Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Libertarian Mish Is Happy Republican Mourdock Lost In Indiana
Mish is on the side of the Democrats, plain and simple, here, referencing a story at the Christian Science Monitor:
Yet this is what happens when views are too extreme. I am very pleased to report "'Red' Indiana sends Democrat to US Senate, as women fled Mourdock".
Of course Mish is happy the Democrat won in Indiana. Libertarians ran a spoiler candidate in that race to throw the race to the Democrat. When it comes down to it, social freedom is more important to libertarians than economic freedom. They cry "Freedom" all the while they mean only "License!"
Libertarians are not on the side of conservatives or Republicans. They are on the side of the Democrats, the party of death to the unborn, and soon the party of death to the elderly under ObamaCare, and eventually the party of death to the middle class, which will not long exist because of Obama.
The middle class stands in the way of the Alinskyites' real objective: the rich. Middle class people, after all, would like to be rich some day, too, not poor. So they must go first in order to get at the rich. If the middle class had any brains they'd understand that Obama's invective against the rich is primarily aimed at them because, compared to the poor, the middle class is rich. Unfortunately, they went to public schools.
One thing at a time, making use of the useful idiots, the libertarians.
Libertarian Party Boasts Of Stopping Republican Senate Hopefuls In IN and MT
A reader points out that the Libertarian Party is actually boasting here about how well two of its Senate candidates performed in the elections a week ago, one in Montana and one in Indiana, because they threw the races to the Democrats. By doing so they prevented Republicans from winning precious seats needed in the contest against the Obama agenda.
He's right. I quote from the post:
"[T]hese are exceptionally good results:
Dan Cox (MT) 31,476 votes - 6.5% - high impact: more than margin of victory for Democrat over Republican ...
Andrew Horning (IN) 143,790 votes - 5.8% - high impact: more than margin of victory for Democrat over Republican"
It's obvious from this that Libertarians view themselves as spoilers who count Republican defeats as victories for themselves, which tells you everything you need to know about whose side the Libertarian Party is on.
Of course there is no reflection on the libertarians' bad faith in this election in the media in general, nor from conservative talk radio in particular which boasts self-professed libertarian sympathizers in people like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.
h/t Housman2000
What A Shock. Mish Voted Libertarian In Illinois.
Mish says so, here:
"I voted for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson and I am proud of my vote. Can those voting for the lesser of two evils say the same thing?"
Russell Kirk didn't call libertarians chirping sectaries for nothing. They have their very vocal advocates like Mish, Ron Paul, and Rand Paul, but no following of real consequence. As fringe candidates they view themselves as troublemakers mostly, fanatical idealists at war with reality whose only hope is to act as spoilers. Gary Johnson said as much of himself, here, as recently as August:
“I hope that I would get labeled as a ‘spoiler’ from the standpoint of people actually focusing on what it is I am saying, and that this changes the way whoever wins governs,” Johnson told Sunshine State News in an exclusive interview Saturday at the 2012 Ron Paul Festival.
Libertarians often claim they are "principled" in contrast to the rest of us. Evidently deliberately ruining someone else's chances is one of those principles, which vindictiveness is one reason they don't make progress as a party. While their extremism may scare people off, I think their natural lack of good will has more to do with it.
It's bad form, old boy.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Total Votes Cast In Presidential Elections Since 1968
Figures rounded to the nearest million:
1968.....73 million
1972.....78
1976.....81
1980.....87
1984.....93
1988.....92
1992...104
1996.....96
2000...105
2004...122
2008...131
2012...123.
The biggest "shrug" was in 1996 when Republicans ran me-too liberals Bob Dole and Jack Kemp against the real liberals, Billy Clinton and the Div. School Dropout, AlGore.
The second biggest shrug just occurred, when Republicans again ran me-too liberals, tax collectors for the welfare state who promised to preserve Medicare and keep certain parts of ObamaCare, against the real deal in Obama, who just expanded the welfare state with ObamaCare.
Republicans. They don't call them the stupid party for nothing.
If they had at least run conservatives who lost we could say conservatism lost. But they didn't, and we can't.
Total Votes Cast 2012 Presidential Election Now Up To 122.94 Million
Data here.
As of right now third party voting plus Romney's share still comes to less than Obama's, at 49.45%.
Who's More Willing To Let Bush Tax Cuts Expire? GOP Or Dems?
Josh Barro thinks it's the Republicans, here:
Democrats cannot force Republicans’ hand unless they are more willing than Republicans to let all the Bush tax cuts expire. And they won’t be. A full expiration might well cause a new recession, which would be even more politically damaging for the Barack Obama administration than for congressional Republicans. Congress is already about as unpopular as it can become, and Republicans know they are not going to get their legislative agenda enacted in the next two years anyway. But a new recession would greatly interfere with Obama’s second-term plans.
