This blog is a continuation of a previous blog of mine Lies, Damn Lies and Opinion Polls
A recent article at the examiner.com , shows how CNN skewed their most recent poll the show President Obama 53% to Romney 46%. Lets start out with some facts. The way likely voters stack up is approximately 35.4% Democrat, 34% Republican, 35.4% Unaffiliated. So what was the break down of the CNN poll? 50.4 Democrat, 45.4 Republican and 4.2 unaffiliated (no that not a typo, 4.2%!). If the under-sampling and over-sampling are accounted for, suddenly the numbers are reversed; Romney 53% to Obama 46%.
In another poll by washingtonpost.com resulted in register voters for Obama 55%/ Romney 40%; likely voters was closer with Obama 49%/ Romney 48%. But when one looks at the skewed sampling it once again shows a Democrat bias; 33% Democrat/ 23% Republican/ 37% unaffiliated. Once again the Republicans are under-sampled leaving results similar to the CNN poll after the skewing was accounted for.
The reason for these skewed polls is the belief by the liberal media that unaffiliated voters will vote for whom ever the polls show is going to win. It is a patronizing concept that has failed every time it is tried; but like socialism, the left is tied to failed belief systems and always thinking that if they can manipulate the citizenry to go in a direction they really don't want to go, they'll get it right next time.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
The Gaffe That Wasn't a Gaffe
Last July Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney identified Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Most of American press had a field day with this such as the Christian Science Monitor headline, Romney: Another City, Another Gaffe. What makes "gaffe" even more interesting is that in 2008 Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama made the same Gaffe in front of a American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington! Of course it was not reported as a gaffe, because it isn't. By traveling to Israel and calling Jerusalem the capital of Israel, you are aligning yourself with Israel in the land dispute for Jerusalem. For decades the both Republican and Democratic platforms have included the statement that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel to show support to the country. However this year is different; while the Republicans continues to back Israel with it's platform “We support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state with secure, defensible borders; and we envision two democratic states—Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine—living in peace and security,” the Democrat platform has removed any wording that would aline itself with Israel on the fate of Jerusalem , falling back on, "the status of Jerusalem is an issue that should be resolved in final status negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians." What is really in question here is how the media could be so misinformed that it would call the Romney statement a gaffe; of course as an example of the media's continual distortion of the news to favor the liberal agenda, the the answer is self evident.
This article based in part on this Wall St Journal posting;
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/04/obama-attacked-over-party-platform-on-jerusalem/
This article based in part on this Wall St Journal posting;
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/04/obama-attacked-over-party-platform-on-jerusalem/
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Obama and His Economic Fairness
Four years ago the President Obama based his election on a promise of hope and change. Interestingly enough no one in the liberal media ask then candidate Obama what he planned on changing. Today there is little doubt that the American people feel more hopeless than they did four years ago. The change seems to be the consolidation of power for the executive branch, ignoring and actually voicing his disdain for the constitutional separation of powers. While the huge deficits brought on by President Obama are certainly nothing new, the rapid increase of governmental spending and debt has been mind boggling. Another issue totally ignored by the liberal media was candidate Obama's call for a “Civilian National Security Force;” “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as the US Military.”No one even bothered to ask why the US would need a federal civilian army that is as big and well supplied as the US Armed services, yet the size of Homeland security continues to expand exponentially.
Now we have the President running on Economic Fairness. Most believe that this is a plan to raise taxes on the rich to redistribute wealth down to the poor, but as Charles Krauthammer explains, "The tax plan on which the President is basing his economic strategy is a 4.6-point increase in the marginal tax rate of 2 percent of the population". The President has admitted in one of his more candid moments, that raising taxes on the rich is only for fairness not help the economy. This is the same as when candidate Obama said for the purpose of fairness, he would raise the tax on Capital Gain even though it would reduce the amount of revenue collected in taxes,.
