high-water mark. That ain’t happenin’.

It sounds to me like Romney is several percent ahead.

But we all know that national polls don’t matter. State by state polls are what matter. So get this, Rasmussen and Gallup both have Romney ahead now in Michigan and Wisconsin. In Michigan, Romney’s lead is surprisingly strong – 48% to 44%. In Wisconsin, Romney leads by 1%, though other polls have him higher. Romney also is even or ahead in these battleground states: Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, Florida and Iowa. The handwriting may not be on the wall yet, but somebody just whipped out an enormous crayon!

Finally, I leave you with this. The AP put out the photo below this week, causing all kinds of people to wonder what exactly the AP is thinking? Was this an intentional sleight of Obama or just sheer incompetence? You make the call (in the comments). Plus, give us your favorite caption(s)! Have at it!

[+]

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Toon-arama: The Incredibles (2004)

by tryanmax

By the time PIXAR Studios released its sixth feature-length film they had already secured a reputation for instant classics. The Incredibles proved to be no exception, combining family-friendly adventure with enduring themes of proud exceptionalism and the importance of family and teamwork. Because it champions these ideals, it has proven to be a perennial favorite amongst conservatives, and rightly so. On top of that, it is a smart and sophisticated film which proves that children’s entertainment need not be trite. And it hopefully goes without saying that the PIXAR animation team builds a vibrant and exciting world with all the visual panache that a cinema experience should have.

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?

I'm going to be in and out most of today, so let me give you a question to kick around with each other. According to the Gallup, 56% of Americans say they are not better off than they were four years ago, 40% claim they are better off. That's pretty much the kiss of death for an incumbent. So tell us, are you better off today than you were four years ago? How so? How not so?
[+]

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Hillary Educates The Imams

In 2012, the US State Department spent $117.2 million addressing gender-based violence worldwide. For 2013 it is asking for $147.1 million. A hefty portion of those funds are spent on a favorite Hillary Clinton project: ”educating” imams (Muslim religious leaders) about mistreatment of females throughout the Middle East and Africa. They teach “proper” sharia law and the Koran to “experts” on the subject. The focus is on the “compatibility of women's rights and Islam."

Isn't that a little like trying to teach good table manners to a pig?

Clinton and her State Department are delusional. Women's rights according to Clinton's version have existed for a long time in some Islamic countries and she believes her program is helping to expand that view. Perhaps she's thinking of Egypt, where women did indeed share nearly equal rights with men. But perhaps she has also failed to notice that there has been a revolution in Egypt which has placed the Muslim Brotherhood in charge. The revolution had many causes, but largest among them was the secularism of the nation which the Brotherhood declares a violation of the words of both the Koran and sharia. The Brotherhood has every intention of enforcing its own version of sharia law and to abandon the secular “mistake” of treating women as equals to men.

Prior to the revolution in Iran, Iranian women were among the freest and most influential females in the world. So much for that. Nobody with an ounce of brains thinks that as the Arab Spring progresses women are going to be better off. Muslim, but non-Arabic Iran will remain in the caves of yesteryear on women's rights pending a second great revolution. There's no "he said, she said" in sharia. If a woman says she was raped, she must produce four male witnesses to substantiate the charge. Most often those necessary witnesses would be the rapists themselves. If she makes the charge, and doesn't produce the witnesses, she will be convicted of adultery and stoned to death.

Never daunted, Secretary Clinton has cited “evidence” of her program's success. She tells us that one Afghan imam now asks the bride how old she is when he performs a wedding, and whether she consents. Other imams have said that after the training, they have tried to see that widows get a fair share of their husband's estate upon his death. Some imams have come to believe that women might even be entitled to an education like their male counterparts. Unfortunately for Hillary, as the slimy government leader Hamid Karzai continues to play footsy with the Taliban, fewer and fewer of these anecdotal tales emerge from Afghanistan.

Karzai has already approved a code of conduct proposed by the imams which allows husbands to beat their wives, reinstates segregation of the sexes, requires women to travel with a male guardian, and not to mingle with males outside their family. In order to put an exclamation point on it, when asked by an AP reporter if he personally agreed with the policy, Karzai replied “It is the Shariah law of all Muslims and all Afghans.”

