The Logic Lifeline

A logical approach to sorting out world events. Where logic, opinion and speculation are combined to produce a reasoned, but entertaining reading experience. The unofficial hometown conservative blog of Woodridge, Il

Thursday, October 20, 2011

OWS and the Great Clear Debate

Working a few blocks from the Chicago version of Occupy Wall St. has given me a pretty close view of this group. The first day I went I was interviewed by a camera crew. I was sort of surprised, so I did not ask who they were with. I basically stated that I could not easily grasp any coherent message the group was trying to convey. I also underscored my view that this country needs to decide what kind of country we want to live in economically. We can either live in a country that pursues the American Dream where economically the sky is the limit OR we could live in a country where there is a limit to the wealth we can acquire so it is distributed more evenly.

I have gone by to look at the crowd of protesters a few more times since. Each time my goal has been to identify one individual who looks intelligent, engaged and will have a peaceful conversation with me. I have not yet identified that person. Standing across the street staring at the group for several minutes and still at a loss, I cannot imagine the quick passersby either walking or driving could glean anything meaningful to draw them to the crowd.

I actually would love for this group to succeed in conveying a clear message instead of their message being hijaacked by the media or the Democrats. It looks to me like this group wants to be honest in their views, while the media and the Dems seem obsessed with encouraging the group while at the same time obscuring their message. I have felt for some time that what this country needs is an honest, open, clear debate about the issues and may the best message win. OWS seems to be the best opportunity for that debate to happen.

When the Tea Party came on the scene, the Dems and the Media did everything to obscure and corrupt their message. Conservatives should not and do not need to obscure the OWS message. Conservatives need to do all they can to assist OWS to clearly define and communicate their message. We will then be in a better position to have the debate this country desperately needs.

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Ridiculing Those Who Ridicule

A woman this week tried to use her child as a prop to trip up Rick Perry on the subject of Evolution. By her fear of asking the question herself or by her thinking the exchange would be more newsworthy coming from a child, she allows Perry to give the answer in childs terms - a general answer that should avoid the potential of making the news rounds branding Perry as a science hater.

I must say that in recent years, my personal view of religious things has taken a beating. Some of the views and methods of the strongly religious have opened the door both ridicule as well as opening the door to more easily discredit some on the right with easy soundbyte hits. However, when it comes to the science / evolution issue, I think the views and methods of those playing gotcha against politicians that Creationism / Intelligent Design open them to similar ridicule and discrediting.

We have the champions of the so called "establishment clause". We have those that do not view Creation / Intelligent Design as a science. There are those that do not believe in any Higher Being. I get them. I understand them. What I do not understand is the successful marginalization of those who espouse any view but a godless evolution.

According to this About site on Atheism, 79% of Americans claim to believe in God. That is a large number, an overwhelming majority. In fact Gallup is more generous putting the number at 92%. Either number or even taking the average is again, overwhelming. Why that even means that a significant portion of left leaning people believe in God.

What seems ridiculous and silly to me is the notion that God exists, yet He has had no hand at all in any details of how the universe turns out? He is there with more power than we have, yet He just lets everything happen by total chance? Matter just somehow came into being on its own. All the galaxies and solar systems formed by chance. The 3rd rock from the sun formed at just the right place, with just the right raw materials for all this natural beauty and life to form. All the variety of beings: plants and animals just happened.

All the while, this powerful Being - God just watched and stroked his long white beard and was perhaps entertained with all the changes that just happened. Man came along and began communicating, socializing, making laws, building civilizations and this Being just looked on with never a hand in the way anything turned out?

What a ridiculous thought. Of course if such a Being existed, He would have at the very least a hand in how things went from nothing to how they exist today. Then when we look at everything and see repetitive, complex building blocks such as DNA. Such amazing unfathomable things with astronomical odds of happening on their own like the human eye, sexual reproduction, or the germination of a seed. What an interesting and intellectual study to look and find evidence of a master planner. The amazingly broad spectrum of worthless elements of today's education, and yet such a study is ridiculed and marginalized? Maybe the science class is not the best place for such study, but to rule it out altogether and ridicule those who believe it while fully accepting those who believe in God but think He did nothing to bring about the world we live in.

The point of this post is not to promote a view in the evolution / creation debate. My point is that people are so easily swayed by the power of ridicule of those who espouse a creationist view, while at the same time ignoring the exposed flank that to believe in God and believe He has more power than us, but does nothing with it is tremendously open to ridicule.

Monday, July 04, 2011

Happy Independence Day 2011

Happy Birthday to a country that until now has been great and exceptional. Our greatness has been chiseled away for decades as more and more people turn from an attitude of giving to our country to one of taking from our country. The Givers dwindle and the Takers are increasing. Takers emerge more and more from Giver families and are bred from Taker families. Takers look at taking as their birth right. They want to live their life as they choose - artistically, selfishly, carefree with no consequences. Then they look on those who have made right choices and have been responsible and as a result acquired wealth thinking they have a right to their fair share.
Truth is spurned in favor of Ideology. When a guy on the other 'team' is caught in wrongdoing they want full justice and blood revenge. When it is a guy on their 'team' is caught in the same thing, it is blind eyes, excuses and whistling past graveyards.

Now in these last few years under this administration the already rolling snowball has picked up amazing speed. America's greatness appears to be being systematically dismantled either by purposeful destruction or by willful blind faith in ideological beliefs history and current events have shown to fail.

My hope is that we return to the greatness we once had. That the public debate will become clear, decisive and convincing. It is the only way the truth can prevail.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

A Call for an End to Political Timidity

The debate in the United States has become increasingly frustrating as the Right voluntarily gives up one key speaker after another simply because they say things that are offensive to the Left. These are people like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Pamela Geller, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage and others. Perhaps the better way to say it is that these in their pursuit to focus on the deep details of current events to say things that are less concerned about offending people than about advancing the debate.

The fact is that debate is not the Left as a whole vs. the Right as a whole. It is a debate of each individual point of argument. Very few of these points of argument contain much middle ground which often makes me scratch my head over the term moderate. If there are 100 main debate points where the truth lies either on the Left or on the Right, one can go with one side on one point and the other on another point. The concept of moderate however is often conveyed as being somewhere in the middle of ideology as a whole.

Each voice, not matter where they are in ideology, engages in debate on each point one by one; and even if an individual voice is wrong or offensive much of the time, it does not prevent them from being accurate on a given point. Many seem to be quick to cut off a voice if that voice has in some way given offense. Many right of center run from those named above and have written them off. The fact is that if you talk a lot (especially unscripted), are consistently interesting, want to spark controversial debate and are confident in your opinions - you will offend people from time to time. Those named above may have said offensive things and at times smack of arrogance, but the important thing is they are willing to stick their neck out and push the envelope to get people to think. They are also masterful at articulating the issues.

As we have seen in politics, the most destructive force has been the RINO. The RINO has blurred lines, clouded the water, tarnished the GOP brand and taken the motivation to even vote away from many people. In the public debate, there does not have to be party affiliation. However, most people see the public debate as only having two sides. There are, however, at least three groups: the purists on each side and then this big lump in the middle. The debate that occurs in the middle often lacks clarity, effectiveness and progress. Topics go on and on, back and forth with listeners and readers losing attention rapidly.

It is often those voices clearly on each side that ever make advancement in the public debate. When a story, or topic grows legs, or takes wings it is often originating from one or other of the purist's camps. People like Ann Coulter and Pamela Geller frequently cause a major stir when they speak out. They do not hold their punches and instead of worrying about being offensive, they sometimes go out of their way to be offensive. They will discuss things that need to be discussed, but others are two fearful to address.

In summary, the public debate will not be won while debaters are hostage to timidity, fear of offending and middle of the road messages. Some are taking the lead with boldness and clarity. If they happen to go too far, perhaps a reprimand is in order. However, to throw them away is to risk being trapped in the middle or worst to allow the public debate to be lost to the other side. One of the problems I had with the Bush Administration was their affinity for winning a political battle without winning the public debate. They would use all the tools at their disposal to get their agenda advanced - everything except participating in and winning the public debate.

In voting, it is better to vote out the RINOs and lose, than keep voting them in just to win. In the public debate, it is better to risk offense and win the debate than to be too moderate and lose the clarity necessary to capture attention. It is better to convince the people of what is right than to cater to them when they are wrong.

Labels: ,

Saturday, September 11, 2010

The Stockholm Syndrome of the Left

In my memory this is the craziest season of remembrance of the attacks on 9/11 2001. All along the Left has acted in ways one can only shake their head in disbelief, but lately their Stockholm Syndrome has been raised to a fevered pitch. There are two reasons to explain their behavior: sympathy with Islamic radicals or Stockholm Syndrome. I have given them the benefit of the doubt. Stockholm syndrome has been defined by Wikipedia as " paradoxical psychological phenomenon wherein hostages express adulation and have positive feelings towards their captors that appear irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims..."

Nothing points to evidence of skewed thinking on the left as the full court press of the media to defend and encourage the building of the Islamic community center near Ground Zero. Obama and the media have tried to frame this as a religious freedom issue. I have not heard anybody of substance claim that Muslims have less right to build a mosque than Christians have to build a church. Yet that is the framed argument of the Left.

Obama said his comments reflected the right to build the community center, not the wisdom of it. The vocal victims and the those on the Right have only been focused on that latter point - the wisdom of building it in the shadow of Ground Zero. It is a huge insult to the death site of those found there and the burial site of those never found. The building of this proposed center has an upper floor where Ground Zero can be seen. How many radical Muslims will go to the top of that building and overlook the site with joy in their hearts at their greatest victory over the Great Satan? Somehow the media can find all those people in the South and at Tea Party rallies that are racist bigots, yet in their view all of Islam in the US is pure from any such hatred and bigotry?

History tells us of the consistent practice by Islam of planting victory flags in places where they have defeated their enemies. See a photo collage and a good write-up on this here. I have not heard anyone from the mainstream media even present the perspective of how the loved ones of victims might feel - except of course the one or two that for whatever reason think it is a great idea.

Then the media descended on this loony pastor in Florida that wanted to burn a Koran. There was story after story from one perspective after another: how loony he is (given), how offensive to Muslims this would be, how it puts people in danger (not sure how they align that with their 'religion of peace' mantra). The mainstream media left out burning of Bibles and crosses in Gaza in 2007. They failed to discuss the Muslim Taliban's destruction of the ancient Buddhist statues. The missed the Muslim destruction of churches in Egypt, Indonesia, India, Kosovo, Nigeria and many other places.

Apparently the pastor has decided not to burn the Koran. I think that is a good idea. We should respect the beliefs and views of others no matter how much we disagree with them. The destruction of that which others view as sacred is particularly ugly. What I think the pastor should have done instead was to take a collage of pictures of the 9/11 terrorists and burn it saying it signifies these 19 pieces of crap are burning in hell to this day. I would be particularly interested to hear the views of "moderate Muslims" on where they think the souls of the 19 terrorists do reside. Has anybody asked the Imam who wants to build the community center what he thinks of this?

In the face of all this madness, there are many, many of us still out here remembering with great respect, grief, anger and loyalty those people who fell on this day nine years ago. We will never forget.


Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Green Light to Steal Valor

Well the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is at it again. They have determined that it is unconstitutional to ban people from lying about their military service such as making claims a medal was granted when it was not. This notoriously liberal court struck down the Stolen Valor Act by a 2-1 vote. According to FoxNews, they claim "the law was a violation of his free-speech rights" and that "there's no evidence that such lies harm anybody". Obviously as leftists they despise the military, and fail to see how this robs soldiers of the full value of the recognition of their honorable service.

Value is closely related to rarity. By having people make false claims of valor without any accountability, the number of honored people rises artificially. Many honors in other fields are obtained by hard work or work of outstanding quality. In military honor, it is granted by placing one's life on the line to varying degrees in the service of our country. We do not honor our brave soldiers with outstanding pay, but instead give them something of value. Allowing people to make false claims of valor cheapens what we do bestow on them.

Labels: ,

Friday, July 30, 2010

Once Again the 'Little Guys' Do All the Work for the Benefit of a Big Corporation

Everyone is scratching their head over the seeming lack of oil on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. While many fear it is deeper in the water, Y!News is reporting that 'Mighty Microbes' are eating the oil up. Apparently the warmer waters of the Gulf are favorable to the growth of these microbes and so there is a higher count of them than the locations of previous spills. As a bonus, the microbes also seem to like the chemical dispersant that has been used in the Gulf which also keeps oil drops smaller and easier.

It reminds me of the ending of the "War of the Worlds" where the problem was solved "...after all man's devices had failed, by the humblest things that God, in his wisdom, has put upon this earth."

Labels: ,

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Twisted Pretzel of the Day - Bill Press

It is amazing how much people twist themselves into a pretzel logically to defend the failures and actions of Barack Obama. I am launching a new theme - Twisted Pretzel of the Day. Although I have not seen it, it is not likely to be original.

Today Bill Press gets the award. Looking at the utter failure of the Obama Administration to stimulate the economy and ensure there is an environment friendly for job creation, Bill Press claims those unhappy with Obama are simply "spoiled". The Radio Equalizer provides the video and a partial transcript of Press saying:

BILL PRESS (32:49): I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama. I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled. Basically, spoiled-- as a people, we are too critical. We are quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient. Especially impatient. We want it all solved yesterday, and if you don't, I don't care who you are -- get out of the way.

And again, basically spoiled. To the point where it makes me wonder if it's even possible to govern today. I gotta tell you, I don't think Abraham Lincoln -- who certainly didn't get everything right the first time -- could govern today. I'm not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again. Just about like spoiled children. And it's Americans, and it's the media, and if we don't get instant gratification, then screw you is basically our attitude.

Where was Bill Press during the Bush years whenever things got a bit rough? Now the economy, deficit and national debt are far worst than under Bush where 1 out of 10 people are out of jobs and being unhappy with that makes us spoiled!

The fact is that if Obama were doing everything possible to stimulate the economy - including cutting taxes and spending - instead of his ongoing hostility to business, the American people would be more likely to throw him some slack. As it is, his agenda obviously comes before any other concern and that agenda is hostile to the economy and the financial welfare of this country.

Leave it to apologists like Bill Press, however, to twist themselves into a pretzel to defend the guy they fought so hard to put in office. Instead of putting the welfare of the country first, people like Press simply want to reshape the country in their image regardless of the consequences.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, June 20, 2010

Adventures in Comment Land

Sometimes when reading an opinion piece, whether it be a blog post, an newspaper opinion post or column; I find that the comments on the piece can often be more revealing and interesting than the piece itself. It is true that members of both sides of the aisle from time to time do or say something that is truly ugly and indefensible. When such an event occurs at the hands of a liberal / Democrat, one of the first things I do is rush on over to Daily Kos and search for a story / diary on the event and scroll through the comments. Now any excursion into Daily Kos can be traumatic, revolting and unsettling. I do not have this reaction because people are writing things I disagree with. I love political discourse with those who have different opinions than mine. When I read the comments on Daily Kos I see a teaming sea of people ugly inside to the core, brimming over with hatred and such intense, raw desire to reshape society in their image.

I see the Daily Kos community as the hoard in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" in the scene where the Great Lion Aslan offers himself to be killed in the place of Edmund. Or as the hoard of orcs, trolls, and dark men faced by the Captains of the West at the Black Gate of Mordor. This is not because of their political positions I disagree with, but because of their unbridled or barely contained hatred and loathing they spew in comment after comment. There are a few here and there that try to keep the discourse on a higher plane, but they are drowned out and swept away with torrents of venom.

When events are captured on video (such as the ugly comments of Helen Thomas telling Jews to "get the hell out of Palestine" or the assault by Bob Etheridge (D), N.C. on a young man simply asking if he supports the Obama agenda) the comments are dismissive out of hand when it is noticed that they are sourced on a conservative website. The usual denial when a break is caught in an edited version would be enough for these people to overlook a video showing a Democrat having sex with a child, slapping his senior mother, or kicking a dog - just as long as there were edited stops in the video. In fact even after Etheridge admitted and apologized for his actions, the commenters were still in denial.

The twisted minds and thought patterns of the hoard can be somewhat unsettling to wade through. Yet, the adventures in Comment Land that I have endured can be enlightening into their mind set, and sometimes in a strange way can be entertaining. After all, we enjoy some circus acts where the human body is twisted into pretzel like shapes; why can't it also be entertaining to see somebody twist their mind into a pretzel to defend the indefensible?

Labels: , ,

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Shakedown - GOP Loses Pair...Again

The oil spill is reprehensible in so many ways. I have been to locations on the Gulf of Mexico on several occasions and the thought of the damage this area will experience is sickening. BP is very responsible for this disaster and certainly takes primary responsibility for the spill, stopping the spill and for the damages resulting from the spill. The fact that BP (and other oil companies) have punched holes on the ocean without a clear plan and backup plan to address this type of disaster is reprehensible. BP has also been extremely slow in mobilizing cleanup efforts to attempt to tend to the oil in the water before it reaches the shore. So to be perfectly clear, I have no warm / fuzzy or defensive feelings toward BP.

When President Obama announced that he was going to demand the BP set aside billions of dollars to be distributed by and "independent" party to victims of the spill, I thought he was overreaching his authority and secretly hoped BP would reject it. BP should have made a statement that they will act according to statements already made and pay all legitimate damage claims, and since they would be honoring their responsibilities there was no need for an independent party.

Only now do we find that the independent party Obama has in mind is his own executive branch of government. Texas Republican Joe Barton correctly identified that Obama's actions as a shakedown, extorting money from BP in order to set up a fund he would have control over. Recipients of the money will view the source as Obama and the government, that without them BP would surely shirk their responsibility. While an apology to BP did seem a bit silly to me, the comments on the shakedown were dead on.

While lately it has seemed the GOP has found the spine they lacked while in control, today they took several steps back. House Minority Leader John Boehner, and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor threatened to remove Joe Barton from his position on the Energy and Commerce committee if he did not retract and apologize for his statements. To be clear it is only because of the ridiculous spin by Democrats and the certain regurgitation of their talking points by the media that would cause the GOP leaders to go this route. The Dems would certainly spin this as support for BP's destruction of the Gulf.

Basically, let me put it this way using a very admittedly extreme example. If Obama had told BP that because of their egregious mishap, members of his administration could now rape the wives and daughters of BP executives somebody stepping up and denouncing such an overstep of power and authority would not be supporting BP. In the same way, Barton denouncing Obama's overreach on the shakedown of money and appointing themselves as overseers of the funds is not a support of BP.

I am not convinced the criteria for payment from this fund will be pristine. This administration has already shown its disdain for red states and red voting blocks and its generosity towards entities that vote for him and support his agenda. We will certainly be seeing evidence of corruption in the distribution of the $20B. Of course the mainstream media will cover it up or not think it worthy of news when it does happen. When evidence warranting investigative journalism does surface, the mainstream media will as usual lack any driving curiosity to peel back any layers.

I have always said that regardless of media spin, the war of ideology will only be won when both sides put up their best and clear arguments and fight with clear, direct arguments. The GOP leadership cowering to the media spin and threatening Barton was an act of cowardice. Once again, they have lost the pair they need to win.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

The Apples Spill Shows We Need to Reduce Our Dependency on Oranges

In the President's speech last night he took the time to discuss how the oil spill underscores our need to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. Obama then goes on to discuss wind turbines, energy-efficient windows and solar panels. The only area he deals with replacement of the existing fossil fuel solution is in the area of its use to produce electric power. According to Wikipedia, only 1% of electricity in this country is generated by burning petroleum, products made from what is leaking in the Gulf due to the spill. Obama is taking the flimsiest link from the spill and launching into aggressive changes in energy policy; changes that will lead to further taxation and charges to corporations that will only be passed along to the consumer.

I would love to have a vehicle that does not run on petroleum products and I would love to see the entire country shift to an alternate solution for powering cars, trucks, boats, airplanes, etc. What a glorious day it would be to tell OPEC to go pound sand (and they have plenty of sand to pound). How great it would be to deprive revenue to countries that want to see us and our allies destroyed and / or conquered.

Unfortunately, there is nothing in the near or medium term from Obama's policy proposals that will accomplish removing or greatly reducing our dependence on oil. The only remote link is massive job loss resulting in less need and ability for transportation. The topic of electricity generation had no place in the oil spill discussion. It is simply a continuation of this administration's strategy of not letting any crisis go to waste, but be used to reshape this country in their image.

Labels: ,

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Yes We Can, Unless it is Too Hard

President Obama , Democratic Leadership and even punching thugs continue to put the problems of the nation solely at the feet of former President George W. Bush. In spite of the Obama Administration and a Democrat Senate being in control for 1.5 years and a Democrat House being in control for 3.5 years, the finger pointing continues.

When a candidate runs for president, they proclaim and sell themselves as fit for the task and qualified to deal with the challenges that might be faced during their term. Being a United States Senator, Candidate Obama was very privy to the details of the problems facing the nation, including those on the horizon. In fact he benefited from the first wave of the looming crisis, as the McCain polls took a nosedive. He had every opportunity to look the problems in the eye and back away if he was not fit or able to handle these problems. Instead, he looked the American people in the eye and said he could do it.

President Obama took the Keynesian approach to solving economic problems which basically involves spend, spend, spend. Both sides of the political aisle complained about the large deficit spending of the Bush Administration. Bush was a budgetary tightwad compared to this President. I keep waiting for some new trick for Obama to pull from his sleeve, but it appears he came to office with only massive spending as an economic solution and it is not working.

There are many problems big and small where the one causing it and the one solving it are different persons or organizations. Every election cycle, whether it be President, Senator, Representative, Governor or Mayor; people step up and claim that if you will elect them, the problem(s) will get solved. It is a given that it is the fault of somebody else. The question is "Can you solve it?" Candidate Barack Obama sold himself that he could.

Solutions are not making things better this month and inversely worst next month. Solutions are not building the biggest economic time bomb in history to obtain the most anemic of respites now. This Administration is dancing, bobbing and weaving, playing shell games, using smoke and mirrors, playing the blame game, dragging its feet and often just hiding from the public. This Administration has placed its agenda and the passage of its agenda above the needs of this country for a strong economy and jobs. Neither the economy, the lack of jobs, nor the oil spill will deter Obama from his obsession with wealth redistribution and changing the entire landscape of this country by instituting systems shown to fail in every country it has been tried. The priority of ramming an ideology down our throats has obviously been a higher priority than our welfare.

This President declared he was capable and competent to do the job. His continued presence in office is either a daily reaffirmation of his claims or if he knows he cannot address the problems a declaration that he places himself above the needs of the American people. In either case, he needs to be held accountable. Instead our media continues to enable his lack of competence by covering for him.

We cannot allow this President to live by the slogan "Yes we can...unless it is too hard".


Friday, June 11, 2010

Pelosi Bank Failure On The Horizon

Nancy Pelosi's comments according to MSNBC:

“Take it to the bank,” she said, adding: “I’m very pleased with how the primaries have been going in terms of the votes that my members have received. Looking at the other side and who the challengers are, I feel pretty good about it.”

Her "take it to the bank" comment was referring to her opinion on Democrats retaining control of the House. While it remains to be seen how big of a thumping Democrats will receive in November, barring a major game changer, we will at least be seeing a Pelosi's "Bank" go bust as she hands back the gavel of power to a Republican. I realize she must put on a good face and a good spin, but to set yourself up like that for ridicule is foolish. If she does actually believe her comments, then we have proof she is in denial and lacks two feet in reality.


Monday, June 07, 2010

Helen Thomas Puts a Crack in the Liberal Camp

Anti-Israel sentiments may have strong among liberals for some time, but it seems only in recent years that it has become fashionable and very prevalent. All of this time the Jewish people in America have in overwhelming numbers voted Democrat. It was easy when we had staunch GOP supporters of Israel in the White House. While Bill Clinton was not as friendly to Israel, there was enough lip service to being an ally to Israel to keep it from becoming much of a concern to the American Jewish voting block. The Obama Presidency and Administration has been so extremely friendly and pacifying to the clear enemies of Israel, it has to have been for several months the elephant in the room in many Jewish homes in the US. In their zeal for liberal utopia, many a blind eye must have been turned thus far. I believe that is all about to change. The incredible anti-Israel, anti-semetic comments by Helen Thomas have shaken the tree, and the ripened fruit of Jewish bigotry is falling all over the ground.

I have watched the dialogue on the subject on DailyKos for a couple of days with great interest and some admitted measure of entertainment. There are some quite angry and disgusted with these comments telling the Jews of Israel to go back "home" to Poland and Germany. There are others that are quite fine with her comments and coming to her defense. There was initial denial claiming that just because the video debuted on conservative websites, that they must have edited it and taken her words out of context. Listening to the tape it is difficult to see how that is possible, or any benign nature to her words. Yet she has plenty of defenders among the DailyKos comments. Since her apology, it has become even more interesting. There are those quick to overlook her words since she "apologized" and there are those who recognize that her words are to ugly to accept an apology and move on.

The dialogue over Helen Thomas will be the spotlight that is needed to really shake up the Jewish voting block. If she stays in the White House press corps, it will churn the dialogue against her and the ugly anti-semetic sentiment of many progressives. If she is fired, her defenders will also underscore her views. Either way it goes, this dialogue will certainly churn things up and make some American Jews rethink their support of a movement that wants to tie the hands of Israel against defending themselves against their enemies that want nothing more than the State of Israel to cease to exist.

Update: Helen Thomas has retired effective immediately. Well, well, this is the one scenario that would limit the damage with the Jewish voting block as it allows the dialogue to end the soonest.

Labels: ,

Saturday, June 05, 2010

How I Would Solve the Oil Leak

I am completely amazed that this oil leak has not been fixed yet. I do find it interesting that this seems to be the only problem Obama seems to be relying on a solution from the private sector. Every other thing he has looked to government to fix. Plus the only trick he seems to have in his bag is to spend massive amounts of money. Regardless of the arguments over who's fault the leak is, the Obama administration has done an abominable job at addressing the problem. The Gulf of Mexico is a national treasure that should be protected. Once it was determined that there was a large amount of oil spewing into the Gulf, the Obama should have immediately brought the best people together to address the amount of oil in the Gulf. The waited until it was too late to start burning the oil. They dragged their feet on allowing Louisiana to protect its shores with sand berms. They did not bring any tankers into the area to siphon the oil out of the water. Instead of putting the Environment first, they put environmentalists first. Governor Jindal is a Republican and Louisiana is a Red State, so Obama treated both with hostility, a major trademark of this administration. President Obama was nearly invisible during this crisis. He did not want to be associated with the leak, so he put politics above preservation of the Gulf of Mexico.

I have heard many, many solutions offered on talk radio and on the internet. The problem with most solutions is that they address the problem against the direction of the flow of oil. Putting a dome to stop the gushing oil. Plug the hole with golf balls, tires and other junk. Putting a cap on it. All these solutions fight against the pressure of the oil coming out of the hole. I am no engineer so I don't know all the terms that might be used. I will try to avoid using the word "thingy" in my description. My solution involves putting what I would call a sheath with a reverse seal. The sheath would be completely open when placed over the existing pipe. This would allow all attempts to seal the outside rim of the sheath without fighting against the oil pressure. Once the sheath was firmly over the pipe and the rim sealed, there would be an inner rim on the inside of the sheath. There would be (here is where I want to say thingy) a circular plate as wide as the sheath which would be wider than the inner rim between the oil and the inner rim. It would either act as a pop-plunger or by turning a wheel would rise up to seal against the inner rim. The oil pressure would push it against the inner rim and seal it even tighter rather than it being on the other side of the rim and pushing against the oil.

I am sure my description lacks the finesse of a true engineer, but hopefully it was good enough to understand. I am certain that in the end when this is resolved, the solution will be something like that.

Labels: ,

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Obama the Crude

Many are expressing offense the President Obama used the sexual slur "Tea-Baggers" in an upcoming book. We have seen one left-leaning reporter after another use this crude term when referring to those associated with the Tea Party Movement. Instead of addressing the genuine and rational concerns of the Tea Party movement (outrageous runaway spending that will doubtless lead to confiscatory tax hikes beyond the already unfair burden), the left attempts to dismiss the movement by using a sexual term used for the practice of dipping ones scrotum into the mouth of another mimicking the dipping of a tea bag in hot water. I do not join the ranks of the easily offended regarding this slur. Instead of feeling offended for myself, I feel embarrassment for the person using the slur. The crude are often unable to feel embarrassment for their boorish acts, that it is often left to those around them to feel it for them.

What I do take offense over is that President Obama somehow came to believe he has time to write a book. In the midst of one crisis after another, somehow time can be spent authoring a book. This would not be just any book, but a book with the name of a sitting US President on the cover. Add to that, being the first black President. Add to that the intense scrutiny he knows the book will be under. Imagine the care and attention such a book must take to ensure it meets the lofty standard of being written by the most powerful man on earth. How in the world does such time exist without drawing attention away from the great cares that demand presidential action?

We have an impending crisis looming that the recent oil spill will only magnify. The economy has a time bomb in it. This time bomb consists of fuel prices. We are already paying a lofty $3 and higher per gallon. Any improvement in the economy with drive up fuel usage which will drive up fuel prices. With the increased restrictions on drilling that Obama already placed and the doubtless further restrictions on offshore drilling the oil spill will influence, we are likely looking at the highest gas prices ever.

With President Obama driving up our deficits so he can recreate this nation in his image the only solution Democrats understand is to increase taxes. We will likely see a poison pill of increased income taxes combined with a new layer of taxation likely in the form of a VAT tax. The increase of taxation and fuel prices will be disastrous.

I guess after further consideration, I should be glad rather than offended that Obama is spending time writing books. Hopefully, such book writing will steal away enough time to keep him from further poisoning the well of economic prosperity our country has enjoyed for a long time.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Obama Smoking - What is the Big Deal?

So President Obama still hasn't kicked the smoking habit. Should we be concerned about it? After all a lot of people smoke. Ever since I heard Obama was a smoker I really have not thought much of it, other than that it is foolish and a nagging question about the discipline of a man in the most powerful position in the world. After all shouldn't this position be filled by somebody who is driven by the desire to succeed? Well, I shrugged my shoulders and figured there were more important fish to fry.

Then I suddenly saw a parallel between his smoking and his political views. As a smoker, he knows the dangers that are written on every pack. With each year of smoking, Obama risks shortening his life and facing an early, gruesome demise. In order to satisfy an addiction and enjoy the pleasures of immediate gratification, Obama risks the future of his life.

Likewise, Obama in order to satisfy the politicians addiction to massive deficit spending and enjoy the pleasures of immediate gratification to push an expensive political agenda, Obama is risking the future of the life of this country. Everybody, incuding me, was furious with George W. Bush for his excessive deficit spending. Yet we have seen Obama blow past Bush's indescretions with wreckless abandon. Facing a time where 1) Our entitlement commitments are higher than ever 2) The amount of revenue that goes to interest on our debt is higher than ever 3) The value of the dollar is at high risk 4) The main support of our debt is a country with a Communist government that is showing a rapidly waning appetite to continue. These are just the highlights. In short, the house of cards is at risk of a major collapse and the risk is growing.

In summary if Obama does not value his own life enough to overcome his smoking addiction, what confidence do we have that he values his country enough to take the necessary steps to save it? I believe there is every chance the same faulty line of reasoning that puts his life in jeopardy puts the country at risk.

Tuesday, February 02, 2010

The Phoenix is Rising

I will keep this short for now. Things have been less than optimal in my life for some time now. I have never forgotten the Logic Lifeline and the still remains one of my passions in life. I just have been forced to place it in a lower priority for some time now. The good news is that the phoenix is beginning to rise out of the ashes. I have been doing a lot of thinking and have some ideas to accompany my return. I am not fully ready, but thought I would give those that peek here every now and then a heads up as well as to let any concerned that know that I am alive and well. I will keep you posted on my return.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Quick Note: Obama's Racist Criticism of Kanye West

It has been reported that President Obama called Kanye West a "JackAss" for jumping up on stage to claim that Beyonce was slighted of an award, interrupting Taylor Swift who did win it. I am sensing racist overtones in Obama's criticism of West. After all, Obama unlike West is of split ethnicity. Since Kanye West is black, he is immune from ever doing anything worthy of criticism so it is obvious that Obama's outburst is a subtle racist remark masked in pseudo criticism. He must secretly resent West for being fully black and found a controversial event to shroud the outlet of his secret bigotry.

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Has the US Leftist Press Ever Gotten a Crowd Count Wrong Favoring the Right?

I have been following for years the Leftist press in this country time after time distort crowd counts on behalf of their bias. They boost crowds for leftist rallies/protests and artificially lower crowd counts of conservative rallies/protests. Of course that assumes they even cover the conservative gatherings at all or get the message accurate if they do. Looking across several news sources you get:

The Wash-Post gives the number "Thousands"
The New York Times gives an ambiguous number "Sea of Protesters" and later mentions "tens of thousands".
CNN reports "Tens of Thousands"

Then oddly enough the Dailymail from the UK of all places lists the crowd as "up to 2 million". I guess only domestic news sources got the memo.

I did see in two of the sources comments on the lack of an official count. CNN states "An official crowd estimate was not available, but reporters at the scene described the massive crowd as reaching the tens of thousands." The NYT states "the police declined to estimate the size of the crowd". I will have to pay closer attention in the future, but I never recall seeing such comments for Liberal leaning gatherings. Were the police told not to get an authorized count?

I don't ever recall the media getting a crowd count wrong that slights the left or favors the right. I have seen numerous times where the count slights the right or favors the left. I guess this goes along the lines of whether the bank or IRS ever makes a mistake in your favor. Not likely.

As for the numbers. Here are a few pics to give an idea (from Newsbusters and WorldNetDaily):

Labels: ,