The Opinionator

Stuff I See on Facebook or Idiotic Things Leftists Post

We belong to a few groups on Facebook, including a couple of political ones. The things I see make me shake my head in wonderment. You know all of those crazy things that people say but you think no one really believes about Conservatives, they do. First of all, the confuse their strongly held opinions and gross generalizations with fact. And every thing they have seen on DailyKos, HuffPo, Addicting Info, etc., is considered factual. And once they post something from one of these sites, they completely lose it if you post something from Heritage, Fox News or any conservative blog to refute their assertions. Even when the post has links to the underlying data so they can view it themselves. 

With that as the background, in the group Cons vs. Libs, (where they are very unhappy it is not an echo chamber), the creator of the group posted the manifesto below. Since I did not wish to out him but he goes by two first names, I shall call him "Ricky Bobby". What I will be doing is responding to each of these assertions as time permits. I post them here in total as they are very instructive as to what the far left thinks. Enjoy!

Why would anyone vote Republican? Well, here are 10 reasons.
1. You are a bigot
It's true that not all Republicans are bigots. But if you ARE a bigot, the Republican party will be much more your group than the Democratic party. Remember that there are lots of ways to be a bigot: You could be a racist, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, or lots of other things.

2. You like eating, drinking and breathing poison.
Many Republicans are calling for or voting for shrinking or eliminating agencies that protect us against poison. They seem to think that the corporations will do the right thing, without any pressure from the government. Uh huh. Read The Jungle. Look at the way Monsanto is hiding facts about Round Up. Look at food safety and outbreaks of E. Coli. 
Corporations exist to make money. They will do so any way they can. The government needs to stop them from doing so in ways that hurt people.

3. You think the rich don't have enough money
The idea that giving more money to rich people (via tax breaks) will help poor people is nonsensical and has been shown wrong time and again in history. Huge tax breaks for the rich (a la George Bush) don't work.

4. You don't support our veterans
The Iraq and Afghanistan Veteran's Association (IAVA) rates every member of congress on how well they support our veterans. In the Senate, 9 people got A or A+: All were Democrats. 30 got D or F: 29 Republicans and one Democrat. More on this

5. You like big deficits
Since the end of WW II the ratio of debt to GDP for the nation has gone down in 9 administrations (3 Republican and 6 Democratic) and up in 7 administrations (6 Republican and 1 Democratic). The largest increases by this measure were GW Bush's 2nd term; GHW Bush, and Reagan's first term. The largest decreases were the three terms right after the end of WWII (Truman and Eisenhower). The last decrease under a Republican was in Eisenhower's 2nd term
source

6. You don't believe in free speech.
The American Civil Liberties Union is the premier defender of our civil liberties, including the right to free speech. That's free speech for EVERYONE; from Nazis to Marxists to Fred Phelps to anyone else. They rate politicians, including governors, senators and representatives. 12 people got a 100 rating: All were Democrats. 65 people got a score of less than 10: All were Republicans. Only 6 Democrats got a score under 50 (Joe Donnelly, Michael Ross, Collin Peterson, Joseph Shuler, Mark Critz and David Boren). Only 2 Republicans got scores over 50 (Olympia Snowe and Mark Kirk) Full list

7. You like big government
The Republicans like to claim they are against big government. It's a lie. They only object when government helps people. But they are supporters of the Patriot Act; they want the government to say who you can marry; they want the government to forbid abortion; they want the government to be able to spy on you without restraint. Unfortunately, many Democrats agree with them on some of these, but to find opposition to these big government ideas, you have to look to the Democrats.

8. You want government to hurt people, but not help them
This is really just a summation of some other points.

9. You are greedy, short sighted and rich
You really have to be all three for this to work.
If you're rich but not short-sighted, you know that, in the long run, when there is huge income inequality, it leads to things like stock market crashes and revolution, and everyone loses. In a revolution, it is often the rich who lose most.
If you're rich but not greedy, you recognize that helping others is a good thing, and that the government assuring that people have a safety net is a good thing as well.

10. You like torture
The Democrats don't exactly shine here, but the Republicans are much worse. It was, after all, Dick Cheney who bragged in his memoir about being a war criminal. It was Don Rumsfeld who opined that a problem in Abu Ghraib was that they weren't torturing prisoners enough. And it is mostly Democrats who have objected to torture.
Torture is wrong. It's also stupid. It doesn't work. People who are tortured will say ANYTHING (true or not) that they thing their torturers want to hear

Rubio: With No Budget In 822 Days, Dem Leaders Try To Force Last-Minute Debt Vote

via www.youtube.com

Marco Rubio calling out Senate Democrats on the Debt Ceiling issue. This is one reason he has such a bright future. (H/T Hot Air)

Memo to Maddow: Times Have Changed

In this Daily Caller piece, Rachel Maddow describes her new ad which will be shot at Hoover Dam. The theme seems to be that we can build ourselves out of our current economic woes as we did in the 1930s. There are a few reasons why that will not work.

First, in the Great Depression you had large numbers of men that needed work and the skills they had were primarily those suited for labor. These men were well qualified for cutting hiking trails, building huts in National Parks, working on CCC projects and to provide labor for massive projects like dams. While we certainly have unemployed that have those skills today, it is not the type of thing that will employ the large numbers of white collar workers that are out of work. It is simply not practical nor does it make sense.

Secondly, if someone wanted to build another Hoover Dam, it would be tied up by environmentalists for years, maybe decades. The Dam simply could not get built today. And the same thing would be true of many large public works projects. Think about the nearly ten years since 9/11 and all we have is a hole in the ground at the site. And roads would not necessarily be the best use of money as they do not lead to as much employment and prosperity as you might think. In Japan's "Lost Decade" they paved nearly every road in Japan and it did not move the needle for them economically. The new refineries, power plants, offshore wind farms (Cape Wind) and energy drilling that would lead to new job creation are exactly the types of projects that are being held up today. If you want unemployment to abate in Fresno and the surrounding areas for example, let the water flow!

Maddow seems to think that we have done this before successfully in Depression. However, what ended the Great Depression was WWII. There is debate as to whether the Great Depression was extended due to the New Deal rather than shortened. Keynesian economics has not proved to be the panacea the Left would like us to believe. What has been tried this time around was really just a short term effort to prop up union jobs. How has that worked out?

Times have changed. Maddow's approach has not. If she really believes we need to build our way out of this perhaps she should focus her energy on the Left and their opposition to projects like Hoover Dam. They are willing to spend. They are not willing to spend it on the types of projects that Maddow proposes. Oh, and we are broke!

The Heritage Foundation Summarizes ObamaCare

A quick summary of what is wrong with ObamaCare from the Heritage Foundation.

If You Subsidize Tuition, You Encourage Increases

Conservative economists have pointed out for some time that as long as the government continues to provide greater subsidies and access to retirement funds to pay for college, there is no incentive for colleges and universities to reign in costs and therefore tuition. This year the number of schools charging $50,000 has doubled, proving that these economists are correct. It may seem counter-intuitive but it allows the markets to function. Until we reduce these subsidies, universities will have no reason to get their financial house in order. There is simply no reason for the price of tuition to rise 2x the rate of inflation except for increased subsides and access to funds. Reign those in and we will start to see tuition that represents the market price.

$50,000: The number of colleges in the region that charge that much or more for tuition, room and board, and mandatory fees is expected to go up 100%.

This Pretty Much Sums it Up

Re: Cantor: A Look Ahead - Mark Steyn - The Corner on National Review Online.

It would be hard to top Mark Steyn's explanation of what occurred in the Senate regarding the ObamaCare bill. Money quote,

"You can't even dignify this squalid racket as bribery: If I try to buy a cop, I have to use my own money. But, when Harry Reid buys a senator, he uses my money, too."

Thoughts On Cash For Clunkers

In observing the Cash for Clunkers nonsense this week several thoughts come to mind. First, while I am still waiting to be shown the part of the Constitution that authorizes such a program, I know that the horse has already left the barn on that one.

Second, as pointed out at Hot Air, many of these "clunkers" are perfectly usable automobiles that are being destroyed. What a waste. They could be better used providing inexpensive transportation to those with real need. Deliberately destroying these vehicles, many of them fairly late models, is a horrific waste, all in the name of becoming more "Green".

Last night Bruce Williams made an excellent point; if you want this to be a program that stimulates the economy, do away with the "Green" nonsense and provide the credits to everyone that wants to purchase a car. If you are going to have a giveaway, give it to everyone.

It also occurs to me that since the credits are for the purchase of a new vehicle, we are in most instances subsidizing the new car purchase of someone who could afford it without our help. These purchasers need to be able to handle a car payment so they are likely far from impoverished. I thought of this as I sat in front to my old 27" tube TV and realized that many of those I am helping subsidize have a large screen TV on the wall. They are driving a "clunker" because of priorities they have chosen. Yet I am forced to help pay for their vehicle. I bet I do not even get a thank you let alone a reach-around!

What are your thoughts?