Blithely ignoring that little gem, Secretary Clinton has said: “All over the world we see living proof that Islam and women's rights are compatible.” She then continued to report “news” from the last decade or before: “Muslim communities from Egypt to Jordan to Senegal are beginning to take on entrenched practices like child marriage, honor killings, and female genital mutilation.” She neglected to mention Nigeria, where the Islamist war has barely begun.

The State Department defines violence against women as “physical, sexual, and psychological abuse; threats, coercion, arbitrary confinement, and economic deprivation.” Clinton could have added stoning to death for being the victim of rape, but I guess that's just too horrible for Hillary to contemplate. Clinton has open support in her efforts from her boss, Barack Hussein Obama. Like his distorted view of Christianity, Obama also lives in a dreamworld about Islam.

Obama truly believes that a secular, feminist view of women can be imposed on barbarians whose central tenet is hatred and jihad on all those who disagree with them. Oh, well, at least Hillary may have saved a nine year-old girl or two from being married off to an old man as his third of fourth wife, this week. But there's always next week and the entire future.

[+]

Yet More Election News

Lots of little things to catch up on today, but nothing really big. So let’s do a news round up and whip some of these out. Then we can all move on with our lives. :)

Issue One: Everywhere you look, the MSM is smearing Paul Ryan. The Democrats too are focusing almost exclusively on Ryan. This suggests two things. First, they know that Ryan is very important to this ticket and they are desperate to stop him. Unfortunately for them, their attacks on him have been pathetic. They’ve found no damning votes, no skeletons in the closet, and no close associates looking to make a name for themselves by turning against him. Nothing they’ve tried has touched him.

Secondly, it suggests that the Democrats really have no idea how to win this election. Poll after poll shows the public worried about jobs and the economy, and they aren’t happy with Obama’s record. But rather than defend that record or come up with some new plan the public will believe (his latest involves hiring more teachers), they are trying to smear Ryan. . . the number two guy on the ticket. This is horrible strategy. When November rolls around, Ryan won’t even be an issue in the voting both, so attacking Ryan is nothing more than a waste of time. That the Democrats don’t understand that is fascinating.

Issue Two: Swift Boat Boogaloo. Obama really stepped in it when he tried to claim credit for killing bin Laden. Not only was it unseemly for a President to try to steal the credit which belongs to the troops who did the actual deed, but it soon became apparent that our Kenyan Overlord did little more than cower in the corner while others pushed the decision buttons. Yet, Hollywood is intent on making a pro-Obama propaganda film about the event. So it’s rather hilarious that a group of Navy SEALs is putting together an advertisement attacking Obama for his mishandling of this as well has his administration’s penchant for leaking secret documents which harm the troops in the field. Of course, the Democrats are furious about this and they are calling it another swift boat attack, but that won’t change the fact that an ad like this will prove to be highly effective against our arm-chair warrior in Chief.

Issue Three: Gallup now shows Romney with a small but growing lead over Obama – 47% to 45%. I can’t get to Gallup’s underlying data, but you can guess it’s probably biased at least 3% to the left. That means Romney’s support may have crossed the magical 50% mark.

Issue Four: Priorities. Last week, Gallup released a poll showing voter priorities for this election. In the top spots by far are (1) creating good jobs, (2) reducing corruption in the federal government, and (3) reducing the federal budget deficit. Each of these is a notable Obama failure – with the corruption thing being the most ironic since Obama claimed to want clean and transparent government. Obama’s main selling point, “increasing taxes on wealthy Americans” ranks last on the list with only 49% support – 43% behind the jobs issue. This tells us that Obama is in real trouble and is plan to save himself is deeply flawed.

Issue Five: The Boston Globe has now become the first left-leaning editorial board to demand an apology from Biden for his "chains" comment. They noticed that if Romney or Ryan had said that, they would have been attacked for "racial insensitivity" and they think Biden should not be excused merely because he's on the left. Imagine that!

Issue Six: Finally, there is this issue about appointments. You may have heard that the Congress has decided to give the president more power to get his appointments. Specifically, 170 posts which needed Senate approval in the past will no longer need Senate approval. Some people are upset about this because it gives Obama more power, but let’s get real. A President should, by and large, be able to appoint the people he wants to fill most posts. And for decades now, the Senate has done a horrible job of make decision on appointments, leave some slots empty for years after a President is elected. This decision will be a good thing for Romney who should be able to hit the ground running that much faster now, despite what I expect to be Democratic attempts to grind the Senate to a halt. It’s too bad the parties couldn’t come together to give Obama more power to restructure the Executive Branch as well because Romney could have used that very effectively.

