Monthly Archives: May 2012

I dare you to show me a Flip Flop with Romney

[Author’s Note: Most of this was part of an earlier blog but the accusations of flip flopping are coming back with a vengeance so I decided to republish this piece and this piece alone.]

Flip-flopping.

Everyone knows Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper. A fish out of water does less flip flopping than Romney…or so the talking point goes.

Most of his flip-flopping was on the abortion issue. As any regular reader of this blog knows there are about a trillion and one issues that I find more important than abortion—some of them involve discussion of the lint I find in my belly button. I couldn’t care less what his position on abortion is or if it changes regularly with the tides. But let’s deal with them. He admits that his position has changed over the years. At first he thought he could separate this part of his personal beliefs from his duties as a public official and has found that he can’t. In other words, his actual stance has not changed, he’s always been against abortion, it is simply that he finds he cannot sit idly by. So really all it is a change in where it stands with his priority list. And he says he knows it will take a Constitutional Amendment to change Roe. A Constitutional Amendment we know will never get 2/3rds of both houses of Congress. So that’s never going to happen. And we know he’ll obey the law even if he has moral qualms…after all he oversaw and enforced the gay marriage laws in Massachusetts even though he disagreed with them. So much for the central flip flop (and most liberal attacks dealing with social issues when you think about it.)

And then there is the fact that I like attack ads, not because they work all that well against the attacked, but they show you how desperate the opposition is and what their values are. But they can also show you what a candidate does stand for

So let’s take this video apart quote by quote…

  • For instance they have a clip of Romney saying “I think we do need economic stimulus”

His actual statement was:

“Well, I frankly wish that the last Congress would have dealt with the stimulus issue and that the president could assign that before leaving office. I think there is need for economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11 trillion in net worth. That translates into about $400 billion a year less spending that they’ll be doing, and that’s net of additional government programs like Medicaid and unemployment insurance. And government can help make that up in a very difficult time. And that’s one of the reasons why I think a stimulus program is needed.
I’d move quickly. These are unusual times. But it has to be something which relieves pressure on middle-income families. I think a tax cut is necessary for them as well as for businesses that are growing. We’ll be investing in infrastructure and in energy technologies. But let’s not make this a Christmas tree of all of the favors for various politicians who have helped out the Obama campaign, giving them special projects.
[italics added]

Wow, so his stimulus is across the board tax cutting! Exactly why are we opposed to that? And while we have become rather jaded when Obama says infrastructure repair, because I’ve yet to see a single pot hole fixed, let alone real work done…it’s not a bad idea in theory. Also notice in this January 2009 interview he predicted that we would have BS like Solyndra.

  • Then there’s all that stuff on abortion. As I said, I couldn’t care if I tried.
  • The Reagan thing.

“Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”

I’m not thrilled with that line about Reagan. Never have been. But then I looked at the context and it struck me as interesting.

Let me set the scene. 1994. Massachusetts. Democrats might not be beloved but memories of Bush and his idiot policies are still rightfully loathed. Senate race between Sen. Ted Kennedy (1 confirmed kill) vs. Mitt Romney.

Sen. Ted Kennedy: “Under the Reagan-Bush economic programs, under the economic programs you want to return to, the total number of children that are living in poverty, the total number of children out of wedlock — this has happened, you know we’ve had Republican presidents during this period of time and the cutting back of support systems for children and most of all for families to get jobs. If you’re not going to provide a climate and an atmosphere for men and women to be able to work and provide for their children, you’re going to see the breakdown of the family as well.”

Mitt Romney: “I mentioned nothing about politics or your position at all. I talked about what I’d do to help strengthen families, and you talked about Reagan-Bush. Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”

Would I want to distance myself from Bush? Yeah. Still do. And to his credit he wasn’t dumb enough to fall into Kennedy’s trap of changing the phrase Kennedy used “Reagan-Bush.” If he had changed it to “Bush” or “the last administration” Kennedy would have used that in front of a Massachusetts audience not to just demand he be placed into the Senate for the entirety of his existence but that, in a Massachusetts tradition dating back to 1692, the non-conformist must be hung for his heresy. Should he have phrased it better? Yes. However, as I would point out Polifact states “In our fact-check of the DNC ad, we couldn’t find any other references to Romney distancing himself from Reagan beyond the 1994 debate comment.” 18 years and that’s the only anti-Reagan quote you can find…hell the fact that he made it through the Reagan diaries wipes that out (I love Reagan and his writing style and I love thick books, but every time I look at that thing on my shelf I still can’t seem to bring myself to wade through it).

  • Then they want to hit him for being a good capitalist…and the most legitimate source they can find, nut job extraordinaire Rachel Maddow of MSNBC (or Pravda as I call it). The rest is bizarre innuendo, followed by him saying he doesn’t want Congress to control the Fed…I don’t trust the Fed, but I have to agree I wouldn’t want Congress in control either, it would be even worse than now.
  • Okay the health care thing. He endorses an exchange. Okay I’m not thrilled with the insurance exchanges…but it’s not the national health care mandate….you know the part we hate, the unconstitutional part. You couldn’t find video of Romney endorsing that? Not even tied to his statement of “you try and do better with the legislature I had”? And I also love that the state is “is putting together an exchange” future tense as if this was still in the planning stages (I love how they don’t include dates on this video) so probably before we had an idea of how horrible it was going to be. Also notice the tone of “I’m glad he’s doing that…everything else sucks.”
  • The immigration thing. Really? That’s the best you can do, that he hired someone who hired someone else and when he found out about it he told them to stop. Oh yeah, this man is weak on immigration. And such a flip flop.
  • The global warming things. Ummm. I don’t believe in global warming as a man caused problem is real (Also notice his word “contribute” not “cause”) but I live in Phoenix which gets to 120 every summer not because I live in the Arizona desert but because the concrete keeps the Sun’s heat in during the night creating a heat bubble that doesn’t end until October. So it is possible for humans to contribute to it getting hotter without “climate change” in the chicken-little doom and gloom way Al Gore means it to be true. And yes this is probably my weakest defense in this whole article, I admit that. But I don’t see clips of him endorsing cap and trade. And I don’t see him sitting next to Nancy Pelosi endorsing the Al Gore version of global warming.
  • Oh, the union thing. “I’m not speaking about” to “I endorse.” How is that a flip-flop? I oppose then I endorse is a flip-flop? “I’m not speaking about” is I believe political talk for, “look I haven’t done any research into this yet and I know how you guys ask me a loaded question and I’m not going to fall into that trap.”
  • The tax pledge thing that first picture has to be from his Senate race against Teddy, which means “I’m not going to sign a new tax pledge and give that damn Kennedy something to use against me” to 2 decades later.
  • The guns. How is signing a law and then saying we don’t need any more after that a flip flop?  Should all laws only be in extremes.  Should we change it to every crime you either walk free or you die?
  • Again not thrilled with his endorsement of TARP, but it’s hard to find anyone who didn’t support it. But notice he says he supports it because the funds were paid back…you know as if the program is over, it did its thing for its time and that it is no more. And then Obama kept using it as a slush fund for whatever bullshit he wanted to do. Are you surprised that someone who even supported the initial TARP program might have a problem with it being used past its usefulness?
  • The Auto industry thing. I can’t find the whole text of the statement…but let me take a guess here. He was probably talking about loosening regulation and lowering taxes that would have let it come back on its own which is actually in line with saying don’t get the government involved, and if the only way to save it is to let it die, then let it die, (and again I’m speculating here) but if you had a business environment conducive to growth it wouldn’t
And don’t get me started that opposing Obamacare is a a flip flop, it’s not.  The two programs are vastly different.

This ad was done with some money and decent access to media clips. And this is the best they could find. And this was the best ad I could find after 2 hours of searching. Cherry picked statements taken out of context. Mixed with comedians and pundits. Yeah they keep saying the Romney has a reputation as a flip flopper, except for that abortion thing I’m not exactly seeing proof so much as hype to back up that assertion. You know kind of like Obama having a reputation as an intelligent human being, when all evidence suggests he’s really rather dumb. And Ron Paul having a reputation for believing in small government when in reality he is a major porker for useless spending his district. George Bush has a reputation as a Neo-Con…trust me that man knows nothing about spreading democracy nor has he ever believed in it…he just didn’t have anything else to latch onto for dear life on September 12th.

There is reputation and there is fact. Show me the anti-business laws he proposed to the Massachusetts legislature. Show me the socialist executive orders he signed. Show me bills he authored calling for a removal of constitutional rights. Or is all you have to justify your position of him flip-flopping cherry picked statements taken out of context? As someone of Newt Gingrich’s currently high reputation once observed “”Reputation is an idle and most false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving.”

Has he changed his beliefs over time? Yeah. He’s said so himself. It’s called learning from experience and growing. But in everything Romney has had the attitude of looking at everything from a business perspective of solving the problem. He has admitted he’s wrong on things, but he has never shown the constant second-guessing himself that Obama touts as a virtue (when a major vice is trumpeted as a virtue you know there are problems… , he has acted with determination and followed through and when things didn’t work he tried something new. You know, he was a leader.

Please submit any further supposed flip-flops with specific citations…I will prove them all bogus.

1 Comment

Filed under Mitt Romney

Liberal or Conservative, Romney Critics aren’t that bright…

Conservatives can be a dumb bunch at times.  From the social conservative for whom there is nothing conservative about using government to run other people’s lives (how exactly is that different from liberals?).  Then you have the Ron Paul section of the party a bunch of cowardly isolationists who like to hold to an extreme view of an idealist economic philosophy (Austrian economics have many good points, but they are extremists who don’t want to worry about real world problems on in their little ideals).   And we certainly have our share of RINOS who want to be loved more by their liberal friends than having any fidelity to reason, truth or justice.  Not that liberals aren’t stupid (good lord they are) nor are true libertarians less insane than Ron Paul Republicans…but we conservatives have our share of idiots, no doubt.  And one can often see this stupidity in such publications as very inappropriately named “American Thinker” which seems to appeal to all strands of conservative idiocy.

