Friday, August 29, 2008

Don't Want Lawyers Runnin' The Country

A friend indirectly forwarded me this American Thinker article which brings up some good points. If you think about it, it explains a lot.

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers' Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer and so is his wife Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate.) Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Benson, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
And laywers and lawfirms give far more to the Democrats than they do to Republicans.

Kinda makes sense. Democrats want bigger government. More reasons to sue people. More laws, more work for lawyers. Why wouldn't they support the Party of Litigation?

Progressives are always telling us to "follow the money". Ok. Following.

By the way, OpenSecrets.Org is a handy place to follow it. Not that I subscribe to big conspiracies -- that's not what I'm getting at. But isn't it funny to note that the narrative the Progressive Party wants everyone to swallow is often the opposite of what the facts suppport.

Hey, while you're at it, look who supports the party of Universal Health Care.

On Palin

I'd checked her out several months ago when her name first came up, and I liked what I saw -- she seemed like a good pick. But I kind of gave up after a while as her name was dropped from serious discussion shortly after that.

It came up again from time to time over the months, but mostly from people calling radio shows and saying "I wish, but it's not gonna happen."

She's tough. Certainly has more executive experience than, say, Obama. She's a whistle-blower on corruption no matter what party it's in. Conservative in a somewhat libertarian sort of way. Very pro-life. Married. Several kids. Opted not to abort her son even when she knew he'd be born with Downs Syndrome.

As an aside, also Miss Wasilla, AK, 1984. And still a good-lookin' lady at 44.

There's a decent chance she'll nab the votes of a significant number of Hillary Democrats -- the ones who were for her primarily because she's a "she". Add to that that Palin's more like what we're looking for than McCain actually is, and I think we have a winner. Plus it'd be fun to poke in the eye of all the Progresso freaks who just look down at their feet and mumble when you point out that the most diverse administration in the history of the nation has been George W. Bush's....

It'd be a cool feather to add "First female vice president" to that eye-poking point. Though -- will the press fawn over her like they did the wicked witch of the west, Nancy Pelosi when she became Speaker of the House?

I don't know. I expect the press and the democrats to get ugly over her, calling her a bimbo, a beauty queen, whatever the white female equivalent to an "Uncle Tom" is, and all kinds of things since they don't agree with her positions on things. They'll tell us what she should believe as a woman and discredit her as a woman for not buying into the narrative. And did we mention she's white? (racists) Woooaaaah, that's not good. And pretty, too. (objectified) Yeah. Typical white male establishment pick, to cyically pick a token woman and she'd have to be white and attractive. They only did it because Obama's black. Did we mention they're racists? RepubloCheneyHalliburtonNeoConicalBushiltlerHateMongerRacists. Yeah.

Just wait. You won't have to wait long.

Heh! Looks like it's going to be Palin!


Cassy & Murtagh on Ayers and Obama

I wanted to say something about this yesterday. But it's already been done, and better than I was going to be able to do it.

So wander on over to Cassy's Place and read on.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

I'm getting old

I'm older than Alaska Governor Palin?

Ok, only by about 3 weeks. But still. I'm older than Governors now. That's an awakening.

Hell, no wonder I think she's kinda hot.

I agree with Morgan. She would spice up the ticket a bit. And maybe balance it some with her Libertarian leanings.

Won't You Please Give?

Morgan got a letter from the Democrats asking him for a donation. The wording had almost all of the substance of fresh cotton candy on a stick. It prompted me to write this parody.

(to be read in the gooey voice of Rev. Robert Tilton — sans flatulence. Ok, you can insert the flatulence if you feel you must.)

Wow. What an amazing movement. Movement for Change. And Hope. We’ve built up this amazing Hope and Change movement on a Hope for Change.

And we’re Hoping for a little Change from you. $5 to the Hope and Change fund would make such a difference in making the difference we are trying to make, which would be the Change you Hope for.

I Hope you’ll send us the Change so we can use that Change to Change America for the better, which is what we all Hope for.

Because the Hope for Change is the Change that we Hope for. And my friend, when that day comes when the Hope for Change Changes into our Hopes, what a Hopeful day that will be! And what a Change it will have been. For America.

We love America so much, we Hope to Change it. Change it for America. America’s Hope. For Change.

Changitty Chay-Chay-Change.

Yours in Hope and Change,

-- Dan the Democrat

Monday, August 25, 2008

A-Bara-cka the Beautiful

I hear Barry-O is using U2's "City of Blinding Lights" as intro-music for when he comes out to address an audience.

Never was a huge U2 fan, so I didn't know the song.

But apparently he comes out on stage (now this is hearsay from Glenn Beck, but I wouldn't be surprised at all - he's typically reliable on stuff like this) that he comes onstage when this chorus starts:
Oh you look so beautiful tonight
Oh you look so beautiful tonight
Oh you look so beautiful tonight
In the city of blinding lights

Whether they're playing it for him or the crowd .... it's the party of narcissists.

The Case for McCain

I know that a lot of my conservative friends have more than just a few reservations about McCain. Keep in mind he wasn't my first, second, or third choice, either. But I do now have a McCain bumpersticker affixed squarely on my bumper. My wife's as well.

