Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts

Friday, January 30, 2009

Fauxbama's Outrage


I'm suffering from cognitive dissonance—somebody please help me sort out a few questions.
  • Obama says he's going to rescue the economy with big spending (to the tune of $1 trillion).  If spending money on everything from Amtrak and Rural Broadband Deployment to dentist training and special projects at the Smithsonian Museum is supposed to help the economy, why is Obama looking to cut military spending by 10-15%?  Doesn't military spending help the economy at least as much as any other form of spending?
  • The amount of money that Wall Street investment banks and other financial firms doled out in bonuses last year was down by 44%.  As far as Obama is concerned, the bonuses are still too big. Obama thinks Wall Street bonuses exemplify the "outrageous and shameful" excesses of capitalist greed.  Yes, some of the bonuses go to highly paid executives...but to thousands of bank employees who don't sit in corner offices, including human resources representatives and secretaries, that money helps to pay the bills.  I know Obama has a highly sophisticated and nuanced understanding of morality, but how can he lecture people on the need for restraint and discipline as he celebrates congressional spending binges with cocktails and wagyu steak? Am I supposed to have forgotten his $170 million inaugural party already?
  • Obama wants to get the economy back on track as soon as possible, but he says now is not the time for profits.  How can the economy recover without profits?  Where will tax dollars come from if nobody's making money?  
  • VP Biden says he wants to take corporate executives and "throw these guys in the brig."  Who will run the economy if corporate executives are incarcerated?


More


Mr. President, I think it's more than a little bit selfish to try to solve our economic problems which we created by burdening future generations.

Vote for the Best Definition of Bipartisanship!

Monumental Resentment in Hussein's Hometown

U.S. Bled for the Muslim World

Obama's Defense Cuts Breathtakingly Naive

Bonuses no luxury for some Wall Street workers, Obama calls shameful

Republicans push for cut-rate home loans

As president, Obama takes home $400,000 per year, not including perks.  Shameful?  Outrageous?


Monday, January 26, 2009

Light at the End of the Tunnel


With a 70% approval rating, Obama is enjoying a fantastic honeymoon.  To some extent, Obama has earned his approval.  Obama is smart, capable, and he occasionally has a good idea.  But he's not invincible.  And he can't be all things to all people.  In his first week as president, we've seen that he can be petty, he can loose his cool, he can make stupid comments, and he can make stupid decisions.  

At some point the irrational exuberance will simmer down.  The Obama bubble will burst.  

Conservatives need to peel away about 6% of Obama's 2008 voters in order to win in 2012.  Do three out of every fifty Obama voters have enough sense to vote for someone else in 2012?  I think so.  Let's change some minds.


More


Obama is the greatest thing in the whole world.

A Dozen Fun Facts About the House Democrats' Massive Spending Bill

My New Spread the Wealth Grading Policy

Google plans to make PCs history.  Industry critics warn of danger in giving internet leader more power

President orders air strikes on villages in tribal area.

We will enter the Obama presidency as the United States and finish the first 100 days as France.

For those who voted for Obama, hoping for a more pacifist America: Biden warns of higher US death toll in Afghanistan.

Pelosi says birth control will help economy.

A plan for the future

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Liberal Hall of Shame


Using sophisticated methods of analysis* and cutting edge scientific instruments, RightKlik has compiled the authoritative list of the very most shameful, disgusting, annoying and despicable liberals in the world.

Some important liberals were excluded (or only made it to the Dishonorable Mention list) because they have faded from the spotlight or are so incompetent in their evil machinations that they have been ostracized from the Democratic party.  Dead liberals were also excluded.

Dishonorable Mention 

Rod Blagojevich, Eliot Spitzer, John Edwards, Keith Olbermann, Bill Clinton, Planned Parenthood, Cindy Sheehan, Jimmy Carter, Arianna Huffington, and Chris Matthews.

Runners up

Maureen Dowd:  Cynical and obnoxious columnist for the New York Times.  In some ways like a liberal Ann Coulter, but not as successful. Influence: 9, Contemptibility Index: 7, Annoyance Level: 99%.

Joe Biden:  They call him the Gaffe-o-Matic, but the biggest problem with his "gaffes" is that they are often based in painful, inconvenient truth.  I have three words for Biden: Shut up!  Influence: 1, Contemptibility Index: 7, Annoyance Level: 75%, ACU Rating: 0.