For instance in a time when Republicans need to close ranks around Romney…hell even if you can’t see that he is in every way the inheritor of Reagan’s legacy, we’re fighting against the second-coming of Jimmy Carter meets FDR meets Benedict Arnold!    It’s time to close ranks.  But no, no, let’s let idiots complain about Romney on supposedly conservative web sites…and let’s let them use liberal talking points to do it.  Like this article “Mitt Flunks Education 101” by Robert Weissberg who as far as I can tell is a moron.  Why do I say that?  Well, going back over some of his other articles he states as a complaint against the election system that is designed to elect moderates like Romney (who really isn’t a moderate) and that “The system is supposed to produce moderation, not “full-strength” candidate [sic] such as Ron Paul and Rick Santorum.”   I’m not sure when “full strength” became a synonym for “f*cking psychopath,” (not to mention homophone in Ricky and anti-Semite in Ron) but the use of the term really makes me doubt Weissberg’s intellectual credentials.

But it’s this hack’s work attacking Mitt’s education plan that I want to deal with today.  Why because it’s all the liberal BS talking points on education in one place. 

1.  The genius begins his complaints of six things wrong with Romney’s stance on education with something that isn’t even a proposal, rather Romney simply offering a statement of fact.

“He begins by calling the gap between whites and minorities (assumed to be blacks and Hispanics) ‘the civil rights issue of our era.’  This gap may, in fact, be a civil rights issue, but nobody, regardless of ideology, has any solid idea on how to close it.”

Um, actually genius, the solution would be in the next five points.  Although if you want a specific point to address the gap in minority scores then we could look at the one thing Bush got right in education reform—complaining about “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”  I’m a teacher and trust me, there are many in education who are bigots and simply think that if minorities get a C then that’s the best they can do.  I actually once had an argument with a school administrator over who to give an award for academic achievement to—I wanted to give it to a high performing AP student, this administrator wanted to give it to a C student and his actual argument was “Yeah but she’s white, this kid is Hispanic do you know how hard it must be to get a C.”  Took everything I had not to punch the asshole in the face.  And it’s not just race, there are low expectations on gender and income level as well, despite the fact that I have learned you can push any kid from any background to any level so long as you have high expectations and the student is willing to learn.  But even though recognizing this as a problem, the only solution to this problem lies in points 2-6.

2.  Romney, quite intelligently, supports Vouchers and Charters, the idiot complaining about Romney seems to think they don’t work…and I love how he quotes a report, from a newspaper (I’m sure they’re qualified to run this kind of high level analysis), that shows charters don’t outperform regular schools.  (Let’s ignore that charters appeal to lower end students which removing them from the pool raises the public school numbers…and shows charters can bring the worst up to average level).  Heaven forbid we should look at real data that shows some charters do work.  I’ll be the first to admit that not all charters work, but the fun thing about charters is that unlike public schools, if they don’t work, they close and are replaced by something else.  I would also point out that it is simply impossible to judge any school until it has been in operation for at least 3 years—I’ve been involved in opening a school from the ground up, your first year you take whatever type of student you can get and have to deal with a myriad of education deficiencies caused by previous public school incompetence…it takes time to identify and put in systems to correct the most common problems and set up a culture in the school that encourages success, but once in place that culture is effective and hard to destroy. In the real world the same capitalistic market forces that create high quality low price goods for us, create high quality low priced education when competition is allowed to flourish.

The genius ends his critique of charters with what I assume is attempt at wit “Where are all the Bain Capital accountants to calculate gains versus losses?”  Ummm….as the people at Bain are quite good at what they do I would assume they put the profits as far exceeding the losses.

It gets even funnier however when you read this guy’s follow up article on what Mitt should do for education.  Weissberg says “Then dismantle all the Department of Education one-size-fits-all mandates on testing and proficiency.  And on and on.  In an instant, teachers could teach, not battle Mickey Mouse rules, and students will benefit.”  So what Mitt should do is let schools be free from the rules to experiment and try new things to see what works without overbearing control from above…which, in the real world is called, charter schools.  So advocating charter schools is dumb, because what we really need is charter schools.   Man, Weissberg, you are such a genius!

But don’t worry that the statement about freeing schools from “one-size-fits-all mandates on testing and proficiency” appears in paragraph 6 of his article on what Mitt should do.  In paragraph 8 we should “add nationally certified ‘super schools’ drawing on the top 1% or 2% as established by tough, no-nonsense tests.”  So testing is bad, what we need is testing.  Got it.

And you wonder why I find Mitt Romney critiques stupid?

3.  Next up he tries to hit Mitt for calling for Teacher Accountability.  And his proof that teacher accountability doesn’t work is that Mayor Bloomberg in New York has tried to do this and it’s been a disaster.  I’m shocked a big government statist like Bloomberg doesn’t effectively put into practice what should be a capitalist metric that is supposed to be controlled at a local level.  It’s like saying capitalism doesn’t work, because the economy didn’t do well under Obama.

Teacher Accountability should be an issue for principals and school boards, judging by open and fair, but local, criteria that can be adjusted to the needs of the individual school.  This will help address the needs of the students and reward those who meet those needs the best.  This is the advantage of charters, they have very local control. When controlled by a big government, pro-union, damn near fascist state like Bloomberg’s New York, of course it’s not going to work.  Duh.  More importantly Unions should not be in government – what exactly do they need protection from?  If schools were not protected by unions and worried about litigation we probably would not have as many teacher/student molestations as these people would lose their license and schools would tell other schools why they no longer work there – but that would never happen now under current conditions.

4.  Individual report cards for schools is apparently also a dumb idea of Mitt’s.  Yeah, why should parents know if the school their kid goes to is failing or not.  Why not?

According to Weissberg…because there’s been a lot of cheating involved.  So instead of coming up with rules and procedures to reduce cheating (outside proctors, not letting teacher’s proctor their own students, off site testing…you know all the things the SAT does) no, let’s just throw out any legitimate way to judge schools.  And again rather than look at where this has succeeded in raising the bar, let’s judge this by how Bloomberg has failed to implement it.  Schools need to be compared to minimum standards nationally along with all the local schools that should be in competition for a better way to make decisions.  This is how business does it – they have company standards and then they also compare along those lines to local competition.

5.  And Mitt is wrong for being anti union. “But unions are not the problem.”  Dipshit, unions are a huge portion of the problem.  Huge.  They are standing in the way of every major reform ever attempted.  There is a reason why everyone agrees the lawsuit against the California unions is likely to succeed…because the teacher’s unions protect bad teachers!  That is their only purpose.  To protect what is wrong in American education. And how does Weissberg show unions aren’t the problem?  Pro-union Massachusetts (which ironically also has school choice because of the efforts of a previous Governor…Mitt something or other) does better than anti-union South on school tests.  This is stupid because, first, as every state comes up with its own tests, or who gets tested in national tests, it never apples to apples comparisons; second, because, even I’ll admit socioeconomics is a greater predictor to performance than anything else (see point 1) and, last time I checked Massachusetts has better socioeconomics as a whole than most states in the South.  It would be like comparing a union public school in Beverly Hills against a non union charter in Watts and saying that because the charter school’s scores weren’t higher clearly the union isn’t to blame and charters don’t solve anything.  The rest of us realize that parents and culture are more important than school, school is supposed to be the stop gap against those forces which work against education, not merely a reflection of it (which Mr. Weissberg seems all too comfortable with).

And socioeconomics is an indicator only because the majority currently do not value education for their children and are not involved in their children’s lives, look to D.C. and those parents who cared and got their children into the better schools saw an improvement that has been substantiated in studies, despite low socioeconomics, thanks too…charters, vouchers, teacher accountability, grading schools, not having low expectations and…#6

6.  Finally he critiques Mitt’s push for parents to have the right to move their children out of failing schools.  Because why should you have any liberty, after all we live in a fascist/socialist regime where you have no rights, why should you question the government monopoly on education?  Oh, wait.   Why is school choice a bad thing?

“More important, again, past failure is crystal-clear.  Troubled students bring their troubled habits with them, and, more important, they typically undermine their new ‘good schools.’”

And while I’m sure that I’m just reading vehement implicit racism in that statement (the soft bigotry of low expectation), I’m sure no racism exists whatsoever in Mr. Wesissberg.  On the other hand as a charter teacher who has dealt with those students who bring their bad habits, I will simply say that good teachers, given time, are in the job of correcting bad habits and replacing them with good ones.

But Weissberg creates a preposterous example of what would happen if more students want to leave a school than there are slots for students in a good school…are we to shove some of the students that already go to the good school and force them into the bad?  This is stupid beyond belief.  We have lotteries for when there are not enough slots…and we would have more good schools if idiots didn’t oppose charters and vouchers.  Further, .  he is not accounting for the fact that even if there were no slots the schools that the parents want to leave would realize that they were losing students and would slowly need to compete – thus improve and they would realize – this will be a shock- but since the system is based on acquiring money (ADA) and they would need to improve so more people would want to bring their students to that school so they could make more money – what a concept.

Finally he complains that while Mitt’s idea to cut spending to the Department of Education is a good idea, it will fail because Mitt can’t pull it off…because Mitt has such a history of failure (so long as you ignore the history of success at Bain, the Olympics, Massachusetts…I mean if you just ignore the mountain of good stuff then Romney’s a complete failure at everything he does).