There is a difference between McCain and the person he is running against. McCain offers a chance to at least marginally keep America America, while the other guy wants to make America Europe. This strategy is called "buying time". If Barry "O" the Beautiful gets in there AND predictions of the democrats picking up larger majorities in Congress bear fruit ... we have a lot more ground to make up 4 years from now. Or 8, if they end up Super Sizing it.

So I made up a little chart to show that, yes, Virginia, there IS a difference. And sitting on your hands at home come November might not be the best choice.

IMHO, of course ;-)

Besides ... if we can get a few Progressives to move to Europe ...

Wouldn't that be worth it?

On Moving to Europe

So I'm reading this article on Obama's Hillary-Supporter problem, and I see a comment
All I have to say is if McCain wins I am moving to Europe.
Yeah, I've heard that before. With Bush. And they didn't. Dammit.

See, if all these Progressives really want to live in Europe, why don't they just move there rather than try to turn America into Europe? We Americans who like America would like to keep America. So we end up voting for people who do something other than to say "I love America so much, I'm going to change it into Europe."

America is not just a geographic location, folks. Remember? America's forefathers left Europe to start something different. Something having to do with liberty and free speech and a central government with limited power. So much so that they explicitly stated that the citizenry retained the right to the means of removing said government if it got too uppity (that's the Second Amendment for those of you who live in fear of firearms).

If they'd all move to Europe, it might help with Europe's increasing demographic problems -- while leaving America to Americans. It's win-win!

Friday, August 22, 2008

Shoutout to the Prez

The other night while I was watching the American team in my new favorite sport -- women's beach volleyball (at least in part for obvious reasons if you've watched it and you know me at all) -- bring home the gold, I was pleasantly surprised to see Kerri Walsh use a bit of her time and celebrity to take the microphone over and give a positive "shout out" to President Bush on national TV, like a "Hi Mom", only to the President.

I had DVR'ed it so my wife could see the match, which I watched with her last night, and I took the time to make an audio recording of what was said so I could transcribe it. Hadn't gotten around to that today, but Bob Parks has done me one better -- he's got the video.

"Can I just say one thing really quick?" [pulls Misty May in with her arm around her] "Mr. President, we thank you, thank you for your inspiration, for all you do -- everyone at home, we love you...."
Misty May chimed in right after "Mr. President" shouting "This is for youuuu, we brought it hooome!!!"

Six Feet of Sunshine is right, what a cutie, and what a sweetheart! Plus I never want to play volleyball against her -- I'd look more like a target than an opponent ;-)

The match was impressive. The Chinese didn't make it easy on them. But our ladies won it in two sets.

As I said in the comments on Bob's blog, I'm one of that 30% of Americans who thinks "W" is a good guy doing a difficult job in difficult times — trying to do right by the nation in the face of the short attention spans of far too much of the easily misled electorate. I don't agree with George on everything, but he doesn't deserve the preponderance of the criticism he gets.

It's nice to know the whole country isn't crazy.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008


In Morgan's tradition of "Best Sentence I've Heard Or Read Lately" -- I give you this, from here.
Passive resistance only has a chance when your opponent believes in the rule of law and respect for human rights. Gandhi was effective against law-abiding Britain, but he would've frozen to death in the Soviet gulag - if he'd lived long enough to reach the camps.
Actually, it was the second sentence I was talking about but I included the first for more context.

Don't Rock the Vote

About the worst thing we can have happen is to have everybody vote just because it's their "right". It's your right, alright, but it comes with a duty to know what the heck you're talking about.

That's why I always hated the whole "Rock The Vote" campaign.

So I just, ahem, wrote this song:

Don't Rock the Vote

Said I'd like to know where, you got the notion
To rock the vote, don't vote the vote baby
Rock the vote, don't put The Dolt over
Rock the vote, don't rock the vote baby
Rock the vote

Ever since our free nation began
Knowledge on the issues has been our guiding hand
So far wisdom has kept us socialism-free
There's always been a place in our hearts for Liberty

Freedom is floating like a ship on the ocean
Make sure we steer it on truth and not emotion

So I'd like to know where, you got the notion
Said I'd like to know where, you got the notion
To rock the vote, don't rock the vote baby
Rock the vote, don't put The Dolt over
Rock the vote, don't rock the vote baby
Rock the vote

We've sailed through every storm we've been through from the start
But MTV's convinced you you're so very smart
Before you go out and pull that lever for The One
Give me one solid reason he's the one you want

Freedom is floating like a ship on the ocean
Make sure you're steering it on truth, not emotion

So I'd like to know where, you got the notion
Said I'd like to know where, you got the notion
To rock the vote, don't rock the vote baby
Rock the vote, don't put The Dolt over
Rock the vote

Before you punch that chad and stick it to The Man
Stop and think who creates the jobs across this land
They don't get made by raising tax a few more cents
'Cause it's The Man who makes them, it's not the government

Freedom is floating like a ship on the ocean
Make sure you're steering it on truth, not emotion

So I'd like to know where, you got the notion
Said I'd like to know where, you got the notion
To rock the Vote
Rock the vote
Rock the vote
Rock the vote
Rock the vote
Rock the vote
Rock the vote
Don't Rock the vote!

