Truth First, Then Opinion

Obama: His Economic Ignorance Knows No Bounds

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 01:44:00 +0000

In response to Bank of America charging a fee for Debit Card users, President Obama said this to ABC News:

This is exactly why we need this Consumer Finance Protection Bureau that we set up that is ready to go," Obama said. "This is exactly why we need somebody whose sole job it is to prevent this kind of stuff from happening. ... You can stop it because if you say to the banks, 'You don't have some inherent right just to - you know, get a certain amount of profit. If your customers - are being mistreated. That you have to treat them fairly and transparently.'"

Keep what stuff from happening? Companies raising their prices to cover the increasing costs of regulation?

Is Obama serious when he claims that companies "don't have some inherent right to ... get a certain amount of profit". They damn sure do have that right and if you, the consumer don't like the prices, then you're welcome to shop elsewhere.

Then theres the last sentence - "you have to treat them [customers] fairly and transparently". What is unfair about banks charging fees for their services? And what is transparent about publically and widely advertising the $5.00 debit card fee?

As John Hideraker observes, "Obama's ignorance of economics is impressive in its comprehensiveness".

Amanda Knox Aquittal: Justice Prevails

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:13:00 +0000

John Hinderaker's thoughts
<http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/my-thoughts-on-amanda-knox.ph
p> . Very much worth the read. We're so fortunate to live in a country where
the law is practiced largely objectively.

What the Media Hath Wrought

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 00:01:00 +0000

This, from, The National Post <http://www.nationalpost.com/> ,

...the press gave the great American republic an untried,
unknown and, it is becoming more and more frighteningly clear, incompetent
figure as President. Under Obama, America's foreign policies are a mixture
of confusion and costly impotence. It is increasingly bypassed or derided;
the great approach to the Muslim world, symbolized by the Cairo speech, is
in tatters. Its debt and deficits are a weight on the entire global economy.
And the office of presidency is less and less a symbol of strength.

Read the whole article
<http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/09/17/rex-murphy-the-medias-love-a
ffair-with-a-disastrous-president/> - I dare you.

Best Bumper Sticker Ever!

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 23:27:00 +0000

Here's the bumber sticker for the 2012 Republican Voter. Get one here for $5.50.

The People Have Spoken -- The Bastards!

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:44:00 +0000

From the Powerline Blog
<http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/09/the-people-have-spoken-the-ba
stards.php> :

"President Obama's approval rating of the American public
has fallen to an all-time low, according to a new Gallup survey ofWhite
House residents and employees.

Fewer the one in 10 Americans earned the president's favor,
according to..."

Hilarious. You really need to read the whole thing.

Green Jobs Are Like Breeding Unicorns to Sell to Chinese Millionaires

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:34:00 +0000

Yeah, I think James Delingpole
<http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100102917/green-jobs-wot-
green-jobs-pt-242/> has it just about right.

Military Helicopter Flight Training

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:54:00 +0000

A friend of mine from my unit in Vietnam sent this U.S. Army training film of Helicopter Flight Training. When I went through, the program was 12 months beginning at Ft. Wolters, Texas and finishing at Ft. Rucker, Ala.

Boy, does this bring back memories. Some observations:

When one solos for the first time the other candidates really do throw you in a pool. In this case, the pool was at the local Holiday Inn. I was the 6th candidate in my class to solo (after 9 hours of flight time). Everything about that first flight is etched forever in memory because, when my instructor, Marshall Heckaman, told me to "take it around", we had just completed the day's lesson, but I had been thinking that I was going to be flunked out. The damn thing was impossible to control (or so I thought). I honestly had no idea I had been flying the aircraft virtually the whole time. Those instructors were sneaky.

Instrument flight training was really, really hard. It made me sick because I could not see the horizon and the instructor (knowing this, I think) would throw the aircraft out of trim forcing me to reorient the damn thing. I did well, though and was one of only three guys to get a full instrument flight rating.

Flight training was pretty scary sometimes, but the really scary parts were also the most exhilarating. As you might imagine, we all hungered for the low-level gun runs. In this film, they do a great job of illustrating what it looks like from inside the aircraft. My instructor screamed at me if I ever got above 15' above the ground. Believe me, at 140 knots, 10 feet off the deck with the M60s blazing -- it's like nothing you could imagine.