In the end Weissberg gives Romney an “F” on education.  Reason, logic, and common sense would give Weissberg a grade lower than “F” if such were possible.  In fact, saying this as someone from the trenches, Romney gets a “B” in education.  He’s saying the right things, identifying the problems and the correct solutions.  Now if he can actually pull it off, which will require a lot of fighting with liberals tooth and nail, then he gets an “A”.  And I think he will get an “A”, if the GOP backs him and ignores idiots like Weissberg.

Meanwhile you might want to read “A Chance for every Child” the 35 page proposal (because Mitt is always short on details) on what needs to be done about Education.

21 Comments

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Economics, Education, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Free Will, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, People Are Stupid, politics, Racism, Teacher's Union, Tyranny, Unions

Highlights from the week

An oddly dull week for news…a good portion of it is more or less recapping a lot of things we already know, but it still had some interesting did bits..

Dirty Sex & Politics looking at Patriotism, just in time for Memorial Day. 

I love Paul Krugman. He shows just how dumb liberal ideas are. Like seriously saying that we should fake an alien invasion to justify even MORE stimulus (because the only reason the last 2 trillion didn’t work is that it just wasn’t enough). Sane people, however, realize that when you have to pull out the plot of Watchmen to justify your idiot schemes that is generally a clue that the idea is idiotic.

The Obama Administration has declared war on the very concept of religion, luckily religion isn’t taking this lying down.

Thankfully someone is willing to point out that experience at Bain is exactly the kind of thing that prepares you for the presidency

News to warm the cockles of the heart: Has Debbie Wasserman Schultz worn out her welcome with Obama?

And in case you needed proof that Obama claiming to have spent less than other presidents was a pile of horseshit.

Or maybe you should have a look at how everybody but Obama and his fellow lovers of tyranny the world over think that cutting the military is a truly insane idea.

Romney on Education

…right on the heels of a more than justified law suit is filed against the teacher’s union to break their unethical and illegal power.

Even the libertarians at Reason understand business making profit is good for everybody.

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Economics, Education, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, Patriotism, Paul Krugman is an idiot, Reading Suggestions, Taxes, Teacher's Union, Tyranny

Weekly Meditation: If it’s not working, change it.

This week’s meditation quote comes from The Book of Certitude.  The Book of What?  Certitude.  Written by the prophet Baha’u’llah, it is the central work of the Baha’i belief system, probably the world’s religion youngest major religion (unless New Age ever gets counted as a belief).  I’ll be honest I don’t refer to the Book of Certitude as much as other holy texts (but certainly more than ones that, say, advocate mass genocide) but it does have its moments of wisdom.

For instance:

 189: “We have variously and repeatedly set forth the meaning of every theme, that perchance every soul, whether high or low, may obtain, according to his measure and capacity, his share and portion thereof. Should he be unable to comprehend a certain argument, he may, thus, by referring unto another, attain his purpose. “That all sorts of men may know where to quench their thirst.” [Italics Added]

 

In most organized religions you seldom get an understanding that if one idea doesn’t work you should move onto what does rather than just mindless hold to dogma…although this should not be surprising for a religion that thinks Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna, Buddha and Zoroaster are all prophets of God, nor as far as I know, did Baha’u’llah claim to be the last prophet that will ever come.  And again while I could probably get into volumes of commentary on passage, I’m going to go with the idea that that if it isn’t working, it’s time to move on and find something that is.

If you are completely happy with your life, wonderful…please tell me your secret.  I think however that for the rest of us, there are moments where we feel like George Bailey half-way through the film, not quite sure what the hell we’re doing with our lives.  Not miserable, but not sure how to be even happier.

Now I’m big on focusing on the good and using the law of attraction to visualize a better life.  But looking at what’s wrong can also be helpful so long as you don’t get bogged down in the negative.

So to start out this week I want you to make a list of things you are unhappy about in your life.  Stop writing at 20 items or so, we don’t want to get too bogged down in the negative.  Too often our misfortunes and miseries in life have a single root problem that merely tends to spill out into our the rest of our life.  And while the more pressing problems of job, relationship, health might be quite detrimental, they have are merely symptoms of a more basic problem (that may be in one of the more important areas) that then affects everything else in your life.  But you can’t solve a problem until you know the cause of it.

So this week I want you to meditate on this list for 10 minutes every day, beginning your meditation with the question ”What is the root cause of all of these dissatisfactions in my life.”  And clear your mind and let the universe provide you an answer.
Now, hopefully if your meditations do point to a single cause, meditation alone won’t be enough to solve those problems. New job, new relationship, new city, new behavior…it might take a little doing, but if you find the cause of your problems, you do need to change it—but I’m here to provide meditations you will be responsible for changing the thing you can.

And as I’m always about the positive, I would focus an additional ten minutes on visualizing what your life will look like with this stumbling block removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Faith, God, Happiness, Meditation, New Age, Prayer, Purpose of Life, Religion, Spirituality

Movies for Conservatives: The Avengers

Agent Phil Coulson: Oh, you are. Absolutely. Uh…we’ve made some modifications to the uniform. I had a little design input.
Steve Rogers (Captain America): The uniform? Aren’t the stars and stripes a little…old fashioned?
Agent Phil Coulson: Everything that’s happening, the things that are about to come to light, people might just need a little old fashioned.

Okay I waited two weeks before writing a review—if the film is ruined for you because of the spoilers in this, that’s your fault….No really I’m not holding back…if you haven’t seen it, leave this post now and go watch it. This is not a movie recommendation; this is an analysis of what makes this movie great.

Okay. You’ve been warned. Don’t come crying to me when Phil Coulson’s death doesn’t come as a shock.

First, I listed this blog under the “Movies for Conservatives” category but that is not conservative in the strictly Republicans vs. Democrats, Romney vs. Obama sense. This is partly because writer/director Joss Whedon is a good writer. And good writers don’t usually tie themselves to transitory, temporary issues—they deal with the timeless stuff, the issues and ideals that resonate not just for a modern audience but that will hold true generations from now. This is also partly because it’s really hard to tie Joss Whedon down politically. I’ve seen some references that he campaigned for Kerry and Obama, but at the same time he said that he viewed season 5 of Angel as a metaphor for the Bush White House at war, which doesn’t exactly come off as an insult to conservatives. While he certainly is not puritanical in his view of sexuality, he also is not foolish enough to conceive of sex as something that comes without serious long-term consequences as many liberals seem to. If anything, if I had to peg him to a political philosophy, and I admit there may be some extreme bias here, he’s more a traditional libertarian, some distrust of government organization, but not foolish enough to think that we can live without them, and a great belief in the individual. Also, for all of his cynicism, there is certainly a love of America that seems to pop up in all his works.

Now, I have seen some try to portray this as a liberal film. Right-wing hacks over at Breitbart.com (since Breitbart’s death it’s stopped being a valid source of information and morphed into the right’s MSNBC) wanted to point out that Whedon cutting a liberal spiel from Captain America complaining about the lack of welfare shows what a liberal hack Whedon is…because a guy like Captain America, who would have spent his formative years growing up under the FDR’s New Deal, would clearly not talk about how he doesn’t see that in society…it must be Whedon being a liberal hack and not, oh I don’t know, being true to the actual character.  Meanwhile liberals have been pointing out that the character often used mentioned the idea of clean, renewable energy in a positive sense, thus the film must be liberal. Uh-huh. As if conservatives don’t want clean, renewable energy. I think they forget that it’s conservatives that want nuclear power…we just don’t want to shell out billions for Solyndra style “green” companies that won’t actually give us clean, renewable energy…and, stop me if I’m wrong, but don’t they also make it clear that the only name in cheap, clean, renewable energy in the world of The Avengers is the narcissistic billionaire who plans to make a killing off said clean energy? Oh, yeah, really liberal.

Now there are the small things in the film that make it conservative. The anti-government sentiment as seen by the fact that the S.H.I.E.L.D. council is stupid. The fact that the idiotic Senator complaining about the actions of the Avengers is shown with a “D” after his name (because only a liberal would be dumb enough to complain about having their ass saved—“ These so called heroes have to be held responsible for the destruction done to the city. This was their fight.”). The fact that at no time in this film are the armed services insulted or degraded.

Nothing more American than this guy…

And there are some of the not so little things. Like Captain America’s uniform. Liberals might like to say they’re patriotic, but flag waving is and wearing your patriotism on your sleeve is definitely a conservative trait.

“What?” you say. “How is that conservative?” It’s the stars and stripes. You can’t get much more patriotic and more conservative than that. But you say, “That’s Captain America’s uniform, what else could they put him in?” Well, they could have muted the colors, toned down the theme or just made it solid black like every other S.H.I.E.L.D. agent. After they watered down all the patriotism from the first Captain America film and had no backlash there it wasn’t like they should have been afraid to change anything. “Whedon couldn’t just kill one of the character’s costumes!” you say. Oh yeah? Have you seen the early posters for the movie?

I hesitate to imagine what this movie would have been like with Hawkeye in that silly purple suit…you’ll notice that Thor’s winged helmet is also nowhere to be seen in this film.

Look in the bottom left hand corner. That’s Jeremy Renner in the purple jumpsuit that Hawkeye is in in every comic book. Whedon put the kibosh on that preposterous outfit (in a film that is not short on preposterous outfits), if he really, really wanted to, I’m sure we would have seen the Captain in a more toned down outfit. And more importantly, of all the characters, only Captain America has a discussion of the nature of his suit.

Steven Rogers: The uniform? Aren’t the stars and stripes a little…old fashioned?
Agent Phil Coulson: Everything that’s happening, the things that are about to come to light, people might just need a little old fashioned.