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

He Just IS

Just overheard, in a conversation over VP picks. Really. First hand. Right here in the office. Over the cube wall. After discussing Obama's potential picks, they went on to McCain.

"Mitt Romney."

"I know him. He's evil."

"Why is he evil?"

"Because he just is. He's an evil ... Republican guy."

Really? That's the extend of the thought you put into it? He just IS???? Because he's Republican, which is obviously synonymous with 'evil'?

So Obama-boy tells office mate to look up Romney on Google. You know, to see how evil he is.

And they find:

He cut higher education funding!

He cut aid to cities and towns!

De-facto "proof" that he must be evil. Because, of course, all funding for higher education is sacred and necessary. All funding to cities and towns is justified! None of that was wasted money. None of that was unjustified. Because it just isn't.

And these people vote.

Things I Know #19

I ran into this young lady this morning on her bicycle with her trumpet case in her handlebar basket. She wanted to know how to get to the stadium. Freshman. Marching band practice.

I directed her, and she thanked me and said, "I'm already late."

I run into this a lot in the younger generation. I think it's because they've relied on their parents all their lives to make sure they got where they were supposed to go by the time they were supposed to be there all their lives (or made excuses for them when they failed).

I wanted to say this to her, but I have a feeling it would have gone right over her -- or that she would not have appreciated the advice. Too "negative", I suppose.

This led me to Things I Know #19.
When you have to be somewhere by a certain time in the morning, make sure you know how to get there before you go to bed the night before.
It takes a little effort, but so does figuring it out in the morning. Under pressure. So it's worth it in the end.

She seemed sweet. Hope she learns.

Things I Know #18

18. Unfortunately, sometimes war actually IS the answer.

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Divided We Fall

If you've read my much, you probably know one of my mantras is it's not about race, it's about culture. And in addition, multiculturalism amounts to no culture at all when carried to its logical conclusion.

And we've heard over the last few years how by the middle of this century "white" will be in the minority in the USA. That excites activists. And in and of itself, it doesn't bother me, either.

What I worry about is the loss of the major ideals of Western culture. Western culture has adopted and entrained lots of things from many cultures where they fit in and improve our ideals. But what we've seen during the latter half of the last century is a wholesale rejection of all that we as a culture had become. A lot of this had to do with wrestling with the ugly spectre of racism, especially the huge upheaval in the 1950's and 1960's. No culture is perfect. But ours has been very good at self-correcting.

However, much like AIDS, this self-corrective urge seems to have developed into an auto immune disease, and we've got a good 20%-30% of the country that's ready to throw the baby out with the bath water and start something new. Hence the success of the Hope and Change™ movement. We've got another 30% of the population that's fighting to keep some continuity and cohesiveness in our culture. Which leaves the middle 40%.

Most of the middle 40% are decent folks who just want to do the right thing, but they're not really paying a whole lot of attention to what's going on. By and large, they're not racists, they're for freedom of religion, they don't want to lay waste to the planet. And a good portion of them love God and country. But they don't spend a lot of time learning how things outside of their own specialties work, and they turn to "experts" when it's time to make decisions that affect things outside of their sphere.

These "experts" are generally chosen and presented by the media.

And a large proportion of people in the media are infected with that autoimmune disease. Or more accurately, they are our defense against our cultural weaknesses, but they have been attacking their own culture as if it were some foriegn threat to itself. Rather than isolating what's bad and modifying it or purging it, they are attacking the structure itself.

Ok, you know sometimes you start down a road and then some other side thought leads you in a different direction. That, I think, was a worthwhile trip... but it's not what I started out to say.

I read an article in the NYT today that's actually kind of encouraging in two ways. One, it's nice to see somebody in the media thinking and taking note of something besides the numbers that support the progressive narrative ... but what else the numbers might be telling us if we look at some others that put it into context. Somebody in there is "thinking outside the box", to use the buzz-term. The other is what the numbers actually say.

Deep inside a data dump by the Census Bureau last week was a startling racial projection: By midcentury, the United States will be home to 80 million more white people.

Never mind, for a moment, that the bureau also predicts that Americans who identify themselves as Hispanic, black, Asian, American-Indian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander will constitute a majority of the population by 2042. The number of people who say they are white is projected to rise by about two million every year.

At that rate, even while the Hispanic and Asian populations expand enormously, the proportion of Americans who identify themselves as white will barely shrink, from a little more than 79 percent, to 74 percent.
When I was growing up, we talked about two races in America. White, and Black. Blacks were those of African decent with lots of melanin in their skin, and Whites were everyone else. I never thought of, say, a Japanese person as not being "white". Or a Hispanic. Or an American Indian. To me, they were all White. And it was because all of the ones I knew shared my cultural idioms and values -- at least for the most part.