What can not be disputed is Economic Fairness is a brain child of Marxist communism; it is a call to end capitalism and the free market by using draconian economics to force equality. What made the US the success is what has been coined the Protestant work ethic (which has no real connection the Christianity); the Protestant work ethic is based on hard work, thrift, and efficiency in one’s worldly calling and the lack of a work ethic has economic consequences. Economic Fairness says success via the law of supply and demand is simply not fair, so the government needs to mandate wages; not a Living Wages, which is only a minimum wage on steroids, Economic Fairness would determine the fair wage of every worker is only possible in a socialists society. Calling someone a socialist is neither a pejorative or a conspiracy theory, it is simply the belief in a certain world view of Economic Fairness.
Now we have the President running on Economic Fairness. Most believe that this is a plan to raise taxes on the rich to redistribute wealth down to the poor, but as Charles Krauthammer explains, "The tax plan on which the President is basing his economic strategy is a 4.6-point increase in the marginal tax rate of 2 percent of the population". The President has admitted in one of his more candid moments, that raising taxes on the rich is only for fairness not help the economy. This is the same as when candidate Obama said for the purpose of fairness, he would raise the tax on Capital Gain even though it would reduce the amount of revenue collected in taxes,.
What can not be disputed is Economic Fairness is a brain child of Marxist communism; it is a call to end capitalism and the free market by using draconian economics to force equality. What made the US the success is what has been coined the Protestant work ethic (which has no real connection the Christianity); the Protestant work ethic is based on hard work, thrift, and efficiency in one’s worldly calling and the lack of a work ethic has economic consequences. Economic Fairness says success via the law of supply and demand is simply not fair, so the government needs to mandate wages; not a Living Wages, which is only a minimum wage on steroids, Economic Fairness would determine the fair wage of every worker is only possible in a socialists society. Calling someone a socialist is neither a pejorative or a conspiracy theory, it is simply the belief in a certain world view of Economic Fairness.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Obama's War on the Middle Class Part 2
President Obama may make speeches to the contrary but suburbia is one of his main targets; suburbia represents to Obama all that is wrong with America. First the flight to the suburbs took with it funds that had been used to fund inner city schools. Second the lavish comfort of a single family in a suburban home is the kind of inequality and flaunting of capitalist success that runs contrary to his socialist’s roots and the gas wasted driving to and from the suburbs. The President has reacted by letting gas prices double in 3 years, a plan to increase taxes on those making over $250,000 and allowing middle-class healthcare to increase substantially . The president believes that except for the government elite, the preferred method of housing is small high rise apartments near ones work as the President has praised in China.
The NYT recently performed an accidental act of journalism with an article titled Ambiguity in Health Law Could Make Family Coverage Too Costly for Many.
Remember those immortal words by Nancy Pelosi, “We have to pass the bill to find out what is in it?”; well there has been more “find(ing) out what is in it”. Turns out when determining what is affordable healthcare Insurance, the IRS says the dollar amount should be based solely on the cost of a single employee and not his family; family insurance usually cost 3-4 times that of individual insurance. Healthcare advocates say this will result in millions who are currently insured, not being able to afford healthcare for their families or afford private insurance from the “State Exchanges” and will not qualify for any subsidies; further those that are being priced out of their health insurance, will now have to pay a fine for not buying health insurance!. The Democrats who pushed the Healthcare bill through late on Christmas Eve despite the public’s dislike, believes this “interpretation” of the Healthcare law is wrong. But the IRS who has been tasked to implement ObamaCare, simply says their interpretation of the health care rules were drafted by, “our legal experts — career civil servants who are some of the best tax lawyers in the world,” and if the IRS runs out to be wrong, even though $70 billion @ year is already being gutted from Medicare, the cost of ObamaCare will once again increase substantially. In affect the ObamaCare, which was supposed to make healthcare available to millions of uninsured Americans, will take away affordable healthcare from millions of employed lower middle class families that previously had insurance but won’t be able to afford healthcare under Obamacare; and the uninsured will be primarily women and children which advocates say will “unravel much of the progress that has been made in covering children in recent years”.
This continues President Obama’s war on the middle class and perpetuates the belief that ObamaCare was designed to fail so the electorate will be more receptive to socialized healthcare. Apparently President Obama’s belief in the redistribution of wealth is not restricted to the rich, unless you consider those that make $30,000 @ year, rich.
If you're going to have a war, it's better if your opponent is unarmed.The recent mass shootings in Colorado and Wisconsin are beyond tragic; but the idea that somehow the lack of gun control is the cause, is political correctness at its worse and admittedly will not stop the killing. The simple fact is small arms make terrible mass causality weapons compared to what else is available to terrorists. In the United States with its gun culture, a semi-automatic firearm is the weapon of choice. However in countries were fully automatic firearms are common, terrorists use bombs. The reason is very simple; a bomb will kill and injure 10 times that of a firearm. Further, all that’s needed to stop an armed terrorist is an armed citizen. If gun control is taken to its logical extreme, we will have to rely on government to protect us, something the police admit they cannot do, as all they can do is respond after the fact.
The NYT recently performed an accidental act of journalism with an article titled Ambiguity in Health Law Could Make Family Coverage Too Costly for Many.
Remember those immortal words by Nancy Pelosi, “We have to pass the bill to find out what is in it?”; well there has been more “find(ing) out what is in it”. Turns out when determining what is affordable healthcare Insurance, the IRS says the dollar amount should be based solely on the cost of a single employee and not his family; family insurance usually cost 3-4 times that of individual insurance. Healthcare advocates say this will result in millions who are currently insured, not being able to afford healthcare for their families or afford private insurance from the “State Exchanges” and will not qualify for any subsidies; further those that are being priced out of their health insurance, will now have to pay a fine for not buying health insurance!. The Democrats who pushed the Healthcare bill through late on Christmas Eve despite the public’s dislike, believes this “interpretation” of the Healthcare law is wrong. But the IRS who has been tasked to implement ObamaCare, simply says their interpretation of the health care rules were drafted by, “our legal experts — career civil servants who are some of the best tax lawyers in the world,” and if the IRS runs out to be wrong, even though $70 billion @ year is already being gutted from Medicare, the cost of ObamaCare will once again increase substantially. In affect the ObamaCare, which was supposed to make healthcare available to millions of uninsured Americans, will take away affordable healthcare from millions of employed lower middle class families that previously had insurance but won’t be able to afford healthcare under Obamacare; and the uninsured will be primarily women and children which advocates say will “unravel much of the progress that has been made in covering children in recent years”.
This continues President Obama’s war on the middle class and perpetuates the belief that ObamaCare was designed to fail so the electorate will be more receptive to socialized healthcare. Apparently President Obama’s belief in the redistribution of wealth is not restricted to the rich, unless you consider those that make $30,000 @ year, rich.
If you're going to have a war, it's better if your opponent is unarmed.The recent mass shootings in Colorado and Wisconsin are beyond tragic; but the idea that somehow the lack of gun control is the cause, is political correctness at its worse and admittedly will not stop the killing. The simple fact is small arms make terrible mass causality weapons compared to what else is available to terrorists. In the United States with its gun culture, a semi-automatic firearm is the weapon of choice. However in countries were fully automatic firearms are common, terrorists use bombs. The reason is very simple; a bomb will kill and injure 10 times that of a firearm. Further, all that’s needed to stop an armed terrorist is an armed citizen. If gun control is taken to its logical extreme, we will have to rely on government to protect us, something the police admit they cannot do, as all they can do is respond after the fact.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Obama's War On the Middle Class Is Real
It is time that the American realize that Obama’s war on the middle class is more than just hyperbole. While President Obama continues to voice a need to protect the middle class, the results of his policies produce the opposite. First he defines the rich as making $100-200 thousand. Perhaps in Chicago this seems like a lot of money, but not in California where the housing market averages continue to hover around $450 thousand. Further he uses the similar figures to tax small businesses, seeming oblivious to the fact that a $300 thousand grossing business is one with 2-3 employees. During his time in office gasoline prices have doubled from $2.00 @gal to $4.00 @gal and gas prices are particularly hard the middle class and small business; big business and agriculture can simply increase prices to account for higher transportation prices but it will be up the middle class to pay these prices. Further Obama’s major claim that medical insurance cost would be reduced with Obamacare, but the opposite has occurred with insurance costs to the middle class increasing 50%-60%; when asked about this disparity the white house said we will have to wait until 2023 to see the reductions. Does anyone really believe that medical insurance costs in 2023 (long after Obama is out of office) will be lower than today?
So I guess one has to ask, why the President of the United States wants to gut the US economy of it’s greatest money producers. Well the reason is simple, President Obama is a socialist; and in socialism there are only two classes, the lower collective class with no individual rights and the upper class that rules with totality. In the United States it is the middle class that ended any hope of a socialist takeover, so President Obama continues to lay the ground work by raising prices and subsidize the unemployment of the middle class, by extending unemployment insurance indefinitely, until a majority of the citizenry is dependent on the government and middle class autonomy becomes something viewed by the majority as unobtainable. The President has also tried to show that it has been government that is responsible for the gains of the middle class with his infamous, “You didn’t build that” comment, as if need follows infrastructure and not the other way around. And how does the President’s agenda jive with the weakest post-recession "recovery" in more than 100 years? " The President has recently said, “We tried our plan and it worked."
So I guess one has to ask, why the President of the United States wants to gut the US economy of it’s greatest money producers. Well the reason is simple, President Obama is a socialist; and in socialism there are only two classes, the lower collective class with no individual rights and the upper class that rules with totality. In the United States it is the middle class that ended any hope of a socialist takeover, so President Obama continues to lay the ground work by raising prices and subsidize the unemployment of the middle class, by extending unemployment insurance indefinitely, until a majority of the citizenry is dependent on the government and middle class autonomy becomes something viewed by the majority as unobtainable. The President has also tried to show that it has been government that is responsible for the gains of the middle class with his infamous, “You didn’t build that” comment, as if need follows infrastructure and not the other way around. And how does the President’s agenda jive with the weakest post-recession "recovery" in more than 100 years? " The President has recently said, “We tried our plan and it worked."
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Left's Book Burning Party
MoveOn. org has a interesting video titled This Is How You Beat The Tea Party . The video is smug in its message but clearly shows how the left has embraced the "end always justifies the means" approach, voiced by their mentor Saul Alinsky, “do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral arguments.”. The video is about a Library in Troy, Michigan. The city needed money so they decided they would either have to close a library or raise taxes. An initiative was placed on a ballot to see if the residents wanted to raise taxes on themselves to keep their library. The Tea party in the area organized the no argument wanting no new taxes. The yes argument was the tax would be small in comparison to the cities need for the library; but it appeared the tax initiative would go down in defeat. Then suddenly these bizarre signs signs started to appear all over town and there was even a Facebook page for touting the burning of the library books.
Now of course the Tea Party had no idea where they were coming from nor did the city. But the postures went viral, all accusing the Tea Party of wanting to burn the library books; finally just before the vote a young group of socialists took ownership of the postures. They said they wanted to get attention in an audacious manner to swing the election to force a new tax, so they decided to put a vile face on the Tea Party and came up with the idea of portraying the Tea Party as NAZI’s. Well the tactic worked. By the time the true nature of the signs had come to light the vote was over, with most the voters voting for the new tax solely because they did not want to be associated with book burning even if it was a fallacy perpetrated by the left.