Not only does Whedon admit that these ideas are old fashioned (one might say too conservative for the cynical modern populace) but he allows Coulson, arguably one of the moral bedrocks of the film, revel in that old fashioned patriotism (vintage trading cards and all). And we do need that kind of old fashioned patriotism, and it’s a good thing that it is pointed out that we need this kind of old fashioned patriotism.

And speaking of old fashioned there is this little line:

“There was an idea, Stark knows this, called The Avengers Initiative. The idea was to bring together a group of remarkable people, see if they could become something more. See if they could work together when we needed them to, to fight the battles that we never could. Phil Coulson died still believing in that idea, in heroes. Well, it’s an old fashioned notion.”

And this is a very conservative idea. Modern liberalism doesn’t believe in heroes, by their nature heroes are individuals, they’re leaders not followers, they disregard the state, not follow it, they show the greatness that a person is capable of—not the limitations that require constant government assistance that liberals believe is all that makes up people. A hero is the very embodiment of everything that liberalism opposes, a hero doesn’t need government help, a hero doesn’t take mindless orders, a hero does what is right according to their mind and their morals not merely the will of the herd. And in this respect, Whedon has always been very conservative (sometimes his heroes are more flawed than others, but that just helps to show how any individual can reach the highest levels of virtue through nothing but choice and action).

Granted this isn’t conservative in any explicit way…but that’s okay, because the subtle conservative belief in the virtue of humanity lasts far longer than momentary political statement.

Further as I’ve stated before there is a disturbing subtle relationship between the words of Loki and Obama…I don’t think this was intentional on Whedon’s part, it’s just all petty tyrants tend to sound the same.

Now of course aside from the philosophical points, it’s just a cool movie.
There is Whedon’s usual level of razor sharp wit, his deep understanding of character and their motivations, and, what is probably the least complemented part of Whedon’s skill, the man is a genius who knows how to use a camera; unlike so many directors who just let the camera sit there, Whedon knows how to use the camera to help tell the story and move the action and drama. And of course there is that last beautiful scene which says more with no words than any amount of dialogue could.

I have seen it twice in the theaters already and probably will see it again. And I certainly will buy it the day it comes out on DVD. I only hope Disney and Marvel are smart enough to let Whedon have complete control of the sequel.

5 Comments

Filed under Art, Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Faith, Government is useless, Joss Whedon, Movies, Movies for Conservatives, Patriotism, Popular Culture

Ramblings from Conservative Cathy – Help! help I may be dying or maybe not! Or worse, I live in California!….

I just ran into a “California Advance Health Care Directive”and although with research I have found out

In a choice between California red tape and Obamacare Death Panels…I’m afraid I’m safer with the Death Panels.

that this has been around since 2000 I just found out that hospitals must hand this out to any patient coming into the hospital or ER regardless of why they are there or whether they are actually able to fill it out.  (There’s nothing as annoying as filling out paperwork after you been intubated…well, maybe dealing with California bureaucracy).

Basically this is a serious subject but I want to deal with the particular form in my sarcastic humorous way.   This form apparently must be accompanied with a signed statement about whether you already have a DNR (do not resuscitate), do you have it on you and do not want one.  Sounds exactly like what California or government would produce – now keep in mind that many people enter a hospital in a non-communicative or responsive manner so then a doctor has to sign a form that states he tried to offer to the patient but they could not understand (again huh?).

Now I want you to keep in mind that if you enter the hospital and have a DNR but do not have it with you then you will be given all the appropriate medical services.  Actually I believe that without specific instructions by the patient and tons of documentation that you will be given all that anyway as they do not want to be sued.

Now let’s just think about this last part – do you really have this information on file will all hospitals near everywhere you go?  Do you have this info on file with every doctor you see and every person you know and do they all carry it on their person just in case?  Now that you have answered those questions with an affirmative YES – if you were brought into the ER under a true trauma do you think everyone is going to stop everything until we have confirmed all this information and made sure it is accurate and legal?  Probably not, unless the doctors are in agreement with a DNR order.  Because litigation probably trumps all that when it comes to medical care or maybe it is because doctors are in the business of saving lives – I wonder.

Now for fun lets deal with some of the individual pages and wording in this form because it really does get funnier.  And to think these people are responsible for anything in the world is really scary.

On page 2 they let you know as I stated above that you need to share this form with all your doctors, nurses, social workers (does everyone have one of these?), family and friends along with your health care agent (someone who you pick to make decisions for you – probably better give them a legal medical power of attorney but if it is signed prior to 2000 in CA it is no longer legal and you need a new one).  So hopefully you have a lot of copies of this 3 part (12page)  document to pass out and hopefully everyone carries it on them at all times (including you).  And apparently all of these people on this list can help you fill out the form (really?), so that is whom you should take questions to.

Now this is important as you will see – if your health care choices are not listed then write them on a “piece of paper” and keep it with the forms – sounds legal to me.

If you want a healthcare agent it cannot be your doctor (as they would never look out for your best interests) unless they are a family member.  I am sure your doctor does not want to be your agent anyway as there is some legal responsibility here but otherwise Huh??

On page 3 – “ If you are too sick to make your own decisions, your doctors will ask your closet family members to make decisions for you” really – without a legal form – I don’t think so – they will provide the responsible necessary care – I think.  Also “If you want your agent to be someone other than family, you must write his or her name on this form” – I think you have to write anyone’s name on the form as you cannot just choose “family” as your option – how would a doctor decide between disputing members (better write that out on that piece of paper)?

On page 6 is where that piece of paper is really going to come in handy.

“My life is only worth living if I can” now there are choices to put an X by:

·      talk to family or friends (piece of paper right now because if you have no family or friends and are able to communicate you might want to clarify this line)

·      This one is my favorite –  wake up from a coma (of course but that piece of paper might come in handy in determining a time line for this hopeful event)

·      Feed, bathe, or take care of myself (I guess those death panels are already starting because I always thought that paralysis was not a reason to let someone die)

·      Be free from pain (now that is a very subjective statement – a piece of paper might be helpful in stating that if you can still function with pain killers versus vegetable state with pain killers might be a better way to determine but another one might be is the pain forever or only for a period (seems a little early to make a decision just based on being free from pain – I think I need more information – please)…also what level of pain are we talking about…if I come in a with stubbed toe but check this box are they going to kill me?

·      Live without being hooked up to machines – well an IV drip is a machine so I think we might need that piece of paper again to be a little more specific.  And I don’t think anyone but your Doctor is going to be helpful with most of these specifics unless all your family and friends are medical doctors also.

·      My second favorite – and this is the last one on all questions – “I am not sure” – based on the phraseology offered, I wouldn’t be sure either but I don’t think that is what they are referring to – so back into the doctors lap – who would have guessed.

Page 7 is about life support and what treatments can be used.  There is this phrase “little hope of getting better” – again a very subjective statement – does it mean that I will die (thought we all were going to do that anyway – is there like a time line involved – better get that piece of paper)

When it goes into the allowed treatments you had better have someone with some medical experience help you as I do not think all of these are considered “life support”.

CPR = well yeah – they would not be doing it if life was not in the balance or slipping away – I think that piece of paper and quality/length of life might be pertinent here

Dialysis – gee you could get a transplant or something so is the death panel again suggesting that dying is a viable alternative – or is your current life expectancy a factor in this decision?

Breathing Machine – a good call but that piece of paper again as is this long term or short term?

Feeding Tube – gosh I hope so if I am unable to consume food – keep in mind that if you are unable to consume food that you will starve to death so I think some other things might be pertinent to this one also – gosh I guess we now have several pieces of paper.

Blood transfusion – really is that all you need to live – unless this is a religious decision I can’t imagine why you wouldn’t want that – but oh well.

Medicine – really I love this very vague term – why wouldn’t you want medicine – I guess we had better talk to a pharmacist also and fill out a whole bunch of pieces of paper on this one – so does he need copies of this form also???

Other treatments – ?? Guess you better spend some time with your Doctor/medical school and lots of pieces of paper

Page 8 – I’m very curious about something on this page – there is a question about whether you want an autopsy and one of them is “I want an autopsy if there are questions about my death”.  I want to know if you check no autopsy and you were murdered are they no longer allowed to autopsy your body???  The other question I have is if you request an autopsy when normally one is not done – who pays for it?

Also on this page is this statement – “What should your doctors know about how you want your body to be treated after you die?”  Let’s see, doctors work on you and then call your death – do you think they really are doing anything else to your body – they leave the area you are in and go work on someone else or go home – I am not really an expert in all the religions but exactly what is this referring to?  Because really do you think that most doctors (unless maybe if they are family/friends) really care about your body after you die?  My God you are dead and have left your body – why would they care??  What am I missing here???

Page 10 is where you and witnesses sign.  You need two witnesses and one of them cannot be related to you in any manner but they need to know you and they can not inherit anything from you and they can not work for the hospital.  So let’s see if you are entering the hospital ER and this form is given to you, what are the odds that you are also accompanied by this friend (but not too close as they can not receive anything from you when you die) to witness your signing – I guess you all should be better prepared.  Your only other option is having it witnessed by a Notary – gosh do they now need to be employed 24/7 by hospitals??

I really do not see where this form has alleviated any potential legal problems for the medical field.  I just think it is silly when government does things like this – The DNR forms and power of attorney that they have had for decades did this much so how have they helped but they have now made it cost money that this form now must be given to everyone (even when it is not currently applicable).  Silly Silly

Everyone better check out their own state and see what’s happening there regarding these issues…or this could just be another symptom of why if you’re placing a bet between Greece and California going down first, safe money says Greece will outlive the Golden State.

1 Comment

Filed under Evils of Liberalism, Health Care, People Are Stupid

Weekly Meditation: Know Thyself

As I continue to pull from religious texts the world over, I decided to pick this week from one of the really lesser known ones: The Gospel of Thomas.  For those who don’t know, the Gospel of Thomas is one of those Gospels that didn’t make the cut from Constantine’s Council of Nicea, who, four-hundred years after the death of Christ, were able to tell which Gospels, epistles, and revelations were the word of God and thus made it into the New Testament, and which were not and got cut.  (They also made some edits to the ones that got in, because while the New Testament books were inspired by God, God clearly didn’t get it right on the first draft—silly God, what

Many scholars actually believe the Gospel of Thomas is more reflective of the real Jeshua of Nazareth.

would you do if the Council of Nicea wasn’t there to correct your mistakes?)

The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of 114 sayings of Jesus.  Some look similar to those found in the canonical Gospels…others do not.  I’m going to pull one of those that have no counterparts.  Verse 70.

Jesus said: ‘If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you.  If you do not have that within you, what you do not have within you will kill you.’

As with most lines in a spiritual text you can probably read a lot of levels in any line, but I want to focus on the idea that your salvation, is inside you, that the light of God is in your soul.  Know thyself.  Happiness is a choice.  A dozen other variations throughout history and philosophy.

I think this sentiment can be found in every belief represented in this symbol…how do constantly forget this basic truth?

Your soul, that spark of God within you, is really all that matters.  If you are trying to find Happiness, contentment, salvation, or escape anywhere besides your soul, you’re kind of missing the point.  And the lack of your soul in your life will, spiritually, kill you.

So this week, I want to drive this dagger home, and so I want to try something a little radical…

As you sit down for your daily meditation, I want you to imagine your life.  Now imagine that you lose the job you have and are stuck at something dull and monotonous (if you don’t already have that) with only bare subsistence pay.  Now tell yourself, “Even with that I still have my soul.  I still have God’s love.  I will still find Happiness.”  The next day imagine not only losing your job, but add losing your acquaintances that you hang out with (I would say friends, but you can’t ever lose friends, even if they die, that’s what makes them friends—you can, however, lose acquaintances.)  Again, “Even with that I still have my soul.  I still have God’s love.  I will still find Happiness.”  Each day strip more and more away, and remind yourself that all of these things are transitory and impermanent, which is what makes them something other than the source of Happiness and salvation.  They may be a  reflection of our thoughts, of our Happiness and of our soul…but they are not what matters, they are not what bring us Happiness.

No matter how much or little you have, you have your soul, which is all you need.  “‘If you bring forth what is within you, what you have will save you.”

Now, I will say that since I do believe in the laws of attraction, the idea that your thoughts shape reality, focusing on losing everything might have some negative consequences.  But luckily positive thoughts are thousands of times more powerful than negative ones.  So if you spend 10 minutes stripping your life of all it’s worldly items and reminding yourself that these are not what bring you Happiness, you might want to follow that with 5-10 minutes of focusing on your ideal life.  5-10 minutes of the ideal job, ideal house, ideal relationship.  Yes these aren’t what bring you Happiness…but they don’t hurt either…and taken with the right attitude they can serve as reminders of your connection to God.

Leave a comment

Filed under 7th Chakra, A Course in Miracles, Crown Chakra, Faith, Free Will, God, Happiness, Law of Intention, Love, Meditation, New Age, Prayer, Religion, Spirituality

Weekly Reading 5/18

There is simply too much information out there and not enough time to blog on it…so I’m going to try to get back into releasing a weekly list of the best articles you should take a look at

The truth about Romney, Bain Capital, and steel.
Vampire Capitalism? Please by Kimberley A. Strassel, WSJ

JPMorgan proves we don’t need more regulation by David Harsanyi

Is Too Much Familiarity Bad For Creativity? By Sam McNerney
Apparently being over educated is actually bad for your brain…you know what conservatives have known for years about the useless intelligentsia.
Dirty Sex & Politics on What a Jackass Chuck Schumer is. Facebook Status: Screwed By Schumer

SEIU UNION BOSSES MAY MAKE LAX THE MOST DANGEROUS AIRPORT IN AMERICA by Don Loos, Breitbart.com
I’m shocked. Shocked I tell you. To think that unions are a danger to American security. I’ve never heard of such a thing.

Keep your personal opinions out of my bedroom. By the Snark Who Hunts Back
The Snark’s take on Obama’s less than thrilling stand on gay marriage.

How much taxes are paid by the poor, middle class and rich 
A helpful way to look at how the rich aren’t paying their fair share. Did you know that that the top 10% only pay 55% of taxes (this counts all taxes at all levels) the cheap bastards.

Arthur Brooks makes the case for the morality of capitalism. 

You know that surplus last month that liberals are all giddy about? Complete fiction. 

The libertarians are getting dumber and dumber…it’s sad really…they’re apparently so far gone by this point they’re arguing for a Mitt Romney/Ron Paul ticket. My personal favorite is where they go over the downsides of Ron in the #2 spot…but somehow forget to list “he’s a mentally unstable, anti-Semitic, isolantionsist, psychopath.”

FoxNews came out with w a poll this week that shows Obama up by 7 points.  Fun little fact, and why registered voter polls are worthless, if you compare it to the last FoxNews poll  you would actually find that Romney has had no statistically significant change in most of the demographics except two. His number among those 65 and older are up by 11 points and his numbers among those younger than 35 are down by 20 points. In other words, he’s doing better among the people who always vote and doing worse among the people who never make it onto the list in a likely voter poll because they don’t vote in large numbers. I don’t think Romney has anything to fear.

And finally, I felt the need to share this picture (thanks to the Snark for showing it to me)

Leave a comment

Filed under Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Corporate Welfare, Debt, Economics, Education, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, People Are Stupid, philosophy, politics, Reading Suggestions, Taxes, Tea Party, Unions

I hate Obama Conspiracy Theories

Maybe it’s a reaction against my teen years where I was utterly infatuated with the X-files and all ideas that surrounded it, or maybe it’s because those plot lines made more sense than some of the crap I’m hearing now, but I find Obama conspiracy theories pointless and stupid.

Let’s run through some of them…

“Some men aren’t looking for anything logical, like money. They can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.”…and some men are just blithering idiots…Obama is in this latter category.

He was born in Kenya…he could have been born on Mars; it is still not a worse point than the fact that this man has not done a single thing to help improve the economy.  Yes economies go up and down on their own and Congresses and Presidents don’t have absolute control over them, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are certain things that could have been done to reduce the severity of this recession, Obama did none of them.  And even if he wasn’t eligible to run for the presidency, this absolute failure of leadership is a far greater damning point than a mere technicality.

That Barrack Obama Sr. isn’t really is his father…he could be the son of Hitler and it would still not negate the fact that every action by this president has hurt the economy.  Every thing he has done with the economy has been to hurt it in the short run and hurt it in the long run.  Now he could have done even worse things, but I don’t think he is doing it because he wants to ruin the economy, he and his people are just that dumb.  And

If only Obama wanted to earn a million dollars.

incompetence of that level should never have been let in the White House, let alone re-elected, to hell with who is parents are.

That he’s really a Muslim…he could be a Satanist, it doesn’t change the fact that in reality the only thing he really does believe in is himself.  The man has an ego that makes Caligula, Napoleon and Mao put together look humble.  He puts portraits of himself all over the White House, he puts himself in every president’s biography, he acts like he is unbeatable and he never deigns to actually talk to people in Congress.  He has written 2 biographies and he is not yet 60 or accomplished anything of value.  I don’t care what religion he professes, the only god he believes in is himself.  And while I don’t trust people with low self-esteem, megalomaniacal narcissists are even more worrisome and definitely should not be allowed into positions of power.

Every person in this picture is an idiot. Only one of them isn’t bright enough to actually leave a mark on history for good or ill. Guess which one.

That and Rev. Jeremiah Wright planned a massive socialist take over…or maybe it was a take over by blacks…or maybe by zombies for all I care…or whoever was in his past that you want to critique…none of that compares to the insanity of his current associations.  A corrupt hack as Attorney General, a jackbooted fascist as Homeland Security Secretary, an incompetent twit in HHS, a tax evading moron in Treasury, and two of the worst Supreme Court Justices ever…need I go on?  This man has an inability to surround himself with qualified people.  No president has ever possessed the experience and intelligence to know everything about every part of the government, but some presidents do possess the ability to find qualified people who, in turn, have the qualifications to run their section of the government.  Obama has failed on every point (I mean the most qualified person he has is Hillary, how sad is that?)…and this is far more important than which church he went to for years.

As dumb as he is, and as much as I loathe him, I still don’t think he rises to this level of evil.

That Obama is seeking to make the US subservient to the UN  and is going to sign treaties that will eliminate the Constitution…uh-huh…the UN and what army?  I think Obama’s idiocy on foreign policy, his stupidity in declaring the war on terror over, his supporting every Islamic government he can (not because he’s a Muslim, but because he’s an idiot who wants to not appear as being anti-Muslim…please tell me how that’s working in America’s favor), his destroying the military readiness are all more important than whoever make believe conspiracies you can think of.

That he’s really the Manchurian Candidate, planted by George Soros years ago…ummm….if he was going to make a play for absolute control, wouldn’t he have done so by now?  I mean by the time the opposition has a leader to rally around any fascist type takeover becomes near impossible.  This is kind of why most dictators quickly kill all their opposition…right now the right could unite around Romney, Ryan, Christie or a few others.  If there was a plan to take over it’s the worst plan of all time…and more importantly I think Obama’s actual disregard and ignorance of the Constitution, as shown by his fiat rule by executive order, and his gross misunderstanding of state’s rights and limited government, are far more dangerous than any supposed communist plan.

That Obama has a gay lover…oh, like I care…there have been what four maybe five presidents in the last hundred  who haven’t had a mistress or two, and it has no bearing on whether they were a good president or not.  I’d worry more about his failure to uphold his Oath of Office more than whether or not he’s upholding his wedding vows.

He’s not bright enough to plot Armageddon.

That’s he planning a takeover of the government, ruin the economy, declare permanent marshal law, suspend elections, disband Congress, a coup d’état, yaddah yaddah yaddah…this one has to be my favorite.  So I am supposed to believe that a man of unspeakable arrogance and astounding stupidity is simultaneously a villainous mastermind of such caliber that he makes Lex Luthor and Ernst Stavro Blofeld look like amateurs, that he has planned a coup and kept all the major details secret within a government so bloated and useless it can’t keep any of its departments in line.  Yeah, no contradiction there.  Or that a military that is not doing much to hide it’s abject dislike for Obama is going to sit by and let him take over…and that there is a gun for almost every man, woman and child in this country which pretty much prevents government takeover.  You know, I’ll worry more about his absolute inability to balance a budget or even recognize that the growing debt is a problem.  Obama is not a villainous mastermind bent on world conquest, he’s a buffoon well in over his head and wouldn’t know where to begin if he wanted to take over (as evidenced by his laughable campaign).

The fact of this matter is that this man’s character, intelligence and actions as president are all you need to convict him of being unfit to serve one term, let alone two.

So why is a certain part of the right so obsessed with Obama conspiracy theories and scandals when we could crucify this jackass a dozen times over on real issues.  Well I think the answer is Palin Derangement Syndrome.  Palin Derangement Syndrome?  The habit of the media to obsess about Palin to the point where they will make crap up about her when just ignoring her would be better? Yes that.  PDS is caused in fact by two things. The first one is that Palin supporters are following a dimwitted unprincipled narcissist who is good at creating a cult of personality among morons who don’t care for facts but love meaningless platitudes from a cult leader.  The second is that Obama supporters are following a dimwitted unprincipled narcissist who is good at creating a cult of personality among morons who don’t care for facts but love meaningless platitudes from a cult leader.  Both sides aren’t quite competent enough to trade in facts (for instance, liberals could have ripped Palin apart with conservatives for her saying in the VP debate that the solution to education problems was to throw more money at it, but as facts elude them they’d rather trade in questionable personal attacks)…the same applies to those who trade in conspiracy theories against Obama, they’re not the brightest bulbs in the box.  Both parties have them.  (Although you’ll notice that while they were strong enough to catapult Obama over the more qualified Clinton, they were not powerful enough to elevate their beloved Santorum.)  If you put Obama and Palin in a room and they didn’t have their cults of personality backing them, the appropriate soundtrack to this moment would be “Dueling Banjoes”…but since they do have their respective cults mindlessly following them “O Fortuna” might be a more appropriate set piece.

So they attack our Cult leader with obsessive drivel, and our idiots attack their Cult leader with obsessive drivel.

Meanwhile if we don’t want to look like a bunch of buffoons, want to win the independents, and really want Obama out of office.  Let’s be honest here, Obama has only ever won two elections.  A Senate race against Alan Keyes and a Presidential race against John McCain.  Quite frankly you could have run sock puppets against Keyes and McCain and they would have won.  We’ve got a great candidate this time, let’s not ruin it by sounding like a bunch of dimwitted Democrats more concerned with rumor and conspiracies than with reality and facts.

Focus on the issues.  Focus on the failures of the last 4 years.  Focus on Romney’s superb record of intelligence and leadership.

Focus on those three things and we win.  Focus on birth certificates and ancient friendships and outdated statements and we lose.  I’d like to win this time as we can’t afford another 4 years of this dimwitted jackass.

4 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Atheism, Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Corporate Welfare, Death, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Fear, Foreign Policy, Gay Rights, God, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Illegal Immigration, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, Obama Ceasar, People Are Stupid, politics, Rick Santorum, Taxes, Tyranny, Unions, War on Terrorism

Romney’s “Lack of Specific Plans” or Romney The Man with A Plan

Recently I’ve been hearing from all sides things like, “Romney isn’t specific enough about what he’s going to do” “I don’t know what he would do in office” “He needs to be more clear about his plans” “he’s doing well for someone who hasn’t articulated a plan yet.”  I’ve heard it from the right, from the left, from the far right, from the far left, on Beck, on O’Reilly, on Blitzer, Maddow, Matthews, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, RealClearPolitics, DrudgeReport.  From pundits I love, from pundits I have no feelings about one way or another, from pundits I loathe with a fiery passion.  You name a media outlet I will show you someone who said Romney doesn’t have any specifics just vague generalities.

Are you people living in a goddamn cave? A sensory deprivation chamber?  The darkness of space, where no one can hear Mitt Romney’s extensive plans?

Ignoring that his speech can get pretty detailed…spoken words are imperfect…let’s look at the written record,

This man has more specific plans the media knows what do with. So rather than critique him on points, they just say he’s lacking specifics.

namely MittRomney.com.  Have you been to MittRomney.com, because it’s not your typical campaign website.  Typical campaign websites, even Obama’s, are a half-dozen or so issues, most of them covered by a paragraph or two with a general statement of goals, and maybe one or two pages with two or three more pages of detail for the really important things.

And then there is Mitt Romney.   This is the CEO of Bain.  The Savior of the Salt Lake Olympics.  The guy who balanced the Massachusetts’s budget without raising taxes. This is not only a guy who gets things done, he gets them done because he plans out what he is going to do.

And this kind of shows you why of the hundred deals Bain did, Obama can only find a few that were failures.  This man plans for EVERYTHING.

26 Topics!  And he didn’t just put a paragraph in each…no, I think he hired a Russian Novelist to fill these pages up.

This man covers every issues you could have questions about…

Let’s for instance go to the Jobs and Economic Growth page…

Not only does he have a link to a 5 page pdf that explains the 5 bills he will send to Congress on his first day and the 5 executive orders he will sign literally seconds after finishing the inaugural address (hell he might actually sign them during)

Screw the first 100 days, the first 100 hours is going to be productive under Romney.

How many Presidents do you know who has 5 bills and 5 executive orders ready to go day one?

But that’s not all…on that same page you have a link to the 160 page plan of Romney’s for the Economy called “Believe in America.”  Let me say that again 160 pages of details of what caused our problems, what Obama did wrong and pages 31-153 of how Romney is going to fix the problem.  And if you read it, it becomes pretty clear that this is the combined work of CEO’s and economists that know what they’re doing.   “But I don’t have time to read 120 pages of plans” bitch the same people who claim that he’s not specific.  Well lucky for you there is an Appendix of the 59 specific things he’s going to do.  But you don’t know what he’s going to do to you…he only gave you 59 specifics.

Yeah, after these 59 major things, I have no idea what Romney will do…

But it gets better.

Want to know about foreign policy?…well, where Obama’s got one page of vague generalities Romney’s got pages on every section of the world…

plus a page that lists ALL of Romney’s advisors on foreign policy and their qualifications.  I’ll admit I don’t know the names of most of these people…but from the lists of credentials and experience this is a who’s who of foreign policy experience.   Do you know who’s advising Obama…probably not, as he devotes only a page to economics and a page to defense.  Ooooh…two whole pages for the most important issues facing the nation at this point.
Romney also has an impressive list of judicial advisors… as opposed to the crack team of Obama’s that gave us Sotomayor and Kagan, possibly the two most incompetent justices in the history of the Court, save Earl Warren.

There are over 670 blog posts by Romney supporters and advisors, 30 articles written by Romney himself, nearly 800 press releases, and 32 video .  Yeah, that’s a real lack of information from Romney.

As for most of the other pages, they follow a pretty specific format.  They list basic principles, describe what Obama is doing wrong, and give SPECIFICS on what Romney will do.  Don’t believe me, go read for yourself.

I mean how can that compare to Obama’s eight whole issues (one of them a made up issue) with pages full of nothing…oh and there’s pandering to a lot of different minority groups.  They spend more time telling you about Michelle’s life than they do on how they’re going to fix the economy.  But remember it’s Romney who is short on specifics.  Oh, and Obama has a massive button that says “Espanol” (let’s forget that speaking fluent English is a requirement for naturalization…so exactly which legal voters aren’t speaking English?)  Clearly Romney is the candidate who is just dealing in platitudes and vagaries, changing his talking points with the wind.  Clearly.

So when you get a moment, drop by MittRomney.com and actually read some of the stuff there.  I know that sounds boring, but you really should.  Because if you do you will realize that not only is the comment that he doesn’t have specifics is insane as saying 2+2=5 (yes there are some lack of specifics where it comes to things that will actually be the purview of Congress to work out the details, but that would mean that Romney actually understands how laws are made, unlike Obama who thinks he rules by fiat).

Now, you can tell me that you don’t think Romney is being honest in what he says, you can tell me that you think his plans won’t work, but please stop this bullshit about him not having specifics.

5 Comments

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Corporate Welfare, Debt, Economics, Education, Election 2012, Equality, Evils of Liberalism, Foreign Policy, Free Will, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Natural Rights, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics, Stupid liberal quote of the day, Taxes, Tea Party, Unions, Unjust legislation, Welfare

Obama’s Short-Sighted Campaign and his Idiotic Stand on Gay Marriage

Obama and his team are running a laughably pathetic campaign.  It’s mildly to be expected, the thrill is gone, and you’d have to be dumber than Joe Biden to want to run on that record.  But still, there are some dumb moments…like

Is Newsweek trying to hurt Obama?…also I think Lincoln actually has right to that title.

claiming the New York Times is biased against Obama…uh-huh.

The latest major misstep is that Obama is now for gay marriage.  Well, kinda (he thinks it’s a state’s rights issues).  Sorta (he’s not going to push for the Defense of Marriage Act to be overturned).

