Archive for the General Category

It has to be asked–

Posted in General, politics on August 26, 2010 by johnmwilliams

Has NYC Mayor Bloomberg lost his mind?  What about the mosque at Ground 0 has driven him, and the left, temporarily insane?

Nobody wants to keep Muslims from peacefully practicing their faith.  Admittedly, I don’t live in NYC and don’t have the scoop on each and every protest, but nobody I’ve heard hates Muslims or is an “Islamaphobe.”  But people do have feelings–and the feelings of the family members of the victims of 9/11 have been pushed to the side in this debate like so much garbage by the likes of Bloomberg.  He’s an absolute disgrace to New York and America.  That he can’t defend the rights of those who suffered the most because he’s too gutless to abandon his pathological political correctness shows just how cowardly he and his cohorts are.

Nobody I know of has asked Bloomberg or the city to shut down the initiative.  All of the protests I’ve seen have expressed outrage over the insensitivity of the imam, Rauf, and his dubious motivation for placing the mosque at that particular spot, and have asked that Rauf–nobody else–move the mosque, IF his intentions are truly honorable.  Nobody’s tried to take away anybody’s right to practice Islam.  But you know what?  Bloomberg and the left’s constant haranguing of those who oppose it for those reasons are turning that reasoned opposition into a hard line, absolutest mindset by their tone-deafness and ignoring of anyone who dares question the wisdom of the mosque so close to a site where 3000 Americans died.

Bloomberg and the chattering class are foolish clowns, posturing and primping for the camera and publicly lobbying for their invitation to the next lefty confab in NYC.  They should be ashamed of themselves.  But we all know they really have no shame.

Advertisements

Want to really hack off a leftist radical?

Posted in General, Incompetence, Liberals, politics, Religion on August 25, 2010 by johnmwilliams

Ask him about what he’s said in the past.  This is your “Counter-terrorism Czar” John Brennan.  He has stated that a 20% recidivism rate for Guantanamo isn’t really too bad and called Jerusalem “al-Quds”–its Arabic name.  He also says that “jihad” is a legitimate tenet of Islam.  Here he’s confronted with a question that he cannot answer after presenting himself out as an expert on Islam:

How hard a question is this?  The left accuses the right of bigotry because they bring up concerns about Islam, but the left proves daily it doesn’t have a clue about it either–just general concepts that comport to their constructed reality and cast Muslims beliefs and attitudes in the left’s preconceived notions based on little more than what they wish were true.

Can we cram any more incompetents into one administration?

I spoke of the Franfurt School in the preceding post…

Posted in Demo-narcissists, General, politics on August 24, 2010 by johnmwilliams

For those not familiar, the Frankfurt School was a “communist Utopian-based school” in Frankfurt, Germany, founded in the Marxist revolution that swept Europe in the early 1900’s, and the techniques developed here were based on the tools used by both Mussolini and Hitler to build their fascist movements.  The school was abandoned when Hitler turned against the communist government of Russia in WWII and began seeking out communist infiltrators.

Those Marxists escaped to the United States and made Columbia University their home.  This three-part video details the Frankfurt School and its ideology in terms of “political correctness,” but provides a good background on the techniques and strategies developed by those Frankfurt School refugees at Columbia to create Marxist governments:

I see where Dems are trying to scare seniors again…

Posted in Entitlements, General, Obamacare, politics, Seniors on August 23, 2010 by johnmwilliams

I guess their hypocrisy knows no bounds.  While they talk of Republicans trying to take away their Medicare, seniors would do well to remember who just wiped out $500 million of Medicare (and inevitably more as this boondoggle grows).  Who is talking of pain pills and end-of-life counseling instead of lifesaving medicine?  Who has decided that boards of physicians can fashion “one-size-fits-all” medicine?

And the Dems’ claims they can make up the $500 million in overspending, fraud, and waste?  So they are implying that the government knows where these savings are but just hasn’t bothered to track them down?

Seniors have far more experience–and wisdom–than the typical liberal.  Scare tactics may work on the poor, uneducated, and government-dependent; but they will fall on deaf ears in the face of the overwhelming evidence that Dems consider seniors past their prime and of little future use, constituting nothing more than “excess baggage” in their entitlement state.

Reagan’s freedom v. the left’s slavery

Posted in General, Liberals, politics, Ronald Reagan on August 16, 2010 by johnmwilliams

Some of my liberal friends linked this report on Whitacre’s departure from GM…

Posted in Business, Economy, General, Liberals on August 14, 2010 by johnmwilliams

from the WAPO trying to pretend that Whitacre’s leaving was totally voluntary:

Washington Post

Please read it to reference this post or you won’t have the context.  This is nothing more than Administration propaganda.  No “analyst”–other than a White House “analyst”–would estimate the offering to hit $70 billion.  The largest IPO in history thus far was at the height of the economic expansion in 2006 by the Industrial and Commerce Bank of China, and it was only $22 billion.  And the bank was, to put it mildly, wildly successful.  Anyone who thinks that a car company that has struggled to generate all of $2 billion dollars in profit in the last year and half, almost 80% of which can be attributed to a $16.7 billion tax credit scheme the White House cooked up to try to “cook the books” for those of us they consider their intellectual inferiors; that has not structurally changed anything that drove it into bankruptcy in the first place; and that made sure that real investors were pushed to the back of the line behind unions and other special interests in the first bankruptcy; could in any way generate a $70 billion IPO is living, as this Administration often does where matters of business and common sense are involved, in a fantasy world.

