Archive for Liberal Nonsense

Is Obama Nuts?

Or is he just an Islamophile?

This is a new take on our question: Is Obama malevolent or merely stupid? And this guy is channeling me, so I thought I’d share his thoughts:

Why do Muslim extremists continue to behead people with impunity? Why do Palestinians continue to celebrate terrorist acts?

The answer is easier than you think.

They keep doing it because it works. When ISIS executed American aid worker Peter Kassig, President Obama took the occasion to show off his Islamophilia, his reverential respect for Islam.

Asked yesterday why Palestinians continue to engage in murderous acts of terror Prof. Alan Dershowitz explained that their actions have cowed much of the Western world… to the point where more and more Europeans and Americans favor giving Palestinians whatever they want.

When Palestinians attack Israel the American Secretary of State and other Western leaders conspicuously call for Israeli restraint.

When terrorism is rewarded, it is likely to continue.

Now, he is writing from the perspective of a therapist, which tells us all that it isn’t particularly healthy for us to reward genocidal behavior. Here’s more of the article:

Mona Charen has shown that Obama manifested his Islamophilia in his official statement about the recent murder of Peter Kassig.

First, the White House statement:

Today we offer our prayers and condolences to the parents and family of Abdul-Rahman Kassig, also known to us as Peter. We cannot begin to imagine their anguish at this painful time.

Abdul-Rahman was taken from us in an act of pure evil by a terrorist group that the world rightly associates with inhumanity. Like Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff before him, his life and deeds stand in stark contrast to everything that ISIL represents. While ISIL revels in the slaughter of innocents, including Muslims, and is bent only on sowing death and destruction, Abdul-Rahman was a humanitarian who worked to save the lives of Syrians injured and dispossessed by the Syrian conflict. While ISIL exploits the tragedy in Syria to advance their own selfish aims, Abdul-Rahman was so moved by the anguish and suffering of Syrian civilians that he traveled to Lebanon to work in a hospital treating refugees. Later, he established an aid group, SERA, to provide assistance to Syrian refugees and displaced persons in Lebanon and Syria. These were the selfless acts of an individual who cared deeply about the plight of the Syrian people.

ISIL’s actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith which Abdul-Rahman adopted as his own. Today we grieve together, yet we also recall that the indomitable spirit of goodness and perseverance that burned so brightly in Abdul-Rahman Kassig, and which binds humanity together, ultimately is the light that will prevail over the darkness of ISIL.

What’s wrong with this statement?

A great deal.

First, Charen points out, Peter Kassig converted to Islam when faced with a death threat. He did not voluntarily embrace the Muslim faith. When Obama insists on using Kassig’s Muslim name he is effectively affirming the legitimacy of the conversion.

She explains:

Peter Kassig converted to Islam and took the name Abdul-Rahman, but only in captivity. President Obama’s insistence upon using his Islamic name reflects his continuing belief that by denying Islamic extremism, he can promote peace….

When someone converts at the point of a sword, in hopes of saving his life, is that “adopting the Muslim faith as his own”? Whom is Mr. Obama respecting by using the Islamic name — Kassig, or his executioners?

Note well: Obama’s use of the Islamic name is a gesture of respect for Kassig’s executioners!

Even more appalling is Obama’s insistence that ISIL’s actions represent no faith, and certainly not the Muslim faith.

Who is he trying to fool?

Charen replies:

But Mr. Obama is still at pains to protect the good name of Islam. He condemns the barbarism of the Islamic State and other terrorists, but feels the need to quickly add that their crimes “represent no faith, least of all” Islam.

Throughout the Muslim world, extremism is in full bloom. Only a minority of Sunni extremists travel under the name al-Qaeda. Others are called al-Nusra (Syria) and AQIM (North Africa) and ISIS (Syria and Iraq) and Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia) and Boko Haram (Nigeria) and Abu Sayyaf (Philippines) and Taliban (Afghanistan and Pakistan) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (Pakistan) and al-Fatah (Palestinian territories) and Hamas (Gaza). The Shia extremists include the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah (Lebanon), and the Madhi Army of Iraq.

Why does Obama feel compelled to protect the good name of Islam? Surely, that good name and the reputation of people who profess the Muslim faith has been sullied by the actions of multiple Islamist terrorist groups.

If Muslims want to restore their good name they will need to destroy the terrorists in their midst.

Obama’s servile profession of respect for Islam denies reality and tells the terrorists that their actions have not compromised the reputation of Islam. Their actions seem to have terrorized him to the point where he can only show respect for the terrorists’ faith.

Islamophilia is the other face of Islamophobia… the latter meaning, fear of Islam.

Charen is right to say that Obama is in denial. She might have added that the Islamic State will continue to do what it does because its actions have caused world leaders to show greater and great respect for the religion it represents.

It isn’t just that ISIS and Palestinian terrorists have barely paid a price for the horrors they have unleashed on the world. They have been rewarded for it.

And he’s exactly right. In the language of psychology, if you want more of something, reward it. In the language of economics, if you want more of something, incentivize it. Two words with approximately the same meaning – a reward happens after the behavior and an incentive precedes it, but the goal is the same. And why? Because there is a strong correlation between those statements and reality. It is a useful concept in bringing up kids, running a classroom, or a grocery store or a nation of over three hundred million. If you want more of something, reward it.

The West has been rewarding terrorism for decades. And, predictably, we are getting more and more terrorism.

– Aggie

Comments

Shameless

Scoot down, would ya Jay Carney? Make room, David Axelrod. Chris Matthews, Laurence O’Donnell, where are your manners?

C’mon Stephanopoulos, give the lady a seat!

MSNBC announced Friday morning that it hired the White House’s associate communications director to head up the network’s press shop.

Starting December 8, Rachel Racusen will be the cable news outlet’s vice president of communications. “I’m thrilled to add Rachel to our senior team. She has great experience, she’s creative, strategic and passionate about our brand,” said network chief Phil Griffin. “She’ll be a tremendous asset to the network.”

Who are we kidding? She already was.

As an associate communications director at the White House, Racusen works long days and nights promoting the White House’s messaging. On a typical day, Racusen arrives at the office around 7 a.m. for a flurry of meetings, prep sessions and events related to amplifying presidential initiatives.

On any given day, Racusen may help staff an interview for senior presidential advisers or oversee the press coverage of a policy rollout event. After 12- or 13-hour clock-ins at the office, she’ll return home only to log online and continue answering emails into the night.

She’s perfect for the “brand”! Thanks at least for not insulting us by calling it a “news” organization.

Comments

A Truly Astounding Video

It seems that youtube links open automatically, so I will not provide it. Instead, here is a page link to The Jerusalem Post. Go there and watch the video about flags at UC Berkley. You won’t be disappointed.

– Aggie

Comments

You’re Fired!

Vermont is so green, even their license plates are green.

But they’re red-faced now:

Following an embarrassing string of missteps, Vermont has stopped paying controversial economist Jonathan Gruber for his work on the Affordable Care Act.

A spokesman for Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin said Wednesday that the state would no longer pay the ObamaCare architect.

“As the Governor and I have said, the comments by Mr. Gruber are offensive, inappropriate and do not reflect the thinking of this administration or how we do things in Vermont,” Lawrence Miller, said Wednesday in a statement. “As we have also said, we need solid economic modeling in order to move forward with health care reform.”

Miller continued that he told Gruber, “that I expect his team to complete the work that we need to provide the legislature and Vermonters with a public health care financing plan. I’ve informed Mr. McGruber [sic] that we will not be paying him any further for his part in completing that work.”

Gruber’s original contract with the state was worth more than $400,000. He’s already been paid $160,000.

Odd that the Green Mountain State doesn’t understand green (money). Or maybe it’s typical of the pinkos up there to compel someone to work for no pay.

What grandstanding nonsense.

Comments

We Can Quantify The Loss Of Personal Freedom Under Obama

Do you remember all those people who claimed that George W. Bush was taking away our personal freedoms? All those fiery dinner parties? Where are those folks now?

Americans’ assessments of their personal freedom have significantly declined under President Obama, according to a new study from the Legatum Institute in London, and the United States now ranks below 20 other countries on this measure.

The research shows that citizens of countries including France, Uruguay, and Costa Rica now feel that they enjoy more personal freedom than Americans.

As the Washington Examiner reported this morning, representatives of the Legatum Institute are in the U.S. this week to promote the sixth edition of their Prosperity Index. The index aims to measure aspects of prosperity that typical gross domestic product measurements don’t include, such as entrepreneurship and opportunity, education, and social capital.

The freedom scores are based on polling data from 2013 indicating citizens’ satisfaction with their nation’s handling of civil liberties, freedom of choice, tolerance of ethnic minorities, and tolerance of immigrants. Polling data were provided by Gallup World Poll Service. The index is notable for the way it measures how free people feel, unlike other freedom indices that measure freedom by comparing government policies.

“This is not a good report for Obama,” Legatum Institute spokeswoman Cristina Odone told the Washington Examiner.

In the 2010 report (which relied on data gathered in 2009), the U.S. was ranked ninth in personal freedom, but that ranking has since fallen to 21st, with several countries, including France, Germany and the United Kingdom passing the U.S.

The nation’s overall personal freedom score has declined by 17 percent since 2009, with a 22 percent drop in combined civil liberty and free choice contributing to that decline.

Of the eight categories in the index, personal freedom was America’s second lowest performance relative to other countries. The U.S. had its lowest ranking when it came to safety and security (a broad measure of how threatened citizens feel in instances such as walking late at night, or expressing their opinions) — ranking 31st out of 142 countries.

More at the link.

– Aggie

Comments

Interesting Midterm Demographic Stuff

Did the Republicans sweep merely because of midterm demographics?

Happily, no.

A congealing conventional wisdom surrounding the 2014 elections is that Democrats had a long night because of an unfavorable Senate map and because Democratic constituencies failed to show up. One storyline growing out of this is that once Democrats can enjoy a “presidential electorate” rather than a “midterm electorate,” their fortunes will turn, and Democrats will run well.

This isn’t entirely correct. The major factors driving the different results between 2012 and 2014 were not demographic. The major difference was that in 2012 Barack Obama was a moderately popular president. In 2014, he is an unpopular president. If this does not change between now and 2016, demographic shifts alone will not save the Democratic nominee.

He proceeds to become wonky, but it’s interesting. The gist of the approach is to compare the known differences in voter demographics between 2010 and 2012, and then apply to the differences between 2012 and 2014. I’ll give you a bit of the argument:

We can illustrate this best by borrowing a page from Harry Enten, and seeing what would have happened if the 2014 electorate had instead more closely resembled the 2012 electorate. That is to say, let’s keep whites voting 60-38 for Republicans, Hispanics voting 62-36 for Democrats, and so forth, as they all did in 2014, but alter their shares of the electorate to resemble 2012 (72 percent white, 10 percent Hispanic, and so forth) rather than 2014 (75 percent white, 8 percent Hispanic, and so forth). This allows us to isolate the effects of demographic change between 2012 and 2014.

The results are underwhelming: If the 2014 electorate had resembled the 2012 electorate in terms of race, the Republican vote share would shrink by just 1.97 percentage points. In other words, in a 2012 electorate, Republicans would have won the popular vote for the House by 4.5 points, rather than 6.5 points. That’s not nothing, as they say, but it still only explains a relatively small share of the difference between the 2012 and 2014 results. Put differently, if Obama had put up the same vote shares among racial groups in 2012 as Democrats ultimately did in 2014, he’d have lost.

Perhaps the difference is not so much differences in the racial makeup of the electorate, but rather differences in the age makeup of the electorate? The 2014 electorate was, in fact, quite a bit older than the 2012 electorate. This isn’t necessarily surprising, given that the elderly population is actually set to grow substantially in the next decade. Regardless, if we reduce the 65+ share of the electorate from 2014’s 22 percent to 2012’s 16 percent, increase the 18-24 year old share from 7 percent (2014) to 11 percent (2012), and adjust everything in between accordingly, the Republican advantage contracts by … 1.94 points.

Now you might look at this and say, “Well, that’s a total of four points!” The problem with this approach is that there is a substantial double count going on. Democrats do better among young voters in large part because that demographic is less white; younger whites don’t vote that differently from older whites. So this isn’t a cumulative exercise.

That last section is fascinating. Did you know this: The problem with this approach is that there is a substantial double count going on. Democrats do better among young voters in large part because that demographic is less white; younger whites don’t vote that differently from older whites.

Now, I thought that younger whites definitely voted overwhelmingly for the Democrats. I did when I was young and virtually all of the young people that I know today do too. But apparently I exist in a liberal bubble, and this doesn’t generalize to the rest of the nation.

In any case, if Obama continues to suck, we have a hope for 2016. Let’s raise our coffee cups to that.

– Aggie

Comments

Another American Beheaded

If you go to CNN, you can watch of video of an interview with him, working with wounded Arabs and explaining that he was put on this earth to do this.

It is very sad. But he would have been better off helping injured people just about anywhere else in the world.

Obama uses his Arabic name in this statement (he was born Peter Kassig):

Kassig had converted to Islam in a process that began before his captivity, his family has said. The trained emergency medical technician was captured while traveling in an ambulance to deliver medical supplies, they said.

“Abdul-Rahman was taken from us in an act of pure evil by a terrorist group that the world rightly associates with inhumanity,” Obama said, referring to Kassig by the name he adopted after converting to Islam. “Like [executed US journalists] Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff before him, his life and deeds stand in stark contrast to everything that ISIL represents.”

Obama praised Kassig for his humanitarian work and said he cared deeply about the plight of the Syria people.

Poor guy. Like a moth to the flame.

– Aggie

Comments

Simple Arithmetic

Byron York estimates how much Professor Gruber earned from ObamaCare

Remember when Nancy Pelosi declared that Obamacare was a jobs bill? “It’s about jobs,” Pelosi said in 2011, during a news conference to mark the first anniversary of passage of the Affordable Care Act. “Does it create jobs? Health insurance reform creates 4 million jobs.”

Like many other promises about Obamacare, that hasn’t worked out. But there is no doubt that Obamacare created a lot of work for at least one American — MIT professor Jonathan Gruber. Gruber’s frank admissions that he and others deceived the public about Obamacare have drawn a lot of attention in recent days. But the money that Gruber made from Obamacare raises yet another issue about his involvement in the project. Throughout 2009 and 2010, he energetically advocated a bill from which he stood to profit. And when it became law, the money rolled in.

You can read about it at the link. I added it up and it exceeds 1.3 million – roughly 400,000 from the Federal Government and the rest from the states. Four hundred thousand from Wisconsin (which opted out in the end), $329,000, about $121,000 from West Virginia and almost $92,000 from Vermont. The total exceeds 1.3, but it is impossible to know by how much, because Michigan let a contract from over 400,000 which was split between several entities, including Gruber.

I guess you could say that he did well by doing good. Or something.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

Epiphany

Who does Jonathan Gruber think is stupid – the Conservatives who never believed a word of ObamaCare nonsense or the NPR/NY Times/Boston Glob crowd who licked up every syllable and accused those who didn’t believe in it of racism? When he says that the American voter is stupid, he means them. Because the Limbaugh crowd and the Wall Street Journal crowd and the Libertarians and Fox News and the small business community and the Tea Party all knew that he, Obama, Reid and Pelosi lied about this every time they spoke. It was the Charlie Rose crowd, the Terry Gross crowd, the earnest little twits who gobbled this nonsense up with a spoon. No wonder the MSM isn’t covering any of this. It’s embarrassing.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

Yep. [Update]

Update: This is a wonderful clip wherein Jonathan Gruber explains that John Kerry helped craft the Evil Insurance Company Tax™ (aka The Cadillac Tax), using the wonderful tool of the stupidity of the American voter. I couldn’t figure out how to post it, but its a lot of fun.

– Aggie

Comments

Now Dems Want To Vote On Keystone XL

Mary Landrieu fights to save her seat.

It seems the voters have already done themselves some good.

For the first time in the six-year fight over the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, both houses of Congress will hold a vote on the proposed project, giving each side in a Louisiana Senate election a chance to boost its candidate.

But not so fast:

A large showing of Democratic support for the pipeline could complicate the administration’s decision-making process, given the party’s dismal showing at the polls last week. Environmentalist allies of the president are solidly against the project and have been doggedly lobbying the administration against approving it.

But Republicans successfully used the president’s environmental and climate agenda as key lines of attack against Democrats in several contested midterm races. Those results strengthen the arguments of those who believe that it would be a political mistake for the administration to deny permits for the unbuilt sections of the pipeline, and congressional approval of the project could put the administration on the defensive if it were inclined to halt the project.

You know what I love most about this? It again highlights Obama’s idiocy. Love it.

Acknowledging the importance of energy to Louisiana’s economy, Landrieu and Cassidy have championed completion of the pipeline, which would transport oil from the tar sands of Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast. The GOP-controlled House voted several times in recent years to support the pipeline, while the Senate, in deference to the administration’s review, has resisted holding a vote on the matter despite strong objections from several moderate Democratic senators from rural or energy-rich states.

You have to ask: At this point, what difference does it make? (Don’t you just love that question?)

For six years, the pipeline has been under review by the State Department, which has jurisdiction because the project crosses international borders. Democrats such as Landrieu from energy-producing states have joined Republicans in calling for its approval.

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) voiced strong support for the plan on Wednesday, saying that “it would be a tremendous windfall for all of us. It’s something we can count on. And I can’t for the life of me understand why we haven’t to date been able to move this piece of legislation forward.”

Joe, let me help you out here. You haven’t been able to move this piece of legislation forward because your Senate leader, Harry Reid, refused to permit a vote. Does that ring a bell, Joe?

Meanwhile, Landrieu is tense:

Party leaders agreed suggesting that it [the pipeline] could be voted on next year in the new Congress.

Landrieu had other ideas.

“I don’t think we necessarily need to wait until January,” she said Wednesday in a floor speech that lasted almost three hours. Landrieu made no attempt to hide her motive. “I’m going to do everything in my power here and at home on the campaign trail, where I’m still in a runoff, as you know, to get this project moving forward,” she said.

She blathered on for three hours!!! She must really want to keep her job.

This exchange between Chuck Schumer and Landrieu is priceless:

Before her remarks, Landrieu was spotted riding the escalator alone up from the Senate trains that carry lawmakers between their offices and the Capitol, toward a row of elevators. She was stone-faced and declined to answer questions from reporters. Once she reached the top level and stepped off, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), one of his party’s top campaign strategists, walked over.

Smiling, he asked Landrieu to step aside for a private conversation. She shook her head and moved briskly toward the elevator. As she did, she pointed to her phone, saying she had a call. Schumer paused for a moment as she moved away. His smile dropped, and he turned to follow her. “Mary, Mary,” he said, a few steps behind, asking her to speak with him. When she kept moving and ducked into an elevator, he hustled and jumped in to join her as the doors closed.

You know, I’ll just bet she’s furious with the elitist, coastal Left wing of her party. But… she voted with them time after time. I hope that the voters in Louisiana think long and hard before returning her to Washington.

– Aggie

Comments

Humanizing Jonathan Gruber [Update] [Update]

I will not publish the video because it opens automatically, but it can be viewed here

It begins with the well-known stupidity of the American voter riff, which is infuriating. He then shifts the topic to “the Oregon study” which apparently doesn’t support the belief that health insurance leads to better health results. With one exception: mental health. It is a very interesting discussion, and well worth a trip to the link. You also get a better perspective of him as a man, as a human being.

It is completely obnoxious that the entire administration, and the democrats in Congress, lied to us in order to pass this bill. It deserves to be dismantled. I only hope (and I recognize that many of our readers disagree) that the final language continues to include the requirement that all Americans can purchase insurance, no matter what their health status, and that there are no lifetime limits to coverage. Too many of us know and love people with impaired health.

Update: REALLY go to the link. He also discusses the fact that if health care costs shoot up faster than inflation, people in the 3x poverty rate income level could end up paying 17% of their income (as opposed to roughly 9.5%) This could happen over the next decade. Money quote: “That’s sort of a bit of a time bomb hidden in this law.”

Update, Update: “Olympia Snow’s staffer was an idiot” riff. This is solid gold, guys. Gruber really knows how to make friends.

And to complicate the apparent ethical confusion, here is a clip of Jonathan Gruber lying on MSNBC:

And here’s the proof that he is lying.

In the first clip, he says that the language about state run exchanges are just typos. But there are other instances of him stating that the law was written that way in order to force states to implement exchanges. The second link goes to one of those instances. Personally, I’m kind of a bad liar; it is obvious when I lie. So I am just in awe of people like Gruber and Obama who can look you straight in the eye and lie, calmly.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »