Perhaps this unknown would make the best President yet. Check it out.
http://www.tsgnet.com/pres.php?id=380002&altf=Nby&altl=Ipsspdlt
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Reading all your comments convinces me that you folks have a good understanding of what is going on. So I have a question about which I would appreciate your comments to help me understand something. The question is "What has Wall Street done to be blamed for this? Also, why have I not heard any names of those responsible on Wall Street? "I know there has been some short selling and then reports put out that would bring down the value of a company which would make the appearance of that company look bad, thus causing their stock price to fall, thus benefiting the short sell. Is that the only reason for blaming Wall Street?"
Monday, September 29, 2008
Who is in charge of Congress?
Pelosi and the Democrats blame the Republicans that the bailout bill did not pass the House.
Uh.. Please, someone please remind me who has a majority in the House?
Uh.. Please, someone please remind me who has a majority in the House?
Saturday, September 27, 2008
I am so worried about US economy if Obama wins.
I wake up in the middle of the night worrying about the US economy if Obama wins the election. Beneath Obama's flowery rhetoric lies a dangerous economic plan that will wreak havoc on the American economy.
Obama plans to return to the failed policies of high taxation coupled with an expansion of government spending.
Worse, Obama says he is absolutely committed to almost doubling the capital gains rate - something he will easily accomplish with a Democrat Congress.
In the coming months - when investors realize that Obama will raise the cap gains rate - there could be a stampede of asset sales as investors rush to take their profits now to avoid Obama's doubling of the tax rates next year.
Obama makes no bones about his plans to go on a tax rampage. Not only would he increase the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to as much as 28 percent, he wants to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which effectively raises taxes on Americans by tens of billions of dollars.
He also wants to do away with the $102,000 FICA payroll tax cap, which means anyone making over $102,000 would pay an additional 7 percent in taxes on earned income.
Obama plans to return to the failed policies of high taxation coupled with an expansion of government spending.
Worse, Obama says he is absolutely committed to almost doubling the capital gains rate - something he will easily accomplish with a Democrat Congress.
In the coming months - when investors realize that Obama will raise the cap gains rate - there could be a stampede of asset sales as investors rush to take their profits now to avoid Obama's doubling of the tax rates next year.
Obama makes no bones about his plans to go on a tax rampage. Not only would he increase the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to as much as 28 percent, he wants to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which effectively raises taxes on Americans by tens of billions of dollars.
He also wants to do away with the $102,000 FICA payroll tax cap, which means anyone making over $102,000 would pay an additional 7 percent in taxes on earned income.
What are your impressions of the first debate?
I actually did not listen to alot of the debate myself, but my impression was that Obama was "Naive" about international and military issues while McCain to me was experience. McCain has actual experience in the military, he knows first hand about intiregation (as a POW) and he is a veteran himself.
The other thing that dawned on me is that neither of Obama's parents were born in this country. This could possibly open the doors for the sons or daughters of some illegal immigrant who happen to give birth to one of those sons or daughters to run for the presidency. To me that is a weird because the constitution state that you have to be born in the USA to be president but I always pictured that the parents of the candidate were also born in the USA. Sorry I have no change of running. Maybe I'll run for the senate.
The other thing that dawned on me is that neither of Obama's parents were born in this country. This could possibly open the doors for the sons or daughters of some illegal immigrant who happen to give birth to one of those sons or daughters to run for the presidency. To me that is a weird because the constitution state that you have to be born in the USA to be president but I always pictured that the parents of the candidate were also born in the USA. Sorry I have no change of running. Maybe I'll run for the senate.
Listen to one of the Great Presidents
During this political season let's be reminded of these words:
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
--Abraham Lincoln
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
--Abraham Lincoln
Friday, September 26, 2008
Freddie/Fannie/Dems/Republicans
Alan brought up the question of who might be at fault in the Freddie/Fannie fiasco that is currently plaguing our country and collective consciousness. He posted a video via U-Tube that was a report on FOX news in which the blame was laid at the feet of Democrats. It appeared in the video that the fiasco could have been avoided if the Democrats had not 'blocked' an effort by Republicans in that committee to move it on to the Senate. In the comment section related to the post, Alan further suggested that something was stinking in the overall process due to money that a government supported agency was contributing to politicians particularly Obama.