But there is nothing new here. The left can never present a true accounting of their agenda to destroy capitalism, so instead of presenting their socialist agenda, they demonize their opponents, usually using rhetoric that more closely resembles their actions than that of their opponents. Typical is the left crying racism any time someone disagrees with President Obama’s socialists policies. This of course continues a false paradigm ignoring the facts that it was the Democrats who initiated a Welfare scheme that subsidized poverty by making the blacks and poor completely reliant on Government handouts and the destruction of the black family by only paying unwed mothers or families that the father had abandoned. That's right, nothing to see here just MoveOn.
Now of course the Tea Party had no idea where they were coming from nor did the city. But the postures went viral, all accusing the Tea Party of wanting to burn the library books; finally just before the vote a young group of socialists took ownership of the postures. They said they wanted to get attention in an audacious manner to swing the election to force a new tax, so they decided to put a vile face on the Tea Party and came up with the idea of portraying the Tea Party as NAZI’s. Well the tactic worked. By the time the true nature of the signs had come to light the vote was over, with most the voters voting for the new tax solely because they did not want to be associated with book burning even if it was a fallacy perpetrated by the left.
But there is nothing new here. The left can never present a true accounting of their agenda to destroy capitalism, so instead of presenting their socialist agenda, they demonize their opponents, usually using rhetoric that more closely resembles their actions than that of their opponents. Typical is the left crying racism any time someone disagrees with President Obama’s socialists policies. This of course continues a false paradigm ignoring the facts that it was the Democrats who initiated a Welfare scheme that subsidized poverty by making the blacks and poor completely reliant on Government handouts and the destruction of the black family by only paying unwed mothers or families that the father had abandoned. That's right, nothing to see here just MoveOn.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Fast and Furious; Not a Bush Operation
Operation Fast and Furious may be the downfall of Obama. In 2006 the Bush administration used an Operation called Wide Receiver to try and track US guns to those in the Mexican Cartel s that were looking to buy them; this was done in coordination with the Mexican Government. Here the guns were closely followed to their destination in Mexico to arrest the buyers while carefully tracking and seizing the guns as evidence; the procedure is called a controlled delivery and is a very common law enforcement tactic. Although arrests were made and no guns were lost, the Bush administration determined the plan was not productive enough and stopped it toward the end of 2007, or a year before he left office.
In 2009 the Obama administration initiated a program Fast and Furious (funded by the Obama stimulus) with seemingly the same goal as Wide Receiver, however there were significant differences in how it was run. First the guns were not tracked but allowed to “walk”, meaning about 2000 guns were allowed to disappear and fall into the hands of murdering Cartels with no one tracking the guns or identifying suspects or making arrests. There was also no coordination with the Mexican government who rightly complained of what seemed like a sudden flood of illegal weapons into Mexico from the US. The big lie that is being spread by the pro-Obama machine is just like Fast and Furious, Bush (Operation Wide Receiver) let guns walk also; this never happened. Congress is now investigating this debacle and has found Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt and the President has now invoked Executive Privilege to keep DOJ documents on Fast and Furious from the Congressional investigation. www.nationalreview.com and www.americanthinker.com
The question now is what the President is trying to hide. Whatever it is it may produce another Constitutional crisis mush the same as Watergate. In my opinion I believe the there are three issues about Fast and Furious, any of which if made known could result in the downfall of Holder and President Obama. The first is the number of arms has been greatly understated. In May of 2009 President Calderon remarked to AP, We need to stop the flow of guns and weapons towards Mexico. Let me express to you that we've seized in this two years more than 25,000 weapons and guns, and more than 90 percent of them came from United States, and I'm talking from missiles launchers to machine guns and grenades. In this short statement, it appears that there is much more that meets the eye in Fast and Furious. First President Calderon described the weapons as “machine guns” (he has previously described the weapons as military grade). The fact is machine guns or military grade small arms are not generally available in American guns shops. Automatic weapons are highly regulated in the US, requiring a laborious background check and history. Even if someone qualifies for an automatic weapon in the US, the price is usually cost prohibited for anyone other than a hard core collector. As an example a civilian semi-automatic AK-47 can cost $800 to $1000; the same military grade AK-47 will cost near $5000. However if you buys a military grade AK-47 from a international arms dealers they are about $100-$200@. Because of this there is simply no way 25,000 military grade weapons could even be collected in the US never mind smuggled into Mexico. The only supply that large would have to come from the US Military itself or bought from an international gun dealer and made to look like they came from the US. One can imagine a Contragate style operation where US intelligence agents sold military grade weapons to Mexican Cartels in exchange for intelligence on Iran (it is believed that Iran has plotted with Mexican Drug cartels to carry out political assassinations).
The big lie by the Democrats, by the likes of Eric Holder, Jay Carney and Nancy Pelosi is blame Bush for Fast and Furious; that Fast and Furious was a Bush legacy operation. It's a lie, they know it's a lie, but as usual President Obama will take no ownership or responsibility for anything and the democrats just play along. Socialism is based on the the concept on the infallibility of government; that actions and information of and from government should never be questioned and should be accepted as necessary as truthful. This is what we are getting from the President and his ruling subordinates, their attempt to re-write history even as it's being made.
In 2009 the Obama administration initiated a program Fast and Furious (funded by the Obama stimulus) with seemingly the same goal as Wide Receiver, however there were significant differences in how it was run. First the guns were not tracked but allowed to “walk”, meaning about 2000 guns were allowed to disappear and fall into the hands of murdering Cartels with no one tracking the guns or identifying suspects or making arrests. There was also no coordination with the Mexican government who rightly complained of what seemed like a sudden flood of illegal weapons into Mexico from the US. The big lie that is being spread by the pro-Obama machine is just like Fast and Furious, Bush (Operation Wide Receiver) let guns walk also; this never happened. Congress is now investigating this debacle and has found Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt and the President has now invoked Executive Privilege to keep DOJ documents on Fast and Furious from the Congressional investigation. www.nationalreview.com and www.americanthinker.com
The question now is what the President is trying to hide. Whatever it is it may produce another Constitutional crisis mush the same as Watergate. In my opinion I believe the there are three issues about Fast and Furious, any of which if made known could result in the downfall of Holder and President Obama. The first is the number of arms has been greatly understated. In May of 2009 President Calderon remarked to AP, We need to stop the flow of guns and weapons towards Mexico. Let me express to you that we've seized in this two years more than 25,000 weapons and guns, and more than 90 percent of them came from United States, and I'm talking from missiles launchers to machine guns and grenades. In this short statement, it appears that there is much more that meets the eye in Fast and Furious. First President Calderon described the weapons as “machine guns” (he has previously described the weapons as military grade). The fact is machine guns or military grade small arms are not generally available in American guns shops. Automatic weapons are highly regulated in the US, requiring a laborious background check and history. Even if someone qualifies for an automatic weapon in the US, the price is usually cost prohibited for anyone other than a hard core collector. As an example a civilian semi-automatic AK-47 can cost $800 to $1000; the same military grade AK-47 will cost near $5000. However if you buys a military grade AK-47 from a international arms dealers they are about $100-$200@. Because of this there is simply no way 25,000 military grade weapons could even be collected in the US never mind smuggled into Mexico. The only supply that large would have to come from the US Military itself or bought from an international gun dealer and made to look like they came from the US. One can imagine a Contragate style operation where US intelligence agents sold military grade weapons to Mexican Cartels in exchange for intelligence on Iran (it is believed that Iran has plotted with Mexican Drug cartels to carry out political assassinations).
The big lie by the Democrats, by the likes of Eric Holder, Jay Carney and Nancy Pelosi is blame Bush for Fast and Furious; that Fast and Furious was a Bush legacy operation. It's a lie, they know it's a lie, but as usual President Obama will take no ownership or responsibility for anything and the democrats just play along. Socialism is based on the the concept on the infallibility of government; that actions and information of and from government should never be questioned and should be accepted as necessary as truthful. This is what we are getting from the President and his ruling subordinates, their attempt to re-write history even as it's being made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)