Thoughts? Anything I missed?

P.S. Don't forget, it is Star Trek Tuesday at the film site.

[+]

Monday, August 20, 2012

Republican Wacko Should Resign Now

This is going to be a nasty article and some of you won’t like it. I don’t care. I’m finding myself really pissed off at the retard who will be representing our side in the Missouri Senate Primary. His name is Todd Akin and he seemed pretty decent until his dogma shut down his brain. He needs to resign.

Akin was asked this weekend during a television interview about his view on whether or not abortion should be allowed in the case of rape. His answer was this:
“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
By which he meant that victims rarely get pregnant from “legitimate rapes.” He then stated that he thinks abortion should be banned in the case of rape.

Uh... f*ck you.

First of all, what is a legitimate rape? And what kind of piece of sh*t would believe that rape comes in degrees of legitimacy? I hate the word “insensitive,” but I can’t imagine a better use for it than the way Akin just smeared rape victims. This is so reminiscent of Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams, who obnoxiously said about the rain: “It’s a lot like rape. As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.”

That a human being would utter either of these statements is frankly incomprehensible to me. How f*cked up do you need to be to believe that only certain rapes matter or that rape is something women should enjoy? Where does the Republican Party keep finding these sex-obsessed troglodytes?

Secondly, what is this crap that somehow the female body “has ways to shut the whole thing down”? Where does this medical quackery come from? If a doctor said this, they would lose their medical license for incompetence. If a teenager said this, we would laugh at them for being stupid. Yet here a grown “man” says this? This is dogma, this is not science. This is a man who believes in witchcraft, who sees women as unclean deceivers, and who fears the atheists under his bed. This is not a man whose judgment can be trusted. This is the kind of crap which gives Christians a bad name.

Akin, of course, apologized for this obscenity, but this is one of those moments where you can’t un-ring a bell. We now know what he believes, and this is not a man I would want near any female I knew and I sure as heck don’t want him in a position to represent my side of the aisle on women’s issues. He is unfit and needs to resign.

And let me say, this is exactly why young professional women will never vote Republican, but that’s not even what bothers me here. What bothers me is that a man with a Fourteenth Century understanding of sexual relations could be chosen to serve in the United States Senate. He needs to resign. If he doesn’t, I will support McCaskill.

Conservatives need to rid themselves of these people.

And while I’m at it, let me say that if you believe women should be forced to carry children to term when they’ve been raped, then you are wrong. There is no legal or moral justification for your position. You are suggesting sexual slavery. You are suggesting that you have the right to victimize these women every single day until they give birth because you think your religion tells you to use the force of law to control others. You are wrong.

UPDATED: It is now being reported that Akin will resign. Good. But there's one more bit to add to the story. The mouth-breathers at the Family Research Council have been giving strong support to Akin throughout the day. Their president Tony Perkins claims this is nothing more than an attempt to distract from the record of that unclean woman Claire McCaskill and Satan’s workshop at Planned Parenthood. Pathetic. Seriously, if you don't see the problem with this, then there is something wrong with you.

[+]

I Will Heal The Divisions

During his 2008 campaign for the presidency, Barack Obama proclaimed: “There is not a black America and a white America and a Latino America and an Asian America; there's the United States of America.” Near the end of his first (and only?) term, America is more divided along racial and class lines than at any time since the beginning of the civil rights era. Barack Obama himself deserves much of the credit for this divisiveness.

There were hints in that earlier campaign that Obama really wasn't all that post-racial. He commented that “some people won't vote for me because I don't look like the other presidents.” That was a suggestion that if you voted for the other candidate, you were voting against Obama solely because of his color. There was a lot of criticism on the right for that comment, though some of us conservatives thought that it was not an entirely unfair or untrue remark. It recognized a truth that both liberals and conservatives ought to be able to agree on. Bigots still exist, and probably always will. It was the suggestion that anybody who voted against him was a bigot that was offensive. And that thought has been magnified and amplified throughout his administration.

The concept has gelled to the point that it is now a major theme of the liberals during the 2012 presidential campaign. Never mind Obama's utter failure on the economy. Never mind the apology tours. Never mind his abandonment of allies and pats-on-the-back for Middle East dictators. Never mind his Chicago-style oppression of dissent. Never mind his crony socialism. If you oppose anything Obama does, you are an “intolerant bigot.”

