Texas Rainmaker
Liberal Economics at its Finest
July 31st, 2006 10:46 pm

From The Telegraph:

Tom Wittman’s 1994 Saturn may look the same as other cars on the road, but it costs considerably less to drive.

Wittman, 52, of the 200 block of Osage, Jerseyville, has converted the motor so the car runs strictly on electricity.

The car, actually worth $2,000 to $3,000 in the blue book, cost Wittman between $8,000 and $9,000, but he said it will save him money in the long run.

“I’ve been wanting to do one for years, then the price of gas went up,” Wittman said.

That gave him the extra push he needed to get started.

Why spend $30 per month on gas when I can spend $3 on electricity?” he asked.

So he spent over $8,000 to save around $27 per month. Ingenious. He’ll break even in just over 296 months (24.7 years). That’s not even factoring in the time value of money.

Looking up Tom Wittman in Opensecrets.org, I confirmed my suspicions. He’s donated to the likes of Howard Dean, Wesley Clark and Moveon.org. He should’ve taken that $750 he donated to those candidates and invested in 25 more months of gasoline instead.

Only a liberal could possibly think that sinking over $8,000, into a car valued at $2,000 in order to save so little money that it would take more than 2 decades to break even, is a brilliant idea.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (4) Comments
divider

The headline had me laughing before I even read the article:

Michael Moore says gets lots of Republican hugs

I’m thinking it must be a slow news day. But then I read the article and realize that the entire article reads like a press release for Moore, himself.

Michael Moore — gadfly filmmaker, liberal activist and political lightning rod — says he finds himself being hugged by a lot of Republicans these days.

So who are these Republicans he speaks of? Does the article identify any?

…the Oscar-winning director says he is approached all the time by conservatives ready to make peace.

Ok, so who are they? Names? Descriptions? Anything….?

Some in solidly Republican northern Michigan and elsewhere now believe that they made a “colossal mistake” in initially supporting the war in Iraq, Moore said, and they have let him know it in chance encounters on the streets of Traverse City, a resort town where he has relocated from New York.

Great, I’m six paragraphs into this article and I’ve already read - three times - Moore’s own claims that Republicans are anxiously lining up to caress him… So who are they?

Used to traveling with security and encountering a barrage of hostility, Moore said he finds people now more accepting, even to the point Republicans are spontaneously hugging him.

Paragraph # 7. Moore claim # 4. Moore-hugging-Republicans identified: Zero.

The success of the second annual Traverse City Film Festival, which runs from Monday to Sunday, has also won over some of Moore’s political foes — or at least sidelined them.

So did it win them over or sideline them? The article is shifting its claims now. Still haven’t seen one of these Moore-hugging-Republicans identified. Beginning to wonder if they actually exist.

In 2005, critics attempted to upstage the Traverse City film festival with a parallel event nearby intended to hammer the message that Moore was out of touch with the mainstream. Moore said the effort failed to draw crowds and fizzled.

“Moore said…”? Well, I’m glad they cited an unbiased source for that comment. That would be like writing an article on Auschwitz and claiming “accommodations were reasonable”… “according to Mr. Hitler”. Still no Moore-hugging-Republicans identified.

I read it all the way to the end and never once saw an identification of a single Moore-hugging-Republican. What I did see was 17 paragraphs of pro-Moore propaganda bolstered by quotes from Moore himself. This is supposed to be a news article and yet I’ve seen press releases with less bias.

A more appropriate headline would’ve been: “What Michael Moore thinks about Michael Moore”

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (9) Comments
divider
So You Like Polls, Do Ya?
July 30th, 2006 12:16 pm

Then you ought to enjoy this one. In an election that is being “closely watched nationally as an off-year referendum on the embattled Bush presidency,” the Republican candidate has a 16-point lead over the Democrat.

And as if that wasn’t enough…

Iraq was cited most often as the race’s top issue. … Webb, 60, a decorated Marine veteran of the Vietnam War and a best-selling author of war novels, has been a persistent critic of the war in Iraq. He left the Republican Party after the war began and campaigns extensively on the issue.

…and he’s losing by 16 points.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (1) Comment
divider
Body Worlds
July 30th, 2006 9:01 am

Visited this exhibit yesterday at the Houston Museum of Natural Science. It was absolutely amazing. At points during the exhibit, you tend to forget these are real human beings that once walked and talked. But then you catch one with face in tact, eyes glaring forward, and you quickly snap back into the reality of it all.

I would highly recommend that everyone see this exhibit. Though it may be a bit scary for children and I’d recommend not going immediately after lunch if you have a weak stomach.

