Tag Archives: Leftist

Jerk-Ass Radio Show Host

Brad and Britt.  Man, ya gotta love ’em.  I mean, even when you hate ’em, you gotta hand it to ’em.

This morning they are talking about health care legislation and Joe Lieberman.  I guess Joe is to the Democrats as Snowe is to the Republicans.  Anyway, that’s what they were talking about.

Then, during a break, Neil Boortz came on and pitched his show; a quick 15 second bit advertising his show at 10:00.  During his bit, he made mention that this health care legislation was “Government takeover of health care.”

Heh.  Brad went nuts.  He lashed out in his typical 2 octaves above normal voice and began ranting and raving.  Finally, he ended with the comment that “this is not government takeover of health care, I don’t care what a jerk-ass radio talk show host says.”

Stay classy guys, stay classy.

Where the Left Falls Down

I came across this horrible story last week, a woman was raped and murdered.

A former mental patient has been charged with raping and murdering a Los Angeles woman…

The man was abducted and arrested.  The part that has me confused is this:

Three counts of murder were filed Thursday against 22-year-old Boneetio Washington.

Huh?  Three?  But I don’t understand.  How is he being charged with 3 counts?  Ahh, I see it now:

A former mental patient has been charged with raping and murdering a Los Angeles woman and her unborn twins

The woman was pregnant.  With twins.  And they, of course, also died in the attack.  So, what is it?  Are those babies people?  With rights?  Can you be charged for murder if that which you murdered didn’t have rights?  Well, maybe the twins were of such an age that they were considered people.  Even by the leftist crowd?
Nope:

Police believe he randomly targeted Kang, who was four months pregnant.

16 weeks.
Of course the law is getting this one right.  Mr. Washington did take the lives of three people.  That night, 3 people perished.  Why the Left can’t be consistent is frustrating.

This Will Soon Be US

As we slip further and further into the cluthes and dangerous mindset of the Government nanny state, we will soon find ourselves in THIS siutation:

A SHOPKEEPER has been fined £180 by Southend Council for NOT producing commercial rubbish.

…

Mr Howard was astonished when a council official visited to check his waste disposal credentials. The officer refused to believe he did not produce any waste and he was issued with a £180 fixed penalty notice…

Awesome.

Now that I think of it, this is EXACTLY where the Leftists are sending us.  If you DON’T use our Health Care system, we will fine you!

Hat Tip: Kids Prefer Cheese

When Down is Up

Let’s say that you are running a lemonade stand.  You buy your cups, your ice, sugar and lemons.  All in, it costs you $0.10 to make a cup of lemonade.  Include your time and risk plus the profit you need and you sell it for $0.20 a cup.  Anything less and the risk of running the stand forces you to pack up shop and go back to work at the local grocery store.

Now, let’s say that the friendly neighborhood HOA comes over and says that some of your customers are kids who are thirsty because they are mowing lawns for the old ladies on the block.  They can’t afford the 20 cents you are asking but it’s just not fair that these kids don’t get to drink lemonade when they are so so thirsty and so so deserving.  You shake your head and kick your toes….you know what’s coming.

If you wanna keep selling lemonade on this street you have to sell lemonade to the kids for a nickel; a stinkin’ nickel!

What happens to your lemonade business model?  Well, you either:

  • Quit
  • Raise the price such that you compensate for the reduced price to kids
  • Move to another street so that none of your customers, including the poor deserving yet thirsty kids have ANY lemonade.

Right?

So how is that different than this?

WASHINGTON – A bipartisan group of lawmakers hopes to finally win a long struggle to ease curbs against importing low-cost prescription drugs…

Same thing, right?

Drug companies have a market that they sell into.  The prices currently are set such that they make the profits they need to exist.  In fact, those prices might ALREADY be higher than they would because foreign nations are already forcing prices below market levels.

Well, guess what will happen when/if this becomes law?  Our fearless reporter gets to it.  In the SIXTH paragraph:

…the billions of dollars drug companies would lose if Americans began buying large amounts of lower-priced pharmaceuticals from other nations — has prevented the proposal from being implemented for about a decade.

Good for our young reporter!  Finally he gets what might happen.  See, if the drug companies lose billions of dollars they are going to have to …. Ahh, what?  What did you say?  Our fearless reporter is continuing in ANOTHER direction?

“Does the pharmaceutical industry have a lot of clout? The answer is they sure do,” Dorgan said Wednesday. He said when it comes to a vote, he hoped “the interest of the American consumers will have as much clout in this chamber.”

Heh.  I should have known.  But lucky for us we can spot the key phrase:

the interest of the American consumers

And that means that this bill is a bunch of:

You Know What This IS

California: Part IV

I just got done posting on some crazy talk coming out of California.  Not 10 lines down the page and I saw this gem:

Tenant advocates got a win at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Tuesday with initial approval of a plan to extend eviction protections to rental housing built within the past 30 years…

…

Supervisor John Avalos, chief sponsor of the legislation, said the change is needed “to assure equal protections for tenants in all rental units, in San Francisco. This legislation’s really about fairness.”

Avalos – responding to concerns raised by tenant advocacy groups – said he drafted the legislation after seeing the growing number of evictions of tenants living in properties foreclosed on by banks. Foreclosure is not considered a just cause for eviction.

Look, whenEVER a politician says anything related to “This legislation’s really about fairness” run.  Run far far away.

But there is hope; albeit ‘prolly pretty small:

Colin Gallagher, who owns a condo with his husband in the city’s South of Market, said they would not have purchased their home had they known the rules would be changed after the fact. Their plan is to rent out their condo some day and they don’t want to be restricted with eviction controls. “We certainly feel this would negatively impact our investment,” said Gallagher.

Strange that, huh?  Rules implemented that affect the ability to realize return on investment might reduce said investments?

But hey, don’t let economics get in the way:

Proponents’ message: “In a city with 60 percent renters, a severe housing shortage and an economic crisis, this fix in the law should be a no-brainer,” said Sara Shortt, executive director of the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco.

Gentle Miss Sara.  “No brainer”  You have NO idea.

They Say This With a Straight Face

Turns out about 22.1% of households in the 10 county Bay area are struggling to make ends meet:

Whereas the federal poverty level would be $17,170 a year for a family fitting that description – no matter where they lived in the United States – the self-sufficiency standard estimates that it would take $54,590 for such a family to live comfortably but without frills in San Francisco County, $49,823 in Contra Costa County and $63,871 in San Mateo County.

Are you kuckin’ fidding me!?!

Now granted, this is for a family of two parents with an infant child.  BUT STILL!  We are talking about an income north of 63 large.  $63,000!  And they are struggling to make ends meet?  I read the article twice.  I regret to inform you, gentle reader, that these people are DEAD serious.

Okay, okay.  So…so what?  So, like, what is the conclusion?

“This report raises important questions about how we can better serve the thousands of low-wage workers and families who were already struggling before the recession, whose situations are undoubtedly more precarious now,” said Anne Wilson, chief executive of the United Way of the Bay Area.

How we can better serve people who make about 55k?  Un-be-liev-able!

Check this out:

Annual Salary to be Considered Below Standard

Two things:

  1. Anyone making about $55,000 has the ability to move.
  2. Anyone else think these numbers are just made up so that about 20% of the population will fit?

No wonder California is broke.

Danger Ahead

A couple of days ago I gave my explanation of why California doesn’t have any water left.  The basic idea is that when the price of a thing is reduced and limited below what the market would otherwise bare, you will experience a shortage of that thing.

This is true of water in California
This is true of housing in New York during rent control.
This is true of housing in San Francisco during rent control.
This is true of gasoline during times of rising prices.

So why is it that very smart people don’t take these lessons to heed?

Dorgan’s drug re-importation amendment is another significant hurdle. Allowing for the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada and European countries is popular among many Democrats and Republicans, giving Dorgan’s proposal a strong chance of passage.

Unbelievable.  Drug companies make drugs to sell, at a profit.  The market in the US is SO massive that they can sustain gross economic policies in other countries that force these companies to sell thier drugs for less than cost.  Now, the US wants to take those drugs from those countries and re-import them here.  For a price less than the market can bare.
Guess whats gonna happen?

Hat Tip: Say Anything

Note to Obama

Obama is having his jobs summit today; in fact it may already be over.  In the spirit of wondering how to create more jobs, I noticed that Krugman has a solution:

Meanwhile, the federal government could provide jobs by … providing jobs. It’s time for at least a small-scale version of the New Deal’s Works Progress Administration, one that would offer relatively low-paying (but much better than nothing) public-service employment. There would be accusations that the government was creating make-work jobs, but the W.P.A. left many solid achievements in its wake. And the key point is that direct public employment can create a lot of jobs at relatively low cost. In a proposal to be released today, the Economic Policy Institute, a progressive think tank, argues that spending $40 billion a year for three years on public-service employment would create a million jobs, which sounds about right.

That got me to thinking.  There are currently about 15.7 million unemployed people in America.  Almost all are receiving some form of unemployment benefits.  How about instead of spending $40 billion a year for 3 years like Krugman says, we just make these people do the work he is suggesting and call ’em jobs?  Why would we create a program to offer “relatively low-paying” jobs for people to work when we already have a program that offers “relatively low-paying” jobs where people have to do–NOTHING!?

Krugman.  Sheesh.

Hat tip:  Forbes

California: Part II

A lot of talk going on about projections and what ifs.  So much so, that for many of us, we begin to lose sight of  “what is” within the forest of  theoretical science.  Sometimes, really, a picture is simply worth a thousand words.  Or maybe, a picture is not having to read a thousand words.

Who get's it? Who doesn't.

Why, you may ask, is the unemployment rate so much higher in California than in Texas?

What’s the worst state to do business in? According to readers of Chief Executive magazine, it’s California. In the same poll, Texas won first place as the best state in which to put your headquarters. As reported in The Economist, the two largest states in the nation have very different philosophies and very different success rates.

The article goes on to mention why Texas is doing a better job:

  1. Texans on average believe in laissez-faire markets with an emphasis on individual responsibility.  Since the ’80s, California’s policy-makers have favored central planning solutions and a reliance on a government social safety net.
  2. Californians have largely treated environmentalism as a “religious sacrament” rather than as one component among many in maximizing people’s quality of life.
  3. California has placed “ethnic diversity” above “assimilation,” while Texas has done the opposite.
  4. Texas has focused on streamlining the regulatory and litigation burden on its residents.  Meanwhile, California’s government has attempted to use regulation and litigation to transfer wealth from its creators to various special-interest constituencies.

The whole article is an awesome read as a “how to guide” for planners.  It would be great if Barack Obama would read it.

Hat Tip Mark Perry and Rick Perry

Powerful Hurricane Set to Hit North Carolina

Do you remember the hurricane that made landfall onto North Carolina beaches this past July?  Uh, no?  Maybe August then?  September-October-November?  Yeah, me either.  Wanna know why the mainstream media didn’t report any of those storms hammering the Carolina coast?  Cause we had the quietest Hurricane season in 10 years.

SAVANNAH, Ga. — The Atlantic hurricane season ended Monday with barely a whimper: Not a single hurricane came ashore in the United States.

Since June, when the season began, just nine named storms developed. Only three of them became hurricanes, and those stayed out at sea or weakened before passing over land.

Two tropical storms made landfall in the U.S., causing little more than rain and some beach erosion.

It would seem that with a vanishing hockey stick, record cold and dampening of the powerful tropical storm season that we should finally be able to make some progress in combating the Climate Alarmists.

Prolly not, see, CO2 changes climate of which can appear all kinds of different symptoms.  Including cooling and lessening of storms.