Republicans Attacked ObamaCare. Hispanics Overwhelmingly Supported It. Any Questions?
The idea that Republicans alienate (can I say that?) Hispanics because Republicans are against amnesty for illegal immigrants is ludicrous. Hispanics love the welfare state and the party which stands for it, especially its newest iteration in ObamaCare:
The poll, which surveyed 887 likely Latino voters, shows that 62 percent of respondents approve of the overall job Obama has done with health care while in office, including his creation of the controversial plan for comprehensive health care reform. The poll was conducted the Sept. 11-13 and the margin of sampling error is +/- three percentage points.
More here.
Heather Mac Donald gets it right, for National Review, here:
"It is not immigration policy that creates the strong bond between Hispanics and the Democratic party, but the core Democratic principles of a more generous safety net, strong government intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation."
Thomas Sowell Recognizes Tom Dewey In Mitt Romney
Thomas Sowell recognizes Tom Dewey in Mitt Romney here, as did we, and divines the horrible consequences of Romney's loss:
Quite aside from the immediate effects of particular policies, Barack Obama has repeatedly circumvented the laws, including the Constitution of the United States, in ways and on a scale that pushes this nation in the direction of arbitrary one-man rule.
Now that Obama will be in a position to appoint Supreme Court justices who can rubber stamp his evasions of the law and usurpations of power, this country may be unrecognizable in a few years as the America that once led the world in freedom, as well as in many other things.
Barack Obama's boast, on the eve of the election of 2008-- "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America"-- can now be carried out, without fear of ever having to face the voters again.
This "transforming" project extends far beyond fundamental internal institutions, or even the polarization and corruption of the people themselves, with goodies handed out in exchange for their surrendering their birthright of freedom.
Obama will now also have more "flexibility," as he told Russian President Medvedev, to transform the international order, where he has long shown that he thinks America has too much power and influence. A nuclear Iran can change that. Forever.
Have you noticed how many of our enemies in other countries have been rooting for Obama? You or your children may yet have reason to recall that as a bitter memory of a warning sign ignored on election day in 2012.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Hurricane Sandy Victims Search For Gasoline
In the Mad Max movies, it took an apocalypse to start the war for gasoline. In 2012 in New York and New Jersey it only took a Category 1 hurricane.
Oh yeah. We're so advanced.
Republicans Lose Again Because They Offered No Conservative Alternative
Andrew McCarthy for National Review here gets it, even if I would quibble about the precision of his election results:
In truth, millions of Americans have decided that Republicans are not a viable alternative because they are already too much like Democrats. ...
Washington’s Republican establishment is progressive, not conservative. ...
[T]he Republican campaign called for enlarging a military our current spending on which dwarfs the combined defense budgets of the next several highest-spending nations. When was the last time you heard a Republican explain what departments and entitlements he’d slash to pay for that? ...
Republicans talk about limited central government, but they do not believe in it ... They look at a money-hemorrhaging disaster like Medicare, whose unsustainability is precisely caused by the intrusion of government, and they say, “Let’s preserve it — in fact, let’s make its preservation the centerpiece of our campaign.” ...
Truth be told, most of today’s GOP does not believe Washington makes things worse. Republicans think the federal government — by confiscating, borrowing, and printing money — is the answer to every problem, rather than the source of most. That is why those running the party today, when they ran Washington during the Bush years, orchestrated an expansion of government size, scope, and spending that would still boggle the mind had Obama not come along. ... No matter what they say in campaigns, today’s Republicans are champions of massive, centralized government. They just think it needs to be run smarter — as if the problem were not human nature and the nature of government, but just that we haven’t quite gotten the org-chart right yet.
That is not materially different from what the Democrats believe. ... Tuesday pitted proud progressives against reticent progressives; slightly more preferred the true-believers. For Americans who don’t see much daylight between the two parties — one led by the president who keeps spending money we don’t have and the other by congressional Republicans who keep writing the checks and extending the credit line — voting wasn’t worth the effort.
McCarthy thinks about 2 million fewer voters showed up in 2012 than in 2004, which is "staggering", except that his election math already looks just a little off. Today I'm showing 122.5 million total votes in 2012, and 122.3 million in 2004, eight years and two elections ago. Still, that is a staggering comparison when you realize that the population has grown by a net 21 million over the period.
Clearly, as McCarthy says, the voters in 2012 "shrugged", but the shrug was actually bigger in 1996 when Republicans again characteristically picked two other moderate losers in Bob Dole and Jack Kemp. Fully 8% fewer ended up voting in 1996 than in 1992 (1% fewer voted in 1988 than in 1984).