And that's what this guy goes on to say, basically.
Race and ethnicity, says Joel E. Cohen, professor of populations at Rockefeller University, are really about culture, not biology. Categories contrived by bureaucrats and politically correct committees can be confusing and skew the results.
It's a worthwhile article, and I recommend you go read it (it's linked above in this post where I first mention reading it).

We're not as far down the road as much of Europe is, completely fragmenting American culture, but we've been on that road for a while now and the cracks are starting to widen. This is a good argument for an official common language and to stop supressing the public expression of our common cultural traditions ... which, sorry, are largely based in Christianity. This doesn't mean everybody has to be a Christian, go to church, observe Christmas, Easter, Thanksgiving ... but it does mean that we shouldn't bend over backwards as a nation to accomodate those who are hostile to this culture.

And we shouldn't be shy about defending it in the newspapers, at work, and with force when it is called for.

Friday, August 15, 2008

Suing our way out of it

In today's scandal-angle obsessed media, one doesn't often hear the other side of the story. Big numbers are impressive, but they're usually expressed in a vaccuum, out of context. High demand can mean you're selling a lot of product, if you have it to sell. And that's the case with high oil profits in this time of high demand. Volume, volume, volume. Not really so much the price of the barrel. Which the oil companies have to buy. Much of the barrel cost goes to paying oil royalties to the nationalized companies that own the oil fields they buy from. (Here in the U.S. that royalty tax rate -- before the tax on the profit, is 16% of the barrel price. It's much higher in other countries where companies like Shell and Exxon buy most of their oil.) That's right. They buy the oil that they search for, find, and pump. Transport it, refine it, and sell it.

"I saw someone characterize our profits the other day in terms of $1,400 in profit per second," Tillerson [Exxon CEO] told Gibson.

"Well, they also need to understand we paid $4,000 a second in taxes, and we spent $15,000 a second in cost. We spend $1 billion a day just running our business. So this is a business where large numbers are just characteristic of it."

We can't think of anyone who would be willing to pay $4,000 in taxes for every $5,400 they earn in salary or wages. Yet many in our country believe it's OK, even desirable, for oil companies to do just that.
There's a basic rule of thumb in economics. If you tax something, you get less of it. When you get less of it, the comodity becomes more scarce. Supply down. Demand steady or rising. Price up.

$4 billion in tax breaks for oil companies? I did the math. That amounts to about a 3% tax break over a year's time. So they're getting a "break" from 73% to 70%. By anybody's standards, that's still an obscene tax rate. For every $100 worth of net income (that's after costs), the government gets $70. Who is making obscene profits?

Ex-Shell president John Hoffmeister recenty said that oil companies are actually losing a little money right now on gasoline. The price has soared, but not enough to cover the increase in the cost of crude. They are currently making their money off of deisel and jet fuel.

But the ad says that evil McCain is the pocket of "Big Oil" for favoring reducing their obscene tax burden a little bit. Obama, on the other hand, is gonna "stick it to 'em" and Robin Hood each household up $1000 out of their "windfall" profits. Effectively raising the tax rate on oil profits to 75%. Populism in action. Statist confiscation of an obscene portion of earned income. Are we trying to MAKE Atlas Shrug?

We can't sue our way out of this. Those who support suing have no concept of the mechanisms of the economics behind oil. Or in front of it, for that matter.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Misha has a way with words

Which is why I was drawn to his often over-the-top, but typically topical, uncannily close-to-the-mark observations long ago. The Emperor himself led me to my blog-buddy-in-crime, The Blog that Nobody Reads.... but I digress.

I'd left a comment on an RCP article responding to the same type of thing Misha was reacting to earlier today (Andrew Sullivan et. al. raising the ugly "moral equivalence" stick on the US in Iraq/Afghanistan and Russia in Georgia) .... but his Imperial Highness out-did me in the wording department:
Anyway, there we were with a genocidal madman with the declared goal of starting his WMD programs back up, a psychopath who had, on numerous occasions, himself declared that he still possessed a lot of them and, just to drive the point home, had used them on his own population, not to mention that every single intelligence agency on the planet agreed that he had them. A known and self-declared supporter, financially and otherwise, of terrorism and terrorists who was so much in violation of the terms of the ceasefire agreement that he’d signed in ‘91 that he had to go back violating several of them again and again whenever he got bored, a known threat to his neighbors and the vast energy supplies that they sat upon etc. etc. We were stumped. How could we possibly come up with a casus belli there? It was hopeless.

But then PNAC and their neoconservative IllumiHalliburton evil geniuses came along and, hey presto!, we were at war.
All in all, far more entertaining. ;-)

At least people are looking for treatment

From my statcounter page: [Label IP Address] FOR BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME&*&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1

I've seen similar searches several times over the past few months land people on my blog. Encouraging ;-)

Of course, the treatment you seek is here:

Dr. Philmon, at your service.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008


Yeah, the Obama posters in with the Soviet and Maoist posters above ... those are REAL Obama posters, not some "Right-Wing" attack. Idealists. Symbols.

Idealists have killed a lot of people for the crime of simply not agreeing with their ideals and daring to let it be known.

