Some Interesting, Funny, and WTF Moments Today

Interesting:  the following graph of costs under different scenarios.



The Funny:  Watching Democrats try to justify their absolute affirmation of women's "Right to Choose", when confronted with other ways people might want to have rights to choose.

xwejQBIyjow

And, finally, WTF?

syKF3eqoqQk

 

The DNC Convention

8:47 pm - a Sister is talking about how Obamacare is a GOOD thing.  Sister Simone Campbell, from the Nuns on a Bus tour.

I'm sure that she is a good-hearted person.  I don't believe that she is the last word on how Catholics need to vote.  I don't agree that the Romney/Ryan budget plan is "immoral".

Funny how she worries about the budget, but not about forcing abortion & birth control on people who are morally opposed to it.

It is NOT immoral to plan your spending so you can avoid debt.

8:55 pm - Rahm Emmanuel is being interviewed.  When asked why donors haven't contributed to the Obama campaign, he started stuttering, and made a lame, incoherent answer.

Rahm is implying that Republicans, after the elections when Clinton was president, caved, and the legislation that passed was ALL Clinton's idea.

Huh?

Boy, is he trying to spin.

He says that Obama will have a "broad-stroke, vision" speech, that will totally change this election.  Somehow, the more detailed speeches of Romney and, even more so, Ryan, are NOT visionary.

Rahm is complaining that the Republicans impeached Clinton, voted against the American involvement in Bosnia (he even admits that the vote took place when the troops were "in the air" - so, that would be NOT asking the Congress to declare war?), and "obstructed" Clinton by sending bills to be signed - but were vetoed - that were not acceptable to Clinton.

Rahm is claiming that Obama voted to implement "welfare to work" as a state senator.

I checked, and I thought Rahm was wrong.

President Obama had a convenient change of heart regarding welfare reform when it was time to run for President. In 1998, when he was an Illinois state senator, Obama said:  I was not a huge supporter of the federal plan that was signed in 1996. Having said that, I do think that there is a potential political opportunity that arose out of welfare reform. And that is to desegregate the welfare population—meaning the undeserving poor, black folks in cities, from the working poor—deserving, white, rural as well as suburban.

The same year, he reiterated that “the 1996 legislation I did not entirely agree with and probably would have voted against at the federal level.”

Well, he voted against it, with an executive order this year.

 

Just Who Are the H8rs?

It's not Republicans screaming "bigot"!

It's not Republicans smearing ALL Democrats as "H8rs".

It's not Republicans sneering that "you ALL hate women".

It's not Republicans implying that your chosen candidate is a "felon".

Don't bother Democrats, or their allies, with the FACTS.  They'll TELL you what the "facts" are.

An example of "fact-checking" is this:

A case in point: a perfectly correct statement by Sen. Rand Paul that the average federal employee makes $120,000 a year, while the average private-sector employee makes $60,000.  This was labeled "FALSE," by PoliFact because the figures included benefits.  On salary alone, the folks on the federal payroll only made $31,000 more than their counterparts.

Bold-face mine.

Another instance of "fact-checkers" bias:

If you want a clue about the objectivity of "fact-checkers," take a look at what snopes.com has to say about Barack Obama's claim to have visited 57 states.  It turns out this "a mixture of true and false information."  Why?  Because Barack was obviously tired and meant to say 47, and some obscure, anonymous blogger somewhere claimed that he used this number because there are 57 Islamic states.

If Obama had been a Republican, this would have been labeled as FALSE. 

In the past, I've recommended snopes.com for checking forwarded email's veracity.

No more - their political bias is clear.

Debate Ideas to Consider

I've been watching the DNC convention (yes, it was occasionally painful), and have noticed some talking points that are likely to come up in the debate:

• Obama talks about "free" contraception.  It is NOT free, as Mitt should point out, but "taxpayer-paid" contraception, as those who don't pay for their own contraception through their insurance premiums will receive them thanks to the taxpayers.


• Those "tax subsidies" for oil-producers - does Obama mean "reductions in taxes" for legitimate expenses?  Instead of requiring government to "invest" in alternative energy start-ups, why not let the PRIVATE sector do the investing, since that's what they're good at.


• BTW, IF any money is to be given to alternative energy, it should come from NEW oil and gas leases of public land.  That should encourage the federal government to open up land to oil producers.  And, in effect, the old energy will fund development of new energy.