It’s also eye-opening to see the various comparisons of healthy body parts with those that have been afflicted with a variety of ailments… from smoker’s lungs to the impact of obesity on the heart and blood vessels. I mean, it’s one thing to hear about the damage these things cause to the body… it’s another thing to actually see it.

One of the more amazing displays is the centerpiece of the exhibit… The Equestrian.

Check it out if you get the chance.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
divider
That’s Gonna Leave a Mark…
July 28th, 2006 11:14 am

John Kerry, meet John Bolton.



Transcript:

Kerry: This has been going on for five years, Mr. Ambassador.

Bolton: It’s the nature of multilateral negotiations, Senator.

Kerry: Why not engage in a bilateral one and get the job done? That’s what the Clinton Administration did.

Bolton: And, very poorly since the North Koreans violated the agreed framework almost from the time it was signed.

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit

Another flip-flop as well. Kerry is now advocating a “go it alone” strategy. Wasn’t that the very thing he criticized Bush for doing back in 2004?

UPDATE: Welcome readers from the Nutroots movement at democraticundergound. As I understand it, you guys think I’ve taken Kerry’s comments out of context… so here’s the rest:

KERRY: Why not engage in a bilateral one and get the job done? That’s what the Clinton administration did.

BOLTON: Very poorly, since the North Koreans violated the agreed framework almost from the time it was signed. And I would also say, Senator, that we do have the opportunity for bilateral negotiations with North Korea in the context of the six-party talks, if North Korea would come back to them.

KERRY: Mr. Ambassador, at the time — Secretary Perry has testified before this committee, as well as others — they knew that there would be the probability they would try to do something outside of the specificity of the agreement.

But the specificity of the agreement was with respect to the rods and the inspections and the television cameras and the reactor itself.

BOLTON: Senator, the agreed framework requires North Korea and South Korea to comply with the joint North-South denuclearization agreement, which in turn provides no nuclear weapons programs on the Korean Peninsula.

So it was not limited only to the plutonium reprocessing program.

KERRY: Mr. Ambassador, the bottom line is that no plutonium was reprocessed under that agreement. No plutonium was reprocessed until the cameras were kicked out, the inspectors were kicked out, the rods were taken out, and now they have four times the nuclear weapons they had when you came on watch.

So there’s your context. Kerry really told him off, didn’t he? Well, except for the fact that Kerry was lying (hat tip: Old Soldier):

July 1999: A U.S. intelligence report claims that North Korea has between 25 and 30 kilograms of weapon-grade plutonium, enough to make several nuclear warheads.

You’d think someone who served on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence would know the truth. That is… if he’d ever bothered to show up for the meetings. (Then again, this is the same guy who issued a press release claiming he’d been Vice Chairman of that committee when, in fact, he never had been)

He’s either lying, or he was intentionally playing a game of semantics, claiming that the North Korean nuke development occured “outside the Framework Agreement”. If that’s the case, then it shows that the Framework Agreement was worthless to begin with. In addition, it shows the Clinton administration had knowledge that the Framework Agreement was worthless with respect to preventing North Korea from developing nukes at the time it engaged in it:

…at the time — [Clinton’s Defense] Secretary Perry has testified before this committee, as well as others — they knew that there would be the probability they would try to do something outside of the specificity of the agreement.

Maybe in that parallel universe where John Kerry was Vice Chairman of the SSCI, North Korea actually complied with the 1994 Framework Agreement and Osama bin Laden didn’t do any planning for 9/11 until January 20, 2001, the day Bush took over the Presidency. And maybe in that same liberal utopia, Sandy Berger was really stealing and destroying old math homework and not top secret national security documents relating to Clinton’s inaction towards terrorism.

How’s that for context?

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (26) Comments
divider

Let’s review the most recent bogus MSM poll of 1,010 people with nothing better to do than site around responding to intrusive telemarketers… which as Mark accurately describes as:

…a completely useless poll of 1,010 adults (not “registered voters” and not “likely voters” - “adults”…meaning that some large percentage of the sample are people who get their views from daytime television and wouldn’t show up to vote if you put a gun to their head).

NBC/WSJ does a good job of co-mingling disgust with the liberalism that infects our society with the rabid anti-American and anti-Bush sentiment of the Left to create the appearance that all the world is angry with President Bush. In fact, they even include a David Gregory report near the top of the article about the poll entitled, “Poll shows anger at Bush administration”. Not that we even need a poll to tell us there are people “angry with Bush”. They were angry with him for just… winning. Twice!

But let’s analyze this poll…

America’s direction

Do you think the nation is?
………………………………………………..7/06…..6/06
Headed in the right direction……………….27……..27
Off on the wrong track………………………60……..61
Mixed…………………………………………..11……..10
Not sure………………………………………..2……….2

Now the appropriate follow up question - which is never asked - is… “Why?”

The reason it’s not asked is because the answer likely doesn’t revolve around the MSM-hopeful answer of “that rotten George Bush”, but rather around a host of issues that likely includes the increasing protection for criminals, illegals and terrorists or the fact that God is being removed from every corner of our country by a radical Left that doesn’t understand the founding of this country. Or maybe it’s because our educational system has evolved into an institution of liberal doctrination. Or it could be because we have an institutional mainstream media that’s fond of aiding and abetting our enemies. Maybe it’s not just that Bush is a “cowboy”.

Evidence of my suspicions comes in the response to the next question in the poll:

Short or long-term?

Does the nation’s direction feels more like a short-term blip or a longer-term decline
Short-term blip…………….12
Longer-term decline……….81
Not sure………………………7

The respondents indicate that their feelings towards America’s “decline” has been a long time in the making. It’s not just a magical feeling that has arisen since George W. Bush moved into 1600 Pennsylvannia.

Then the poll ties the above questions directly into some follow up questions about perceptions on Bush’s performance. This wraps the first responses neatly into the pre-defined template that makes the story worthy of MSM publication.

But then look at the next question:

Federal priority

Which one of these items you think should be the top priority for the federal government.
………………………………………………..7/06…….6/06
The war in Iraq……………………………….29……….22
Terrorism………………………………………14……….11
Job creation and economic growth…………12……….13
Energy and the cost of gas………………….11……….11
Health care…………………………………….11……….14
Illegal immigration……………………………..9………..14
Reducing the federal budget deficit…………5…………7
Environment…………………………………….4…………-
Iran’s nuclear program ……………………….-………….4
Other…………………………………………….1…………1
All equally……………………………………….4…………3

Forty-three percent say the federal focus should be on the war against terrorists. Despite any claims Howard Dean tries to make, this is the GOP’s strong issue. If you doubt that, take a look back at what happened in the Presidential election of 2004… an election billed by the anti-war Left as a referendum on the man who has led us into the wars. And he received more votes than any President in the history of our country.

But also look at the question on the importance of focusing on Iran’s nuclear program. It’s zero. And the question relating to “Bush’s handling of the situation in Iran” is the only question in the section where his approval rating is below his disapproval rating. So basically he’s losing in the minds of 1,010 adults on the one issue they care nothing about anyway.

Then the question on our children’s future:

Our children’s generation
Do you feel confident life for our children’s generation will be better than it has been for us?
…………………………………………………7/06……….12/01
Feel confident………………………………….27………….49
Do not feel confident………………………….65………….42
Not sure………………………………………….8…………..9

I could fall into the “do not feel confident” category with the caveat that it’s based on whether we continue to take this war against radical islam seriously, or whether we continue to have leaders willing to forego political correctness and transparent niceties for tough action against evil in the world.

The remaining questions deal with the islamonutjobs in the middle east that are causing all the strife and stress to normal, civilized human beings in the region. Whether we are committed to sending each and every one of those radical islamonutjobs to meet allah is paramount in understanding the responses of those final poll questions.

If we decide that a bunch of whiny-ass liberals dancing around in birkenstocks at the ACLU headquarters or the elitists who reduce their condescending, national secret-revealing, anti-American rhetoric to the pages of our major media outlets and the halls of our educational institutions should lead this country, then you can guarantee this place is headed in the wrong direction. And it has nothing to do with the man in the White House.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (2) Comments
divider

Even the woman who sat in the defendant’s chair, having undisputedly murdered each one of her children with her own bare hands, reacted as if to say, “Holy crap, they bought that insanity gig?!?”

Talk about your all-time cases of injustice. This case ought to shine a gigantic spotlight on the travesty of justice that is the “insanity plea”.

Yates’ attorneys never disputed that she drowned 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah in their Houston-area home in June 2001. But they said she suffered from severe postpartum psychosis and, in a delusional state, believed Satan was inside her and was trying to save them from hell.

Get that? NEVER DISPUTED… It was never even an issue as to whether she knowingly filled her bathtub full of water before systematically chasing each child around the house, dragging them into the bathroom (some fighting for their lives) and holding their innocent little heads under the water under the precious life left their tiny bodies. NEVER FRIGGIN’ DISPUTED

But yet we held not one, but two trials in her honor. Andrea Yates committed what could be deemed as arguably the most heinous crime imaginable, killing her own child… and she systematically committed it FIVE TIMES… and the message from yesterday’s verdict is that murderers shouldn’t worry about serving jail time so long as they can convince a jury they had a really bad day.

And now Andrea Yates is finding the American justice system offering her the mercy she denied her own flesh and blood… and someday in the future, she may walk free to do it all over again.

The 42-year-old will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings before a judge to determine whether she should be released. If convicted of murder, she would have faced life in prison.

Life in prison ought to be the minimum she faces. But no, thanks to the insanity defense, she may soon be able to walk right back out into public and procreate again. It’s not so much the insanity defense that’s the problem, as much as it is the liberal application of it in many cases. It seems to be the fallacy of circular argument whereby the argument goes like this: Only someone out of their mind could think about killing their own children, thus since she killed her own children, she must’ve been out of her mind. Therefore, Andrea Yates’ crime was so outrageous that it inherently came with a built-in defense to escape punishment.

And while I feel terrible for the psycho’s husband, Rusty, I was disappointed to read his reaction to the verdict, saying it was the right decision, and then lashing out at the prosecutors who sought justice for his murdered children.

Rusty Yates lashed out Thursday at prosecutors who spent five years pursuing murder charges against his ex-wife, saying they misrepresented certain details of the day Andrea Yates drowned their five children.

Who cares? For the sake of argument, let’s toss out every single “misrepresentation” made by prosecutors, and focus on a single, completely undisputed fact: Andrea Yates drowned her five children. Period.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (3) Comments
divider
Hypocrisy, Thy Name is Howard Dean
July 26th, 2006 8:18 pm

From the AP:

Howard Dean Calls for End to Divisiveness

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — Down with divisiveness was the message Wednesday delivered by Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean as he told a group of Florida business leaders that Republican policies of deceit and finger-pointing are tearing American apart.

So how does he plan on “ending the divisiveness”?

By being divisive, of course…

“The Iraqi prime minister is an anti-Semite”

Apparently, when Dean was calling the Iraqi PM an anti-Semite for not denouncing those that attack Israel, he conveniently forgot the time he campaigned while wearing a black and white kaffiyeh, a symbol of Palestinian resistance, made popular by Yassir Arafat.

…and then for good measure, in an attempt to end divisiveness, he made sure to toss some of this very divisiveness at our own President:

“[Bush is] the most divisive president probably in our history” as he complained that Republican policies of deceit and finger-pointing are tearing the country apart.

“He’s always talking about those people. It’s always somebody else’s fault. It’s the gays’ fault. It’s the immigrants’ fault. It’s the liberals’ fault. It’s the Democrats’ fault. It’s Hollywood people,” Dean said. “Americans are sick of that. Even if you win elections doing that, you drag down our country.”

…and in case they didn’t hear him putting an end to the divisiveness, let them hear some more:

Dean also attacked the president on national defense, health care, education and Social Security. “He is bankrupting the middle-class,'’ Dean said.

…and to make sure the divisiveness is once and for all brought to an end, compare a political opponent to a communist:

Howard Dean compares Katherine Harris to Stalin

Maybe it was one of those moments where he was really saying, “It’s time to end the divisiveness now! Oh, wait, I mean…. now! Oops, I meant…. now! No, really, this time I mean it….now!”

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (6) Comments
divider
A Gathering Storm…
July 25th, 2006 6:28 pm

And I’m not talking about Gulf Coast weather. I’m referring to the investigation of Democrat Rep. William Jefferson and the possible implications it may have on another high profile story: Plamegate. And for bonus points… there’s a Clinton connection in all of this.

Enjoy!

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (2) Comments
divider

From the Washington Times:

Josh Rales, a Democratic candidate for Maryland’s U.S. Senate seat, paid a drug-treatment center in Baltimore to drive its recovering addicts to last week’s debate in College Park, where they held signs supporting his campaign.

The ICWC patients told The Washington Times that they pay about $350 a month to undergo treatment at the center and that some have criminal records, including felony convictions.

Well, I guess it was easier than bringing out the dead voters!

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
divider
Tourisme Dentaire Dental TourismTourisme DentaireProthese dentaireClinique dentaireFacette dentairesTourisme DentaireVoyage DentaireTourisme DentaireTourisme DentaireTourisme DentaireTourisme DentaireTourisme DentaireDental TourismTourisme DentaireDental TourismMedical Tourism Tourisme DentaireTourisme DentaireAntalya Web Tasarim

Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes

Copyright © 2003-2006

Users Online


    •  

      sidediv




    • HuckPac.com



    • sidediv


    • sidediv



  • CATEGORIES

    Fatal error: Call to undefined function wswwpx_fold_category_list() in /home/texasrai/public_html/wp-content/themes/rainmaker/sidebar.php on line 62