Even among white voters, Obama's race seemed in 2008 to have been more of a plus than a minus. Many who really knew nothing about him listened to what he said and thought to themselves, “at last, we can get past all the division by electing a black president who wants to put racial and class division behind us once and for all.” A huge percentage of those same white voters have come to regret their vote. Almost from the beginning, it became apparent that Obama had no intention of healing racial relations. He, along with his Attorney General Eric Holder, early on began to make it clear that the administration would not be about healing, but rather about revenge for real and imagined past white sins.

When Harvard Professor Henry Louis (“Skip”) Gates was arrested for disorderly contact and resisting arrest, Obama rushed to blame it on “stupid cops” arresting a notable black academic based on his color. The Holder Justice Department dropped all further actions against the New Black Panther Party for egregious voter intimidation in Philadelphia, going so far as to drop cases which had already been won against them. When a black teenager was shot by a “white” neighborhood watch member, Obama rushed to judgment, bringing out the violins by proclaiming “if I had a son, he would look just like Trayvon (apparently Obama disregarded the most recent photos of the victim sporting gang tattoos and a gold “grill”). The Holder DOJ has throughout Obama's first term used the obsolete provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to squelch reform efforts in the South. The list is very lengthy.

This president had an unprecedented (his favorite word) opportunity to bring Americans of all colors and classes together to make a greater America. Instead, he has taken every opportunity to divide the country along those very lines he could have helped to erase. As I said in 2008 (and still say), I don't oppose Barack Obama because he's black. I oppose him because he's red. Yet the mainstream media continue to prettify Obama and his legions while downplaying any criminal activities on the left which are racially or ideologically motivated.

Although he has not overtly spouted black liberation or socialist philosophy, both his actions and inactions have led America down those primrose paths. He has emboldened the left to call conservatives racists and bigots for opposing his policies, no matter what the issue before them. His cynical reversal of his position on gay marriage has added gay-straight/Christian-secularist hatred to the mix. His above-the-fray inaction in failing to condemn tagging of all conservative and/or traditional values as bigots has further emboldened the liberals. He has never said that he agrees with the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center labeling the Family Research Council as a “hate group.” But neither has he condemned it, and a supporter of gay, lesbian, and transgender causes used that as a justification for an armed attack on the “hate group” FRC in Washington, DC.

As the racial and class warfare remarks continue to escalate in the campaign, Obama remains silent. As most of us know, the ancient legal dictum is that “silence implies consent.” And that is exactly how the race and class warriors on the left have interpreted the silence. A Democrat PAC implies that Mitt Romney was directly responsible for the death of a cancer victim, and Obama remains silent. His Press Secretary mumbled and bumbled when the abject lie was pointed out to him. The ad continues to run in key states, and Obama continues to remain silent.

By allowing his minions to attack all conservatives and Christians as bigots, racists and neanderthals without putting on the brakes by condemning their actions, Obama is complicit in the very bigotry he purports to loathe. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Barack Hussein Obama is not a good man. And anyone who opposes him, is (in his own words) a "typical white person."

[+]

Sunday, August 19, 2012

The Great (film) Debates vol. 50

Today's question is brought to you by the Happy Bunny Munitions Company. Kill happy!

What is the most obnoxious product placement you recall?

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

Saturday, August 18, 2012

More Fun with Liberal Logic

It comes under the title "More Fun with Conservative Logic" or "More Fun with Neo-Con Logic", Whatever the title, these clever lists of liberal logic are making the rounds on Facebook and are just begging for responses. Responses that I know the clever minds at Commentarama can provide with ripping success. You will notice as you peruse the list, that my wonderfully liberal FB "friends" who pride themselves in their intellect haven't even bothered to read their posts for mindless inaccuracies.[See #3]

But that aside, please feel to free to formulate a response to deflate their inaccuracies with wit and panache that I have come to expect from Commentarama-ians!

1). Clinton, who was banging Monica Lewinsky, had to be impeached according to the Constitution as written by Thomas Jefferson, who was banging Sally Hemings.

2). John Edwards, who had a love child with his mistress while his ailing wife lay dying, was pronounced unfit to hold elected office by Newt Gingrich,
who had a love child with his mistress while his ailing wife lay dying.

3). Willard Mitt Romney, who insists our southern border needs a wall and would have voted against The Dream Act chooses as his running mate Marco Rubio, who wrote the Dream Act and whose parents came to America illegally.

