The Final Five: Bedtime Stories for Conservatives
March 8, 2012
An internet outage and an evening meeting left me without the time to put anything together on Tuesday, and then I spent yesterday trying to catch up on all the news I missed Tuesday. So...in an attempt to make it up to you, I have put together a special double edition of The Final Five tonight with ten topics plus some extra other features. Enjoy!
Tonight's Crazy Story:
McWashington? Presidential McNugget sells for $8K
Your mom always told you not to play with your food. However, seeing the faces of historical figures in your food is a different matter. A Nebraska woman sold a McNugget resembling the face of George Washington on eBay for $8100.
Topic One: Iran
President Obama received the Khamenei endorsement today. According to Newsmax, "Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has welcomed comments by U.S. President Obama about the need to dampen the drumbeat of war as a diplomatic "window of opportunity", the Iranian state news agency IRNA said on Thursday." I am sure that was an endorsement that none of the Republican candidates desired. However, while Obama welcomed discussion and Khamenei approved of them, Israel remains cautious and skeptical.
Thomas Sowell on Obama's rhetoric vs. his actions: "The track record of Barack Obama's pronouncements on a wide range of issues suggests that anything he says is a message written in sand, and easily blown away by the next political winds. Remember the "shovel-ready projects" that would spring into action and jump-start the economy, once the "stimulus" money was available? Obama himself laughed at this idea a year or so later, when it was clear to all that these projects were going nowhere. Remember how his administration was going to be one with "transparency"? Yet massive spending bills were passed too fast for the Congress itself to have read them. Remember the higher ethics his administration would practice -- and yet how his own Secretary of the Treasury was appointed despite his failure to pay his taxes? If you were an Israeli, how willing would you be to risk your national survival on Obama's promise to stand by your country? If you were a leader of Iran, what would you make of what Obama said, except that an election year might not be the best time to attack Israel?"
Ben Gharagozli argues that Israel cannot "legally" attack Iran: "Absent a UN Security Council resolution, there are two scenarios in which Israel may legally attack Iran: (1) if Israel suffers an armed attack at the hands of the Iranian government; (2) under the anticipatory self-defense doctrine." He goes on to explain why Israel lacks the ability to attack under the second point. However, I would counter by arguing that threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" counts as a threat that Israel would need to defend. Since obtaining nuclear weapons would greatly assist Iran in achieving this goal, any evidence that Iran's nuclear program is being used for non-energy purposes must be considered a threat, and that would give Israel the right to attack.
Related stories: Timeline of Iran's nuclear program || IAEA Chief: Iran is not telling us everything || Romney: How to stop Iranian nuclear ambition
There's Always Time for a Laugh:
"Mitt Romney's been out on the campaign trail even though he's suffering from a terrible cold. I'm not surprised he's sick. It's very unsanitary to keep putting your foot in your mouth like that."
-Craig Ferguson
Topic Two: The Election
The freedom issue: "His 35-minute speech in Cuyahoga Falls touched an array of subjects that drew applause. But at the halfway point, when he tore into ObamaCare, his mostly working-class audience exploded into applause and cries of "Rick! Rick! Rick!" Mr. Santorum didn't get this response by discussing health-insurance exchanges and guaranteed issue. He told these people that ObamaCare "is usurping your rights. It is creating a culture of dependency. Every single American will be dependent on government, thanks to ObamaCare. There is no more important issue in this race. It magnifies all that is wrong with what this president is trying to do." His call for repeal produced the explosion. He followed with an tight description of how he understands the terms of the election: 'This race is coming down to the economy, the deficit and control of your life, which is ObamaCare.'"
Reagan was a sure loser: "Then as now, the chattering classes wondered aloud whether a candidate who could win the Republican nomination could prevail against President Carter in November. On March 1, former President Gerald Ford amplified that view when he told a New York Times reporter, "Every place I go and everything I hear, there is the growing, growing sentiment that Governor Reagan cannot win the election." Then as now, some put their hopes on a late entry, in the same way that some now pine for Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie to enter the race. In the same interview where Mr. Ford predicted that Reagan's nomination would mean a repeat of 1964, he also declared himself open to a draft if there were a genuine "urging" by the party."
Who is truly electable? "In the eleven presidential elections since the birth of modern conservatism, five GOP nominees ran as moderates –- and were perceived as moderates. All lost, with the single exception of George H. W. Bush in 1988, and he was arguably running for Ronald Reagan’s “third term.” Conversely, all six GOP candidacies which were framed and perceived as conservative won. So it is of concern that the TV’s White House-wannabes who crowned Mitt Romney the victor last October now are trying to hand him the scepter."