First of all, let me state that I am not making any effort to make excuses for Democrats who acted unwisely or unethically. I have nothing good to say about Raines. I do not like the way Dodd presents himself. I am not enamored with Democrats simply because I am one.
I do blame the Democrats involved in 'blocking' the efforts of the then chairman of the committee Richard Shelby to restrain and regulate Fredddie/Fannie. However, the Republicans could have pushed it through the committee anyway. They were in the majority and held the chairmanship. They didn't have the courage to battle a looming Democratic filibuster. They should have had. After all, passing bills and regulating is rarely a one chop assault on a policy/law/institution. Bills have to be presented, rejected, debated even in the face of certain loss. Someday, if the bill/legislation is good and wise, it will pass. Good on the Republicans for taking the initiative, bad on them for not going as far as possible and then starting again. A question here is in order, why did they wait for so long to get started on this?
In the last year of their six years control of Washington, they waited until the last year? A year when traditionally majority parties lose their majorities especially when their incumbent president is immensely unpopular? There must be more to the story. I don't know, maybe they did make earlier efforts and maybe they failed in some way as well, but they were in the majority. Did the House Republicans make any similar efforts? My point is that Republicans were in control. Democrats can hinder, block, and filibuster, but the art of negotiation is at the heart of our process. Partisanship is so predominant today that negotiations are very difficult.
I therefore blame both parties. As I recall, my impression is that, and it is only an impression, Republicans took an 'our way or the highway' approach to their initiatives during their 6 years (excluding most war issues that the Dems didn't dare contest.) Democrats could only balk at the whole if compromises were not welcome. Democrats often do the same when in control. Believe me, that type of partisanship is so thick in our Utah State government that there are Democrats who believe there is no longer any point of even having a Democratic party in Utah. It is a waste of time and money. I digress. The Republicans could and ought to have done more! The Democrats ought to have not marched in lock-step with a persecuted attitude!
Now the notion that something is stinky with Freddie/Fannie making contributions to Obama.
Freddie/Fannie are government sponsored enterprises-GSE's- that have PAC's and are allowed
to donate money to politicians. Their employees can do likewise. I was surprised that this was allowed and think that it is wrong. But it is absolutely legal.
It is also true that Obama is second on the list in amount of money received. I think it is about $125,000 over the entire course of his presence in Washington. Only Dodd has received more.
Outraged? Don't be outraged at Democrats only! Bob Bennett of UTAH is fourth on a list of the top twenty-five! Although not in the top twenty-five recipients, McCain has received $21,500 and UTAH's Orin Hatch has received $18,250. Principle is principle and they have all seemed happy to take it. In fact in the 2006 election cycle when the Republicans were in control, they accepted 53% of the money contributed by Freddie/Fannie. When the Dems were in control they accepted about the same percentage of the money contributed. Freddie/Fannie do what all businesses do. The question is, ought this be allowed from a GSE? I say no. Those reasons can be argued in another blog if anyone disagrees.
In summary, the blame for the fiasco cannot be demonstrably laid at the feet of either party singularly. However, and unfortunately, the blame can be spun to the feet of one or other of the parties. Too bad that Freddie/Fannie can try to buy influence, but don't assume that Obama is to blame more that McCain, Bennett, or Hatch.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
How McCain almost lost my vote!
McCain almost lost my vote because I darn near fell to my death out of the gondola ride from the base of Mt. Pichincha (9,400') in Quito to the summit (12,000'). Luckily for me Dallan was able to catch me while Shawn and Jacob held onto my feet for dear life.
After I got back in I swore to get my ballot in as soon as possible!
Something good may come of it yet
A few nonpartisan points about the current brouhaha.
1. The government bought Chrysler securities to boost the company back in the 80's. Some years later the government sold those securities at a profit.
2. The government bought Mexican government bonds (I think it was bonds) to prop up the Mexican government (in the early 90's?? I can't remember), and the Mexican government paid us back and the US government made some money in the deal.
3. The current crisis may turn out to be a small bailout or even turn a profit in that the mortgages the US government is proposing to buy are valued very low right now, but will increase in value once the market stabilizes. So the mortgages are not totally worthless. They can be sold later to reduce the loss or even at a profit if the market is right. Also, many of these mortgages are currently performing mortgages and are in no way in default.
So, in the end, I think the nation will be OK, but it should never have come to this in the first place.
1. The government bought Chrysler securities to boost the company back in the 80's. Some years later the government sold those securities at a profit.