4). Romney says it wasn't worth going after bin Laden until he was dead, then it was.

5). "Al Gore should not have taken campaign donations from the Tobacco industry since his family raised tobacco, " said Bob Dole who took donations from the Tobacco industry after publicly stating there's no known scientific link between cigarette smoking and Lung Cancer.

6). Being gay or lesbian is a choice, but having a baby isn't.

7). Having more guns will produce less gun violence in the same way that building more highways produces less traffic jams. If every hormonal inner-city high-school student were armed with a gun, there would be far fewer school shootings.

8). Photo ID's that cost money to obtain ( for the certified birth certificate) in order to vote does not constitute a violation of the 24th Amendment whereas requiring a photo ID to purchase a handgun is the inevitable descent down the slippery slope to totalitarianism and the end of representative government in America.

9). It makes sense to outlaw abortion AND cancel welfare for unwed teenage Moms. This will produce less dependence on government.

10). It makes more sense to treat poor people in county hospitals and present them with bills they never can nor will pay than to include all Americans on a national health care insurance program.

11). Banks, oil companies, Wall St. etc. , are all capable of self-regulation in the same way that BP IS perfectly capable of filling out its own safety inspection reports.

12). Marketplace law always produces lower consumer prices, such as electric bills in California.

13). Rather than get poor returns on Social Security funds, it makes far more sense to privatize and invest those funds in the Stock Market - with companies such as Enron, J. P. Morgan, WorldCom, etc.

14). The more money rich people have the more money poor people have. This is not done through taxes - it's MAGIC!!
[+]

A DREAM That Is All Wet

Pictured are young immigrants paddling their way toward American citizenship (or at least toward Obama-ordered two years of amnesty). These are the DREAMers whom Obama has exempted from any immigration enforcement and whom he has granted the easy road (or river) to permanent residence and citizenship. Don't ask, don't tell is back. If an illegal immigrant says he's a DREAMer, then he is, period.

President Obama has ignored the Constitution and slapped Congress in the face. Though Congress rejected the so-called DREAM Act, Obama has, by executive order, implemented a major portion of that rejected act. For those who have dried off from their swim to citizenship, DREAM workshops have already been set up in most of America's major cities. The workshops help the applicants fill out the forms from DHS. In Chicago and Los Angeles, the crowds of DREAMers were so great that additional workshops designed to teach illegals how to become legal had to be set up. The course teaches them how to avoid the pitfalls of admitting they're here illegally under any definition, including but not limited to claiming they are DREAMers without having to explain how they fit the all-new and improved definition.

The DREAM program is open to all illegals between the ages of fifteen and thirty-one who entered the country before they were age sixteen and have lived here for at least five years. The application form requires no proof. Just say you fit, and you do. You can say I'm a DREAMer, but I'm not the only one. In fact the estimates of those who would semi-legitimately fit into the unconstitutional parameters is between 1.7 million and 3 million. It doesn't take a genius or a demographer to figure out that number will undoubtedly double or triple almost overnight as more illegals catch onto the scam.

Several TV and newspaper reports indicate that the workshops have told the illegals that if the Republicans win in November, their executive order amnesty would be revoked. Well, I certainly hope they're right. But they also know that the thing is that once that semi-legal status has been established, it will be well-nigh impossible to undo it that quickly, if it can be undone at all. So, sign 'em up! The executive order, aka The Democratic Voter Registration Project, throws a huge monkey wrench into the machinery of genuine comprehensive immigration reform.

There simply can't be any question that Obama's order is just another Democratic tactic for influencing the outcome of the presidential/congressional elections. Once young Juan and young Juanita are signed up for the program, Hispanics would take serious umbrage at that legal status being revoked. Convince enough Hispanics that this is going to happen and there could be the double benefit for the Democrats of illegal voting, and voting by angry legal Hispanic voters who encouraged their friends and relatives to come here illegally in the first place. The DREAM Act and the DREAM order are nightmares.

And not to put too fine a point on it, the order applies not only to illegals already in the United States, but also to those attempting to cross into the country. Under the Obama order, Border Agents are no longer allowed to arrest or detain those caught entering the country illegally once the magic word “DREAMer” has been pronounced, in Spanish or English. Are you pissed off yet?