Starting with 1968 and ending with 2008, the average increase in total votes cast in the presidential from election to election has been 6%. 2012 compared to 2008 shows 6% fewer votes cast. The slightly smaller shrug over moderate Republicans Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan may reflect the distance in time and understanding from the debates over conservatism in the 1980s and 1990s.
The single biggest gains in total votes cast, incidentally, occurred in 2004 in Bush 43 v. Kerry (16% more votes cast than in 2000) when war in Iraq put patriotism center stage (just barely 51% voted for that despite buying off seniors with Medicare Part D in 2003), followed by 1992 in Bush 41 v. Clinton (13% more votes cast than in 1988) when the issues were breaking the no new taxes pledge (43% voted against that) and "that giant sucking sound" (19% voted against that).
Republicans still haven't learned how to put conservatism all together and wrap it in a bow.
Of 7000 Banks, 3500 Need Recapitalization, 2000 Need To Sell
So note various experts in this story by Stephen Gandel for Fortune, who concludes:
Mortgage rates are about one percentage point higher than they would be if we had more competition. Apply that to all mortgages, and that higher interest rate costs consumers about $100 billion a year in extra interest. Not to mention all those who can't actually get refinanced. I'd say that's pretty good evidence that we should figure out a way to keep small banks around.
The bottom line: Dodd-Frank will not go away because Obama is not going away, so up to as many as 6300 banks may go away, destroying what's left of free market competition in banking. The people are already the losers, and stand to lose even more.
Since the beginning of 2008, 460 banks have failed.
Larry Kudlow Slanders Christ On His Radio Program
Larry Kudlow, former Democrat, member of SDS, drug addict and alcoholic, and supposedly a Jewish convert to Christianity, slandered Christ in the final hour of his radio program yesterday. That's a lot of "formers".
He did so while attacking Paul Krugman for advocating that the Bush tax cuts be allowed to expire as a remedy for the fiscal cliff, ridiculing the idea with the ever popular provincialism "for Christ's sake".
Obviously the defeat of Mitt Romney has pushed all of Kudlow's buttons at once. He began the program with a full-throated denunciation of the Pat Buchanan wing of the Republican Party and its anti-amnesty stance on illegal immigrants, saying it must be "crushed".
You can take the man out of the SDS, but you can't take the SDS out of the man.
You can not hear a podcast of Kudlow's program anytime you don't want to, here.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Larry Kudlow Declares War On Pat Buchanan Wing Of Republican Party
Just now on the radio show, saying the anti-amnesty wing, the Pat Buchanan wing, of the Republican Party must be defeated and "crushed".
Two back to back defeats of liberal/moderate Republican candidates for president continue to be misinterpreted by the fifth column on the right.
They should join the Democrat Party once and for all.
David Frum Loves The 47%
Here:
"To be a patriot is to love your country as it is. Those who seem to despise half of America will never be trusted to govern any of it. Those who cherish only the country's past will not be entrusted with its future."
David Frum should know a thing or two about patriotism. He's from Canada.
Did the Founders love England as it was, or any of the huddled masses yearning to be free love the hellholes they came from as they were?
Gold To Oil Ratio Skyrockets to 20.11
The action, however, is mostly on the side of gold, which is movin' on up because of Obama's re-election.
He aims to tax and spend, but the US House stands in the way of that, which takes some of the pressure off the need to borrow money or print it, which is negative for gold. But with Ben Bernanke serving at his pleasure at the Fed, dollar devaluation through quantitative easing is still positive for gold and negative for the dollar.
Gold doubled under Obama's first term, from $850 the ounce to $1,730 today. I wouldn't be surprised to see that happen again.
$3,400 the ounce in 2016?
Just the thought of it makes my nose bleed.
He aims to tax and spend, but the US House stands in the way of that, which takes some of the pressure off the need to borrow money or print it, which is negative for gold. But with Ben Bernanke serving at his pleasure at the Fed, dollar devaluation through quantitative easing is still positive for gold and negative for the dollar.
Gold doubled under Obama's first term, from $850 the ounce to $1,730 today. I wouldn't be surprised to see that happen again.
$3,400 the ounce in 2016?
Just the thought of it makes my nose bleed.
Friday, November 9, 2012
Don't Blame The 47%
Don't blame the 47%.
- The percentage which Romney said wouldn't vote for him in the general (the takers)
- The percentage which did vote for him in the general (the makers)
- The percentage which didn't vote for him in the Republican primaries (the achers)
Instead, blame Romney (the faker).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)