Chuck Schumer: Windbag of extra-ordinary windiness. Influence: 12, Contemptibility Index: 9, Annoyance Level: 98%, ACU Rating: 0.

Dennis Kucinich:  He's an idiot who publically professes his belief in UFOs, and he's a bit to the left Perez Hilton, but he's funny and not very annoying, so he's only on the runners up list.  Influence: 2, Contemptibility Index: 2, Annoyance Level: 55%, ACU Rating: 4.

Liberal Hall of Shame

10)  Rep. John Murtha (Pennsylvania): Murtha abides by a very prudent principle—if he doesn't have anything derogatory to say, he doesn't say anything at all.  As a clever politician and consummate professional, his most incendiary remarks are about his own constituents, e.g., "There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area."  Influence: 10, Contemptibility Index: 10, Annoyance level: 99%, ACU Rating: 8.

9)  Al Franken:  an immature, profane, and obnoxious jerk who gets off on grinding on people's nerves.  Now he's one sneeze away from becoming a Senator. Influence: 10, Contemptibility Index: 10, Annoyance Level: 100%.

8)  Tom Daschle: Senate Majority Leader for thirteen days, Tom Daschle was eventually sent back home to South Dakota after he became known as the "chief obstructionist".  Now that he's your health care czar and government-run health care is a virtual inevitability, Tom Daschle will be making decisions about everything from your pap smear and your prostate exam to your neurosurgeon and your MRI.  Influence: 14, Contemptibility Index: 8, Annoyance level: 99%, ACU Rating: 16.

7)  Michael Moore: Fat slob, liar, creep.  Influence: 12, Contemptibility Index: 10, Annoyance level: 100%

6)  Harry Reid:  Senate majority leader and the voice of reason and sunny optimism, Harry Reid is never distracted by thoughts about the long term (like next week).  Harry speaking about the surge in Iraq: "I believe...that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week."  Harry speaking about the delay in coming up with an auto bailout bill: "I dread looking at Wall Street tomorrow. It's not going to be a pleasant sight."  [emphais mine] Influence: 17, Contemptibility Index: 8, Annoyance level: 94%, ACU Rating: 0.

5)  Barney Frank:  Still an influential member of Congress despite the fact that while serving in Congress, he paid $80 for sex with Steve Gobie, a man who eventually shacked up with Barney and brought clients into Barney's apartment.  Not content to live the quiet life of a simple whoremonger, Barney has positioned himself to become one of the most dangerous congressmen of all time. Barney is at the center of our current economic implosion—in fact—Barney's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco.  Influence: 15, Contemptibility Index: 10, Annoyance level: 90%, ACU Rating: 0.

4)  Nancy Pelosi:  San Fran Nan has been such a horrible Speaker of the House that she has led the Democratic Congress to its lowest approval rating in HISTORY. Influence: 18, Contemptibility Index: 9, Annoyance level: 96%, ACU Rating 0.

3)  Hillary Clinton:  Soon to be fourth in the presidential line of succession, Hillary is the nightmare that won't end.  Influence: 18, Contemptibility Index: 9, Annoyance level: 99%, ACU Rating: 0.

2)  George Soros:  The puppet master of the Democratic Party, Soros represents all that is evil in the world of evil leftists.  He's the liberal billionaire equivalent of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney rolled into one inconspicuous but extremely evil package.  Influence: 20, Contemptibility Index: 9, Annoyance level 60%.

1)  Barack Obama:  Soon to be crowned the Global King of All Liberals, Obama is a deadly combination of Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and FDR.  Influence: 20, Contemptibility Index: 6, Annoyance level: 95%, ACU Rating: 7.


*Liberal Shame was calculated using the following formula, where S is shame, i is influence, A is annoyance level, r is ACU Rating, and c is the contemptibility index:

Reference Ranges: influence (1-20 units), annoyance level (0-100%), contemptibility index (0-10 units), ACU rating—where applicable (0-100)   


More

Obama And Conservatives Break Bread At George Will's House

Is Obama Selling Out to the Right?

Obama's Treasury nominee failed to pay taxes

Conviction reversed in 30-year-old death row case

The First Amendment to the rescue!

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Liberals' Primitive Understanding of Fairness


To say that leftists and liberals are primitive in their thinking on issues relating to equality is really giving them more credit than they deserve.  Even primates demonstrate a more sophisticated understanding of equality than do liberals.  Primates understand that merit should enter into their calculations of fairness, and they reject the idea that slackers should get special treatment:


"Brosnan and de Waal conducted four tests, each including two sessions of 25 trials, on pairs of female capuchins. The researchers first gave study monkeys the low-value rewards of cucumbers in exchange for tokens. Then, they measured the study subjects' responses when the higher-value reward -- grapes -- were given to their partners for exerting varying levels of work effort.

"'We showed the subjects compared their rewards with those of their partners and refused to accept a lower-value reward if their partners received a higher-value reward,' says Brosnan, 'This effect is amplified when the partner does not have to work for the reward.'

"The researchers recorded a 95 percent completed exchange rate with the subject monkeys during the equity test, in which both subject and partner received cucumber as the reward for the same amount of work. The completed exchange rate fell to 60 percent during the inequity test, in which subjects observed their partners receiving grapes for completing the same amount of work. A further decrease to 20 percent of completed exchanges occurred in the effort-control test, when partners received the higher-value reward for less work."


Liberal human beings apparently aren't quite as clever as their capuchins counterparts.  Not only do liberals tend to ignore merit in their calculations of fairness, they actively dismiss the issue of merit when it is brought to their attention. If you tell them you believe in a system of merit-based rewards, they will tell you that you have exposed an intellectual flaw and that you are clinging to an unhealthy psychological defense mechanism.  For an example of this line of thinking, consider the recent work of  liberal egalitarian researchers John Jost and Jaime Napier of New York University as reported on livescience.com:


"Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

"Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found. Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person's tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities."


Okay, I see.  If conservatives are happier, it's not because they're psychologically healthier, it's because they are happily delusional.  Here's more:


"The rationalization measure included statements such as: 'It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others," and "This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are.'

"To justify economic inequalities, a person could support the idea of meritocracy, in which people supposedly move up their economic status in society based on hard work and good performance. In that way, one's social class attainment, whether upper, middle or lower, would be perceived as totally fair and justified.  

"If your beliefs don't justify gaps in status, you could be left frustrated and disheartened, according to the researchers, Jaime Napier and John Jost of New York University. They conducted a U.S.-centric survey and a more internationally focused one to arrive at the findings."  [emphasis mine]


Wow...now I understand.  Conservatives are happy because their worldview is contaminated with the idea that it's okay if slackers aren't quite as rich as hard workers.  Liberals' hearts are heavy because they are burdened with the understanding that even lazy people deserve the best things life has to offer.  Liberals know that the idea of meritocracy is a big fat piece of capitalist propaganda.


"'Our research suggests that inequality takes a greater psychological toll on liberals than on conservatives,' the researchers write in the June issue of the journal Psychological Science, 'apparently because liberals lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light.'"


The truth is apparently almost too much to bear.

Setting aside the sarcasm, here's my take: Rational, healthy societies allow their citizens to reap the rewards of their good decisions and to feel at least some of the stinging consequences of their bad decisions.  This allows people to learn and grow.  The idea that we should use the force of government to ameliorate perceived inequalities is dangerous and destructive.  When we get to the point where we're using the virtually unlimited power of the Imperial Federal Government to "even the playing field," the government becomes a tool of the envy mongers.  Then we have to hear people like Obama say things like "It's not that I WANT to punish your success...but I'm going to do it anyway.  This is going to hurt me more than it hurts you, buddy"

[Yes, I know those aren't Barry's EXACT words.] 

More

Peeved monkeys reject unequal pay on the job

Tennessee Woman Accuses Farm of Favoring Foreigners

You can't make this stuff up: Biden says Obama Made A Mistake By Not Consulting Feinstein Over His CIA Pick.

Richardson's Lies Have Finally Caught Up to Him: Libs are dropping Richardson like a hot potato. 

How Will Dems Govern On Their Honeymoon?  Some very good advise for Democrats...I'm not sure I want them to listen.

Republicans Happier than Democrats

The Palliative Function of Conservative Ideology

Words that deserve wider use...like collywobbles, fubsy  & sesquipedalian.


Senators Turn Burris Away at Capitol