Nobody thought of George Bush as a symbol and a savior. He's just been bashed for daring to be a Christian and treating it like it's an important part of his life ... like the vast majority of our presidents.

Can't say the same for Obama and his people.

Monday, August 11, 2008

Stupid Bush

Ok, I've about had it with the "Bush is a Moron" bit. Last week in my cube I had someone who is relatively conservative bring it up as "obvious", to which a less conservative -- ok, a Democrat, nodded and agreed. I don't get confrontational about these things at work. (after reading this, you might want to go check out Why Are We Whispering? by Andrew Klavan.)

Bush scored 1206 on his SAT. That puts him in the top 10 percentile. He graduated from the Harvard Business School with a 3.6 GPA.

Ah, but his daddy probably bought those grades. Mmmm-hmmm. And Gore was actually involved in threesomes in the Oval Office with Bill and Monica. Hey, I've got just as much hard evidence to back that up. (besides, if you're paying for grades, why not a 4.0? I mean, all that oil money!) If you can make bullshit up and present it as fact, so can I. (ah, but perhaps you're just repeating bullshit somebody else made up.)

George also flew fighter jets. As Bill Whittle pointed out:

Here is a random question from the instrument rating exam I had to pass a few years ago.

Refer to figure 91:

What should be the approximate elapsed time from the BOSEMAN (BZN) VOR to the DUBOIS (DBS) VORTAC if the wind is 24 knots from 260 degrees and your intended True Air Speed is 185 knots? (The magnetic variation is 17deg. E)

A. 33 minutes
B. 37 minutes
C. 39 minutes

(It's C., obviously)

If he had been a civilian rather than military pilot, Dubya would have had to have passed 60 questions like this with at least 70% correct. Questions on weather, radio communications, mechanical systems, aerodynamics, pilot physiology, airspace, navigation and a hundred other things. But, since he was military, he also had to know how to operate that primitive in-flight radar, plus weapons systems, rules of engagement, electronic warfare, hydraulics, fuel systems -- it goes on and on.

People like Michael Moore and Bill Maher and Keith Olberman would not be able to figure out how to close the canopy on an F-102. These people would be weeping with fear when those afterburners light up and you barrel down that runway hoping that engine doesn't flame out and roll you inverted into the asphalt, or when you're rocketing through the soup at 300mph watching two little needles chase each other, praying the next thing you see out the window is a runway and not a mountain goat.

George W. Bush is not stupid. It's not possible to be a moron and fly a supersonic jet fighter, and everyone knows it.

What George W. Bush is, however, is inarticulate. English is his second language. From what I can see he does not have a first language. Abraham Lincoln spoke in simple frontier language in an age of rhetorical flourish. Like Bush, he was considered a bumpkin and an idiot, and like Bush, he realized that there were times when having people misunderestimate you repeatedly was a real advantage. That's goal-oriented. That's playing the deep game. That's cunning.
I saw him last night being interviewed by Bob Costas at the Olympics about policy toward China, Russia, Georgia ... and here's what strikes me about the man. He doesn't need a script. He is not the most articulate man in the world, but (I know, it's hard to believe) neither am I. He knows what's going on in the world, he knows what the options are, and he doesn't have to take a poll to tell you what his opinion on the best course of action would be. He's comfortable talking about it.

Not only is he plenty intelligent, he's genuine. Sincere. Not some PR illusion.

Big Law

Saw an ad this morning for The One highlighting that McCain has gotten $2 million from the Oil industry, and that means he's "in the pocket" of "Big Oil", just like Bush.

"Big Oil" can only muster $2 million to "control" McCain? Doesn't sound too big to me.

I'm looking at the amount of money "Big Oil" gave to the top Republican candidates at OpenSecrets.Org ... and I can see that it adds up to about $2 million, as opposed to a little over a a million to the Democrats. Of course, that money doesn't affect Democrats at all, just Republicans, we are subtly instructed to believe.

But back to that $2 million.

What about "Big Law"?

Law firms and lawyers have apparently donated $42.5 million to the Obama, Clinton, and Edwards campaigns while donating donating around $13 million to McCain, Giulliani, & Romney.

Does that mean Obama is "in the pocket" of "Big Law"?

Or "Big Hollywood" who gave $4.7 million to Obama alone? $8.3 million to him and Hillary combined. 83.4% to the Democrat candidates, 16.5% to Republicans. Is Obama "in the pocket" of "Big Hollywood"? And all "Big Oil" can muster for McCain is a paltry $2 million (while giving half that amount to his opponent? )

Seems to me that "Big Oil" is pretty weak. Even "Big Education" managed to shell out $13 million to the Democrat candidates.

So knock it off on the "Big Oil" bit.

Friday, August 08, 2008

We Can't

We can't demonize Oil Companies & Speculators our way out of this, either.

As I was just saying....

I was just talking about all the stupid explanations for "what's wrong" and the template answers that "activists" have for things and how these ideas spread.

Look at the bull-crud people will buy into! I think I remember colored bell peppers being much less expensive in the past than they have been in the past 3 or so years. And I've been meaning to type in to Google "why are bell peppers so expensive" just to see what comes up.