2. The government bought Mexican government bonds (I think it was bonds) to prop up the Mexican government (in the early 90's?? I can't remember), and the Mexican government paid us back and the US government made some money in the deal.
3. The current crisis may turn out to be a small bailout or even turn a profit in that the mortgages the US government is proposing to buy are valued very low right now, but will increase in value once the market stabilizes. So the mortgages are not totally worthless. They can be sold later to reduce the loss or even at a profit if the market is right. Also, many of these mortgages are currently performing mortgages and are in no way in default.
So, in the end, I think the nation will be OK, but it should never have come to this in the first place.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Irked with McCain antics
I'm irked that McCain trots out Palin and parades her around with foreign bigwigs and does not allow her to take questions. So pictures are supposed to make us believe that she is growing in foreign affairs savvy, that she suddenly knows a bunch, and yet she is not allowed to be heard speaking to them, not allowed to debrief in public and share with the American people her new-found diplomatic qualities? It is an antic as ridiculous as John Kerry dawning hunting gear and strolling through the pheasant fields of Iowa. I loathed that and I loath this.
So McCain decides that he now must look presidential and rush back to Washington even if he must miss the first debate? Suddenly two days before the weekend and two days before the debate, he is going to go back to the Washington machine, to help right the ship. He of such economic acumen! He knows that it will decided with or without him, that he will have no effect, that he will make it back for the debate. But! He will be able to say that he puts country before campaign. Another antic.
His handlers are dreaming all this up. I personally think that he is a better man than all this.
Wish he would take charge and show it. Not such a maverick now! It was what I disliked greatly about Kerry. I voted for him because I felt that I had no other choice, voting for Bush was not possible for me.
McCain Almost Lost My Vote!!
No time now...getting late but tomorrow morning I will explain how McCain almost lost my vote while I was in Ecuador!
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Puzzling behavior
Democrats have not called for hearings on the financial crisis.
Hearings and congressional investigations are the modus operandi of congressional Democrats.
Why is there no call for hearings and investigations?
I know the answer. Do you?
Hearings and congressional investigations are the modus operandi of congressional Democrats.
Why is there no call for hearings and investigations?
I know the answer. Do you?
Sunday, September 21, 2008
McCain's Bad Week
I think that McCain is beginning to flail. Even George Will on ABC's Sunday morning news program was not encouraging. Mr. Will may favor Senator McCain, but by my interpretation of his comments this morning, he is clearly nervous about Senator McCain. I think that the case for choosing McCain is getting tougher to make. I cannot begin to express this better than what was said on the program. I suggest that you go to abcnews.go.com/politics and click on the video of this morning's Roundtable discussion. I learned a lot about the economic disasters that we are dealing with. About 8 or 9 minutes into the discussion, the subject turned to the presidential race as it applies to our economy's troubles.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Go Cougars!
BYU wins 44-0 over the hapless Wyoming Cowboys. BYU has now scored 103 unanswered points!
Go Broncos!
Who would have expected it? Boise State beats U of O in Eugene 37-32 and dominated for 2 and 1/2 quarters! Amazingly, and contrary to what the photo indicates, we couldn't run a lick. But our red-shirt freshman quarterback was spectacular!Ya, babeee!
Speed and Direction
Jerry Johnston of the Deseret News writes:
"While serving as bishop for the local diocese, current San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer liked to say that society needed both conservatives and liberals because a car needed both an accelerator and a brake.
"While serving as bishop for the local diocese, current San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer liked to say that society needed both conservatives and liberals because a car needed both an accelerator and a brake.
When he offered Catholic sacraments to a homosexual couple not long ago — prompting an outcry — he was working the accelerator.
Now, by calling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who supports abortion but still takes communion — and asking her to meet him for a chat, the archbishop is apparently applying the brakes."
I think this analogy is not quite correct. It makes it sound like this country has only one direction to go and the speed is either fast or slow. We use the terms "left" and "right" for a reason. We are deciding the direction much of the time, not the speed. My advice to the left (which I freely offer because I know it won't be heeded) is to go in small increments rather than huge leaps. No one worries too much about small increments, but huge leaps (like currently well-known liberal issues in MA and CA) cause backlash and hurt the liberal cause.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Stupid Polls
Ok....is anyone else bothered by STUPID POLLS? I found the following article at:
http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-teacher It said:
"If this election were about which candidate people wanted as their child's schoolteacher, Barack Obama would be moving to the head of the class. They'd also rather watch a football game with him, but only by inches."
Why do they bother taking polls like these when reality dictates that we will never vote on a Presidential candidate for these things. Let's take a poll on who thinks these kinds of polls are stupid! I vote YES, for stupid!
http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-teacher It said:
"If this election were about which candidate people wanted as their child's schoolteacher, Barack Obama would be moving to the head of the class. They'd also rather watch a football game with him, but only by inches."
Why do they bother taking polls like these when reality dictates that we will never vote on a Presidential candidate for these things. Let's take a poll on who thinks these kinds of polls are stupid! I vote YES, for stupid!
Mickey on the hit list!
The magazine Israel Today reports this week that a Muslim cleric has issued a fatwa urging the murder of the Disney mascot, "whom he characterized as an agent of Satan sent to corrupt young minds." "On Tuesday, another Saudi cleric, Sheik Mohammed Munajjid, told a religious website that the cartoon character Mickey Mouse should be killed because under Islamic law, rats and mice are considered "repulsive" and to be "soldiers of Satan."
"For children they’ve become something great and beloved. Like this Mickey Mouse, who is seen as a great figure, even though under Islamic law, Mickey Mouse should be killed," said Munajjid.
Ok.....It's not enough to put a death order Americans....let's get their Disney mascot too. Poor Mickey has to go into hiding! literaly, how can Disney risk letting Mickey Mouse out to greet his fans knowing some lunatic might make an attempt on whom ever's life is under that suit! He's going to need armed body guards.
I try to be tolerant...but I just don't know the limit of my tolerance if they take out Mickey!
"For children they’ve become something great and beloved. Like this Mickey Mouse, who is seen as a great figure, even though under Islamic law, Mickey Mouse should be killed," said Munajjid.
Ok.....It's not enough to put a death order Americans....let's get their Disney mascot too. Poor Mickey has to go into hiding! literaly, how can Disney risk letting Mickey Mouse out to greet his fans knowing some lunatic might make an attempt on whom ever's life is under that suit! He's going to need armed body guards.
I try to be tolerant...but I just don't know the limit of my tolerance if they take out Mickey!
Thursday, September 18, 2008
The Denver Broncos didn't win!
The Denver Broncos never win, they always STEAL the games by luck. In the Broncos vs. Chargers game they were handed the game by the moron referee. Denver should hang their heads in miserable shame for claiming a victory in that one.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Obama Undermining His Own Campaign?
If Amir Taheri is correct, then Obama has contradicted the whole foundation of his campaign by urging a delay in the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. I hope this can be clarified soon.
LDS Doctrinal Question
No politics in this one. I am looking for LDS doctrine on this one and supporting publications.
Question: In the LDS plan of salvation can one progress from one kingdom to another in the afterlife? I believe not, but living in the south and Bible belt sometimes our quorum discussions get close to discussions that I believe are not quite what the LDS manuals teach. We had this discussion in our meetings this week and I want to back up my position. We had some statements that made me raise an eyebrow and ask where did that come from. I believe from one's (the lesson facilitator's) previous affiliations but was taught in our quorum lesson.
Question: In the LDS plan of salvation can one progress from one kingdom to another in the afterlife? I believe not, but living in the south and Bible belt sometimes our quorum discussions get close to discussions that I believe are not quite what the LDS manuals teach. We had this discussion in our meetings this week and I want to back up my position. We had some statements that made me raise an eyebrow and ask where did that come from. I believe from one's (the lesson facilitator's) previous affiliations but was taught in our quorum lesson.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Banter all you want!
Regarding all this political stuff: Read, argue, banter, fall for every line... As push comes to shove, my strategy is to pray about who might be the best candidate for our Nation. Whether God aswers my prayers or not, you can't fault me for not asking supreme guidance on the subject. Kim
Response to: "Even Sara Palin can't quite tell the truth!" Part 2
Now for the response to the email.
I carefully read through the email, but I couldn't find the lie.
I suppose that the sender of the email is concerned that Sarah Palin didn't fully disclose every aspect of some issue. I seems like this is akin to being asked in a Temple Recommend interview
"Are you honest in all your dealings?"
"Yes." (but I won't tell the bishop about the time I brought home a No. 2 pencil from work.)
I suppose that would make you a liar.