Now before I lay into Obama for how stupid a move this was, let’s make a few things clear.  First, I have no dog in the gay marriage fight.  I think both sides are stupid.  Marriage is a religious institution and should not be in any legal code.  Legal codes should offer civil unions to any two adults that want one.  That would protect the religious institution from government meddling and would give everyone equality under the law….but as of yet it appears the majority of the nation is squabbling over two options, both equally stupid.  Second, you’re a moron’s moron, if you’re voting for or against Romney or Obama for their positions on gay marriage.  Really you’re just about as dumb as it gets. The economy, foreign policy, the size of government, the sacrosanct nature of the Constitution and private property, healthcare reform, immigration reform, all of these are far, far more important whether or not the government issues a piece of paper when two people love each other (yes there are private property issues entangled with the concept of marriage, but last time I checked Romney seems willing to endorse civil unions that cover all those private property rights, and Obama seems viciously opposed to private property rights for straight couples, gay couples, and single people of all orientations).  So for liberals who are voting for Obama because of this stance, you’re idiots.  And for conservatives who are now voting for Romney (after your first choice, the ever psychotic Rick Santorum dropped out) only because he says marriage is between a man and a woman, you’re also idiots.

Okay, that said, let’s deal with the pragmatic realities of this choice.

First off, let’s dismiss this as Obama making a principled choice.  If it was a principled choice, then the pragmatics of how it will affect his reelection wouldn’t be important, but it’s not a principled stand.  As my friend, The Snark Who Hunts Back, points out it’s a little hypocritical for Obama to say that this is a state’s rights issue when he has opposed the 10th Amendment at every turn (healthcare, enforcing federal immigration laws, voter laws, just to name a few).  And the fact that one in six of Obama’s high dollar bundler’s being gay also makes this ring a little hollow.  (And keep in mind it appears he did this to make a mere 60 million dollars…not exactly a high price for a politician).  (The actual number is about $12 million so far but I figure that the long term effect is going to be in the ballpark of $60 million, but I’ll admit this is a guess).

So if this isn’t a principled move, it’s a political one.  And a very dumb one at that.  One of Romney’s remaining problems was with the marginally unstable Santorum supporters who weren’t going to vote for a Mormon who passed gay marriage in Massachusetts. But low and behold Obama just gave this wacky bunch who considers social issues to be more important than those pesky economic and foreign policy issues that might actually have an effect on their lives a big reason to vote against Obama, even if they’re not still utterly thrilled with an economic conservative like Romney.  So what Obama just did there is shore up Romney’s base.  Did it shore up Obama’s base…not really, the people who this might have made a difference for were already going to vote for him.  So Obama gained $60 million and by that probably saved Romney $150 million in ads designed to appeal to the Santorum-voter base and not alienate the middle.

Gosh…how can I best kill my base and help Romney’s?

So instead of wasting all that money, he just had to have a throwaway line at a college graduation and he shored up the all the Santorum voters who were still on the fence.    “But Romney said he believes that marriage is between a man and a women, won’t that offend the middle?”  I doubt it.   While it’s not a 50-48 split in favor of gay marriage  that’s of an “anyone asked” poll, and registered voters are more conservative than “anyone asked” polls, and likely voters are more conservative than registered voters…so of the voting populace it’s probably still against gay marriage.  Further I think that of those 50% who are in favor of gay marriage, a heavy plurality if not a majority, can say, “I understand this is an issue with lots of religious, spiritual and personal values tied into it” and won’t have a knee jerk reaction against Romney who is in favor of civil unions.

This also hurts Obama.  Why?  Well because of those all important African-American and Hispanic votes.  Yes these are voting blocs that tend liberal, but they are also very socially conservative and very against gay marriage.  African-Americans in North Carolina voted 2 to 1 against gay marriage  and it was these two groups that killed gay marriage in California.  So will this mean that they will now vote for Romney?  Not necessarily, but these are two voting blocs with historically low turnout and if you cross them on an issue like this that statistically they’re very impassioned about it creates the distinct possibility that they may just stay home and not vote (which was already a major threat with African-American voters this election cycle, so this is tipping them over the edge to not vote). Overall I would say that this will translate to a around a 1 point advantage to Romney overall.  Not a lot, but let’s remember how many votes decided Florida.  It is a point that Obama couldn’t lose.

Granted there is a bit of guess work here, but I feel comfortable that my analysis is accurate.

So what does this do to the Electoral College?  Most pundits are pointing out that most of the swing states are socially conservative states.  Well, when you figure in the likely voter polls (as I did here), and that this shores up the Romney base and hurts the Obama base, I would say it moves Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Minnesota back into the toss up category and will probably give Romney the South.  So my guess is that if we took likely voter polls right now it would be somewhere in the ballpark of Obama 187 electoral votes to Romney’s 248 (meaning Romney would have to win Ohio and one other state, or some combination that leads to 22 votes).

This wasn’t a principled or pragmatic move.

And it gets worse for Obama.

RealClearPolitics has the current Senate battle at 46 Democrat, 46 Republican, 8 toss up.  This will probably move anywhere from 4-6 Senate seats from toss-up to lean Republican as most of those toss-up states are socially conservative.  And it could move 1-2 from leaning Democrat to toss up and 1-2 from likely Democrat to only lean Democrat.  In short Obama, in a tight election for control of the House may have just placed the straw that broke the jackass’ back.

Now you could say I’m reading too much into how this will effect the Senate, and you may be right, but if it convinces some of Obama’s base to stay home, as I think it will, this will hurt the Senate votes, especially in states where Romney is expected to win as Democrats will have even further reason not to go vote.  I’m not saying this move guarantees a 60 vote Republican Senate, but it certainly won’t hurt.  (And this will help the battle for GOP control of the House as well).

Again, if you’re voting against Obama and the Democrats only because of the gay marriage issue you’re an idiot.  But the fact of the matter is that both parties seemed filled with people who prove the rule that “People are Stupid” and right, wrong or indifferent you have to take the actions of these idiots when you’re in a leadership position (screw angelic, if all men were intelligent and rational no government would be needed).   Obama made a very stupid move not for principle but for a short-term gain that will hurt him in the long run.  Ignore what side of the gay marriage debate you’re on, this shows that this man is not a good leader.

The Teleprompter made me do it!

1 Comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Debt, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Faith, Gay Marriage, Gay Rights, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Illegal Immagration, Illegal Immigration, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics

Facts vs. Emotion in Campaign Season

It’s interesting to watch how both campaigns are beginning to work. And as usual, the old battle lines are being drawn. Democrats are playing to lies, half truths, and emotion and Republicans are more or less playing to facts and patriotism.

Let’s take a look at what I mean by taking a look at 4 ads that came out this weekend. Obama and his team came out with this ad hitting Romney for closing a steel plant in

It starts with a former steelworker saying that his company GST Steel, which is kind of odd because if you had a great reputation for quality I don’t think the company would ever have been in a position where Bain Capital could have bought it out. But there I am using logic, silly me all that matters is that picture of the old guy putting on the hard hat. I should really feel sorry for him. Then we have David Foster, Lead Negotiator for workers at GST Steel, saying that it was Romney’s fault. Okay let’s deal with that point piece by piece. First GST Steel closed in 2001 two years after Romney left Bain. Second, the reason GST Steel was closed because Bain kept trying to make the plant work but as the union refused to compromise on ANYTHING there was no way to make the company profitable.  Also let’s not forget that Bain offered to buy employees out and offered to give them new jobs, albeit non-union jobs at the profitable steel company…more on that later.  So in reality it was the union’s refusal to negotiate that killed GST…hmm who was the chief union guy?…oh, that would be the “Lead Negotiator for workers at GST Steel” David Foster. So Foster’s claim that Romney was to blame comes off a little hollow as it was really Foster’s inability to put the well being of employees ahead of the well being of the union. “They closed it down without any concern for the families or the community”…after you know, years of trying to make it profitable. And they “made as much money off it as they could”! Dear God! What monsters! They actually tried to make a profit. Sick, sick people.

They terminated health and life insurance…strangely that’s what happens when you go out of business.

“It was like watching an old friend bleed to death.” And given that it was the employees and their union that refused to bargain which was what really killed this company, the image of standing there, watching your friend bleed to death, and not just doing nothing, but continuing to stab him repeatedly is a very fit image. If anyone is to blame it’s not Romney.

My union refused to negotiate. I refused to take a non-union job. It’s all Romney’s fault.

I love the “Those guys are all rich” complaint. Not only is Obama still playing to the most base and uneducated class warfare, but it shows how dumb some people are. You can have millions. Hell you might even have billions…but that money doesn’t last to just give out, if you’re not making a profit, then that money won’t last forever. The implication from that line is that Romney and all the other Bain executives should have gone bankrupt to keep funding a plant that wasn’t making money.

“We view Mitt Romney as a job destroyer” and I view you as someone who doesn’t do math very well. Why? Well, 750 employees (you have to love how they claim he destroyed thousands…the typical Democratic propensity for lack of accuracy in numbers ) lost their jobs because of what Bain did…now last time I checked 750 was less than 6,000…8 times less if my math is correct. Also fun fact, the GST Steel plant was reopened in 2004 with somewhat fewer workers…thus proving Mitt Romney’s point that sometimes you need to let industries go bankrupt so things can be reset, reorganized, and redone and come back stronger than ever…it’s a term in capitalism known as creative destruction. Although from the Obama ad you would never know the plant reopened.  And also what’s with all the pictures of houses collapsing like it’s a post-Apocalyptic landscape?

