This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.


The Savage Republican



Local Attractions

Favorite Links

Remember, Being a Savage Republican is not where you are from, but what you believe.


Previous Posts

Archives


Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Obama in 774 words

Sometimes it takes South Park to put the policies of the Community Organizer in Chief (COC) in perspective. As I've written before, the left is great for proclaiming something will happen because they SAY it will happen. The following is from a WSJ article:


Sometimes it takes "South Park" to explain life's deeper mysteries. Like the logic of the Obama administration's policy proposals.
Consider the 1998 "Gnomes" episode -- possibly surpassing Milton Friedman's "Free to Choose" as the classic defense of capitalism -- in which the children of South Park, Colo., get a lesson in how not to run an enterprise from mysterious little men who go about stealing undergarments from the unsuspecting and collecting them in a huge underground storehouse.
What's the big idea? The gnomes explain:
"Phase One: Collect underpants.
"Phase Two: ?
"Phase Three: Profit."
Lest you think there's a step missing here, that's the whole point. ("What about Phase Two?" asks one of the kids. "Well," answers a gnome, "Phase Three is profits!") This more or less sums up Mr. Obama's speech last week on Guantanamo, in which the president explained how he intended to dispose of the remaining detainees after both houses of Congress voted overwhelmingly against bringing them to the U.S.
The president's plan can briefly be described as follows. Phase One: Order Guantanamo closed. Phase Two: ? Phase Three: Close Gitmo!
Granted, this is an abbreviated exegesis of his speech, which did explain how some two-thirds of the detainees will be tried by military commissions or civilian courts, or repatriated to other countries. But on the central question of the 100-odd detainees who can neither be tried in court nor released one searches in vain for an explanation of exactly what the president intends to do.
Now take the administration's approach to the Middle East. Phase One: Talk to Iran, Syria, whoever. Phase Two: ? Phase Three: Peace!
In this case, the administration seems to think that diplomacy, like aspirin, is something you take two of in the morning to take away the pain. But as Boston University's Angelo Codevilla notes in his book, "Advice to War Presidents," diplomacy "can neither create nor change basic intentions, interests, or convictions. . . . To say, 'We've got a problem. Let's try diplomacy, let's sit down and talk' abstracts from the important questions: What will you say? And why should anything you say lead anyone to accommodate you?"
Ditto for Mr. Obama's approach to nuclear weapons. In a speech last month in Prague, right after North Korea had illegally tested a ballistic missile, Mr. Obama promised a new nonproliferation regime, along with "a structure in place that ensures when any nation [breaks the rules], they will face consequences." Whereupon the U.N. Security Council promptly failed to muster the votes for a resolution condemning Pyongyang's launch.
Now Kim Jong Il has tested another nuke, and we're back at the familiar three-step. Phase One: Propose a "structure." . . .
It was also in his Prague speech that Mr. Obama repeated his pledge to "confront climate change by ending the world's dependence on fossil fuels, by tapping the power of new sources of energy like the wind and sun."
Never mind that neither the wind nor the sun are new sources of energy. It so happens that the U.S. gets about 2.3% of its energy resources from "renewable" resources of the kind the president advocates while fossil fuels account for about 70%. The reason for this, alas, has nothing to do with the greed of the oil majors. But it has much to do with something known as "energy density": Crude oil has almost three times as much of it as switchgrass, supposedly the Holy Grail of our green future. A related problem is that heat invariably dissipates, meaning that it will always be difficult to turn diffuse sources of energy, like wind, into concentrated ones.
In Gnome-speak, then, Mr. Obama's energy policy goes something like this: Phase One: Inaugurate the era of "green" energy. Phase Two: Overturn the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Phase Three: Carbon neutrality!
Take any number of Mr. Obama's other initiatives. Rescue Detroit? Phase One: Set a national mileage standard for passenger cars of 39 miles per gallon and force auto makers to make the kind of cars that drove them to bankruptcy in the first place.
Reduce the deficit? Phase One: Approve $3.5 trillion in government stimulus, and then await the mythical Keynesian multiplier.
Pay for a $1.2 trillion health-care reform? Phase One: scrounge around for about $60 billion in new "sin tax" revenue.
Actually, we can easily guess how Mr. Obama intends to make up the difference on this last item: To wit, by taxing health benefits. Taxes, subsidies funded by taxes, regulations and mandates will also fill in many (though not all) of the other blanks. Underpants gnomes: meet Phase Two. Say, what happened to profits?



Tuesday, May 26, 2009

"I pledge..."

I pledge to give President Obama the same level of respect as the left gave President Bush for eight years.
I pledge to give Sonia Sotomayor the same level of deference and critique as the left gave Sarah Palin, Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.
I really do!

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

You're not broke enough, in debt enough, miserable enough or dead enough-yet

Last night I was listening to the Community Organizer in Chief (COC),on the official Janet Napolitano certified radical right wing terrorists on Fox News, proclaim the virtues of new CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards. Afer hearing how the we should all be grateful to pay an average of $1300 more per vehicle (as per estimates-ya), the vehicles will be smaller (where do you put the kids?) plus a number of other great reasons we should declare 19 May a new national holiday in gratitude for the depth of experience and wisdom COC brings to us, the servile masses. What really caught my attention was this: A spokesman for the Washington Policy Institute said, regarding the vehicles that will be manufactured under the new CAFE regs, "More than likely, all the safety features that the buyer would like will not be available." Let that sink in.
According to a Heritage article, the National Highway traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that the CAFE standards have, over the past years, been responsible for the deaths of an additional 49,000 people. That translated into 7,700 lives for each mile/gallon (MPG) improvement. Again, that's just deaths. It does not not include the 100,000's of injuries, permanent pain and suffering, the disruptions of lives forever.
If we take the 7,700 lives lost in each MPG gained and extrapolate the ten MPG the Mandater in Chief proclaims, that means 77,000 of you are going to die. That includes children who can't read this blog entry. It does not include the, again, the 100,000's if not 1,000,000's of you who will be injured, many permanently. And of course, it will include the innocent children.
So, next time you meet someone who extols the virtue of CAFE and the "green" movement, first
cite these statistics. Then ask them "How many people dying are acceptable to you? How many permanently scarred and painfully injured children are acceptable to you?"
I'd be interested in hearing what they have to say.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

"...where no President has gone before!"

From "Day by Day" from "No Runny Eggs" from an article (you need to read this one. Basically "another canary drops dead" posting) from "Hot Air" (There. I think that covers it all).

Labels:

Sunday, April 26, 2009

"Just a little more_ _ _ _ _ and WE'RE THERE!!!!"

As I look over the decades (and now the century and a half of failure of socialism), there are always excuses as to why left wing programs always fail:

  1. "The program needs more time"
  2. "Not enough money has been spent"
  3. "The right people haven't been in charge"
  4. "It needs just a bit of tweaking"
  5. Any combination of the above.
So, listen to how many of those elements are in this exchange :


Thursday, April 16, 2009

The ugly duckling

I just caught the last of this on Glenn Beck. (here are the lyrics for the song).
Watch Simon Cowell's expression as she starts to sing.

Here are my comments from the Stribune story:

My shame

"Her story immediately transcends packaging as we are all immediately consumed by the humanity -- and inhumanity -- in all of us." I caught the last 30 seconds of the video on Glenn Beck and decided to go see it at You Tube. In the past 12 hours I've watched it at least 25 times. Watching that first expression on Simon Cowell's face speaks volumes. And I, I am deeply ashamed to admit, prejudged her on her appearance. There is a significant lesson here for me should I choose to learn and apply it.



Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Uh, no, you don't-really

From a WSJ headline "More States Look to Raise Taxes". As I read through the article, what impressed me, negatively, was how few states were going to balance their books by cutting spending. There are a few who will try to do it by cutting some spending and raising taxes, but raising taxes is the main thrust. Here in Minnesota, our state budget has increased 100% . At the State Central Committee meeting in December, I offered to help Governor Pawlenty dry up that $5-6,000,000,000 in red ink. I told him all I needed was the projected budget, a neon highlighter , a pot of coffee and viola'! At least $6,000,000,000 in savings before noon. And that I'd supply the coffee. And the highlighter! He said he'd mail the documents. I never saw them, even with a follow-up email. But, the point is that there is fat in every single state budget. But notice where the cuts are highlighted-" With the size of our budget gap, we are looking at a situation of closing down our courts, releasing prisoners and cutting the school year by as much as a month..." The very things that governments are required to do are the first things cut (except that school thing- one less month of left wing indoctrination and debasing of America and a possible extra month of part time work will help some families and the local economies. Plus the reason schools are hit is to force parents to scream for more money).
So, when non-essential programs are truly cut ( not just the rate of growth) there will be trail of sobbing witnesses, telling the whole litany of why their right to your money is more pressing than your evil, greedy, uncompassionate desire to keep what you've earned to provide for your family (I inadvertently left out that you're heartless too).
If these politicians had a spine, all state budgets would and could be balanced in a couple of hours.