Someone calling himself Meteor Blades has written a missive entitled Open Thread for Night Owls, Early Birds & Expats in which he bemoans the fact that the One plans to spend only a paltry 15 billion dollars a year fighting climate change.
Fighting climate change may well be a noble calling on par with windmill tilting and unicorn chasing. I can see the romance in it -- really, I can. After all, science says it must be done and if science says it, it must be right. Only the most bone-headed fundamentalist would have the effrontery to question science.
So, in order not to appear ignorant, I will happily own to global warming even though I am freezing my ass off in the first snow storm of the year in the Great Lakes region. There is one nagging question that continues to bother me no matter how unseasonably warm things may get.
How in the hell is the government going to do it?
I suppose we could invade China and force environmental controls on them. After we showed them the error of their ways, I'm sure that India and other emerging industrial nations would take notice.
"Indrani, we must stop driving our automobile because the One has decreed it."
"I agree, Hadji, a bicycle was good enough for mother and it is good enough for me."
Of course, the One will not invade China. He will attend meetings in Poland, bemoan the state of the climate, and make promises to the world that we will mend our wastrel ways. Then he will come home, realize there really isn't a damned thing he can do about the weather, and spend money we do not have on a problem we cannot solve.
And people like Meteor Blades will complain that 15 billion dollars a year isn't nearly enough.
It would be funny if our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren didn't have to pay for it.
Showing posts with label Democratic_Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democratic_Party. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Friday, November 14, 2008
When the Democrats act Surprised, Don't be Surprised!
What a surprise! The democrats are trying to blame someone else for their bailout catastrophe!
Any guess on who they are blaming?
President Bush..! Yes, yes! President Bush of course. I know, that one was easy.
The democrats are starting up the finger pointing machine, aimed at Bush.
They are now acting like Bush tricked them into the bailout legislation, by scaring them.
Yep, that means they want us all to believe the Obama bailout legislation was a big Bush trick.
Funny thing is, Candidate Obama fought for that bill!
And Candidate Obama had a big part in determining what the bill should be!
Can anyone remember that the democrats are the ones who started scaring us about the whole "Crisis" in the first place????!
Right before the November 2008 election as a matter of fact.
(Hmmmmmmm coincidence??? HA, HA HA! Right.)
But yeah, the democrats were the ones telling us we had to solve this problem in 2 days or we would all face a horrible fate.
Now, after the dust has settled, the Citizens of the USA are looking around and see 850 Billion in debt added onto their growing tab, and the stock market is plummeting.
This awareness by the people has triggered the democrat default response to anything they get caught doing wrong. They act Surprised!
Surprise, Surprise! See the democrats act surprised and start pointing those fingers! With the help of their minions in the press.
But that shouldn't be surprising to us. The democrats and their helpers never take credit for their mess. They always blame someone else.
In this latest mess, we can see the democrats want to avoid taking blame for two things :
1) Causing the financial crisis in the first place. Democrats brought us the faulty loan policy that caused the problems in the market in the first place. Policy that, after $850 Billion in "emergency" legislation, still hasn't been repealed.
History tells us the credit problem was caused by our government. Jimmy Carter signed the law that started it all. Left wing organizations, including ACORN forced these loans on banks with lawsuits. (By the way, President elect Obama donated $800,000 to Acorn this election, and Worked with Acorn and was a lawyer for Acorn.) The democrats, who were in charge of overseeing this policy, defended this loan policy even though it was pointed out over and over how dangerous the policy is. Here is a video of when the left defended the loan policy when it was questioned in 2004. Here is another video describing the evolution of the problem and mapping out how it was covered up and defended by the left .
2) The Bailout. Democrats hold the purse strings now. THEY wrote the Bailout legislation. THEY fought for it when it didn't get passed, THEY added bribes to it so it would pass, then THEY brought it to the floor again and THEY got it passed.
The bill is a democrat creation. We can all look honestly at this bill and know that there isn't one thing in that bill the democrats didn't want! Guaranteed! They had full control.
America is getting exactly what the democrats wanted. It isn't good. It isn't right. But this is how THEY run things.
The democrats wanted things this way!
This is all about taking power, prosperity, freedom and rights away from the people, and getting to their promised land. Socialism.
The democrats are doing what it takes!
NewsFlash: The super powers that were granted to the Treasury Secretary, to do whatever he damn well pleases to our economy, was not on accident! The bill was written that way, by the democrats, on purpose!
So we can take for granted that it is no surprise to the democrats that the superpowers of the treasury are being used to buy into private banks that have been devalued by the poor loan policies of our government. George Soros, who owns nearly all of the democrat party and finances practically every left wing group in the World, is dictating this policy to them. Soros told them to buy out banks. And they are doing it!
Democrat benefactor George Soros is dictating the socialist solution to a problem caused by the interference in our capitalist system by our government. The democrats KNOW that Soros wanted this, and all this is happening because Soros said to do it .
Face it! The bank buyouts are NO surprise to the democrats! They are following orders from their boss!
The democrats are working for their one constituent, George Soros, to hell with the rest of us!