And I just did.

Yahoo has this "Yahoo Answers" web service where you go out and ask a question and then anybody can answer it and then people vote on the answers and I think the asker can close comments once he/she thinks the question has been satisfactorily answered.

Now my guess as to why they are much more expensive than green peppers was that it takes longer to grow them because you have to wait for them to ripen. Hence they are more expensive to grow and I'm sure that's part of it. Why they've jumped in price in the last several years I suspect has something to do with demand.

But here's a couple of the answers that were left to a person asking why yellow bell peppers are more expensive than green ones:

They are priced SO high since forever..!No one buys them and the ones who do,, just support the "fair market nonsense"If the store sells ,,, one,, Justifacation ..and if not the store claims the loss on their proffit for taxes..
Aside from this person obviously gettting a commission based on how many commas he uses ("Justafication" for his income, I suppose), it is also clear that this person has no concept how pricing, supply and demand -- actually works. He has bought into the socialist perspective that there's some sort of natural "fair market price" that is independent of production costs and supply and demand. In other words, he buys into socialism. Sadly, he doesn't even make any sense saying that "nobody" buys them, "and the ones who do..." --- huh?

With apologies to The Blog That "Nobody" Reads (which is obviously a joke now since lots of people read it and it was a self-depricating joke to begin with) -- either nobody buys them or some people do. Mike (the commenter) clearly doesn't understand taxes, either, as you don't subtract a tax write-off from your tax bill, you subtract it from your taxable income -- which means you probably save, what, a third of what you lost by claiming it as loss. Or whatever your tax rate is. It would be better to sell the pepper at a bit of a loss than to charge so much for it that it never sells.

But that's what these "activist" types teach people to believe. Business is bad, profit is bad. Anybody making a profit is screwing the little guy. It's bullshit.

And that wasn't the only answer that went that way. Here's another:

That's interesting, here in the UK all the major supermarkets that I use charge the same price.Sometimes large corporations just charge what they can get away with. If consumers are used to a higher price for one thing over another they will continue to charge extra, just because they can!

Yeah, like Power to the People, man!

If people pay a certain amount for a good or service, it is worth it to that person. If you can't get enough people to buy your product at the price you are asking, you lose money and you need to figure out a way to lower your price. If you're making enough money at it -- you don't.

And if somebody else figures out how to product that product at a better price, people will start buying it from them instead of you. And now you either need to figure out how you can lower your price and stay in business, or you go into another business.

That's how capitalism works in a free-market system. It drives prices down. It drives efficiency up. Which increases everybody's standard of living as we spend less time meeting our basic needs and more time persuing leisure or things we want above and beyond our basic needs.

That little iPhone you got there you're so proud of? Probably wouldn't exist for another thousand years if it weren't for such a system. And even if it did it'd likely be way to expensive for your average Joe.

As it is, it's still too expensive for me. It's not worth the price to me. So I didn't buy one. Nobody's screwing me over.

Drive Naked!

Mheh! Glenn Beck.

You know, if everybody's tires were grossly underinflated ... which they're not -- then if everybody started inflating them properly, they could reduce their gas consumption by 3-4%.

Easy, feel-good solutions to problems are what makes progressivism so appealing.

You've got these good, well-meaning people out there who aren't informed because they've got other stuff to do, other interests ... and they see bad stuff around them and feel guilty because they're not doing anything about it. They're not involved. And they don't really have time to think about these things and tie them in to the big picture. They've got kids to take to soccer, dinner to cook, things to fix around the house, movies to watch, parties to go to -- whatever.

Along comes the "activist", with templates for an easy solutions -- "if we only..." "taxes for the children, bake sales for bombs", "inflate your tires", "turn your thermostat up/down", "wear a sweater". "Dissent is patriotic." "Don't shop there." "Buy this item".

Honest to God, I saw someone wearing a T-Shirt a few weeks ago that said "This T-Shirt Saves the Planet". If it were a spoof, I might think it was pretty funny. But I seriously doubt that it is.

They also come out with these pre-chewed ideas about what's wrong in the first place, all geared toward getting you to act according to their agendas. "It's the evil oil companies." "It's blood for oil!" "Che was good, the Evil United States of Amerikkka just made him look bad." They've "done the thinking" for you, but feed it to you in such a way to make you feel like you're the one doing the thinking. Thinking people think this. Everyone else is an idiot. Aren't You smart?

Now instead of having no idea what to say when a topic comes up at a social event, you've got this logical sounding argument you heard somewhere from someone who seemed to you like they knew what they were talking about. Well it sounded smart to you, other people will think it sounds smart, too.
Hmmm... I want to sound smart. I'm a thinker. So I'm going to repeat it like I know what I'm talking about!
Of course, most of those people are also too busy to know the details and mechanisms behind how things actually work, and they want to be seen as part of the solution as well. So they nod and hum their approving "mmm-hmmm's", making you feel good, making them feel good, and making people who actually have an idea how things work feel too uncomfortable to say anything about it because they'll just be seen as a killjoy, or worse, someone who doesn't want the problem solved.