[+]

Friday, August 17, 2012

Guest Review: Back to the Future Part III (1990)

by ScottDS

As I mentioned in my last review, I watched the Back to the Future films in reverse order, so Part III was my first glimpse inside the universe created by filmmakers Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale. I don’t remember how I stumbled across it one Saturday night in the early 90s but something about it kept my interest and two hours later, I was a fan!

Click Here To Read Article/Comments at CommentaramaFilms

[+]

You Didn't Build That Bridge

During his “you didn't build that” speech, Barack Obama said the following: “During the Great Depression, America built the Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge. Democratic and Republican administrations invested in great projects that benefited everybody, from the workers who built them to the businesses that still use them today. And that's the true lesson of the past.”

I'll leave Hoover Dam for others, but let's take a look at the Golden Gate Bridge. So how much did the federal government invest in the Golden Gate Bridge? Zero. Zilch. Nada. It was strictly a local project, with cooperation from the state government and opposition from the federal government. Financing the project was almost as difficult as building the bridge itself. Preliminary plans to construct a bridge from San Francisco began in 1915. It was strongly opposed by the Southern Pacific Railroad which had a near-monopoly on the ferries that crisscrossed San Francisco Bay. But local residents wanted their bridge, and when Southern Pacific filed suit to stop the project, the locals boycotted the ferries.

The federal government, via the War Department, opposed the project as well. They contended that the major ports of San Francisco and Oakland would be put in jeopardy if a ship crashed into one of the towers and blocked the harbor entrance. The Secretary of War never visited the site so he was unaware that three or four ships could crash into the pillars and still not block the harbor. He was also basing his objections on a plan which had already been abandoned (a double cantilever design which was much closer to the water than the final soaring cable design).

So how did the financing work? The citizens of San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma and Del Norte counties (with special districts in Napa and Sonoma counties) voted to issue bonds to pay for the bridge. The timing couldn't have been worse. The bonds were authorized in 1929 and issued between 1929 and 1932. Almost none were purchased as a result of the stock market crash. So, did the federal government rush in to bail out the project? Nope. A certain A. P. Giannini, who had almost single-handedly rebuilt San Francisco after the Great Earthquake and Fire, used his resources to purchase all the bonds. His major resource was the Bank of America, which he had founded originally as the local San Francisco Bank of Italy. He changed the name of the bank after the Quake to give it more universal appeal. In those days, Bank of America was a bailor rather than a bailee.

The bondholders (BofA later sold many of the bonds to private investors) were paid in full with appropriate interest by the Bridge Authority from automobile tolls, though it did take thirty-four years. The return on investment was quite healthy. Although the state of California had little involvement, the creation of a special bridge district required state approval, which was granted in 1923. The locals had taken a big risk (on the theory that only great risk can produce great projects—a very American concept). They did not want outsiders interfering, and they knew that they would get no financial assistance from the state or federal government. The result was one of the most beautiful and breath-taking structures in the entire world.

How different this project was from federal projects. The locals maintained and maintain local control. The project was ultimately paid for solely by those who actually use the bridge, in the form of bridge tolls. When asked by A. P. Giannini how long the bridge would last, chief architect Joseph Strauss replied: “Forever.” To this day (after the bridge was fully paid-off in 1971), the local project is self-financed. In fact, it is so successful that it also helps to fund mass transit for those who will be using the bridge on public transportation, and even helps to finance the adjunct ferries.

While the federal-state project which became the San Francisco-Oakland Transbay Bridge (the Bay Bridge) suffered major damage in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the Golden Gate barely noticed. The Bay Bridge authority is in constant financial trouble, and the entire stretch from Yerba Buena Island to Oakland is in the process of being completely replaced. In the 60s, that same stretch had gotten a needed facelift which included the approach to Yerba Buena Island which locals affectionately called “the hump.” Naturally, there was a big scandal afterwards which showed that the very expensive hump was unnecessary.

The original traffic plans had to be modified. Originally the Bay Bridge had two levels of two-way traffic, cars on top, trucks, buses and heavy vehicles on the bottom. It didn't work, so now all westbound traffic travels on the one-way upper level and all eastbound traffic travels on the lower deck. So now the Bay Bridge is very much comparable to Hoover Dam historically. The Golden Gate Bridge bears no resemblance whatsoever to the Hoover Dam project, except possibly for the success of each.

Obama, who has repeated the Golden Gate Bridge falsehood many times since he first mentioned it in his State of the Union address, has proven that he is as incompetent as an historian as he is as a president.

[+]