You are asked by a potential employer: Have you ever committed a felony?
You answer "No." because you haven't, but maybe you should have disclosed the fact that you illegally have a No. 2 pencil in your possession.
What I am trying to say is that one should not be required to disclose every little detail of one's life to be considered a truth-teller. It's ok to debate whether something is a "little detail" or not, but until such a determination is made I think that one should not be considered to be a liar.
So please, will someone tell me what lie Sarah Palin told?
Also, please tell me why we shouldn't call Obama a liar since he has not fully disclosed all his dealings with Bill Ayers (the terrorist)?
I carefully read through the email, but I couldn't find the lie.
I suppose that the sender of the email is concerned that Sarah Palin didn't fully disclose every aspect of some issue. I seems like this is akin to being asked in a Temple Recommend interview
"Are you honest in all your dealings?"
"Yes." (but I won't tell the bishop about the time I brought home a No. 2 pencil from work.)
I suppose that would make you a liar.
You are asked by a potential employer: Have you ever committed a felony?
You answer "No." because you haven't, but maybe you should have disclosed the fact that you illegally have a No. 2 pencil in your possession.
What I am trying to say is that one should not be required to disclose every little detail of one's life to be considered a truth-teller. It's ok to debate whether something is a "little detail" or not, but until such a determination is made I think that one should not be considered to be a liar.
So please, will someone tell me what lie Sarah Palin told?
Also, please tell me why we shouldn't call Obama a liar since he has not fully disclosed all his dealings with Bill Ayers (the terrorist)?
Response to: "Even Sara Palin can't quite tell the truth!" Part 1
I guess it doesn't matter how much I plea to have political stuff put on the blog.
Please remember that Kim has requested that politically-related email not be sent to his military email account, so don't just blast out emails without reviewing the address list.
Also, I get two emails with each blast, so please remove my BYU address (akw32@email.byu.edu) from your email list. You may keep the other (which you can plainly see by looking at the list of addresses before you send an email).
If you can't do the above or figure out how to log in to the blog, I don't want to hear anymore complaining about how McCain can't use email. It would appear that my family is no better.
Please remember that Kim has requested that politically-related email not be sent to his military email account, so don't just blast out emails without reviewing the address list.
Also, I get two emails with each blast, so please remove my BYU address (akw32@email.byu.edu) from your email list. You may keep the other (which you can plainly see by looking at the list of addresses before you send an email).
If you can't do the above or figure out how to log in to the blog, I don't want to hear anymore complaining about how McCain can't use email. It would appear that my family is no better.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Democrat or Republican?
I heard this today on a Neal Boortz radio show. He is a devout Libertarian.
A straight "A" 4.0 gpa girl asked her dad how she would know if she believed in the Republican philosophy or the Democratic philosophy.
He said, "How would you feel if the girl down the street was a student with a 2.0 gpa. She did not really excell in anything and just did the minimum to get by in school. And the teacher said, 'Since you have achieved so much and have applied yourself and excelled, you don't need so much and so I will take a point from you and give it to her. That way you both have a 3.0 gpa. and the playing field is even now.' "
The daughter replied, "That's not fair!"
"Then you are a Republican" quipped the father.
Just reporting what I heard on the radio. Of course referring to wealth redistribution and taxing the rich at a higher rate because "they can afford it".
Wow, will this get any responses?!
A straight "A" 4.0 gpa girl asked her dad how she would know if she believed in the Republican philosophy or the Democratic philosophy.
He said, "How would you feel if the girl down the street was a student with a 2.0 gpa. She did not really excell in anything and just did the minimum to get by in school. And the teacher said, 'Since you have achieved so much and have applied yourself and excelled, you don't need so much and so I will take a point from you and give it to her. That way you both have a 3.0 gpa. and the playing field is even now.' "
The daughter replied, "That's not fair!"
"Then you are a Republican" quipped the father.
Just reporting what I heard on the radio. Of course referring to wealth redistribution and taxing the rich at a higher rate because "they can afford it".
Wow, will this get any responses?!
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Electoral Map
Go here to have fun playing with the electoral map.
Here is my current projection of how the election will go.
Here is my current projection of how the election will go.