“How could you care for the average working person if you felt that way?” Well jackass, you care because you want to actually build something that will last, that will make a profit and that will not need the constant handout that this ad was asking for. And then this loser looks like he’s about to cry. This, I can only guess, is supposed to make us feel for him. I will admit it does make me feel something—it makes me feel like slapping this loser so hard he grows up. For god sakes, you lost a job, it happens to the best of us, man-the-fuck-up and go get another job, don’t cry like a baby and bitch about the mean businessman who didn’t want to bankrupt himself to keep your losing company alive.

Strangely there are no facts quoted, no numbers given, no quotes used (other than comment by Romney which have no bearing on this issue). Hell, GST Steel pensions were underfunded by $44 million when it went bankrupt…that would have been a fact to use…of course I think all of that came after Romney left Bain and they were already stretching it as it was.

Meanwhile over on the Romney side, we have 6,000 jobs created…and again I think 6,000 is more than 750. You know if for every 750 fired we get 6,000 new jobs, bring on the massive firings (start with OSHA, TSA and the Post Office)! We’ll be at 3% unemployment in no time.

Now granted there aren’t a lot of facts in this one either (of course it’s not even half as long), but what facts there are are accurate (go back and watch the Obama ad again and see how many different numbers they use for how many people lost their jobs). And there is the fact that this is one of the companies that Bain helped out when Romney was in charge (as opposed to GST closing two years after Romney left).

The American Dream brought to you by Romney, Bain, and capitalism.

Also, instead of treating people as helpless who need Obama’s teat to survive, rather it shows hope and prosperity and that people can actually live on their own. The American Dream, which for most of us is to provide for ourselves through our work…for Obama it appears the American Dream means living high on the hog off of the rich and entitlement programs…just look at Julia.

Are they playing for emotion as well? Yeah, but you’ll notice it’s not hate and pity and vitriol, it’s hope for tangible things like a job and prosperity (rather than some ephemeral undefined “hope and change” that means nothing) and the best in us…

Also you have to love how Romney got this out less than 24 hours after Obama’s crappy ad…and Obama’s looks more professional. His campaign has clearly anticipated objections made by Obama and has the rebuttals already in the hopper. This is like watching a novice try and play Deep Blue.

But let’s look at how the groups that are not part of the official campaigns are working…

Please give me the quote where Romney threatened to end contraceptives…that would have been Santorum.
And insurance charges you more because the actuarial tables say you cost more…so to have equality it would just be that men would pay more (thanks)…I assume you want to make sure that car and home insurance companies stop it when they charge women less than men…because that would be unfair.

And he hasn’t threatened to get rid of Planned Parenthood …just public funding of it. If it’s so great a place, then I’m sure your rich liberal friends who want to be taxed more, will donate by the bucket load when Romney lowers their taxes.

And throwing women under the bus isn’t Romney’s style, MoveOn.org…it’s yours. Because let’s remember that MoveOn was formed to tell Republicans to Move On past Clinton’s numerous infidelities, because it was “just sex” (and sexual harassment lawsuit, accusation of rape, exploitation of a 20 year old woman who was incredibly naïve, perjury, suborning perjury, adultery…yeah it’s Republicans throwing women under a bus and waging a war on women).

Not one fact, not one reference, not one piece of truth. Everything I’ve come to expect from MoveOn.

Every one of Obama’s quotes are in context. Every fact is shown for quite a bit of time, and can be easily searched for. It’s interesting how, when the facts are on your side, you tend to use them.

Now, please don’t misunderstand me. Republicans are not saints, they are human, they come up with crappy misleading ads as well. But right now the GOP has the facts on their side and appears to be using them.

1 Comment

Filed under Capitalism, Charity, Congress, Conservative, Corporate Welfare, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Fear, Free Will, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics, Unions, Welfare

Excellent analysis on the latest Obama hit piece.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Weekly Meditation: God in the silence

This week we return to holy books for inspiration in meditation.

This week I’m pulling from the Bible.  I usually don’t because unlike a lot of other holy books, which were generally written more or less at one period by one person (or at least one group) and has more or less remained consistent through the ages, the Bible was written by numerous people, rewritten by numerous others, recollected, reordered, mistranslated, rewritten again throughout numerous ages with numerous different values and beliefs…Also while you can find some questionable content in most holy books (just about anything taken out of context of the passage, the time and the culture, can be twisted), the Bible is singular in ability to come up with a passage to justify just about anything (want to hate gays, we have a passage for that; want to love gays, we have a passage for that; want to justify capitalism, we have a passage for that; want to justify socialism we have a passage for that).   But that does not mean there is not Truth in the Bible, there is, a lot of it.  You just have use reason and good judgment and not take everything, pardon the phrase, on faith.

But there passages that, to me at least, are self-evidently true.

John the Baptist…err, I mean the Prophet Elijah (who says there’s no reincarnation in the Bible) hearing those tiny whispering voices.

For instance:

“Then the LORD said, “Go outside and stand on the mountain before the LORD; the LORD will be passing by.” A strong and heavy wind was rending the mountains and crushing rocks before the LORD–but the LORD was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake–but the LORD was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake there was fire–but the LORD was not in the fire. After the fire there was a tiny whispering sound.” I Kings 19-11-12

The passage reflects a very accurate view that people look for God in giant powerful things, when it is in a small breeze that he can most easily be found.  Most commentaries on this passage tend to look at that last line as something along the lines of a statement of “and after the fire there was a breeze, and God was in the breeze.” And I’m not claiming to be making an incredibly new interpretation of this line, I’m not.  But I find this a very good passage because I often see so many people of many religions looking for God in miracles, huge events, lottery tickets, signs, portents, and burning bushes…when really they should be taking a minute to quiet their mind and listen to the voice of God that is always there.

So this week I want you to quiet your mind and listen…not just meditating on nothingness and keeping a blank mind, but focusing on what you hear.  Whether it’s in a corner of your house, on a grassy field, or even on a city bench (if that’s the only place you can find time alone).  No iPod, no radio, no friend talking or TV in the background, just whatever white noise is around you.  Every day for at least 10 minutes focus on the sounds around you, but don’t dwell on them, and see if you can hear that “tiny whispering voice” which is always there saying it loves you without restraint or qualification. 

Leave a comment

Filed under 6th Chakra, Books, Faith, Free Will, God, Karma, Meditation, New Age, philosophy, Reincarnation, Sixth Chakra, Spirituality

The Sad Life of Julia Part VI:The Twilight of a Moocher

And so Julia’s is coming to a close…you’ll notice that her life seems to end around 67…hmmm…I wonder if the health care rationing boards have something to do with that?

Drugs which are over priced because of terrible policy for patents and over regulation that causes shortages…not to mention that Medicare will be bankrupt in only 8 years (2020)…so assuming that Julia is 3 right now then she’ll be 65 in 2074 Medicare will have been bankrupt for over 50 years, so I’m not sure how it’s paying for her prescription drugs, but Obama is just a magical being and can do anything he wants.  2074, a mere 66 years of Obama in office, Obama will also be about 110…one has to wonder how he is still cogent enough to rule with an iron fist, I’m not ruling out at this point a deal with Mephistopheles).  Or to put this another way, the Congressional Budget Office projects that, assuming the economy keeps growing at a steady rate (not under Obama it won’t) and that Medicare keeps growing at the rate it has been then right now it accounts for 2.9% of GDP, in 2020 when it goes bankrupt it will account for about 4.1% of GDP, and in 2074 it will account for about 12.8% of GDP (over 4 times the bankruptcy level).

Under the Ryan plan which brings in competition and sanity the Medicare program is saved and it puts the whole system on a track to have private competition drive costs down across the board.  And Romney’s plan is pretty much the same.  So let me see here, a plan to keep Medicare alive and create private competition that will turn Medicare back into a safety net for those who absolutely need it rather than a money and soul sucking entitlement.  Oohhh, tough choice.  Throw granny off a cliff in 2020 or make the program actually work.  I’m sure trying to make sure that a safety net is around for Julia later in life is just right-wing social engineering.   Yes Romney and Ryan would end Medicare as we know it—they’d make it work.

Well under current Social Security plans she is pulling out more than she put in (goddamn moocher)…of course that’s if she is 67 right now and pulling out benefits.  If this is 64 years from now after Obama’s obscenely long rule as dictator she won’t be drawing any benefits whatsoever as Social Security will be bankrupt in only a few years (kind of like Medicare)

Now I’m not sure where they get the 40% number (I searched for it, and I couldn’t even find that number listed on any liberal websites) so I am forced to conclude (like unemployment numbers and so many other facts purported by Obama and his administration) that these numbers are a complete and total fiction.

Now what the Ryan plan calls for is a slowdown in the growth of Social Security and Romney calls for:

“First, for future generations of seniors, Mitt believes that the retirement age should be slowly increased to account for increases in longevity.

Second, for future generations of seniors, Mitt believes that benefits should continue to grow but that the growth rate should be lower for those with higher incomes.”

Wow cut benefits from social security for the rich…how terrible.  Also exactly which reasonable person is arguing that we don’t need to raise the retirement age and probably slow growth to at least only account for inflation if not under inflation to put benefits back on par with what the person has put in.

***

In the final analysis there are numerous problems with the life of Julia.

Obama’s rule for almost another 7 decades.

Obama proudly touting cradle to grave socialism.

Obama seeing nothing wrong with a person who needs government help at every stage of their life.

The obscene amount of lies in every single supposed fact and number that Obama’s people displayed in the show.

Ask yourself if you want to live the life of Julia?  Dependency, ignorance, control, misery.  That’s what Obama is offering in this plan.  Makes you yearn for the sweet-talk of Mondale promising to raise our taxes; it was at least more honest and less power hungry.

2 Comments

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Equality, Evils of Liberalism, Free Will, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Mitt Romney, Obama, Obama Ceasar, Patriotism, People Are Stupid, politics, Taxes, Tyranny, Welfare