Archive for the ‘The World’ Category

PROVEN: Republicans More Well Informed than ‘Reality-Based Community’ Democrats

October 22, 12

Via AoSHQ, from Director Blue:

In a scientific survey of 1,168 adults conducted during September and October of last year, respondents were asked not only multiple-choice questions, but also queries using maps, photographs and symbols. Among other subjects, participants identified international leaders, cabinet members, Supreme Court justices, nations on a world map, the current unemployment and poverty rates and war casualty totals.

In a 2010 Pew survey, Republicans outperformed Democrats on 10 of 12 questions, with one tie and Democrats outperforming Republicans on just 1 of the 12. In the latest survey, however, Republicans outperformed Democrats on every single one of 19 questions.

Related, Dems think the economy (THIS RECORD BREAKINGLY BAD ECONOMY!!!!) is doing just fiiiiiiiiiiine:

The Best and the Worst of the Obama vs Romney Denver Debate

October 13, 12

There are probably plenty of other dissections of Obama various skews, misdirections and outright lies… But here I’m just focusing on the lines and moments that leapt out at me. Relevant links and extras included for your additional time disappearing!

(I did some of the transcript by ear, then switched to NYT’s transcript with some modifications.)

———————-

BEST, 5:15 – Romney: “I’ve had the occasion over the last couple of years of meeting people across the country. I was in Dayton, Ohio, and a woman grabbed my arm, and she said, I’ve been out of work since May. Can you help me?”

Romney does this several times throughout the debate – citing personal anecdotes of real people, which really serves to humanize him. Which must be very surprising to the viewer who knows Romney only from the liberal media’s portrayals:

(more…)

Four Years On, Stock Market Still Allergic to Obama

August 14, 12

In the vein of the historical Obama Speaketh, Stock Market Crasheth, American Stock Exchange ‘Celebrates’ Obama With Record CRASHES – Repeatedly!, and Dow Jones Surges After 2011 GOP Debate… Here’s a more recent update from CNBC via AoSHQ:

One analysis concludes that last week’s sharp three-day market surge can only mean that Wall Street is banking on a victory from Republican Mitt Romney.

That’s the logical interpretation one can draw from a rally amid conditions that otherwise would demand a selloff, Morgan Stanley chief U.S. equity strategist Adam S. Parker said in an analysis that asserts there is no other reason now to like stocks than a Romney win.

And via AoSHQ, next:


Stocks Shoot Up — This Really Might Be A Romney Rally

Stocks are taking off. Now up a bit less than 1%.

Romney rally? It could be, since there’s no equivalent rally happening in the European sovereign bond market, so it would imply that the rally is based on something stateside.

A couple other quick points:

It’s pretty well accepted dogma on Wall Street that Romney would be better for stocks.
Also, stocks got a bit of a lift last night right after the Romney victory.
The Romney win was the #1 talking point on morning analyst notes today.

Bottom line: Quite plausible.

Also noteworthy is that volume is on the high side today.

See also massive collection of telltale graphs and videos at Obama’s Economic Successes: A Roundup.

Obama’s You Didn’t Build That – Well, Roads Didn’t Build That For Sure

August 13, 12

Another in the Communist vs Capitalist vein, from IMAO:

See also North Korea vs South Korea: We Require More Minerals, Red Primer for Children and Diplomats: History of Communism in Cartoon Form, Full Version Available.

Every State That Elected a GOP Governor in 2010 Saw a Drop In Unemployment

July 16, 12

Via AosHQ via Breitbart.com:

Kansas – 6.9% to 6.1% = a decline of 0.8%

Maine – 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Michigan – 10.9% to 8.5% = a decline of 2.4%

New Mexico – 7.7% to 6.7% = a decline of 1.0%

Oklahoma – 6.2% to 4.8% = a decline of 1.4%

Pennsylvania – 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Tennessee – 9.5% to 7.9% = a decline of 1.6%

Wisconsin – 7.7% to 6.8% = a decline of 0.9%

Wyoming – 6.3% to 5.2% = a decline of 1.1%

Alabama – 9.3% to 7.4% = a decline of 1.9%

Georgia – 10.1% to 8.9% = a decline of 1.2%

South Carolina – 10.6% to 9.1% = a decline of 1.5%

South Dakota – 5.0% to 4.3% = a decline of 0.7%

Florida – 10.9% to 8.6% = a decline of 2.3%

Nevada – 13.8% to 11.6% = a decline of 2.2%

Iowa – 6.1% to 5.1% = a decline of 1.0%

Ohio – 9.0% to 7.3% = a decline of 1.7%

On the other hand, the unemployment rate in states that elected Democrats in 2010 dropped, on average, as much as the national rate decline and, in some states such as New York, the unemployment rate has risen since January of 2011.

