Wednesday, January 26, 2005
|
HE MAKES THIS TOO EASY! I FEEL GUILTY
Now, to be fair (and I am such a stickler for the hypocritcal brand) I am quoting Washington Post quotes. They may have...might have...must have...been taken out of context. But, the following evidence not withstanding, the Shrub is dumb. Well, he might not be dumb. Instead, he is nowhere near "Presidential".
Quoting the 43rd President at the annual Alfalfa gala in DC:
(Why his "Shrub" moniker is not off base)
"Good to see Vice President Cheney, I have this habit of giving out nicknames, but Dick is the only person who's given me a nickname. He calls me 'The Apprentice.'"
(Why we should be very, very afraid of Condi)
"Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice is here. People often ask me what Condi is like. Well, she is creative; she is tough -- think Martha Stewart with access to nuclear codes."
Now, to be fair (and I am such a stickler for the hypocritcal brand) I am quoting Washington Post quotes. They may have...might have...must have...been taken out of context. But, the following evidence not withstanding, the Shrub is dumb. Well, he might not be dumb. Instead, he is nowhere near "Presidential".
Quoting the 43rd President at the annual Alfalfa gala in DC:
(Why his "Shrub" moniker is not off base)
"Good to see Vice President Cheney, I have this habit of giving out nicknames, but Dick is the only person who's given me a nickname. He calls me 'The Apprentice.'"
(Why we should be very, very afraid of Condi)
"Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice is here. People often ask me what Condi is like. Well, she is creative; she is tough -- think Martha Stewart with access to nuclear codes."
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
|
I CAN'T HELP IT...I'M COMPLUSIVE
I try not to read about the President. But I can't. It's everywhere. He's ubiquitous.
So I return to thumping my favorite ideological punching bag, Talon News. In this lovely article titled, Dems Resist White House Call For Bipartisanship, the current Administration is cast as cooperative and bi-partisan. Horseshit! When coopration equals "believe what I believe", cooperation is a sham.
I ain't lying, check out the McClellan quote:
"Now, the president wants to work closely with members of Congress to move forward on that agenda. It would be very unfortunate if there are Democratic leaders who simply want to block and obstruct the agenda."
If that's cooperation, I want to be a Bushie. That way I'd never have to change.
I try not to read about the President. But I can't. It's everywhere. He's ubiquitous.
So I return to thumping my favorite ideological punching bag, Talon News. In this lovely article titled, Dems Resist White House Call For Bipartisanship, the current Administration is cast as cooperative and bi-partisan. Horseshit! When coopration equals "believe what I believe", cooperation is a sham.
I ain't lying, check out the McClellan quote:
"Now, the president wants to work closely with members of Congress to move forward on that agenda. It would be very unfortunate if there are Democratic leaders who simply want to block and obstruct the agenda."
If that's cooperation, I want to be a Bushie. That way I'd never have to change.
Monday, January 24, 2005
|
OUR PRESIDENT IS A LIAR!
Yet another example of Iraq's similarity to Vietnam has surfaced. The President plans to introduce yet another supplementary spending package to cover Iraq, Afghanistan, and the "War" on terror costs. Another $80 billion requested outside of the annual budget bringing the total spending to more than $280 billion dollars! This is how the Shrub can claim to keep the fed budget under control. It's dishonest. I would even say it's American national politics as usual. Our politicians are not honest with us. Hell! We don't even expect them to be, so this is par for the course.
The purpose of this money should be anything but mundane. Our armed forces have slaughtered thousands with this $280 billion. Our government has stolen the rights of anyone they choose to define as "terrorist". This is morally bankrupt! Putrecense! Rape, plunder, murder, and terror (after all what is "shock and awe" but terror) are being committed in the name of our freedom! Meanwhile, back in Gotham, the Evil Empire's unofficial propaganda ministry debates the Democrats missing sense of comfort discussing "moral" issues. FOX News continues it's dark legacy of redirecting the public debate away from substantial moral issues to fluff. From, "Why is it Ok for American farm boys to kill towel heads in cold blood?" to "Why are the evil Democrats so out of touch on abortion?".