Tweet of the Day:
Melissa Clouthier (@MelissaTweets):
Lefties, if I have a decent economy, devastate it, and then grows a tiny bit, that's not success. #ObamaFAIL
Topic Three: Gas Prices
Policy is the real problem: "In this day and age, we ought to be encouraging more transparency rather than pushing it underground. The real culprit to the high oil price caper is anyone that is limiting the exploration for new energy resources, and anyone/anything that is limiting the building of new capacity to turn those raw resources into productive energy. Mostly it comes down to the federal agencies over seeing energy, and the President of the United States that believes algea, wind and solar are competitive alternatives to what we are using today."
Chuck Norris on rising gas prices: "Forbes ran recent articles saying that the "primary reason" for the spike in oil prices is "the dollar has lost value" and that the Fed has announced an explicit goal "to devalue the dollar by 33 percent over the next 20 years." But the Obama administration doesn't bear any responsibility in the spike of gas prices? This administration is a crashing currency culprit via its disastrous recovery plan -- borrowing astronomical amounts of money from countries with which we are already in vassalage relationships (such as China), bailing out corporations that should have gone bankrupt, bamboozling the American public with Obamacare, and placing our posterity in bondage with more than $15 trillion of national debt."
Obama's contradictory gas price policies: "President Obama on Tuesday flatly dismissed the notion he’s content to see gas prices rise. “Just from a political perspective, do you think the president of the United States going into re-election wants gas prices to go up higher?” he asked. ... Obama is marching in lock-step with Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who told a House committee last week that the administration has no policy on higher gas prices — except to let them rise.
Asked point-blank by Rep. Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss.) if the “overall goal is to get our [gasoline] price down,” Chu responded: “No, the overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil.”
It’s simple market economics: Higher prices means lower consumption — and, hence, reduced dependency."
Related stories: Driving Americans out of cars || Obama knows what we need || New Keystone route on the way
Food for Thought - A Quote from our Founders
"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate — look to his character...."
-Noah Webster
Topic Four: Contraception
Ms. Fluke, stay out of my wallet: "So here’s a deal for Ms. Fluke and her fellow travelers. I’ll agree to you doing whatever you want behind closed doors. ... But, in exchange, I want you to leave me alone, which means I don’t want to pay higher taxes OR higher insurance premiums to subsidize your birth control."
Contraception isn't free: "What's the ObamaCare contraception mandate about? For much of the media and many politicians, it's about "free contraception." ...But there's no such thing as a free birth control. Someone's paying for it. Here's the step-by-step of the mandate for the plans to which it applies, which is nearly every employer-based plan: Insurers are required to pay the cost of all birth-control pills, without copay. As the insurer's liability increases, the premium for the insurance plan increases. So employees pay higher premiums, as do employers. But because this plan applies to nearly all employers, the employers pass the cost onto employees in the form of lower pay."
I have refrained from commenting on the Limbaugh uproar; primarily because I have not had the time to research it and see what was actually said. I did spend a little bit of time looking at it today, and here is my opinion: First, there was a factual error in his statement about Fluke herself; Fluke said in her testimony that the $3000 contraception bill was for someone she knew. Second, I believe he took the situation too far with the comments on wanting to see the videos. Finally (and most importantly), he picked the wrong battle. Debating contraception will always be a losing issue for Republicans; debating religious freedom and the freedom to choose what insurance you purchase is how Republicans can win on the issue. As I have commented before, it is ironic how those who claim to be "pro-choice" (on abortion) are so opposed to choice in other arenas.
However, there is one important item to be discussed with regard to the Limbaugh comments: the double standard. "The left, by and large, can say things about their political opponents that are cruel and defamatory and mostly get away with it, while those on the right are called on the carpet. That’s not true in every case, but it’s certainly true often enough to draw a reasonable conclusion. What we have a right to expect is even-handedness rather than glaring double standards. My guess is that for many journalists and commentators, what’s happening is less a conscious bias than a sub-conscious one. When conservative women are savaged by liberal men, it’s boys will be boys/politics ain’t beanbag/sticks and stones may break my bones. But when liberal women are savaged by conservative men, it’s an assault on reason, decency and civilized standards."
It's Time for Another Laugh:
"Kim Kardashian is being sued for $5 million for endorsing a diet pill that doesn’t work. That's weird — if there's anyone who's perfect to represent "not working," it's Kim Kardashian."
-Jimmy Fallon
Topic Five: Corruption and Waste
The words "government" and "efficiency" rarely belong next to each other. In fact, wasteful government projects probably count for a larger portion of federal expenditures than any of us realize. Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn documented $6.5 billion of unnecessary spending in his "wastebook". However, a new video attempts to show one couple's attempt to get one of those porky earmarks to create a "Museum of Government Waste." "In a new Daily Caller piece, it is revealed that filmmakers Ellen and Jim Hubbard have been working diligently to try and obtain a Congressional earmark for the creation of the Museum of Government Waste (a monument to useless federal expenditures). In their new film which documents the process, aptly titled, “The Museum of Government Waste,” the Hubbards showcase their five-year journey to lobby Congress for the creation of the building."
Besides these wasteful expenditures, we also have corruption. WND Editor Joseph Farah explains how corruption is allowing Obama and his allies to loot the public treasury. How does it systematically redistribute billions in taxpayer money to sham companies, take political contributions from those companies, watch the government subsidies squandered, and pay no political price with voters? How? The secret to their success is being involved in corruption that is audacious and beyond the imaginations of most Americans, who simply cannot believe anyone would or could attempt to get away with such schemes."
Finally, if we need an example of government inefficiency, we need to look no farther than FEMA. "Remember all those horrific wildfires in Central Texas last summer that destroyed thousands of homes? There's an interesting article in today's Austin American-Statesman -- "Homes rise in Bastrop with the help of more than $4.4 million in donations" -- about how private donations and volunteer efforts (as opposed to yet-to-arrive Federal funds) are now fueling rebuilding efforts. In reading that piece, I couldn't help but recall another article in the Statesman several months ago, "City program has spent millions to improve East Austin neighborhood, but has it helped?"
Last Friday, an EF3 tornado touched down about fifteen minutes from where I live. However, the people did not wait for FEMA to come. One church opened its doors that night as a rescue shelter, and it began collecting donations from the community. However, only two days later, the church had to ask people to stop bringing donations temporarily because the church's gymnasium was too full to handle any more. I have not seen any official number reported in the media, but area residents I know have told me that hundreds of people--perhaps even one thousand--showed up the day after the storm to help residents clean up their property. In the aftermath of the storm, these people accomplished much more than FEMA or any other government agency.
Another Tweet of the Day:
Kathleen McKinley (@KatMcKinley):
Rush calls one woman a slut and the left goes nuts, but a lib host says ALL conservative women need their ovaries cut off, and it's FINE.
Topic Six: US and Israel
Obama says that our relationship with Israel is "unbreakable" and "rock solid". I concur, if he means it is as "unbreakable" as a drinking glass on its way to the floor and it is as "rock solid" as lava when it first comes out of a volcano. Meanwhile, Netanyahu tells Obama that Israel must be able to defend itself. Netanyahu told Obama, "I believe that's why you appreciate, Mr. President, that Israel must reserve the right to defend itself. And after all, that's the very purpose of the Jewish state -- to restore to the Jewish people control over our destiny. And that's why my supreme responsibility as Prime Minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate."
Debt Watch:
$15,498,306,692,627.99
(As of
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
)
Change from March 2, 2012: +$8,433,041,030.49
Your share as a citizen: $49,619.31
Share per household: $135,669.20
Debt since Obama inauguration: $4,871,429,643,714.89
Topic Seven: Green Energy
Why do so many green energy companies fail? "It's almost as if the only reason someone would form a "green energy" company is to try to cash in on government subsidies being blindly dished out by the U.S. Department of Energy, rather than try to establish a sustainable business!"
Does Obama tout failures? "Has anybody else noticed the disturbing correlation between Obama speaking for a product and that product failing miserably shortly thereafter? And they say this guy gives good speeches. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, SpectraWatt -- the list of failures touted by Obama goes on and on and on. Midas was to gold as Obama is to blood-red ink. When Obama visits a factory, it becomes a "failure factory," doomed to the scrap heap of defunct businesses." With Obama's record of picking winners, I would feel comfortable gambling on sports as long as my selections are the exact opposite of the President's.
If you thought that the current administration would be excited about an overage of wind power, you are wrong. The government is now paying wind farms to NOT produce power.
One Final Joke:
"It seems a cat named Hank is running for the Senate in Virginia. You know the difference between a cat and politician? A cat doesn't pretend to care about you."
-Jay Leno
Topic Eight: Overregulation
The regulatory juggernaut: "While Republicans focus on skewering GOP presidential candidates in primaries, Team Obama’s regulatory juggernaut continues to destroy the American way of life. Small businesses, entrepreneurs, and job creators are already groaning from the weight of the many and new regulations Obama has initiated in the past three years. Even more regulations are on the way. However, many of the regulations are masked as "initiatives", where the actual regulation is buried in various appropriations bills sent to congress in the President's 2013 budget."
What will tomorrow's stupid rule be? "When I was a kid, I remember watching that Schoolhouse Rock cartoon about how a bill becomes a law. That single cartoon probably brainwashed three generations of children into believing in the checks and balances fantasy of the US federal government. The reality is what we see everywhere today– self-regulating, self-legislating executive agencies with nearly unlimited scope and authority. Even the most mundane offices within the Fish and Wildlife Service can confiscate people’s private property without any judicial oversight. These agencies can also conjure new rules out of thin air, all on their own, that have the same weight and effect as laws."
Tweet of the Day:
John Hayward (@Doc_0):
I am so tired of being "denied access" to all the stuff other people aren't forced to buy for me.
Topic Nine: ObamaCare
Will the Independent Payment Advisory Board established by the Affordable Care Act to control health costs lead to rationing? Scott Gottlieb, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, testified that it will. See his responses to two questions. First, will the ability to deliver care be hurt by reduced payments mandated by the board? And second, will this lead to a form of rationing?
One of the claims behind the push for computerized medical records is the belief that it will lower costs by eliminating duplicate testing. On the surface, this claim does seem to make sense; if a doctor has access to the results of a test ordered in the emergency room, it would seem that the doctor would not need to order the same test again. However, a study showed that this is not the case. From the study: "Physicians without such access ordered imaging in 12.9 percent of visits, while physicians with access ordered imaging in 18.0 percent of visits."
Food for Thought - A Quote from our Founders
"In a general sense, all contributions imposed by the government upon individuals for the service of the state, are called taxes, by whatever name they may be known, whether by the name of tribute, tythe, tallage, impost, duty, gabel, custom, subsidy, aid, supply, excise, or other name."
-Joseph Story
Topic Ten: Abortion
Steven Aden on ultrasound requirements and "rape": "Straining to prove this mad assertion, abortion supporters are claiming that such an ultrasound requirement will result in women being “forcibly penetrated,” and therefore, violated by the state. What’s strange is that these same people have no ethical qualms about allowing an abortionist’s scalpels and vacuum devices to be inserted into a woman as her baby is literally ripped from the womb limb by limb. And they apparently feel no angst over a pre-born child being injected with medicine that stops his or her heart so that labor can be induced and the stillborn child can be disposed of in a trash can (or a dumpster) in much the same way one would dispose of a banana peel or moldy bread."
Is abortion moving further down a slippery slope? "Nowhere is the danger of the slippery slope more evident than in the area of abortion. If an unborn child's right to life can be denied based on criteria like age, size, location, cognitive capacity or simply the wishes of the mother, then what's to stop similar criteria from nullifying the life rights of the elderly, the disabled, or even the very young? The fruits of this disturbing trend are already playing out in countries like the U.K. and Canada, where panels of bureaucrats hold the power of life and death over the terminally ill and the aged. ... It is hardly surprising, then, that some in the field of bioethics – in the abhorrent tradition of Peter Singer – have begun to embrace infanticide as a perfectly reasonable solution to the hardship and inconvenience sometimes imposed by the birth of a child."
Tomorrow in History
March 9, 1842
- California's first gold discovery occurred at Rancho San Francisco, a full six years before the gold rush.
Grab Bag - Interesting and Important Stories to Conclude Your Evening
Second amendment victory: Maryland gun owners >do not have to have a "reason" to get a permit
Hooked on free money
Critical TSA scanner flaw? Blogger shows how to get metal objects past scanner
Florida city offers free gas for tourists
You'll need 76 days to read all your privacy policies
Remedial Constitutional education
Obama: the most Biblically-hostile president
The coming pension crisis
The real obstructionists
GOP AGs allege Obama administration violated law 21 times
Would you like to receive The Final Five in your inbox each night? Click here to sign up for our new e-mail updates.