But remember, vote Obama and his party, because, uh, coincidence.

See also related which have tons of graphs:

Obama’s Economic Successes: A Roundup

Republican Led Economy VS Democrat Led Economy

The Ryskind Sketchbook is Back

June 27, 12

And in action once again!

Blogging at his WordPress, and tweeting at this handle.

I’ve long been using his spot-on cartoons to make a point.

Conspiracy Theory: Is Anders Breivik Actually a Pro-Islam Agent?

June 25, 12

I’ve written on how Anders Breivik is a non-practising ‘Christian’ and how his usage of Scripture is entirely out of whack.

Now I’ll put myself in the mindset of conspiracy theorists and conjecture: Is Anders Breivik actually an agent provocateur for Islam?

Consider the following:

1) He claims to have carried out his shooting massacre in protest the colonization/conquest of Europe by Muslim immigrants. But who did he actually decide to kill? Not Muslims or immigrants, but Caucasians of irreligious/nominally Christian leanings.

2) He cites the Bible and argues his justification for killing. But his citations are out of context and way off, requiring incredible stretches and leaps of logic to fit his agenda. He acts nothing like a Christian, but ordinary Christians bear the brunt of the outraged backlash.

3) He claims his actions are to inspire the West to arouse from its slumber and begin resisting the ‘Muslim invasion’… But anyone with the slightest grasp of what gutless, spineless, milquetoast postmodern European sociopolitics is like (and Breivik claims to be all too aware of it) would know that an act like this would only arouse mass support for Islam, as well as give Muslim agitators potent ammunition in wringing out concessions to make up for the West’s ‘Islamophobia’.

So in one fell swoop, NO MUSLIMS ARE KILLED OR INJURED… But plenty of godless, immoral liberals lie dead. Those Islamophobic conservatives and crusader-spawn Christians take a major PR blow. And Muslims get a (for once) concrete reason for Western Politically Correct handwringing, groveling, apologizing and promises to make up to the Islamic world for the ‘hatred’ shown against their noble culture.

Even though no Muslims were actually hurt, or even directly ‘hated’, in Breivik’s attack.

However, I personally don’t believe that Anders Breivik is some sort of Islamophilic apologist for Muslims, carrying out an incredibly intricate and devious ploy to rouse public and political sympathy for Muslim immigrants (as if there wasn’t enough of that already).

How do we usually know that a terrorist attack (attempted or successful) is motivated by jihad? Their history is usually clearly marked by public proclamations of faith (e.g. Nidal Hassan‘s derision for his infidel coworkers); browsing of extremist and jihadist websites, chatrooms and message boards (e.g. many of the BUSTED terrorist wannabes that The Jawa Report regularly; and of course the telltale giveaway cries of “Allahu akhbar!” as they carry out their murder spree (e.g. Nidal Hassan again and countless others).

None of these markers were present in Anders Breivik, who spent his time polluting fascist chatrooms instead of jihadist ones. He did not ‘come out’ as a Muslim

Very seldom do we hear of a

That said, if Anders Breivik really does turn out to be a ‘secret Muslim supporter’ or a Muslim himself, then his ability to hide/fake his online history and plan out such a convoluted, Tom Clancy-esque strategy shows that is he is a cut above the rest.

‘Landslide’ Victories in US Presidential Elections: Obama vs Reagan

June 22, 12

I’ve covered Obama compared to Reagan before at here:

As well as other mentions of that great President.

Now I’ll rehash an old comment of mine that was in response to a naive Obama worshipper who mistakenly thought that Obama’s 2008 victory was anything close to a ‘landslide’.

———————–

First, we look at the percentage of votes as follows. Wikipedia: United States presidential election, 2008:

Barack Obama vs John McCain
Electoral vote 365 vs 173
States carried 28 + DC + NE-02 vs 22
Popular vote 69,456,897 vs 59,934,814 (116:100 ratio)
Percentage 52.9% vs 45.7%

Not a very impressive map, really.

