Codger on Politics

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

If only the positive political comments are considered, who is better?

Gingrich & Romney Are "Unelectable?" So Is Obama. - Sean Trende, RCP

The above give a case for Obama being unelectable.  If so, the republicans are selecting the president.  Who do we want.

I claim the negative campaigning should be ignored since it is the result of big money and emotional mud slinging.   If Mitt Romney is a go along guy (That’s not negative is it?) and Newt is a bomb thrower, which do we want in our next president? If things were ok, then the go along guy wont spoil things.  If things are terrible, maybe we need some constructive deconstruction, i.e. a few bombs thrown.

My thoughts on the "establishments"

GOP Establishment's Strategic Blunder - Steve McCann, American Thinker

I claim I have been thinking in the terms shown here by Steve McCann.  He expresses in much more learly.

Specifically: The Republican Establishment is made up of. . . The overriding interest of this cabal has been and continues to be: the accumulation of power through the control of the income, borrowing and spending by the Federal Government. .   “This insider apparatus has been the primary determining factor in whom among those choosing to run for office will receive the financial, media and logistical support “

It has been apparent for over a year that Mitt Romney has been chosen to be the next Republican nominee for president.   He is next in line and has the track record and inclination to slow down but not reverse the downward spiral in which the nation finds itself. the collective and coordinated vitriol and false or misleading accusations against Newt Gingrich by virtually all in the Establishment, led by the so-called conservative media, is unprecedented

“The Establishment could not have made a more strategic blunder.   They will, in all likelihood, succeed in securing the nomination for Mitt Romney, but the damage they have inflicted upon themselves is approaching irreversible”

Monday, January 30, 2012

Liberal ultimate sin, hypocrisy

Palin and Gingrich's Shared Hypocrisy - Jonathan Tobin, Commentary

In a posting on her Facebook page on Friday, Palin took aim at Gingrich’s critics with the sort of language that says more about her own lack of judgment than anything else. She claimed former Reagan administration officials who noted this week Gingrich was anything but a loyal soldier of the 40th president were engaged in a “Stalin-esque rewriting of history.” This is not merely nonsensical, it is illustrative of the defects in her own character and intellect that have led many of us who once cheered her rise to conclude that she has no business ever putting herself forward for high office again. I see here, the author understands Alinsky tactics, he uses them here. -?? Did the author once cheer her, or is this a fiction to persuade others of his own credibility?

“For her to go on in the same piece to say Gingrich’s critics were employing “Alinsky tactics at their worst” shows again she understands little about either Saul Alinsky’s writings or history.” Maybe neither are advocates of Alinsky. To say someone does not understand Saul “Alinsky’s writings or history” could be true, but the tactics of a community organizer involve deception and slander.

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.

          -- Saul Alinsky

“While Palin and Gingrich have little in common, the one characteristic they do share is hypocrisy.” This appears to be the worst name to call anyone. I think the serial prevarication is a greater sin.


Right On!

The GOP Base Has Had It With The Establishment - Keith Koffler, Politico

“And they don’t want Gingrich to run things. They want him to destroy things.  The political version of Capitalisms’ creating deconstruction.

the establishment says, you’re no president. The establishment may be right. But it may not get its way. , we dont need a president, we need a wrecking ball.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Parsing Obama

Parsing Obama


"After World War II, a generation of heroes returned home to build the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known. Today, as another generation of brave troops come home, we have a similar opportunity."

"In my State of the Union address, I laid out a blueprint for an economy that's built to last — an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values."

"When it comes to American manufacturing, the rebirth of the American auto industry should give us new confidence. Over the past few years, it's become more expensive to do business in places like China, while America is getting more productive."
" So for a lot of companies, it's making more business sense to bring jobs back home." There is no evidence of this.

"We have to seize this opportunity to help these companies succeed." Like we help Generasl Motors? The government and unions looted General Motors.

" But right now, companies get all kinds of tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas, while companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. That makes no sense. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America."

OK, remove the tax breaks. Don't add more spending.

"The blueprint for an economy built to last also means making sure American workers have the skills they need for the jobs of today and tomorrow. At a time when millions of Americans are looking for work, I hear from business owners who can't find workers with the skills they need. That's inexcusable, and we know how to fix it. Let's train 2 million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job. Let's forge partnerships between businesses and community colleges. Let's turn our unemployment system into a re-employment system that puts people to work."

"These reforms will help people get jobs that are open today. But to prepare for the jobs of tomorrow, our commitment to skills and education has to start earlier. That means giving schools resources to keep good teachers on the job and extending the tuition tax credit which saves middle-class families thousands of dollars and gives more young people the chance to earn their way through college."

"An economy built to last is one fueled by American-made energy. Right now, American oil production is the highest it's been in eight years. Last year, we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past 16 years. However, we all know that oil isn't enough. We need an all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy."

"We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years. My administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy, which could support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade. We must do this without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk. That means requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use."

"What's true for natural gas is true for clean energy." Not true, and no evidence is presented here to support the claim.
" Thanks to federal investments, renewable energy use has nearly doubled over the past three years." True, but is this good? Government has artificially driven this result at cost to the taxpayer.
" I will not walk away from these jobs or cede these industries to other countries." this is the crux of the problem, it is not Oboma's business to create business. The are other much more capable to do this, outside of government.

"We have subsidized oil companies for a century. It's time to end those taxpayer giveaways, and double down on the American clean energy industry." OK, delete the subsidies, don't increase spending.

"Finally, an economy built to last insists on a return to the American values of fair play and shared responsibility." This requires a reasonable definition of fair, and responsibility. Fair is equal treatment under the law and nothing more. responsibility is to obey the law and nothing more.

" These values should guide us as we look to pay down our debt and invest in our future. When it comes to the deficit, we've already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. " Good
Bad, no more spending."But we need to do more, and that means making choices. We can either keep giving tax breaks to millionaires who often pay lower tax rates than middle-class households, or we can keep our investments in everything else — things like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans. But if we're serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both." We can do both through spending cuts.

"The American people know what the right choice is. They know that our generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to their country's future. We know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's an America built to last."
Bull.

Sent from my iPad

Thursday, January 26, 2012

The supposed intellectual said "It's the Stupid Republicans, Stupid"

It's the Stupid Republicans, Stupid - Susan Douglas, In These Times

The pot calling the kettle black?  Stupid is such a three year old expression.  Lets start with you Susan,  you just dont understand what a half of the population is thinking.  You are not going to change their minds calling them stupid, nor are you going to win and election just talking to those who already agree with you. But you will continue talking only to those who agree with you.  Who is stupid?

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

The Criticism of Newt

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/23/opinion/frum-gingrich-enthusiasm/index.html?hpt=op_r1

Looking back on that Gingrich platform from the perspective of eight years later, it's striking how utterly irrelevant those five highlighted points were to the largest problems of the time. This quote shows why the progressive faction (Democratic and Republican) alike dislike, and fail to understand Newt. They thinking he is stressing the wrong issues. Newt is trying to return the country to a less active government, the progressives can only address issues via massive government programs.

Newts issues were:

"1. A work requirement for welfare: 87% of Americans say yes, 5% no. John Kerry and the Senate Democrats have blocked the bill for three years.

2. Government should help faith-based initiatives help the poor: 72% of Americans agree, 26% disagree; Kerry is with the 26%.

3. U.S. interests are more important than international organizations: 73-24; Kerry's positions favor the 24%.

4. Violent attackers of pregnant women who kill the baby should be prosecuted for killing the baby: 84% of Americans say yes, 9% no. Kerry voted no.

5. Children should be allowed to pray at school: 78% of Americans agree; Kerry is against it."

Newt is stressing individual rights, which if restored would allow people to solve their own problems. Each of these issues restore power to the individual by assuring the maximal ability to solve there own problems. Requiring work, relieves the individual of the drag of the takers, Allowing the faith based to help the poor would substitute for the government effort and would be tailored by the religious organizations instead of federal workers. Protesting unborn children stresses the worth of human life, and protects everyones life from arbitrary government decisions. Allowing the children to pray in school , allows them to form their own thoughts, which would make them less pliable to the progressive group think.

These are exactly the things that matter.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

For Republicans to choose Gingrich, would be a gamble per the establishment

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289051/hour-newt-editors

You would expect National Review to represent the conservative position. I have a suspicion that National Review has a vested interest in the status quo. The headline linking to this was stronger: Gingrich Is Too Risky to Be Nominee - National Review Online. Risky for who? Newt answered that, it is reasonable for the established politicos to fear whatever might un-establish them. We live in hard times, the establishment has been party to the drivers for these hard times. Let’s not worry too much about their jobs. A little capitalist deconstruction might encourage them to get a useful job.


Monday, January 23, 2012

Fixing the Unbearable Wrongness

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/01/23/the_unbearable_wrongness_of_roe_112866.html

Suppose we accept the premise that a mother can control the life within her body then make it a requirement that the life of the fetus be preserved, if possible, when it is removed. That means every means must be taken to preserve the life of the fetus short of allowing it to remain within the mother. Further give the fetus (now delivered) the right to sue the persons removing it if it suffers any ill effects, that are medically possible to circumvent. Finally categorically deny the right to kill the fetus in the womb, and in no instance is the right to life less important than the convenience of the mother. Finally allow the mother to sue the doctor or a third party who convinced her to have an abortion using an argument that is any way unprovable.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

What is "Conservative"

What is "Conservative"
The issue is confused by the liberal establishment and the Republican establishment.

Which leads to "That's when I realized that his mission isn't to lead the country as much as to satisfy his own rage. Newt doesn't want to merely win, he wants to destroy and remake the world. So he's not a conservative. He's a revolutionary. And the sound of his own voice is both sun and moon to him." from:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0122-20120122,0,941553.column

when the the country has drifted to the extreme progressive view, the return to the constitution is radical, and upsetting to the political establishment.


Sent from my iPad

Friday, January 20, 2012

on Paranoia in Hong Kong

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204552304577114082539096586.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopBucket

Chinese government organs in Hong Kong are stepping up attacks on America's representative to the territory, Consul General Stephen Young.

Somehow a competent diplomat has survived Obama and Hillary. Who would have thought it?

Thursday, January 19, 2012

NIMBY America

NIMBY America’s quasi-religious devotion to the cause of global warming is the current main reason for their hostility to the basic economy. But it is all a part of a concerted, decades-long jihad to limit the dreaded “human footprint,” particularly of those living outside the carefully protected littoral urban areas.

I just discovered this at: //www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2012/01/18/in-keystone-xl-rejection-we-see-two-americas-in-unnecessary-war-with-each-other/

This made the issues clearer for me. also see:http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2010/11/15/california-suggests-suicide-texas-asks-can-i-lend-you-a-knife/





:

Wednesday, January 04, 2012

Reject selling your vote

Reject selling your vote
Voters who responded to the negative campaigning including provable prevarications, show they are mentally lazy. It is accepted that big money can buy a presidential bid. This is not acceptable and all thinking voters need to reconsider what they are doing.


I is not acceptable to replace a corrupt Politian with another corrupt Politian. It would be better to cut off the flow of money to government until the rats leave the sinking ship.


Sent from my iPad