• On suspending deportation of "youngsters" who were brought here by their parents - instead of funding new give-aways, how about pointing out that they already received, free of charge, an education through high school?  And that we are willing to let them leave, without penalty - they will have equal opportunity to get a LEGAL visa in the future, the same as any other person in their home country.


• On gay marriage - is the president willing to stipulate that this will increase the number of people eligible for spousal benefits?  On what grounds?  The real reason for spousal benefits was that, in the past, child-bearing and child-caring responsibilities made a woman temporarily unable to work.  The major cause for special treatment of women in those cases was that pregnancy was unpredictable and could occur without conscious effort to conceive.  That isn't so in any gay relationship - pregnancy has to be planned and specifically desired.


• Obama still hasn't justified ignoring bankruptcy laws and giving special treatment to the auto unions - one of his BIG campaign contributors.


• The economy still is teetering on the verge of collapse, with minorities suffering the worst effects.


• The housing market is still horrible, with many in foreclosure, and mortgagees underwater.


• Although Obama plans to complete closing down the Afghanistan operation, the region is LESS stable than when he took office.  The Mideast is a volatile mess, and the radical Muslims are in charge.  I'm still flying, but the level of threat makes me very uneasy, and the TSA gives me little confidence that they can handle the threats.


• The border is still unsecured; the threats are not just Mexican gangs and illegals, but also reports of Islamicists paying coyotes to assist them in crossing the border.


• Don't forget Fast & Furious.  Obama seems to have.

Reflections on DNC's 1st Night

Most of the speakers were a relative snooze, with a few exceptions:

• Tammy Duckworth - she's running for Congress, and is a VERY impressive disabled vet.  On the positive side, she should be a strong voice for vets.  On the negative side, she supports the Democratic platform.  Still, a really good speaker, and apparently a remarkable woman.


• Julian Castro - a good choice for the keynote address.  As he has only been the mayor of San Antonio for 3 years, it will be difficult to predict how he will prosper in the future.  He is a good, although not excellent speaker (he is polished in how he presents his lines, waiting effectively for responses, but, in general, he has little to say that isn't a slogan for the Democratic platform).  I heard no new ideas, or fresh strategies.  Oh, and unlike Christie, little of substance.


• Michelle Obama - that dress!  As the fashionable would say, FABULOUS!  For once, she left off the boob belt, and the results were great - AND slimming.  Also, she didn't go for her favorite full skirt, and it really minimized her hips and butt.  This is how a First Lady should dress all the time - not trying to set a style, with over-the-top accessories, but with classic lines that actually work with her figure.  As to her speech - VERY well-delivered.  She talked not only about Barack the man, but supported his policies in a positive way.  Unfortunately, the effect will be lost once people realize that the speech wrapped dogs**t is gold wrapping paper.  The economy still sucks, SS and Medicare are broke, and Obamacare will bankrupt the US into dissolution.

The entire night should be used as an example of how to train the noobs.  Generally, they used their time effectively, and spoke with polish.

The polls should show an upward movement for Obama; in contrast, Romney isn't showing much of a post-convention bounce.

I'm not totally trustful of those polls.  They favor those with land-lines - younger people often don't even own a home phone, instead using their cell for all purposes.  So, it's over-sampling the home-owners.

Republicans are probably NOT answering most polls, judging from the people I've talked to - I know that I refuse to answer polls.  I suspect that this election will be fought right down to the finish line, with the results uncertain until the last.

The American Dunkirk

One of the more amazing incidents in WWII was the make-shift, volunteer-led evacuation of British troops at Dunkirk.  If you've not read about the rescue, click here.

We, in America, on 9/11, had our own volunteer effort to rescue civilians fleeing Manhattan after the attack.  Here's their story.

The Boatlift

You will have tears in your eyes, I promise.

My Blood is Boiling!

 

Irritated at Muslim kvetching about our American troops not treating their Koran respectfully enough (they were burning some papers and terrorist materials, and approximately 100 Korans were mixed in by accident - hey, it IS written in Arabic, which few soldiers read).  The Kabul Press wrote an angry editorial, which is printed here.

My response is in the comments (also written below).

Angry? Bitter that Americans would not give YOUR holy book more respect than Muslims give OUR holy book - which they have burned, confiscated, and torn up. Heck, we shouldn’t give more respect to the Koran than is given to Christians in Muslim countries - where they are kidnapped, raped, beaten, burned alive, and killed via the most horrifying means.

Tough. Their job is to provide military assistance. They do that. They do that, even with the restricting Rules of Engagement (ROE) that they have been forced to follow.

You don’t like it? Too bad.