Interesting Poll vs. what is metioned in the media
I just read a poll done by FOXNEWS (agreeably right wing but extremely similar to results by the LA Times (left wing media)). BOTH show that (Republican)President Bush has only a 30% approval rating while the (Democratic controlled) Congress has only a 17% approval rating. Is it no wonder that McCain is gaining on Obama in all other polls in the last two weeks? Obama needs to quit comparing McCain to Bush because his own Democratic party is lagging 13% points behind Bush. In my opinion, the "Change" that Obama speaks of does not need to come to the Executive Branch as much as it does in the Legislative Branch. I believe that it is far more important to have a higher approval rating in Congress than in the White House. I personally view the White House as more controlling on Foriegn Policy and the Congress on Domestic Policies. Foriegn Powers cannot change our laws only our Congress can do that. But on the other hand, our White House (who basically controls our military) can sure change laws, by force if needed, in foriegn lands (i.e. Iraq, Pakistan, Bosnia, etc.). So, who is more appropriate to lead in Foriegn Policy? If the Democrats had a good experienced leader as their candidate (as opposed to Obama) I might be willing to give them a chance and my vote! But, I think McCain is far more prepared to deal with foriegn leaders over Obama any day. Who is more able to lead on Domestic Policy issues? Let the poll numbers speak for themselves...a Democratic controlled Congress with a 17% approval rating? I think not. "Change" Congress! I just can't stomach the thought of Obama dealing with such important matters as foriegn policy...just can't do it.
Obama-Bible video
Can someone direct me as to where I can view the Obama video or speech where he mentions the Bible that you have told me about. I would like to view it or read it for myself. Thanks. - Deric
International Trip
Just thought that I would let everyone know that the twins and I are going to Ecuador on the 15th and will return on the 20th.
We will be staying with friends from my mission. We will split the time between two families that I was blessed to teach and baptize. We will spend the first night or two with Ligia Diaz and then some time with the Armas family in Quito.
We will travel by bus to Otavalo and Ibarra to pick up local souveniers and handicrafts. San Antonio de Ibarra is famous for wood carvings and Otavalo for linens.
I will be on a real vigilant lookout because I am not 100% convinced that the security in Ecuador is what it used to be. We will be vigilant and caucious but plan on having a good trip.
We will be staying with friends from my mission. We will split the time between two families that I was blessed to teach and baptize. We will spend the first night or two with Ligia Diaz and then some time with the Armas family in Quito.
We will travel by bus to Otavalo and Ibarra to pick up local souveniers and handicrafts. San Antonio de Ibarra is famous for wood carvings and Otavalo for linens.
I will be on a real vigilant lookout because I am not 100% convinced that the security in Ecuador is what it used to be. We will be vigilant and caucious but plan on having a good trip.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Deterioration of Journalism
Aside from the blatant sexist behavior of the MSM in recent weeks, the word "effing" seems to have found it's way into major publications. One example is Andrew Romano in a Newsweek article. He was forced to rewrite his article due to heavy negative feedback from readers.
Ex. "With no idea who's winning this effing thing" was rewritten as "With no idea who's winning this thing"
He also states:
"*These lines previously originally included the word "effing" as intensifier. After realizing that more than a few readers were offended by my use of the bloggy adjective, I decided to edit it out. Personally, I'm no fan of gratuitous cursing--or near-cursing--and saw no reason not to excise a spur-of-the-moment inclusion that doesn't really reflect the way I speak--especially if it was distracting people from the point of my piece. Thanks for the feedback, Andrew"
A professional journalist would not so casually use such a term, and the editor takes equal blame for letting it pass or not editing the article at all.
Ex. "With no idea who's winning this effing thing" was rewritten as "With no idea who's winning this thing"
He also states:
"*These lines previously originally included the word "effing" as intensifier. After realizing that more than a few readers were offended by my use of the bloggy adjective, I decided to edit it out. Personally, I'm no fan of gratuitous cursing--or near-cursing--and saw no reason not to excise a spur-of-the-moment inclusion that doesn't really reflect the way I speak--especially if it was distracting people from the point of my piece. Thanks for the feedback, Andrew"
A professional journalist would not so casually use such a term, and the editor takes equal blame for letting it pass or not editing the article at all.
Another Acceptance speech con
B. Obama made it a point to say that "McCain voted with President Bush 90% of the time!" Again how stupid does he think we are?
President Bush doesn't even vote in the Senate or Congress!
Assuming he meant with the Republican Party, which he didn't say that is what he meant, but giving him some rope if it were. According to the Washington Post, there were 31 votes of any significance in the last session. This is weeding out all the motions to congratulate football teams for winning championships, and motions to congratulate high school achievers etc, etc, etc.