Stop buying into the democrat's act! Stop blaming others!
We will all be better off if you start doing this.
Now and in the long run.
This Opinion is in response to Daily Anti-Kos Diary Our Congress is "Surprised". Surprised??? by Granny Doc
Any guess on who they are blaming?
President Bush..! Yes, yes! President Bush of course. I know, that one was easy.
The democrats are starting up the finger pointing machine, aimed at Bush.
They are now acting like Bush tricked them into the bailout legislation, by scaring them.
Yep, that means they want us all to believe the Obama bailout legislation was a big Bush trick.
Funny thing is, Candidate Obama fought for that bill!
And Candidate Obama had a big part in determining what the bill should be!
Can anyone remember that the democrats are the ones who started scaring us about the whole "Crisis" in the first place????!
Right before the November 2008 election as a matter of fact.
(Hmmmmmmm coincidence??? HA, HA HA! Right.)
But yeah, the democrats were the ones telling us we had to solve this problem in 2 days or we would all face a horrible fate.
Now, after the dust has settled, the Citizens of the USA are looking around and see 850 Billion in debt added onto their growing tab, and the stock market is plummeting.
This awareness by the people has triggered the democrat default response to anything they get caught doing wrong. They act Surprised!
Surprise, Surprise! See the democrats act surprised and start pointing those fingers! With the help of their minions in the press.
But that shouldn't be surprising to us. The democrats and their helpers never take credit for their mess. They always blame someone else.
In this latest mess, we can see the democrats want to avoid taking blame for two things :
1) Causing the financial crisis in the first place. Democrats brought us the faulty loan policy that caused the problems in the market in the first place. Policy that, after $850 Billion in "emergency" legislation, still hasn't been repealed.
History tells us the credit problem was caused by our government. Jimmy Carter signed the law that started it all. Left wing organizations, including ACORN forced these loans on banks with lawsuits. (By the way, President elect Obama donated $800,000 to Acorn this election, and Worked with Acorn and was a lawyer for Acorn.) The democrats, who were in charge of overseeing this policy, defended this loan policy even though it was pointed out over and over how dangerous the policy is. Here is a video of when the left defended the loan policy when it was questioned in 2004. Here is another video describing the evolution of the problem and mapping out how it was covered up and defended by the left .
2) The Bailout. Democrats hold the purse strings now. THEY wrote the Bailout legislation. THEY fought for it when it didn't get passed, THEY added bribes to it so it would pass, then THEY brought it to the floor again and THEY got it passed.
The bill is a democrat creation. We can all look honestly at this bill and know that there isn't one thing in that bill the democrats didn't want! Guaranteed! They had full control.
America is getting exactly what the democrats wanted. It isn't good. It isn't right. But this is how THEY run things.
The democrats wanted things this way!
This is all about taking power, prosperity, freedom and rights away from the people, and getting to their promised land. Socialism.
The democrats are doing what it takes!
NewsFlash: The super powers that were granted to the Treasury Secretary, to do whatever he damn well pleases to our economy, was not on accident! The bill was written that way, by the democrats, on purpose!
So we can take for granted that it is no surprise to the democrats that the superpowers of the treasury are being used to buy into private banks that have been devalued by the poor loan policies of our government. George Soros, who owns nearly all of the democrat party and finances practically every left wing group in the World, is dictating this policy to them. Soros told them to buy out banks. And they are doing it!
Democrat benefactor George Soros is dictating the socialist solution to a problem caused by the interference in our capitalist system by our government. The democrats KNOW that Soros wanted this, and all this is happening because Soros said to do it .
Face it! The bank buyouts are NO surprise to the democrats! They are following orders from their boss!
The democrats are working for their one constituent, George Soros, to hell with the rest of us!
So there you have it democrats! Your democrat party is causing this mess.
It is your democrats who are representing the elites, and not the people of the USA!
It is your democrat party that is trying to cover up for all of it by acting surprised!
And it is your democrat party that wants this all to happen....
Democrats may pretend to be surprised, but they are not surprised!!!!!
Stop buying into the democrat's act! Stop blaming others!
We will all be better off if you start doing this.
Now and in the long run.
This Opinion is in response to Daily Anti-Kos Diary Our Congress is "Surprised". Surprised??? by Granny Doc
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
An Underreported Obama Demographic: Atheists
With all the Democrat interest in voter demographics derived from exit polls, it was more than interesting that Red County reported today that atheists, or "non-religious Americans" (to be politically correct), "came out in large numbers for Barack Obama on Election Day."
Red County's source for this data was Dr. Paul Kengor, Professor of Political Science and Executive Director of the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College, Pennsylvania. Kengor estimated that "up to 11 million" atheists voted for Obama:
Let's be clear: one of the great strengths of the United States is freedom of religion. This includes the freedom to reject religion. When Americans respect each other's right to choose a faith or to be thoroughly secular, this fundamental right lives on. Also, like Kengor, "I'm not saying that if you voted for Barack Obama, you're an atheist." Obama captured a majority of the Catholic vote, more than three-fourths of the Jewish vote and even 45% of the Protestant vote.
What bakes my noodle is the continual brouhaha about evangelicals who vote Republican, on which topic Red County quoted Kengor:
Kengor also pointed out that the level of commitment to a faith (which he could measure quantitatively only by frequency of church attendance, a metric which measures only physical, not mental or spiritual, presence at services) correlated with choice of Presidential candidate:
Equally significant, however, was Kengor's point that the margin of "no religious affiliation" voters for Obama was much larger than that of any group of voters of a particular religion. Non-and weakly-religious voters wielded a larger influence than voters who strongly identified with a particular faith.
"Change" and "Hope", therefore, resonated more with secular Americans. Here's how I make sense of it. The non-religious, who deny the spiritual, therefore look to the human race as the be-all and end-all. Some, like Ayn Rand, went further by elevating the human to the divine. This leads to the belief than humans can solve all the problems of the secular world. Entire systems have been built on this materialistic Weltanschauung. Indeed, some of the founders of the United States, such as Jefferson and Franklin, tended towards such a viewpoint, although they were Deists rather than atheists. Communism and Fascism were built on atheism; the former clearly replaces the spiritual with the materialistic.
So now the United States has elected Barack Obama, whom many view as a secular savior, as President. What kind of influence will the secular materialist wing of his constituency have? Will the mainstream media start keening about an Obama "atheocracy" if he heeds their calls for a more secular American society? I doubt it, somehow.
In Response To: More On Exit Polls and Realignment
Red County's source for this data was Dr. Paul Kengor, Professor of Political Science and Executive Director of the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College, Pennsylvania. Kengor estimated that "up to 11 million" atheists voted for Obama:
CNN exit polls found that 76 percent of those who answered “none” when asked about religious affiliation cast ballots for Obama. They comprised 12 percent of voters. That equates to an Obama grab of at least 11 million (generally) non-religious voters—a number notably larger than Obama’s overall popular-vote victory of roughly eight million. That’s a huge advantage for the Democratic nominee, one that gets more powerful every four years.
Let's be clear: one of the great strengths of the United States is freedom of religion. This includes the freedom to reject religion. When Americans respect each other's right to choose a faith or to be thoroughly secular, this fundamental right lives on. Also, like Kengor, "I'm not saying that if you voted for Barack Obama, you're an atheist." Obama captured a majority of the Catholic vote, more than three-fourths of the Jewish vote and even 45% of the Protestant vote.
What bakes my noodle is the continual brouhaha about evangelicals who vote Republican, on which topic Red County quoted Kengor:
It is quite telling that liberal journalists are constantly wringing their hands over the evangelical vote, but could care less about the rise of an atheist vote. Whereas evangelicals scare them to death -- and are highlighted as a dangerous force -- atheists are of no concern whatsoever.We continue to hear about the Bush "theocracy" even as President Bush graciously fast-tracks a seamless transition to the Obama Administration. This is a demonstration of another great American strength -- stable transitions of power that prevent potential enemies from trying to take advantage of the situation. Compare, for example, Zimbabwe.
Kengor also pointed out that the level of commitment to a faith (which he could measure quantitatively only by frequency of church attendance, a metric which measures only physical, not mental or spiritual, presence at services) correlated with choice of Presidential candidate:
The contrast is clear when broken down among church attendance. Those who attend church services 'once a week' voted for McCain by 55 to 43 percent, while those who attend 'a few times a year' went for Obama 59 to 39 percent, and those who 'never' go to church voted Obama 67 to 30 percent.
The numbers are consistent among denominations: John McCain actually won Catholics who attend Mass weekly (50 to 49 percent), but was trounced by Catholics who don't attend weekly (58 to 40 percent). McCain's largest margin was white evangelical/born-again Christians, which he swept 74 to 24 percent. Yet, even then, that margin was not as wide as those with no religious affiliation who went for Obama.
What's most significant is that this is nothing new. It is a recent trend gravitating to an increasingly secular Democratic Party.
Equally significant, however, was Kengor's point that the margin of "no religious affiliation" voters for Obama was much larger than that of any group of voters of a particular religion. Non-and weakly-religious voters wielded a larger influence than voters who strongly identified with a particular faith.
"Change" and "Hope", therefore, resonated more with secular Americans. Here's how I make sense of it. The non-religious, who deny the spiritual, therefore look to the human race as the be-all and end-all. Some, like Ayn Rand, went further by elevating the human to the divine. This leads to the belief than humans can solve all the problems of the secular world. Entire systems have been built on this materialistic Weltanschauung. Indeed, some of the founders of the United States, such as Jefferson and Franklin, tended towards such a viewpoint, although they were Deists rather than atheists. Communism and Fascism were built on atheism; the former clearly replaces the spiritual with the materialistic.
So now the United States has elected Barack Obama, whom many view as a secular savior, as President. What kind of influence will the secular materialist wing of his constituency have? Will the mainstream media start keening about an Obama "atheocracy" if he heeds their calls for a more secular American society? I doubt it, somehow.
In Response To: More On Exit Polls and Realignment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
