Politics | Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction


Previous 10 | Next 10 
From: TimF5/16/2012 11:44:37 PM
   of 89938
 
Turning Water Vapor Into Pollution
May 10, 2012, 12:24 pm

Several years ago I wrote a post about how frequently steam plumes are used as illustrations to articles on pollution. In the US, if you see a cloud coming out of a smokestack, adds are about 100:1 its steam, not smoke. Look how many of the results today in Google images for “ air pollution” are actually plumes of water vapor.

One trick environmental sites will play is to Photoshop the contrast and darkness of the steam plume to try to make it look smokier. Here is a good example



This photoshopping of steam plumes to make them look like smoke is prevalent enough that I have written about it a few times. That is why this image tickled me. I don’t know the artist. He may be making the opposite plea (e.g. turning smoke to steam) but I’ll interepret it the way I like:



Postscript: This is my all-time favorite image in this category:



This image was used by Battelle labs (update: still is) to illustrate their air pollution expertise. The sad-faced girl with the inhaler is classic, but what makes this my favorite is the water vapor plume from the nuclear plant (you can see the nuclear reactor dome). The water vapor from a nuclear plant cooling tower has only pure water — it has no combustion products and no particulates that might give this poor girl asthma. It does not even have any CO2 in it, if that is your particular bogeyman.

coyoteblog.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Brumar89 who wrote (86045)5/17/2012 12:09:18 AM
From: joseffy   of 89938
 
After suspending Del Rey Oaks store butcher who defended pregnant woman, Safeway faces public wrath


santacruzsentinel.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: TimF5/17/2012 12:16:46 AM
   of 89938
 
Let’s Be Like Europe and Build More Trains!
posted in Transportation

One recently revealed aspect of the European debt crisis is the role European passenger trains played in running up national debts. The Greek rail system, for example, has debts of $13 billion, or about 5 percent of Greece’s gross national product. Rail workers get paid so well that it would be cheaper to hire taxis to move passengers, at least if the taxis carried two or more passengers at a time.

Greece spends $1.20 per passenger mile on passenger trains. That’s twice what the U.K. spends, but even the U.K. trains are hardly a model of efficiency considering that driving in the U.S. costs only about 35 cents a vehicle mile, including subsidies to highway. Divide that by however many passengers you think are in the cars to get an average cost per passenger mile.

Spain, meanwhile, went so far overboard in building high-speed rail lines that it recently shut one down because it was attracting only nine passengers a day. That’s what happens when you let politicians decide where the trains should go.

Many transit agencies in the United States are close to if not in the midst of similar financial crises. Portland’s TriMet agreed to allow transit workers to retire at age 55 after as little as ten years on the job and gave them and their families free medical care (with a $5 co-pay, no deductible) for life (plus 16 years after the retiree’s death for their families). As a result, health-care costs have grown from $18 million in 2000 to $68 million next year and projected to rise to $153 million–40 percent of the agency’s 2010 operating budget–by 2020.

The story behind this agreement demonstrates why Franklin Roosevelt opposed collective bargaining with public employees and why Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has tried to end such rights: you can’t have a fair bargaining process when politicians fear the effects of a strike on their careers and the unions donate heavily to political campaigns.

Such collective bargaining has made public transportation particularly inefficient in both Europe and the United States. Building expensive rail lines when buses cars would work as well at a far lower cost only exacerbates the problem. While some have argued that the trains would be affordable if we fixed the union contracts, while others claim the contracts would be affordable if we got rid of the trains, the truth is we can’t afford to lavishly spend on transportation or anything else.

ti.org 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Brumar895/17/2012 7:27:14 AM
2 Recommendations   of 89938
 

Insults Help Democrats Defeat Rich, Religious Nut, Racist, Redneck RepublicansBy Karin McQuillan

[iframe style="POSITION: absolute; TOP: 0px; LEFT: 0px" id=aswift_0 height=250 marginHeight=0 frameBorder=0 width=300 allowTransparency name=aswift_0 marginWidth=0 scrolling=no replaced="true"][/iframe]
Republicans may bridle at these insults, or we may laugh. But we are chumps when we don't take insults seriously. Slander provides the Democrats with a huge electoral advantage. Many centrist voters, though not radical or loony themselves, have come to believe these libels against Republicans as commonsense, evident truths. Since they can't possibly see themselves as one of those Awful Republicans, they won't abandon Obama no matter how miserable they are with Obama's performance. The economy, a nuclear Iran, rising gas prices -- it doesn't matter. It would be tantamount to selling their vote to a party of greedy, women-hating, violent, racist people. Who are also stupid.

When I discuss politics with moderate Democrats who are unhappy, even very unhappy, with Obama, I also hear how they will never vote Republican. So I ask what is most important to them about voting Democrat. The answer is often moral: their desire to take care of the needy and homeless, the belief that "I am my brother's keeper." In the last few weeks, I got a number of phone calls from Democrat friends who don't follow the news closely -- one was agitated over the Republican War on Women; the other was upset by the Trayvon Martin shooting. Democrat libel works. Republicans don't have misguided policies to help people that won't work; we have evil intentions. We're against everyone but the rich, and most of us are too stupid to know it.

These unhappy Democrat voters are not well-informed and don't have the motivation to change. They rely on network TV, the New York Times, NPR, their spouses and friends whom they trust and respect. Part of their self-esteem and identity as good people is based on their superiority to Republicans. They belong to the party of the kind, the intelligent, the enlightened -- why would they look into the arguments of the opposing side, the rich, the religious nuts, racists and rednecks? That's not their group.

They are not deciding on the merits of our competing visions of America. They don't necessarily want a Big Brother nanny-state government, but they don't want to abandon the poor and elderly. They don't necessarily want race-based affirmative action laws, but they don't want to be racist. They're concerned about the budget deficit, but they trust Democrat assurances that we can spend our way out of debt, if only the Republicans weren't the party of the rich. They're not necessarily against lower taxes or school choice or Social Security reform -- but they never hear our side of those arguments. To be heard, Republicans must cast off the fright mask that has been put over our faces.

Easier said than done. As soon as you're defending yourself, you've already lost. We can learn from the hard-won experience of pro-Israel activists. Anti-Israel propaganda is similar to the anti-Republican propaganda, in that your very moral being is undermined, and hence any ludicrous accusation is believed.

Jabotinsky, the famous Jewish Zionist, once counseled Jews that if an innocent man is accused repeatedly of being a thief, and each time patiently empties his pockets to show they are empty, people will wonder why he is constantly submitting to searches and conclude he is a thief. Jabotinsky's great lesson was that Jews have a right to their homeland and need not apologize or be defensive about it. Republicans have a right to respect as good, moral, intelligent people.

Years ago, I stopped debating insults about Israel. I no longer "empty my pockets" when people ask if I think Israel is an apartheid state. I do not honor hateful accusations by answering the lies with facts. Even the most dramatic and accurate facts carry no emotional weight and are ignored. Instead, I began to state the positive personally, directly, and simply: "I love Israel and am incredibly proud of her. Israel has the highest level of moral standards you will find anywhere. No other country in history has shown such great self-restraint in the face of torture, murder, and war by hate-filled enemies. Through all its troubles, Israel has a beautiful democracy, just like America." The apartheid accusations have nothing to grip onto, and they fall away.

Anyone who has debated the Buffett Rule or the War on Women or whether the Tea Party is racist knows: facts do not move people's political ideas one jot. Facts do not help people change emotional and political allegiance. After all, we are asking people not just to pull a lever for a different party, but to rebel against a punitive and intolerant peer group, and to question the authorities they trust. They would have to accept that they have been lied to and manipulated. It is far easier to deny uncomfortable facts than to change.

Only emotional and moral truths change minds. That is the arena in which Republicans must combat the lies that cost us votes. Fighting defamation has the potential to open the door to political change.

Message to Republicans: stop laughing as if the insults are a joke. Stop defending yourselves. Stop with the wonky arguments. Stop having your heads explode and ranting like a lunatic. Go positive, and go to the heart of the matter. Don't debate -- demonstrate that it is you who occupy the moral high ground.

It's time to try something new. Follow Jabotinisky's lesson: don't empty your pockets. Republicans must respond directly to the despicable nature of defamation.

Let's take the accusations of racism as a prime example. The unfounded and bizarre claim that Republicans are racist is a moral argument which portrays Republicans as evil people. So address the defamation on moral grounds. Make their attack the topic. Do not let them feel superior at your expense.

Being racist is one of the worst sins a person could possibly commit. To call people racists because you disagree with their politics is reprehensible. We all have to respect differences of political opinion, just as we all respect different races or ethnic groups. If Democrats want a civil society, they cannot defame opponents with vicious slurs, to make Republicans less worthy human beings. Ordinary Democrats have to stop encouraging the president to denigrate half the country in order to get votes. We have to pull together to solve our problems. Calling people racist for political gain is destructive to the very fabric of our society. It has got to stop. We have got to treat each other with respect.

In fact, the Republican record on race is outstanding. It is especially impressive compared to the Democrat Lady Bountiful approach, where liberals make themselves feel good by patronizing blacks. Democrats treat blacks like they can't get into a college on their own merits, or can't get out of the ghetto because they are too damaged, or can't be treated like responsible adults. It's demeaning and destructive. Democrats have a lot to answer for. Misguided welfare policies, which make Democrats feel so big-hearted but actually destroyed the black family for generations -- that's nothing to be proud of. Republicans have a lot more to offer. Take any problem that blacks face in America. Republicans can go toe-to-toe with Democrats on our record for helping blacks. We have a much better approach.

We are the party that passed the Civil Rights Acts and that has stayed loyal to Martin Luther King's vision of a colorblind society. We believe in treating everyone as equals -- equal rights, equal respect, equal opportunity. We are rightfully proud of ourselves on race.

It is Republican mayors, not Democrat ones, who have fought to control crime in poor neighborhoods so families can send their child to the corner to buy candy in safety. It is Republican governors who have provided the best job opportunities and educational opportunities for blacks. Look at Louisiana and how their Republican governor, Bobby Jindal, has fought for better education for ghetto kids -- almost half a million kids in failing schools will be given vouchers by the state for private schools. Republicans believe in practical, quality programs to help black kids break the cycle of poverty. We're doing it, whenever we get the chance. I'm proud of how effective the Republican idea of welfare reform was in creating healthier families with the self-respect that comes from a job.

Fighting defamation is hard. But it must be done, and the only way is to call the Democrats on it every single time. They will never change. But it is nonetheless important to speak out and not allow their vicious portraits of Republicans to be taken as normal. When Jews publicly challenge and shame Holocaust-deniers and anti-Semites, it is not in the hopes of winning them over, but because you must not let their lies be acceptable in polite discourse.

The crisis is that Republicans have let these haters dominate the public square. The odds are stacked in their favor, as they currently have the White House and the legacy media. But they do not control your face-to-face interactions with family, friends, acquaintances, and strangers, who are constantly repeating hate speech against Republicans as if it is normal. It is common Democrat conversation in all sorts of social settings to comment how Republicans are racist or stupid or against women. They expect everyone to agree with them.

I have heard all these comments in the past month alone, and you have undoubtedly also. It is widespread, but is not normal. It is not any more acceptable than anti-Semitic or racist insults, which a generation or two ago were also part of social discourse. It is time to call Democrats on it. Defamation works when it is not called out for what it is and delegitimized. Do not accept the role of the evil moron for even one second, any more than minorities in America accept slanderous accusations. Insist that Democrats face us in a fair fight. We will win on the merits.




Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/insults_help_democrats_defeat_rich_religious_nut_racist_redneck_republicans.html#ixzz1v7pxbUwT

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: joseffy who wrote (85986)5/17/2012 11:28:45 AM
From: ManyMoose   of 89938
 
No respect deserved here, and none given.

worth remembering every time President Obama claims bin Laden bragging rights.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Brumar895/18/2012 6:42:53 PM
1 Recommendation   of 89938
 
NPR Having Trouble Collecting Corporate Underwriting To Fund Their Round-The-Clock Evil Corporation News Stories


WASHINGTON — NPR’s new chief executive is signaling that there may be some static ahead for the radio and digital news organization. Halfway through its fiscal year, and six months into Gary Knell’s tenure as chief executive, NPR has seen a sharp downturn in corporate “underwriting,” or advertising revenue. The fall-off has led to projections of an annual operating deficit and internal discussions about staff and program cuts. Another problem area: The strong audience growth that NPR’s news and entertainment programs experienced over the past decade appears to have flattened, a potentially worrisome development because more stations are carrying NPR’s programs. The increasingly bearish climate poses a challenge for Knell, a highly regarded public-media manager who became NPR’s chief executive in December. Knell replaced Vivian Schiller, who resigned in March last year after an embarrassing episode in which two NPR fundraisers were recorded making disparaging comments about conservatives in a meeting with two men posing as donors from a bogus Islamic group. The meeting was secretly taped by a conservative activist, and helped push House Republicans to cut off federal funding of public broadcasting (the money was later restored). NPR has operated at a deficit in three of the past four years, Knell said in an interview Wednesday, and has had to dip into its endowment to cover its expenses in those years

http://rumfordmeteor.com/?p=6516

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Brumar89 who wrote (86051)5/18/2012 7:06:15 PM
From: joseffy   of 89938
 
Hilarious.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Brumar895/19/2012 4:45:07 PM
   of 89938
 
CNN gets into marital counseling:

CNN Urges Normal Couples to Emulate Homosexuals’ Promiscuity

In addition to providing predictable Establishment Left spin to the news, CNN is attempting to remain relevant by offering marriage counseling. Its advice: normal couples should follow the example of homosexuals, who have left behind old-fashioned notions of sexual fidelity.

According to “eminent marriage therapist” John Gottman,

“Straight couples may have a lot to learn from gay and lesbian relationships.”

For example,

“A number of my gay clients prefer to be sexually open but emotionally monogamous,” says sex and relationship therapist Joe Kort. “They can have lovers on the side and not have it be a threat to the relationship.”

It’s a type of male coupledom that sex columnist Dan Savage has famously termed “monogamish” …

Appallingly, this self-indulgent infidelity — which is responsible for the rapid spread of AIDS — is portrayed as positive.

Readers may recognize Dan Savage as the militant pervert who publicly bullies Christian children.

Anyone wonder why CNN is losing its audience?




Out on a limb that is cracking.

moonbattery.com 




.....
Ghost of FA Hayek says: May 18, 2012 at 12:24 pm Yup The ghost of Ted Kennedy just advised me;
“Nothing says I love you dear like a good old fashioned waitress sandwich”



  • fxdwg says: May 18, 2012 at 12:24 pm Is it just me, or is liberalism a thinly veiled excuse for just doing whatever you want to do and not feeling any guilt or shame? NOW wants to own the term “slut”, right? What a childish point of view. Grow up!

    .....


    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

    From: Brumar895/20/2012 2:07:58 PM
    3 Recommendations   of 89938
     
    MTV Wants You To Lose Your Virginity In New Reality Show



    by John Nolte 1 day ago

    A tipster sent this to me this morning and after clicking the link, I -- the guy who thought he had seen it all from our pop culture overlords -- literally gasped: DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THINGS TO THE NEXT LEVEL? LIKE, ARE YOU READY TO HAND OVER YOUR V CARD? OR DO YOU HAVE A FRIEND WHO IS READY TO LOSE IT?

    Young adulthood is a time for exploration. New relationships, fresh experiences and sexual firsts…

    Now MTV is looking to frankly capture that journey in a new series called My First…We’re looking for adults who are ready to go all the way. Let MTV come along on your journey… as you try to lose your virginity! (Note: We will be filming whether or not you accomplish this goal… but NOT the act itself. Duh.)

    If you are 18 years or older and are willing to candidly allow MTV to accompany you on the journey toward “losing it,” please send us an email.

    MTV can and undoubtedly will hide behind the fact that 18 year-olds are legal adults, but you can prey on adults just as easily as you can prey on children, especially young adults conditioned by pop culture outlets like MTV to believe celebrity and narcissism are virtues.

    And the bait here is celebrity. Debase yourselves for our cameras and we'll make you a star! This isn't about love or finding love or even losing your innocence to someone you love. This is about the lie that...

    Young adulthood is a time for exploration. New relationships, fresh experiences and sexual firsts…

    I seem to remember when we were the kind of culture that protected young people from the indignities of loveless sex and did everything in our power to educate about the financial, emotional, and medical pitfalls of leading with your sexuality over your heart.

    What MTV is doing might be legal but it's still a sleazy exploitation of some of our most vulnerable citizens. And the dangling of celebrity and a camera from a swanky studio lot is no different than dangling candy and a camera from your open raincoat.

    If you want to debase yourselves, it's a free country. To entice others, however, is an act of evil.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/05/18/MTV-Lose-Virginity-Reality-Show

    .....



    Dear MTV executives.

    After seeing your recent idea for a show, I thought you know this might not be a bad Idea. Why exploit just any ole girl, heck why not make her a celebrity. SO I’m willing to help you out and offer my services and bang one of your daughters on that special night that you seem to be so inclined to film.
    I’m rather hung, but I’ll go easy on her until you give the signal, at which time I’ll hammer it like a sailor back from 6 months at sea. If she starts to cry you can explain its just sex and means nothing and do it for daddy.
    She should be proud to have a dad that supports their daughter this way and wants to make sure that her special night will always be available on DVD or the web and a potential kick start to a career in porn.
    Heck you can even give them out as stocking stuffers at christmas to share with the rest of the family.
    If that doesn’t suit your fancy, I’m even willing to consider dressing up like a biker and invite my pals over. She could then say she lost her virginity to a bunch of bikers and have video to prove it, man oh man, can you imagine telling that story to your friends family and coworkers?
    I can tell you definately are a thinker and seem to want to make the best out of every situation.
    So let me help you help your daughter get banged on national TV….what do ya say?


    http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=133861

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

    From: greatplains_guy5/20/2012 11:03:30 PM
    2 Recommendations   of 89938
     
    Who Is Barack Obama? The Question that Won’t Go Away
    May 19, 2012 - 4:46 am -
    by Roger Kimball

    So now Chris Matthews isn’t the only one experiencing a little thrill when he thinks about Barack (omit middle name) Obama. The recent revelation that from the early 1990s until the day before yesterday—or, to be more accurate, until Obama made his decision to run for president—a biographical pamphlet circulated by his literary agents described him as having been “born in Kenya” has been setting the world of Twitter atwitter.

    What should we think about that? An agency spokesman who claims to have been responsible for the “born in Kenya” wheeze has publicly said that it was a mistake, a typographical error, a slip of the pen that just went “unchecked” for, um, sixteen-seventeen years. I can understand that. She meant to write “Hawaii” and wrote “Kenya” instead. Could happen to anyone. They look and sound enough alike, don’t they, that no one noticed. You meant to write “there” and you wrote “their” instead. You meant to write “cup” and you wrote “floccinaucinihilipilification” instead. No one—no one at the literary agency, not the author himself—could be expected to notice. You understand that, right?

    Well, maybe that is an unprofitable line of inquiry. However it happened, the take-away here is not that Obama was really born in Kenya. As my friend Roger Simon points out in “The Mystery of the Kenyan Birth,” the noteworthy thing is that it is one more puff in the cloud of unknowing that surrounds the president.

    It’s been pretty foggy in those precincts for some time. During the 2008 campaign, many of us asked the question: “Who is Barack Obama?” It wasn’t a question that Obama’s official PR firms—The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc.–were interested in, no sirree, but it was a question that some of us pajamas-wearing-bitter-enders asked ourselves when we weren’t snake handling or nuzzling our firearms.

    It’s a question that has recurred as more and more pieces of the Obama jigsaw puzzle have worked their way loose and exposed little gaps or fissures in the story. The most recent one concerned Ms. Composite, the girlfriend who didn’t exactly exist. But there have been other revelations, or, rather, revelations of non-revelation. Turns out the book filed under “Autobiography” ought to have been filed under “Teen Fantasy,” “Mystery,” or some other rubric in the fiction section.

    Since 2008, the meticulous Stanley Kurtz has patiently been sifting through what materials are publicly available to answer the question Who Is Barack Obama? His book Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism is essential reading for anyone the least bit curious about the political history and ideological commitments of the most powerful man in the world.

    But not everyone shares Mr. Kurtz’s curiosity. At the beginning of the Metaphysics, Aristotle observes than human beings are by nature curious animals: they ask questions and want to know the truth about the world around them. But not all men. One of the great oddnesses of the 2008 campaign was the code of omerta enforced by the the legacy media about anything having to do with Obama’s past. Where was he born? Don’t know, don’t care. What were his college years like? Can’t you move on to something important, like the time Mitt Romney ragged some hippie in high school? Why did Obama say that former Weatherman Bill Ayers was “just a guy in the neighborhood” when he was plainly an important political mentor, if not also the ghostwriter, for the future president?

    And on and on and on. There are a lot of questions to be asked about Barack Obama. Why are his college records sealed? Why can’t we see a certified copy of his birth certificate? Why are his medical records sealed? I’ve been told that his Social Security registration was issued by Connecticut, which would be odd, but cannot check because that too is sealed. Obama worked as a lawyer, but we don’t know who he worked for because his client list is sealed. Why is it that Michelle Obama can no longer practice as an attorney? We know the fact but not the reason.

    As I say, last time around, general infatuation guaranteed that Obama got more or less a free pass from the legacy media. I suspect there will be much more curiosity as the summer progresses and we get into the campaign. For one thing, the nimbus of inviolability around Obama has been seriously breached. He is no longer the pristine knight come to lower the oceans, fix the economy, and “fundamentally transform” the United States of America into a green paradise where everyone suckles happily at the federal mammary gland except the evil coal producers who are miserable bankrupts. No, I suspect that even The Washington Post, even The New York Times, will have to take a peek or two under the covers of the tale of this international man of mystery.

    They’ll more or less have to. Alternative sources of information are much more potent now than they were in 2008. It matters not if The New York Times closes ranks and buries a story. There are too many other instruments of disinterment. The news will out. And the more people know about Barack Obama, the more, I predict, they will wonder how this man became president of the United States. As a first, preliminary spur to curiosity, I share the following image just sent to me by a friend.



    Question period is now officially open.

    pjmedia.com 

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)
    Previous 10 | Next 10 

    Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.