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Listen Closely

One of my favorite movies is Kevin Costner's "Open Range". There's a line in it:

"Most times a man will tell you his bad intentions if you listen, let yourself hear."
That story about that outfit that came through a while back, that warn't no idle story. He aims to kill us and take this herd -- is basically what followed.

Barack Obama says of solving our oil addiction:
"It will take nothing less than a complete transformation of our economy."
Anybody else think that sounds just a little spooky? A complete transformation, eh? Our current free-market system can't handle it. How convenient, coming from the party that is trying the hardest to transform our economy to a socialist system. Hey, you voted us in. We told you what it would take. We have a mandate.

As I mentioned yesterday, the Dems are willing to promote lying about their positions to stay in power in order to "save the planet". That is their crusade. No separation of church and state anymore. The church of Progressivism wants to become the state.

Windfall Profit Tax on Theaters

Why not?

It makes about as much sense. Congress's Unsound Fury over Big Oil

If 8% profit is "unreasonable", what other commercial endeavors are up for scrutiny?

In the first quarter of 2008, Big Oil had a profit margin of 7.4 percent. Over that same period, the pharmaceutical and medicine industry earned a 25.9 percent profit, the chemical industry earned 15.7 percent and the electronic equipment industry earned 12.1 percent.
What about those movie theater refreshments? Four large popcorns and four large sodas cost $31.50. The total raw ingredient cost is approximately $7.56. That equals a 76 percent gross margin. Where is the political outrage over that figure?

The article points out

if the oil industry is so powerful, why did it let gasoline prices fall through the floor throughout the 1980s and part of the 1990s? For that matter why did it let gasoline prices fall sharply after they spiked in 2005 and 2006?"

Pelosi never decried this "obscene" lack of profits and shareholder abuse. Instead, she seeks to punish an industry that makes a modest profit margin on a high demand good.

For that matter, what's a "reasonable" amount for you, yourself, to make at your job? Maybe Congress should take a look at that, too.

The Right Answer

I heard McCain being interviewed on the radio this morning.

I think I know why Obama doesn't want to debate him. This guy's positions come from inside of him and he's comfortable talking off the cuff. I suspect Obama is script-driven, and the scripts are written to accomodate the latest polls.

That's not gonna come off too well in a debate, especially given Obama's elitist/socialist agenda.

At any rate, Beck asked McCain in closing if he'd consider Paris for Vice President.

John laughed and said she has a great sense of humor, and that he "thought it was hilarious."

If you read yesterdays' posts, you know then that John scored big points with me on that one.

Oh, speaking of that ad and it's validity, check this Pew Research Poll. Yup, 48% of America feel they're hearing too much about Barack Obama as opposed to 26% thinking they're hearing too much about McCain. That's what the commercial was about!

Next I want to see a poll to see how many of us think there's entirely too much polling going on.

Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Pelosi to Dems: You can back drilling if it'll save your job

This is the biggest bald-faced act of contempt for Congress and the American people -- this Pelosi strategy to

  1. make sure the opening of the outer shelf for drilling doesn't come up for an up or down vote before they go on vacation for a month
  2. vehemently opposes increased domestic drilling
  3. tell Democrats they can buck the party line if it'll help them keep their job and thus a Democratic majority, because
  4. the Democratic party intends to block increased domestic production at every turn if said re-election strategy works
Pelosi is basically saying, "It's ok to say you're for what we're ultimately going to use your seat to prevent as long as it means keeping your seat 'blue'". In other words, lie. It's ok.

What was all that about a new, open, honest congress full of integrity if we'd only put the Democrats in power, Ms. Grrrl Power?

Oh, and if you haven't seen this, you should. Talk about evading the question. Again. And again. And again.

Tire Gauges

On Obama being "right" about inflating tires offsetting domestic production, John Hinderaker calculates:
    • Americans drive approximately 2,880 billion miles per year. If we average 24 mpg, we use around 120 billion gallons of gasoline in our vehicles. If, through perfect tire inflation, we improved our collective fuel efficiency by 1.5%, that would be 1.8 billion gallons. A barrel of oil produces around 20 gallons of gasoline, so the total savings available through tire inflation is approximately 90,000,000 barrels of oil annually.

      How does this stack up against "all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling?"

    • ANWR: 10 billion barrels
    • Outer Continental Shelf: 18 billion barrels (estimated; the actual total is undoubtedly much higher, since exploration has been banned)
    • Oil shale: 1 trillion barrels

    So, on the above assumptions, it would take only 11,308 years of proper tire inflation to equal "all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling."

Perspective on the Surge

Victor Davis Hanson:

None of this volatility is new in American military history. The American Revolutionary War ebbed and flowed for nine years, variously pronounced won, lost, and won again. The Union thought it had won, then had lost, and finally won the Civil War during the last 16 months of the conflict. The Philippine insurrection, in various phases, lasted 14 years, often praised as won and condemned as lost. No war was more mercurial than the Korean between 1950-53, in which the American public was convinced the war was hopeless before it ended in 1953 with the preservation of South Korea.

In most of these struggles, the efforts of just a few rare individuals—a Washington, Grant, Sherman, Ridgway—proved crucial. We remember their names, not the thousands of pundits who declared them incompetent and their wars lost.

The Paris Hilton Ad

Actually, it's pretty funny.

If I were McCain, I think I'd be laughing as well. I hope so. Great sense of humor. When you can publicly lampoon yourself like this (kind of ala William Shatner), you gain a little of my respect. Wow, never thought I'd ever say that about Paris. But what can I say ... one thing I can't deny... she is "hot".

It should be pointed out that McCain's energy plan also includes incentives for new/alternate technologies. This makes it look like McCain's for Oil, Oil, and only Oil, while Obama's for Wind, Solar, and whatever else that isn't coal or oil. Not true. McCain's plan is the "hybrid" plan she talks about.

Update: Score! McCain said in an interview on Glen Beck the other morning that it showed she had a "great sense of humor" and that he "thought it was hilarious".


What a nation of whiners we've become.

Wait, didn't somebody get fired for saying that? (or get strongly encouraged to resign?)

Against my better judgement, I went ahead and clicked on a Maureen Dowd headline.... I know, first I visited HuffPo, and today Maureen. I shouldn't complain, it's my fault. I really need to see someone about that. One's shoes will collect the mire one walks through, no?

Well I've said it before... at least Maureen's got a cute mug shot. (see, there I go again)

So what does Maureen have to say about "McCain's Green-Eyed Monster"?, I fatally wondered.

Basically, it's another attack on the McCain campaign's attack drawing parallels between the fame of people like Paris Hilton and Barack Obama's famous fame. Really, does no one besides me see this as not only a valid comparison but an astute observation? It's an issue. Ask 10 Obama people why they're for Obama and you'll get something approaching substantive maybe from one of them.

Even back as far as Dec, 2006 Democratic New Hampshire party communications director Kathleen Strand said that Obama could sell more tickets than the Rolling Stones. In the same month, Obama himself used that term "I've become a symbol".

Paris Hilton has become a symbol. Her fame has made her bigger than she is, larger than life -- and that fame has come from excessive attention in the press. The McCain campaign is pointing out that Obama enjoys attention of that kind in a similar magnitude. They're saying -- before you vote, take a closer look at who you're voting for.

They weren't saying Obama is like Paris Hilton in any other way.

Yet this is called "childish", and even "soul-less".

Soul-less???? Isn't that a bit over the top? Really?!

Maureen also quotes a "colleague" who says that this is all because McCain is vain and jealous of Obama's youth and good looks. So that's the green-eyed monster.

Yeah, I think the spin on this ad from the Obama side is a bit desperate. It's almost like it struck a nerve.

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

I signed

Can't Drill Our Way Out?

Never mind the fact that since Bush lifted the moratorium on off-shore drilling a few weeks ago, the price -- that according to Democrats was only going to drop by a few cents a gallon many years from now if we started actually drilling (and all he did was lift the moratorium ... there's no new drilling yet) -- anyway, the price of gasoline in my town has now dropped by 40 cents a gallon as of this morning (fro $3.99 to $3.59). Crude dropped from ~ $149 a barrell to ... what is it now, $121?

But Obama now thinks we should try to release our way out of it. He proposes we release 70 million barrels from the nation's Strategic Oil Reserves to lower prices within 2 weeks.

Of course when that 70,000,000 barrels is gone (which will take ... a few weeks) and we haven't drilled any to replace it, we still won't be able to drill our way out of it I guess. Because more oil won't help. Unless it comes from the government, of course. Not from those Evil Oil KKKorporations that, you know, actually produce the product.

And aren't those reserves for a big strategic emergency? What if one comes up during the resulting reserve deficit?

Morgan on things that make as much sense as "We Can't Drill Our Way Out Of This" (WCDOWOOT). Pretty good.

But we can't drill our way out of it. Why is anybody listening to the Democrats?

Judging by Obama's reversal of position -- maybe the Democrats have figured out that too many of us aren't if they want to win.

And they don't want anybody listening to the Republicans, on it, either. Look at this stunt.

Monday, August 04, 2008

This is good

Via Cassy (she's back), from Representative Devin Nunes of California.

"Drive small cars and wait for the wind." I love it.

Oh, and read Cassy's post ... the bit about the Dems turning the lights out on the Republicans as the donks left for recess, then paniced that the press might cover it.

1984 - The Final Product

By hook or by crook, this is going to be my next bumpersticker. I'd like to have it printed by a bumpersticker place, but I'm afraid it would be refused. Still, I think the use of the graphic should fall under "fair use" as a parody, and they ought to do it.

Friday, August 01, 2008

I Made A New Word

Academitis: /a CA dehm EYE tis/ n. 1. A disease characterized by the tendency to present arguments -- consisting of layer upon layer of rationalization in place of logic -- as fact, with the expectation that the conclusion has been proven by that argument.

People with high exposure to the "soft 'sciences'" in institutions of higher education are most at risk.