Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Senator Kerry, here is a REAL hero.
Not an arrogant, self-promoting blueblood...
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
The "Generosity Index" has been calculated by the Catalog for Philanthropy for seven years now. It rates states by comparing the differential between income and charitable contributions.
The dry, official version is here at the Catalog for Philanthropy. From Michelle Malkin's blog we have the jazzed up, color coded version. Scroll down and see how long it takes to come to a Blue State...
Update: It's not easy to read here, but if you click on it you can read the states.
But what's really fun is to watch the left twist and spin as they find new reasons to denigrate the right. Right up to 2 November the Republican party was "the party of the rich". Check back for yourself. There was all of the "pro business" rhetoric, ignoring the fact that business keeps people employed. There was the oft repeated canard that Republican tax cuts were only for the rich, which ignores the fact that in a progressive tax system the rich get taxed proportionally more, so their taxes get cut proportionally more as well. On and on it went--the "class warfare" that has so often been spoken of.
And now, post-election, the whole meme has been stood on its head. Turns out the Republican party isn't the party of the rich after all. We're all dumbass Southerners.
Someone decided that average income per state directly correlates to average IQ for each state. An interesting theory that has a shred of validity and myriad flaws. Smarter people do tend to make higher incomes, but you can only make comparisons on a regional basis. The smartest guy in the world, residing in Montana, might not make as much as an NYC garbage collector. But then again, he can buy a house with many acres of land for less per year than the NYC resident pays for his apartment.
So which are we...The party of the rich or the party of economic underachievers? Pick one, guys.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Friday, November 05, 2004
Jane Smiley writes an article that is just so beyond the pale that I have to wonder if she doesn't need to have a serious talk with the nearest psychological professional on an emergency basis.
Some non-contiguous excerpts separated by elipses:
I grew up in Missouri and most of my family voted for Bush...The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry. I suppose the good news is that 55 million Americans have evaded the ignorance-inducing machine. But 58 million have not. (Well, almost 58 million—my relatives are not ignorant, they are just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority.)...[ed.--nice comment on your relatives, Jane. Guess you're a lot better than them. After all, they're still trapped in Li'l Ole Missouri while you make your name on Slate]
The worst civilian massacre in American history took place in Lawrence, Kan., in 1862—Quantrill's raid. The red forces, known then as the slave-power, pulled 265 unarmed men from their beds on a Sunday morning and slaughtered them in
front of their wives and children. [ed.--Red Forces??? The attackers became what were known as "Dixiecrats". The Democrats who almost derailed the Republican pushed "Civil Rights Bill of 1964". Most definitely Blue Staters.]
There's more--lots more, but I won't bother. Her hatred is all consuming. Never mind that nobody knew what the hell a "Red State" was in 1862, mostly because there was no such division. Her ignorance is exceeded only by her hate. And while I don't for one second want to diminish Quantrill's Raid, the worst civilian massacre in American history took place on 9/11/2001. As Robert Byrd would say in his oh-so quaint style of speech: "A fie on you, Jane, a fie on you for forgetting that the worst slaughter of innocent Americans ocurred on 9/11/2001, not in 1862".
It took way longer than it should have, but Americans accept persons of all stripes into our country and culture. The real intolerant ones are the radical Islamicists who think that the entire balance of the world should either convert or be slaughtered.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Monday, November 01, 2004
And now he has people in Florida making phone calls claiming that retired General Norman Schwartkopf is endorsing him.
Problem is, Gen. Schwartzkopf doesn't endorse him. At all.
From Drudge, via Powerline:
TAMPA, FL – Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf today issued the following statement:"The Democratic National Committee is making fraudulent phone calls claiming that I have endorsed Senator Kerry. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I
demand that they stop immediately."
If this isn't bottom-feeding politics, I don't know what is. They're lying. Absolutely lying, just to get a liar elected.
If you really think that "looters" stuffed 380 tons (760,000 lbs.) of explosives in their pockets and ran off with them under the noses of US troops, don't vote. You don't have sufficient intellect to be making decisions that important.
If you're not outraged by the fact that Kerry lied repeatedly and loudly about meeting with the "entire UN Security Council", don't vote. You're a vacuum.
If you're not offended by Kerry's blanket condemnation of every service member in Vietnam, don't vote. You have no soul.
If you don't have serious issues with the fact that Kerry won't release his service records (and admitted to it the other night), don't vote. You don't have the intellectual curiosity to make an informed decision.
If you shrug off his flip flops, his votes for then against, don't vote. You have no command of issues, you're simply a reflexive Democrat.
If you don't care that he blames ski slope spills on "that 'SOB'" who was there to protect him and he blames girly baseball throws on the guy waiting to catch the ball, don't vote. You don't care that he can't say "I f***ed up" like a real man would.
And if you don't find the two Johns' hair utterly ridiculous, well, go ahead and vote and I'll try not to laugh at the way you dress.