Third, the eight day exercise was really cool -- especially the night navigation part. You'll see a bit of it toward the end when a guy runs out and lights up a small landing area with 5 or 6 torches. But note that the landing area is illuminated ONLY AFTER the pilot is on close final (i.e., just about to land). Prior to that, we were looking for a light no brighter than that given off by a match flare.

I count those two years (1 year of flight school and my tour in Vietnam) as possibly most formative ones of my life.

Fair Share? What does that mean exactly?

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:33:00 +0000

Via The Tax Policy Blog

It didn’t go unnoticed, during Obama’s attempt to calm the market, his claim that “fairness” will turn this economy around. What we need, Obama claimed, is for “wealthy Americans and corporations” to pay more in taxes. In other words, we need to equalize the distribution of wealth.

Why do lefties like Obama believe this? I can think of two reasons: First, Obama is simply illiterate economically. He really believes that American’s economic troubles stem from tax rates that are skewed to the poor, i.e., are regressive. That’s fair argument and an economic one for which hard data can be marshalled in its support – or can’t. Consider this:

Recently released IRS data for 2009, shows that taxpayers earning over $200,000 paid 50 percent of the $866 billion in total income taxes paid that year, or $434 billion. Skeptics will say, "That's because they earn the majority of the income in America. Not so. These taxpayers earned 25 percent of the $7.6 trillion in total adjusted gross income in the country that year.
The 2009 IRS data also shows that a record 58.6 million tax filers had no income tax liability that year. This means that 42 percent of the 140 million Americans who filed tax returns that year contributed nothing to the basic cost of government.
Millions of people received cash "refunds" in 2009 even though they paid no income taxes: Some 21 million nonpayers received $27.5 billion in refundable credits from the child credit; Obama's Making Work Pay program gave out $12.8 billion in refundable credits to 32 million filers; The Earned Income Tax Credit program doled out $54 billion in refundable credits to 24.9 million filers; and, nearly 5 million filers received $3.9 billion in refundable Education Credits and roughly 1 million filers got $4.65 billion in refundable credits under the First Time Homebuyers credit program.

What about the corporations, then? Here, also, is an inconvenient truth (at least for Obama and other lefty redistributionists):

In 2008, the roughly 1,900 largest corporations paid $152 billion in income taxes. This amounted to 67 percent of the $227 billion in total corporate income taxes paid that year.

Second, Obama, like so many lefty ideologues, is captured by the siren song of equality. To Obama, the presence of inequality is manifest evidence of injustice. As evidence of this is his use of the phrase “fair share”. But, F.A. Hayak put this argument to bed as follows:

From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time

This shouldn’t surprise – It’s the quote on this blog’s masthead.

How's that Hopey Changey thing workin' for ya?

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:12:00 +0000

Barack Obama, 27 Aug, 2008

And I will restore our moral standing, so that America is once again that last, best hope for all who are called to the cause of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future.

Hmmm – the greens of Iran, the protestors in Egypt and Syria, and the insurgents in Libya all put their hope into an American response. What did they get? Bupkus!

President Obama - Faithful Christian or Panderer? You decide

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:46:00 +0000

President Obama invokes the name of Jesus more that did President Bush

DNA Components Found In Ancient Meteorites

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:26:00 +0000

I’m not quite sure why this is newsworthy except, perhaps, to rile the waters in which creationists and atheists swim. However, I call your attention to this paragraph from the story:

For decades the scientific community had hypothesized that a chemical process inside comets and meteorites could create elements of DNA, or Deoxyribonucleic acid. The ladder-like molecule contains genetic “blueprints” needed to create life and living organisms. It’s made up of four different molecules, called nucleobases, which lock together rung-by-rung in the now-iconic double-helix shape. (my emphasis)

The claim that DNA is necessary to create life is objectively wrong. Scientists do not know the criteria (chemical, physical, or biological) necessary to create life. The importance of nucleic acids for life lies in its ability to mediate reproduction, not create life. How life came into being? No one knows.