Of those 31 votes, 7 were unanimous votes. Meaning that even if a vote is taken and one party sees that it will be trounced in the vote like 70-30 at anytime a senator can make a motion to suspend voting and call for the vote to be a unanimous vote and it can be so noted and passed. So the record shows that both parties voted for the bill so as not to slow it down. So casting out those 7 unanimous votes that leaves 24 votes.
Of those 24 votes McCain voted along party lines 14 times and against party lines 10 times. So in reality McCain voted along party lines 14 out of 31 times....Lets see, 14 divided by 31 is 45.1%. A far cry from the 90% that B. Obama and the Democrates would quote.
Shoot if you count all the fu-fu bills that come the senate that pass unanimously or congratulating teams and high school scholars even B. Obama, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and Joe Biden vote "with the President" over 50% of the time.
President Bush doesn't even vote in the Senate or Congress!
Assuming he meant with the Republican Party, which he didn't say that is what he meant, but giving him some rope if it were. According to the Washington Post, there were 31 votes of any significance in the last session. This is weeding out all the motions to congratulate football teams for winning championships, and motions to congratulate high school achievers etc, etc, etc.
Of those 31 votes, 7 were unanimous votes. Meaning that even if a vote is taken and one party sees that it will be trounced in the vote like 70-30 at anytime a senator can make a motion to suspend voting and call for the vote to be a unanimous vote and it can be so noted and passed. So the record shows that both parties voted for the bill so as not to slow it down. So casting out those 7 unanimous votes that leaves 24 votes.
Of those 24 votes McCain voted along party lines 14 times and against party lines 10 times. So in reality McCain voted along party lines 14 out of 31 times....Lets see, 14 divided by 31 is 45.1%. A far cry from the 90% that B. Obama and the Democrates would quote.
Shoot if you count all the fu-fu bills that come the senate that pass unanimously or congratulating teams and high school scholars even B. Obama, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and Joe Biden vote "with the President" over 50% of the time.
Obama to cut Capitol Gains taxes
In reviewing some of B. Obama's acceptance speech I find some curious things. He promised to cut the capitol gains tax for small business owners of America. He is either ignorant or conning us all. I think the latter. I hope not the former.
In making such a statement he is pandering to all the stupid and uneducated people out there in the world. This statement sounds so great, and how he will save the small business owners who employ the largest population of Americans! He is counting on the fact that most Americans do not realize that he just conned them. He assumes that most Americans do not know that Small Business Owners do not pay Capitol Gains taxes. They pay income taxes! Small businesses are S-corp or Schedule C corportations which reports business income as personal income taxes. So when B. Obama says he will raise taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 per year, he is saying that he will raise taxes on the businesses that have an income of more than $250k per year! Again small business doesn't pay Capital Gains tax, they pay income tax and so it is easy for him to make such a promise to something that doesn't even exist anyway.
How stupid does he think we are?
In making such a statement he is pandering to all the stupid and uneducated people out there in the world. This statement sounds so great, and how he will save the small business owners who employ the largest population of Americans! He is counting on the fact that most Americans do not realize that he just conned them. He assumes that most Americans do not know that Small Business Owners do not pay Capitol Gains taxes. They pay income taxes! Small businesses are S-corp or Schedule C corportations which reports business income as personal income taxes. So when B. Obama says he will raise taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 per year, he is saying that he will raise taxes on the businesses that have an income of more than $250k per year! Again small business doesn't pay Capital Gains tax, they pay income tax and so it is easy for him to make such a promise to something that doesn't even exist anyway.
How stupid does he think we are?
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Obamacons and McCainocrats
When Obama first burst onto the political scene, he was heralded as the person who could bring the political parties together. One piece of evidence for this was the appearance of Obamacons, i.e., conservative Republicans who voiced support for Obama. Since the conventions, a second subset of voters has emerged: McCainocrats, i.e., Democrats (mostly conservative, I believe) who have voiced support for McCain. It was theorized that the Obamacons would be on board throughout the election, giving Obama an easy victory. It has also been theorized that the McCainocrats will swing the election McCain's way. In the end, I think these groups will not have much of an effect. In other words, it will be a wash, or the groups will disappear, having returned to their respective parties. Even if such groups survive the campaign, I think that what they will do in the privacy of the voting booth will not reflect what they are saying publicly. There is also strong but mostly unvoiced fears among the Democrats that the Bradley effect* will come into play this election. I would hope this is not the case, but Dick Polman believes it will happen.
*The Bradley effect: It appeared that Bradley had an easy win his U.S. Senate contest despite his race (African American). The final round of polls showed him winning comfortably, but in the end he lost. This was attributed to voters telling pollsters that they supported Bradley (not wanting to appear racially biased), but when these voters actually voted, they voted the other way.
*The Bradley effect: It appeared that Bradley had an easy win his U.S. Senate contest despite his race (African American). The final round of polls showed him winning comfortably, but in the end he lost. This was attributed to voters telling pollsters that they supported Bradley (not wanting to appear racially biased), but when these voters actually voted, they voted the other way.
The Liberal Has Landed
I loved getting on the blog that I spent a lot of time reading. I intend to visit often. I am delighted to read everyone's opinions, hearing my family talk politics is new for me and I am excited about it.
I have only discussed with Alan in the past.
The Liberal Has Landed.
I have only discussed with Alan in the past.
The Liberal Has Landed.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Response to MoveOn email everyone received.
MoveOn's email deserves a response.
MoveOn: "Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.
AlanW: Ok. So Palin is one heartbeat away from the Presidency. She has time to learn.
Obama will be zero heartbeats away from the Presidency. Obama will have on the job training.
MO: Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
AW: The reference given for this claim is a NARAL opinion, no actual evidence of the rape/incest claim exists in the reference. The claim may or may not be correct, but the reference is a faux reference.
MO: She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.
AW: Right wing, yes, extremist, no. I don't care for Buchanan's positions either, but he's not extremist. And so what if Palin supported Buchanan? BO supported left-wing extremist John Kerry for President.
MO: Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
AW: I am not for teaching creationism in public schools either, but teachers should be able to mention intelligent design as an option. At any rate, the VP does not set education policy, so her belief is irrelevant.
MO: She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.
AW: Neither do I. What a silly concept! ("It's the sun," I shout!, but the greenies have their fingers in their ears going la! la! la! la!")
MO: She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.
AW: I agree with her 100%. And renewables won't be ready for years. Also, Palin took on Big Oil in Alaska and made them pay up. She then redistrituted $1200 to each qualified Alaskan. Have the Democrats come close to doing anything like that?
MO: How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.
AW: So what? I think MoveOn is just upset that they can't find any mud to sling, so now they complain about how McCain chose Palin rather than complain about anything substantive.
MoveOn: "Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.
AlanW: Ok. So Palin is one heartbeat away from the Presidency. She has time to learn.
Obama will be zero heartbeats away from the Presidency. Obama will have on the job training.
MO: Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
AW: The reference given for this claim is a NARAL opinion, no actual evidence of the rape/incest claim exists in the reference. The claim may or may not be correct, but the reference is a faux reference.
MO: She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.
AW: Right wing, yes, extremist, no. I don't care for Buchanan's positions either, but he's not extremist. And so what if Palin supported Buchanan? BO supported left-wing extremist John Kerry for President.
MO: Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
AW: I am not for teaching creationism in public schools either, but teachers should be able to mention intelligent design as an option. At any rate, the VP does not set education policy, so her belief is irrelevant.
MO: She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.
AW: Neither do I. What a silly concept! ("It's the sun," I shout!, but the greenies have their fingers in their ears going la! la! la! la!")
MO: She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.
AW: I agree with her 100%. And renewables won't be ready for years. Also, Palin took on Big Oil in Alaska and made them pay up. She then redistrituted $1200 to each qualified Alaskan. Have the Democrats come close to doing anything like that?
MO: How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.
AW: So what? I think MoveOn is just upset that they can't find any mud to sling, so now they complain about how McCain chose Palin rather than complain about anything substantive.
McCain overview
For those of you who didn't see this, it's worth watching. It sparked tears with me.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
How about that Palin!
How about that Sarah?! I'm sold, where can I vote?! I like her style, her poise, her hair and her politics. (less government, lower taxes, pro-life, pro-energy effecient) I am sorry for her unwed daughter's pregancy and the hype it put on the campaign, but still I am supportive of her being put on the McCain Ticket. It just may be "Maverick" enough to win. On a side note, kudos to Obama for keeping "families off-limits). T
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)