I'm am disgusted to be an American.
Yet another example of Iraq's similarity to Vietnam has surfaced. The President plans to introduce yet another supplementary spending package to cover Iraq, Afghanistan, and the "War" on terror costs. Another $80 billion requested outside of the annual budget bringing the total spending to more than $280 billion dollars! This is how the Shrub can claim to keep the fed budget under control. It's dishonest. I would even say it's American national politics as usual. Our politicians are not honest with us. Hell! We don't even expect them to be, so this is par for the course.
The purpose of this money should be anything but mundane. Our armed forces have slaughtered thousands with this $280 billion. Our government has stolen the rights of anyone they choose to define as "terrorist". This is morally bankrupt! Putrecense! Rape, plunder, murder, and terror (after all what is "shock and awe" but terror) are being committed in the name of our freedom! Meanwhile, back in Gotham, the Evil Empire's unofficial propaganda ministry debates the Democrats missing sense of comfort discussing "moral" issues. FOX News continues it's dark legacy of redirecting the public debate away from substantial moral issues to fluff. From, "Why is it Ok for American farm boys to kill towel heads in cold blood?" to "Why are the evil Democrats so out of touch on abortion?".
I'm am disgusted to be an American.
Monday, January 17, 2005
|
SWEET BABY JESUS? PLEASE LET THIS BE SABER RATTLING!!!
As any self respecting news junky know, the New York Daily News is a no small bit sensationalist. "NEXT STOP: IRAN" screems the headline. Essentially, the story quotes an unnamed Pentagon "consultant" who claims the US is already sending covert commando teams into Iran.
WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS BUSH/CHENEY/RUMSFELD UP TO? Are the machinations of the Evil Empire going to lead us into war with Iran? The New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh implies that. That is a teriffying concept. We don't have enough troops to do an occupation of Iraq correctly. Where are the extra troops for an invassion of Iran going to come from?
Maybe the draft is on the way back, if the New York Daily New's quote of the Pentagon consultant is correct:
"Pentagon neoconservatives - hard-liners who include Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz - believe that surgical strikes on a small list of military targets will minimize civilian casualties and may spark an uprising by reformers against the ruling fundamentalist mullahs"
Does the administration really believe the mullahs will be swept aside? If so, what replaces them? The Pahlavi "dynasty" perished in Eygpt in early 1980's. Mohammad Mossadegh is dead, the CIA made sure of that. What is the exit strategy? Even if the administration had one, with how Iraq and Afghanistan are going, we'd be insane to trust them.
As any self respecting news junky know, the New York Daily News is a no small bit sensationalist. "NEXT STOP: IRAN" screems the headline. Essentially, the story quotes an unnamed Pentagon "consultant" who claims the US is already sending covert commando teams into Iran.
WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS BUSH/CHENEY/RUMSFELD UP TO? Are the machinations of the Evil Empire going to lead us into war with Iran? The New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh implies that. That is a teriffying concept. We don't have enough troops to do an occupation of Iraq correctly. Where are the extra troops for an invassion of Iran going to come from?
Maybe the draft is on the way back, if the New York Daily New's quote of the Pentagon consultant is correct:
"Pentagon neoconservatives - hard-liners who include Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz - believe that surgical strikes on a small list of military targets will minimize civilian casualties and may spark an uprising by reformers against the ruling fundamentalist mullahs"
Does the administration really believe the mullahs will be swept aside? If so, what replaces them? The Pahlavi "dynasty" perished in Eygpt in early 1980's. Mohammad Mossadegh is dead, the CIA made sure of that. What is the exit strategy? Even if the administration had one, with how Iraq and Afghanistan are going, we'd be insane to trust them.
Monday, January 10, 2005
|
DAMN! THAT FUNDAMENTALIST HAS WEBSITES!
Allow me to introduce Dr. Dino, aka Dr. Kent Hovind, the lead ?Minister? of Creation Science Evangelism. I've been introduced the suave hucksterism of Dr Kent through the evangelical television channel, WVCY.
I found some rather interesting things e-touring Dr. Dino's site. The one that really surprised me linked me to the Institute of Creation Research's Graduate School. Who knew I could get an advanced degree in bible sanctioned biology (you know, sans such nonsense as evolution)? Also Dr. Dino runs the Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola, Florida. Who knew?
The most disturbing thing related to Dr. Dino's rebuttal of a Skeptical Enquirer article reviewing the Dinosaur Adventure Land by Greg Martinez. Dr. Dino excoriate Mr. Martinez for his use of ad hominem attacks that attack people but contain no rebuke of Creationist "science". The rebuttal finishes with this very revealing, and disturbing, look into Dr. Dino's mind:
"As suspected, no scientific challenges were made in this article. The very fact that Skeptical Inquirer published five pages of ridiculously irrelevant material really chops at their integrity. The entire article was nothing more than a mangled mess speckled with ad hominem attacks. We're witnessing one of the later phases of the humanistic attacks on Christianity. The first phase was to battle the truth with "science." When those attacks failed, they fallaciously attack people. Welcome to victory, friends!"
Exactly what "victory" is eludes me. However, if he is part of the emerging Creationist New World Order...I am very glad I'm a blue stater.
PS - Greg Martinez included information on Dr. Dino's legal troubles as well as a fun facts about Dr. Dino at the bottom of the Skeptical Inquirer article.
Allow me to introduce Dr. Dino, aka Dr. Kent Hovind, the lead ?Minister? of Creation Science Evangelism. I've been introduced the suave hucksterism of Dr Kent through the evangelical television channel, WVCY.
I found some rather interesting things e-touring Dr. Dino's site. The one that really surprised me linked me to the Institute of Creation Research's Graduate School. Who knew I could get an advanced degree in bible sanctioned biology (you know, sans such nonsense as evolution)? Also Dr. Dino runs the Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola, Florida. Who knew?
The most disturbing thing related to Dr. Dino's rebuttal of a Skeptical Enquirer article reviewing the Dinosaur Adventure Land by Greg Martinez. Dr. Dino excoriate Mr. Martinez for his use of ad hominem attacks that attack people but contain no rebuke of Creationist "science". The rebuttal finishes with this very revealing, and disturbing, look into Dr. Dino's mind:
"As suspected, no scientific challenges were made in this article. The very fact that Skeptical Inquirer published five pages of ridiculously irrelevant material really chops at their integrity. The entire article was nothing more than a mangled mess speckled with ad hominem attacks. We're witnessing one of the later phases of the humanistic attacks on Christianity. The first phase was to battle the truth with "science." When those attacks failed, they fallaciously attack people. Welcome to victory, friends!"
Exactly what "victory" is eludes me. However, if he is part of the emerging Creationist New World Order...I am very glad I'm a blue stater.
PS - Greg Martinez included information on Dr. Dino's legal troubles as well as a fun facts about Dr. Dino at the bottom of the Skeptical Inquirer article.
CONSERVATIVE OPINION PIECES SUCK
Now that the election is over and the Evil Empire's reign continues, Conservatives have fallen back on old habits. What do the following have in common?
- Cattlegate
- Filegate
- Travelgate
- Whitewatergate
- Troopergate
- Chinagate
- Monicagate
- Fundraisergate
Yup, that's right. They are all "scandals" that tarnish the reputations of the leading Dem couple, the Clintons. The hallmark of a true Conservative is to bash the Clinton's when there's nothing else arround.
What! Nothing else arround? That is what I don't understand. In an era of titantic budget deficites, rising inflation, stagant job growth, and butchering in Iraq the Clintons are the greatest threat to the American way of life? Horeshit!
Senator Russ Feingold nailed this point writing for Salon,
"...I can only wonder how many more generations of central Alabamians will say yes when the increasingly powerful Republican Party asks them to be concerned about homosexuality but not about the security of their own health, about abortion but not about the economic futures of their own children."
Now that the election is over and the Evil Empire's reign continues, Conservatives have fallen back on old habits. What do the following have in common?
- Cattlegate
- Filegate
- Travelgate
- Whitewatergate
- Troopergate
- Chinagate
- Monicagate
- Fundraisergate
Yup, that's right. They are all "scandals" that tarnish the reputations of the leading Dem couple, the Clintons. The hallmark of a true Conservative is to bash the Clinton's when there's nothing else arround.
What! Nothing else arround? That is what I don't understand. In an era of titantic budget deficites, rising inflation, stagant job growth, and butchering in Iraq the Clintons are the greatest threat to the American way of life? Horeshit!
Senator Russ Feingold nailed this point writing for Salon,
"...I can only wonder how many more generations of central Alabamians will say yes when the increasingly powerful Republican Party asks them to be concerned about homosexuality but not about the security of their own health, about abortion but not about the economic futures of their own children."
Friday, January 07, 2005
|
SOCIAL SECURITY SHAM
I sound repeative. Nearly every post is about the Shrub's incompetence. I should apologize - but I won't! He is incompetent!
Here's the latest example - social security reform. The underlying assumption about the Shrub's program is that the stock market provides better returns then government bureaucrats (the Social Security Administration). Stanley Logue of San Diego disagrees - and for good reason. He is not some partisan hack. Mr. Logue recalculated the returns of his Social Security contributions over his working life (he retired in 1994 after 45 years of work). Mr. Logue's number put his return on Social Security contributions nearly equal to the overall stock market return (measured as the Dow Jones Industrial Average) over his 45 working years. "Nearly Equal" (approx. $5k) is hardly a compelling incentive.
While there are problems with Mr. Logue's approach, there are key concepts to take away. While it's true that at least some people's investments will beat the stock market, it is also true that at least some people will do worse. The 4.6% figure, leveled by the Cato Institute, mentioned in the article is a joke. What the hell is a 'typical' worker? Does Mr. Logue, an MIT educated engineer count as one? I doubt it.
Secondly, 4.6% is an estimated average. To understand why such an average is a joke consider two data sets with an average return of 5%. Data set one, you get returns of 5% for year one and 5% for year two. Your average return is 5% over the two year period and 5% for any given year.
Now, what if your return for year 1 is 0% and year 2 is 10%? Your two year average, like data set one, is 5%. But now timing matters. If you only invest in year 1, then your money doesn't grow. In fact, thanks to inflation, you loose money. Mr. Logue's analysis illustrate this point as well.
I sound repeative. Nearly every post is about the Shrub's incompetence. I should apologize - but I won't! He is incompetent!
Here's the latest example - social security reform. The underlying assumption about the Shrub's program is that the stock market provides better returns then government bureaucrats (the Social Security Administration). Stanley Logue of San Diego disagrees - and for good reason. He is not some partisan hack. Mr. Logue recalculated the returns of his Social Security contributions over his working life (he retired in 1994 after 45 years of work). Mr. Logue's number put his return on Social Security contributions nearly equal to the overall stock market return (measured as the Dow Jones Industrial Average) over his 45 working years. "Nearly Equal" (approx. $5k) is hardly a compelling incentive.
While there are problems with Mr. Logue's approach, there are key concepts to take away. While it's true that at least some people's investments will beat the stock market, it is also true that at least some people will do worse. The 4.6% figure, leveled by the Cato Institute, mentioned in the article is a joke. What the hell is a 'typical' worker? Does Mr. Logue, an MIT educated engineer count as one? I doubt it.
Secondly, 4.6% is an estimated average. To understand why such an average is a joke consider two data sets with an average return of 5%. Data set one, you get returns of 5% for year one and 5% for year two. Your average return is 5% over the two year period and 5% for any given year.
Now, what if your return for year 1 is 0% and year 2 is 10%? Your two year average, like data set one, is 5%. But now timing matters. If you only invest in year 1, then your money doesn't grow. In fact, thanks to inflation, you loose money. Mr. Logue's analysis illustrate this point as well.