Nor is this a minor point. Both sides of the origin-of-life debate often conflate reproduction with creation and this surely obscures the controversy. At the moment, science and scientists do not understand how life came into being.

Truth in advertising: I am a firm believer in evolution by natural selection (ENS, aka Darwinian evolution). But when discussing the merits of ENS, anti-creationists must first acknowledge this essential truth.

Obama: Stupid Is As Stupid Does

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:24:00 +0000

Brett Stephens, Wall Street Journal,

But it takes actual smarts to understand that glibness and self-belief are not sufficient proof of genuine intelligence. Stupid is as stupid does, said the great philosopher Forrest Gump. The presidency of Barack Obama is a case study in stupid does.

Read the whole article

Full Frontal Bachmann

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:07:00 +0000

[She] proved that one man, all by his lonesome, didn't stand a chance when faced with the Full Bachmann

ABC's Jake Tapper: "What Is The President Doing?"

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 15:29:00 +0000

From Mike Allen’s Playbook:

ABC’s Jake Tapper, to Jay Carney at yesterday’s [Aug 4, 2011] briefing: “[W]hat is the President doing? … [W]e know that … he went to fundraisers last night. What is he doing today? … He stood up there and hectored Congress about all the stuff that needs to be done to help create jobs … and then he flew off to Chicago. What’s he doing today? … So the same stuff he was doing a couple of months ago, calling on Congress to pass things? … Has he called Mitch McConnell? Has he called John Boehner? … [I]s he working on things that they can do? … You’re the one that’s always saying the President can walk and chew gum at the same time. … Other than calling on Congress to pass things that you’ve been calling on Congress to pass for months, what is he doing to help the economy?”

The Civility Project

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 21:08:00 +0000

The National Conference of Editorial Writers, an institution established sixty-four years ago, has adopted at new mission something called the “Civility Project”. The Civility Project endeavors to improve the quality of political discourse. Accordingly, they’ve just elected Froma Harrop, a syndicated columnist and member of the Providence Journal’s editorial board. Here’s what Mr. Harrop wrote yesterday in his syndicated column:

"Make no mistake: The tea party Republicans have engaged in economic terrorism against the United States--threatening to blow up the economy if they don't get what they want. And like the al-Qaida bombers, what they want is delusional: the dream of restoring some fantasy caliphate. . . . Americans are not supposed to negotiate with terrorists, but that's what Obama has been doing. . . . That the Republican leadership couldn't control a small group of ignoramuses in its ranks has brought disgrace on their party…"

How’s that for a start to the Civility Project?

Hat Tip – James Taranto, Best of the Web

Samuel Adams on the Tea-Party and the Debt-ceiling Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 17:50:00 +0000

To those who understand Government’s first duty as ensuring our well-being (which is to say Democrats and those that vote for them), reflect on this:

"If ye love comfort better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, [then] go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands of your master. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"

--Samuel Adams, 1776

Surely, Sam Adams was the first Tea Partier…

“It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”

Fun and Sarcasm from the Blogosphere This Morning

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:51:00 +0000

They told me if I voted for Bush other countries would cease to respect us -- and they were right! U.S. a parasite, says Putin.

Now that the tea-party “terrorists” have got their way in the debt-ceiling debate, here’s a partial list of the horrors about to be unleashed:

· Roving bands of outlaws stalk our streets, selling incandescent bulbs to vulnerable children..

· Beltway policy experts begin living by own wits; after 45 minutes there are no survivors.

· NPR news segments no longer buffered by soothing zither interludes.

· Breadlines teeming with jobless Outreach Coordinators, Diversity Liaisons, and Sustainability Facilitators.

· General Motors unfairly forced to build cars that people want, for a profit.

· Chaos reigns at Goldman Sachs, who no longer knows who to bribe with political donations.

· No longer protected by government warning labels, massive wave of amputations from people sticking limbs into lawn mowers

· WH communications office reduced to sending talking points to Media Matters via smoke signals and log drums.

· Potential 5-year old terrorists head to boarding gates ungroped.

· Defenseless mortgage holders forced to live in houses they can actually afford.

· Without college loan program, America loses an entire generation of Marxist Dance Theorists.

· President Obama places tarp over Washington Monument to conceal from Chinese repo men. .

All kidding aside, maybe there is something to the left’s fear of the Tea Party. Surely, when Tom Friedman notes that the Tea Party is the Hezbollah faction of the Republican Party we ought to take note.

Can you feel the love! Tea Partiers are terrorists, Nazi’s, and members of Hezbollah… How’re those healing words workin’ out for ya’?

From Pajama’s Media, Ed Driscoll on the Orwellian doublethink of the left:

“ to call the grass-roots, libertarian-oriented Tea Party “Totalitarian.” This has to be the first “Totalitarian” movement in the history of mankind that, if it gets everything it wants…will leave you the hell alone.”

On the debt-ceiling deal: Somebody explain to me how increasing our credit card limit lowers our risk of default? Shouldn’t the government be reducing spending, not borrowing? I mean, that’s what the little people do.

Obama: The Master Prevaricator

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:47:00 +0000

Consider this statement taken from Obama’s speech last night:

Now, what makes today’s stalemate so dangerous is that it has been tied to something known as the debt ceiling – a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before. Understand – raising the debt ceiling does not allow Congress to spend more money. It simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up

First, let’s define what lying means. To lie is to knowingly make a false claim. Making a false claim believing that you are telling the truth is simply being mistaken – a condition that arises all too often with all of us. So, how is this statement a bald-faced lie?

Obama claims that “raising the debt ceiling does not allow Congress to spend more money.” This claim is false and the President and His advisors who surely vetted this speech know better. Congress has appropriated funds only through the end of the fiscal year. After that, the government will need to borrow money to continue its spending spree. In the absence of a debt-limit agreement, congress will be unable to allocate additional funds. Get it? A debt-ceiling agreement that extends well into 2013 (Obama’s proposal) manifestly enables Congress to borrow the money government needs to continue spending.

People who lie this way are deceitful, of course, but arrogant as well. Obama instructs us as to what the debt ceiling is because he believes we don’t know. We know he believes us to be ignorant rubes because he believes he can get away with giving us false instruction.

This guy is a piece of work…

Sarah Palin Blamed for Norway Massacre -- Why Am I Not Surprised

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 23:01:00 +0000

From Pundit Press:

Not even 24 hours has passed since the tragic events in Norway, and people on the net are already pushing the link between suspect Anders Breivik and Sarah Palin.

You're Not a Handyman...

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 21:00:00 +0000

...Till you can do this

Debating with Lefties

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:56:00 +0000

Obama and Corporate Jets

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:31:00 +0000

Obama excoriated the Republicans for the their support of tax breaks for owners of corporate jets. Unknown to most of us, however, Obama was for tax breaks for owners of corporate jets before he was against them. It turns out that the tax breaks for corporate jet owners was put in place in 2009 – when Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, and the Executive.

Damn those Republicans.

Derek Jeter and Decline of America

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:13:00 +0000

And these words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart and you shall teach [the Scriptures] diligently to your children and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up (Deut 6:6-7).

Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.(Exodus 20:12).

What do we learn from these two passages? First, we learn the God’s will is for parents (the older generation) to teach God’s wisdom to their children (the younger generation). The second verse (the fifth commandment) teaches us that children (the younger generation) are obligated to honor their parents (the older generation). Now, keep in mind that God is addressing the nation of Israel in both of these passages, not individuals. Phrased negatively in a more contemporary context, the Judeo-Christian tradition, upon which this nation was explicitly and purposefully founded, understands that a nation whose people do not honor this reciprocal obligation will not survive.

What’s this have to do with Derek Jeter, you ask. The decline of an athlete, no matter how accomplished is inevitable as Richard Epstein writes in his article America Strikes Out. The decline of Derek Jeter’s play is a metaphor for the decline of America. He writes,

All individuals undergo a cycle of growth and decay that no one can alter or halt. In contrast, nations can be viewed as perpetually young with the youthful and vigorous replacing the old and cautious as the latter group retires or dies off…[but] if individual declines are inevitable, national declines need not be.

Mr. Epstein ascribes the decline of America to failed leadership – a leadership that, like Derek Jeter constantly fiddling with his swing, is constantly fiddling with its policies. The article is instructive and well worth your time. However, in the end Mr. Epstein’s prescription to reverse the decline, deregulation, only treats the symptom.

America’s decline is due to the loss of the American ideal and the rejection of the idea of American exceptionalism. American ideals derive from the values of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and because the older generations have failed to teach [these values] diligently to their children and their children have failed to honor their forbearers, the decline into mediocrity is inevitable.

This is what happens when our view of science is obtained from Hollywood

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:29:00 +0000

Six Italian geoscientists are being prosecuted for manslaughter for failing to predict an earthquake. Read the story here. This paragraph stands out:

A substantial portion of the public does not have sufficient grounding in basic sciences to understand the scientific information that is presented. This only widens the void between scientists and the public, forcing scientists to use intermediaries such as journalists or public relations personnel. And it also forces those media personnel to simplify concepts or ideas, often to the point where they are no longer strictly accurate. Somehow, whether intentionally or accidentally, this seems to be what happened in Italy.

This is true, as far as it goes. But the plain facts are that science is difficult, non-intuitive and not structured for the attention spans of young people raised on MTV reality-shows. When these same young adults enter the world of adults, which is to say and consequential world, their expectations are so off-kilter as to be delusional.

If you think I’m being unduly harsh, I have two words for you: “Global Warming”

The Morality of Transcendent Truth

noreply@blogger.com (Michael) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:27:00 +0000

Mike Potemra contributed a post to National Review Online, The Ethics of Social Change, in which he asserted that he strongly believes in absolute truth. In response to his article, he received a comment via email around which he wrote a second article, Truth Matters. Here is the section of the email comment to which Potemra responded:

Perhaps there is “absolute truth”. Let’s put aside, for now at least, the intellectual side of this discussion (quantum physics, ego, consciousness, conscience, mind, matter, soul, god, etc.)

You do realize, do you not, that people who “know” the “absolute truth” have committed unspeakable mayhem throughout all of history? Yes?

The list is long, and infamous, and while it includes obvious monsters like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, and Hitler, it also includes lots of religious figures, from pretty much every major religion, including many, many Christians. I know you know this – it is simply a fact.

Let’s face it, my friend. The quest for “absolute truth” pretty much always leaves behind a trail of broken bodies, broken minds, or even corpses.

Or, at minimum, plenty of hatred. I know you must be familiar with the comments at The Corner regarding SSM. A lot of people there, armed with the “absolute truth” provided by Christianity, refer to gays as “disordered”, with “totalitarian impulses”, and worse. . . . [The writer goes on to quote some combox comments, which, I will stipulate, are --- how to put this delicately? --- well, let’s just say they don’t seem to be exactly on fire with Christian love. --- MP]

I am writing only to say, think about it. The quest for “absolute truth” has a pretty dismal history.

And isn’t this because, there isn’t any obvious way to ascertain the truth? So people end up looking for truth in ideologies, both religious and secular. And there you have your problem.

Potemra went on to say that this email “is one of the most spectacularly wrongheaded passages I have ever read. To say that it is completely unhelpful to the human cause would be an understatement.”

Surely, Potemra is correct, but He makes a mistake by accepting the framework of his interlocutor. He should have rejected the premise of the writer’s argument outright because the debate centers not whose truth is absolute, but the authority behind the truth. If the authority of the truth is mankind, as secular humanists would argue, then all truth is relative and, by construction, absolute truth can not exist. Dig deep enough and you’ll find that most atheists are loathe to accept the consequences of their theology.

On the other hand, if the authority behind the truth is transcendent – higher than mankind – then the truth as expressed by that authority is absolute. The greatest evils ever committed in human history have been committed by people for whom a transcendent definition of truth does not exist. Their moral compass is set by themselves so they have no one to answer to but themselves. In the twentieth century alone, atheists – beholding to no higher authority than themselves – murdered over a hundred million men, women, and children.