Archive for June, 2009

The difference between malice and ignorance

June 24, 2009

I’m pretty sure most of the problems in Washington can be traced back to the fact that it’s populated largely by people who’ve never actually had to run a business.  Here’s the delightfully clueless Robert Reich in today’s Wall Street Journal:

Yet without a public option, the other parties that comprise America’s non-system of health care — private insurers, doctors, hospitals, drug companies, and medical suppliers — have little or no incentive to supply high-quality care at a lower cost than they do now.

Yeah, other than the fact that each of them is competing for survival with hundreds of other companies out to steal their customers, there’s no incentive at all to supply high-quality care at a low cost.

Really, how can someone even utter these words? It’s the same ignorance underlying Obama’s assertion yesterday:

Why would it drive private insurers out of business? If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care, if they tell us that they’re offering a good deal, then why is it that the government — which they say can’t run anything — suddenly is going to drive them out of business? That’s not logical.

His inexperience with the real world is such that he’s unable to understand that a government plan, unconstrained by the need to generate profits or even avoid massive losses, would drive private insurers out of business. He doesn’t know enough about business to know that that private insurers have to account for the cost of their administrators, and have to prove themselves an attractive place to invest, while the government can plow billions upon billions of untraceable taxpayer dollars into their layers of bureaucracy and still continue to operate forever (witness Medicare or Social Security).

I used to think the Democrats were malicious about their desire to kill the free market, but increasingly I think they are just ignorant to such an overwhelming extent that anyone who ever ran so much as a lemonade stand can’t even conceive that they are sincere.

It’s utterly shocking.


I mean really, how would we decide which side to take?

June 23, 2009

Just so we’re all clear, this is the conflict in which President Obama does not want to “meddle” or appear to be taking sides:

On Saturday, amid the most violent clashes between security forces and protesters, Mr. Alipour was shot in the head as he stood at an intersection in downtown Tehran. He was returning from acting class and a week shy of becoming a groom, his family said.

A brutal repressive theocratic apocalyptic dictatorship is now shooting its citizens in the head even when they are NOT protesting, and the President doesn’t want to appear to be meddling.  Well, thank goodness for that . . . meddling would be unacceptable.

What the country needs is a hacker capable of breaking into Barack’s teleprompter and uploading the words of someone with courage or leadership.  Heck, just upload a bunch of old Reagan speeches, I don’t care if they’re topical or not it’d be better than the obsequious drivel that the current occupant of the White House seems to reserve for thugs.

Profiles in courage

June 21, 2009

It’s a shame that Barack’s teleprompter didn’t have anything loaded for the would-be leader of the free world to say to support the Iranian people being killed in the street as they protest for democracy and liberty.  All he could muster was that the US shouldn’t “meddle”.  It’s interesting to compare his view of the American role in promoting liberty with that of his predecessor or, for that matter, Reagan.  Oh, well, it was Carter who delivered Reagan unto the world, and Obama’s making good progress in driving the next surge of American interest in conservatism, I’ll give him that.

I know, wishful thinking, except as of today the Rasmussen daily tracking poll finds more likely voters agree with me than with my liberal friends:
It’s too bad Americans are slower on the uptake than Israelis, though since only 6% of Israeli Jews think Obama is pro-Israel (88% thought GWB was).  It seems as though the President is more comfortable meddling in the affairs of our allies (UK, Israel) than in the affairs of murderous thugs who are our sworn enemies. Courage.

How do you make peace with someone who won't stop trying to kill you?

June 14, 2009

Here’s something to think about on a Sunday afternoon . . .  Let’s say your next door neighbor stood in his yard screaming, constantly, that he was going to kill you and your family and that there was nothing you could do, say or give him that would dissuade him.

And let’s say he even went so far as to strap bombs to his own wife and children and send them one by one to your house in an effort to get in and kill you.  And let’s also say that each time one of his kids was dismembered and killed in such an effort this neighbor celebrated rather than mourned them.

How much time do you think you would invest trying to make peace with him versus trying to kill him to protect yourself and your family?

Not saying this relates to any real-world stuation, of course.  It’s just a hypothetical story about the world’s worst neighbor.

Is there any "journalistic" reason to do this?

June 12, 2009

I mentioned there were two galleries I clicked through on Time Magazine’s sad little website.  The other was a gallery of GOP memorabilia.  It seems pretty clear that in spite of the fact that the latest Rasmussen survey finds people now trust Republicans with the economy more than Democrats (first time in 2 years) the gallery is intended to perpetuate the meme that the GOP is dead.

But it wasn’t enough for them to simply talk about the GOP as some long-past event (the kind of thing that would even *have* memorabilia). I wouldn’t have recognized what they’d done except I recently learned about a photographic technique called tilt-shift. It makes any photo look like it came from a miniature.  For example:

And for some reason I’ll let you ponder, Time chose to show the proudest elements of the GOP’s history as though they appeared in a tiny little doll-house.  Ronald Reagan, arguably the greatest American leader of the last century, is shown like this:


A conference room where the collection is housed looks like something carved in a grain of rice:


Now, as a very infrequent reader of Time Magazine (it hurts my head to read their writing) I will admit it’s possible that they use this artistic technique on photos of lots of things.  If so, let me know in the comments.  But the last time I saw a miniaturized view of Obama, it was because some knucklheaded sycophant actually carved the goofball into the eye of a needle. Seriously:

Obamas experience shown actual size

Obama's experience shown actual size

There's not really anyone left who thinks journalism's neutral, is there?

June 12, 2009

I read a commentary in Time Magazine today (I know, why . . .) but occasionally I do check in to see if they’ve hired any journalists to replace the Obama PR flaks. (update: none yet).

The commentary itself was not what caught my attention.  Instead, I found 2 linked galleries both of which I found jaw-dropping in the extent to which they made no effort to come across as unbiased.

First, a gallery of “The Screwups of Campaign ’08“.  Like most people, when I think “Screwup” I think of Joe Biden.  But I’m figuring it’ll include elements of the 4 principals, maybe to include Obama talking about visiting all 57 states, or people “clinging to their guns” or the “spread the wealth around” comment that nearly cost him the election in the end.  Nope. It appears that the sequence changes from one viewing to the next, but the proportions are the same, and here’s the topic of the first 34 that I clicked through (I know, it was painful):

Palin – Palin – Palin – Joe the Plumber – McCain – Lieberman – Palin – Biden (gasp!) – Palin – Palin – Biden – McCain – Biden – McCain – McCain – McCain – Palin – Palin – Palin – Biden – Palin – Palin – McCain – McCain – Biden – Biden – Palin – McCain – McCain – McCain – McCain – Palin – Biden – OBAMA!!!

Mind you, this is not a list you can view, it’s a single item per page.  Which means you have to click NEXT each time to get to the next gaffe. So of the several dozen people who still read Time Magazine, one of them would have to have clicked through THIRTY-THREE pages before discovering (gasp!) that BO had called the Nittany Lions the Nittaly Lions.

But in the meatime Time had managed to find 20 or so Palin gaffes (most of them not gaffes, but things Time disagrees with) and another dozen or so on McCain.  They even covered Joe the Plumber before getting around to The One and Mr. Foot in Mouth Joe Biden.


To the folks at MSNBC, slutty's just another big word

June 11, 2009 has an excellent video up tonight of a trainwreck of an interview at MSNBC.  Even if you don’t have time to watch the interview the description of MSNBC is priceless:

MSNBC occupies a curious niche in the media landscape. It is the first network that has ample financial resources but at the same time, production values on a par with the average home movie and intellectual standards below those of the typical ninth grader. It would be interesting to know who comprises their audience.

Maybe they're not moving to the center. Maybe they're moving to the right.

June 11, 2009

Yesterday Terry McAuliffe was, thankfully, annihilated in the Virginia Democratic gubernatorial primary.  With huge name recognition and a reputation as a bitter partisan liberal, he took only 26 percent of the vote in a three-way race.  The most conservative Dem in the race, Deeds, won with 50 percent.

What’s interesting to me is that the story gets covered as “Democrats in Virginia move to the center” and there’s the suggestion, even in the right-leaning Fox News, that Republicans ought to do the same.

Who decided that the possible “directions” in which a party can move are centerward and outward.  Wouldn’t it make more sense to say that voters in the Democratic primary were clearly moving to the right and that Republicans ought to pay attention and offer a strong, principled conservative voice?

With the left in control of all the levers of power in Washington, Americans are getting a clear, unvarnished view of the type of havoc wreaked when you expose the world’s most vibrant economy to management by Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and GM Board Chairman Barack “never ran a business before” Obama. There has not, in recent memory, been a more opportune time for principled conservatives to stand up and describe why reducing the intrusion of government in people’s lives leads inexorably to more prosperity for everyone.

People are already demonstrating that they want a choice, and that the change BO is bringing is not what they had in mind when they voted for him.  The right should give people that choice, not converge on mediocrity at the political center.  I think we saw in the 2008 race that if the only choices are a Republican liberal and a Democrat liberal, the Dem’s going to inspire more excitement.  The pendulum is swinging, as it always does.  Let’s not meet them in the middle.

Happy Birthday Totalitarian Nightmare!

June 8, 2009

Believe it or not it’s been 60 years since George Orwell predicted a totalitarin nightmare in which an ever-more stifling and far-reaching government would use the euphamistic lies of Newspeak to disguise their constant assault on freedom and individual liberty.

In totally unrelated news, the proposed legislation to rob workers of secret ballots, enabling intimidation by union thugs will be known as “The Employee Free Choice Act”.  The greatest orgy of debt and spending ever known will be termed “A New Era of Fiscal Reponsibility” (illustrated below by the Congressional Budget Office.”  And a pork-filled nightmare that heaps hundreds of billions on favored political cronies while driving the nation deeper into recession will be called “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act“.

We now return you to our live broadcast of “Big Brother”.CBO Estimate

How not to get out of a "deep hole"

June 7, 2009

Hillary Clinton was on This Week with George Stephanapoulos today (transcript here).  She described why she decided to serve in Obama’s cabinet, even after she’d made clear her belief (now validated by the world) that Obama’s nowhere near ready to be President.  The thought process she described helped me understand why Team Obama is so effective at making every situation it touches turn far worse:

“I thought, you know, we are in just so many deep holes that everybody had better grab a shovel and start digging out,” Clinton said.

Tell me, dear readers . . . if you were stuck in a deep hole, would you be using a shovel to get out?  Or would, perhaps, a rope or a ladder be a better solution?