The last “real” estimate I heard for the IPO was $10-12 billion, and as I said–IMO, it won’t happen–unless, I guess, the Administration reprises its Godfather act and threatens Wall Street with more taxes and regulation if it doesn’t eat the crap sandwich.

And the story that it was either this or the long haul is bs, too. No board is going to lay down an ultimatum that its CEO agree to stay on for a protracted length of time or resign if the IPO looks like it has any chance to be successful. I can imagine it now–“Yeah, we like Eisner’s work at Disney and he’s put together an IPO that dwarfs any in history, but hey–he wouldn’t commit to the long term so we thought we’d let him go right before the offering..” If that makes any sense, you need to get out more. It wasn’t voluntary or a business-based decision (see “Obama Administration”). Now, I may be off on the reason, but the timing submarines the IPO and will shake market confidence such that it could be postponed indefinitely. And Whitacre (and the board, if it isn’t made up of leftist hacks) is smart enough to know that–the Administration, not so much.  And even if, as reported in Bloomberg, the underwriters needed a succession plan for their “road show” (where the underwriter tries to sign up subscribers to the IPO before it hits the market), it didn’t require that Whitacre resign–only that he present an acceptable replacement candidate to the board.

There would have been nothing untoward about waiting until after the IPO for Whitacre to announce he was leaving. Even if he was required to give any kind of notice, it would have delayed his departure by only days. But if the IPO looked like it wasn’t going to make it at all, his exit would be a convenient excuse instead of announcing there just wasn’t any interest in investing in a company the government already runs like a fiefdom.

The fact is GM has not been reorganized from the mess it was as it nose-dived toward bankruptcy. All it’s done is get $60 billion of taxpayer money, unfettered access to the leftover billions from TARP1, and show a $1.6 billion “profit” that’s mostly due to a special $16.7 billion tax credit scheme. Meanwhile, Ford’s made roughly 3X more ($4.7 billion over the same period) without special credits or taxpayer money and its market cap is only $42 billion. As many predicted, we’ve just temporarily stabilized the situation and given the unions more time to push the inevitable end to this failed experiment into the future–there have been no structural changes. I have no doubt Whitacre knew this was the case. But putting off the announcement a week–especially if the successor was already known and ready to step up–in order to see the company through an IPO should have been automatic for both the board and Whitacre.

Analyzing media bias and the “neutral story line” myth

Posted in General, Liberals, politics, Press Bias on August 14, 2010 by johnmwilliams

Ace of Spades–one of the most venerable bloggers on the right–has done a masterful analysis of how media presents a completely biased picture using what is defined as a “neutral story line.”

Logically, there are maxims that can seem in total opposition to one another, yet both be correct.  In Ace’s analysis, the “neutral story line” is neutral in the pure sense–that is, arriving at and presenting the data is done in a “neutral” way.  However, neutrality does not equate to consistency–and here is where the press fools itself.  I can say that “I don’t publish personal information about criminals that’s not essential to the story,” which would indicate a neutral position on published information.  But there exists another “rule” that states that personal information is required to give the reader a sense of who the suspect really is, and this rule could be considered “neutral.”  But while both may be “neutral,” the press picks and chooses which one to apply in specific instances.  For those suspected of a crime who might be from the left side of the political spectrum, the press applies the “Don’t publish personal information that’s not essential to the story (although I’ve seen one recent exception to this–Amy Bishop.  I assume that her mother’s statement that she was “obsessed with Obama” was considered relevant to that particular reporter.  But it was the exception–not the rule).  On the other hand, if the suspect seems to be from the right side of the political spectrum, the “Give the readership a feeling for who the suspect is” rule is applied almost without fail.  Everything from television viewing habits to reading lists are published with great zeal.  So while the press salves itself with this false sense of neutrality, it is pure fiction because the press begins its analysis of news stories from the position that the right is filled with hateful, emotional basket cases who are liable to go off at the drop of a hat after a Glenn Beck Show, while leftists who are suspected of crimes should be given the benefit of the doubt until convicted because there must be some rational reason behind their transgression.

It is an excellent article.  Read it in its entirety:

Ace of Spades HQ

And this is how media bias works 75% of the time. Most of the time, the media is selecting between several possible “rules,” many of which are arguably correct, but which are contradicted by nearly opposite rules, which are also arguably correct. The media never decides which rule is correct in the most cases; instead, they choose whichever “rule” benefits the Democrats this cycle.