Compared to Wikipedia: United States presidential election, 1980:

Ronald Reagan vs Jimmy Carter vs John B. Anderson
Electoral vote 489 vs 49 vs 0
States carried 44 vs 6 + DC vs 0
Popular vote 43,903,230 vs 35,480,115 vs 5,719,850 (124:100:16 ratio)
Percentage 51.6% vs 41.7% vs 6.70%

Lookit that sea of red!

1980 Reagan’s 489 electoral votes clearly outstrips Obama’s 365 electoral votes. But fair enough, Reagan got 51.6% of the popular vote against Obama’s 52.9% – though one could argue that the Independent contender John B. Anderson’s 6.70% would other wise have gone to Reagan (using Anderson’s 0 electoral votes as precedent) to give the Gipper a total of 58.30%.

And a 58.30% is not a wild fantasy, because now let’s look at the even more incredible Wikipedia: United States presidential election, 1984:

Ronald Reagan vs Walter Mondale
Electoral vote 525 vs 13
States carried 49 vs 1 + DC (Head to the link and look at the map! It’s almost entirely red!)
Popular vote 54,455,472 vs 37,577,352 (145:100 ratio)
Percentage 58.8% vs 40.6%

Now even the last few blue holdouts have almost all surrendered!

So in 1984, Reagan got a far higher ratio of the electoral vote, states and popular vote than Obama in 2008. Obama is a featherweight compared to what Reagan achieved!

And note that Reagan was running for a second term, which means people voted for his 4 years of proven policies – very different from the untested Obama benefiting from anti-Bush sentiment and a crony media that refused to vet him.

In fact, adjusting for total votes cast (2008’s 129,391,711 which is 40.59% more than 1984’s 92,032,824 or 52.04% more than 1980’s 85,103,195) due to expanding population, if Reagan’s popular votes percentages were adjusted to 2008’s voting population, 1984 Reagan would have gotten 76,558,948 votes – 7,102,051 more than Obama ever managed!

Via Dan Mitchell:

——————–

And if the 2010 elections are anything to judge by:

Then 2012 will see an even more massive landslide for the Republican nominee – just as 1980 saw Reagan first elected on the back of Carter’s failed Democrat policies!

Proven General Deliverables of Conservatism Would Influence Ideology

May 11, 12

Via AoSHQ, this snippet:

It is my belief that ideologies flourish not based upon argument or rhetoric, but when a party comes to power and then delivers the general deliverables. When a president or party is able to deliver objective goods, his ideology advances, not because people have become convinced by reason or rhetoric, but simply because they decide If they’ve got everything working smoothly, I guess that means they’re probably right about these ideological points they keep talking about, too.

This echoes with my own thinking, something I’d independently decided since my post A Short Pondering: Should a Christian Leader Impose Laws Based on Christian Standards?

I have come to the conclusion that a good solution to that problem, personally, would be: If I were to run for and become President, I would focus exclusively on jobs, the economy, energy, security etc (all the general deliverables) and would not focus on sociopolitical issues such as gay marriage, abortion, etc.

This doesn’t mean I don’t care about the latter – on the contrary, they are very crucial matters to me as a Christian.

However, my strategy would be along the lines of this passage:

I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? – John 3:12

Namely, I would deliver such an outstanding performance on the economy and so forth (as Reagan did), that the country would have to stop and ponder: Hey, this guy’s on to something. Could it be that his way of thinking (i.e. Conservatism, Christianity) is RIGHT about things?

The pondering would start on economic, physical, worldly things of course. But then, through association and osmosis, the pondering would lead to social, philosophical and even spiritual things.

The general public would already believe me on worldly issues, so they would be likelier to believe me on spiritual issues as well… The reverse of speaking of earthly things which people don’t believe.

To wit, the observable effectiveness of my worldly policies would convince people that my social/spiritual ideas probable are right too.

PS. Ace continues:

And I believe the contrary: Liberalism will suffer greatly due to Obama’s Miserable Failure, the same as it did under Jimmy Carter.

Which is proven, Obama’s amazing economic ineptness has caused more and more Americans to become Conservatives.

North Korea vs South Korea: We Require More Minerals

April 26, 12

Via Comixed, from The Oatmeal. So sadly true…

North Korea South Korea Minerals Starcraft

Once again, I thank the selfless Americans who allowed me to be a middle class capitalist pig, wasting time on teh Internets, instead of having to be a dirt farming tourist leech.

So, who wants to espouse Communism/Socialism over capitalism?

PS. So why is it murderous commies were also always atheists?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 129 other followers

%d bloggers like this: