By John Ransom
9/9/2012
The Gosh Darn Liberal wrote: Wow, what a week. Obama care passed and hopefully my insurance goes down. Maybe I should call it Romneycare and you people will look the other way. What a week! The weather has slapped most of you in the face and no "Global warming is a fraud" charges. Hope your enjoying your warm spell. What a week. Bin Laden is still dead and it still sticks in your craw. Happiness is a whiney conservative cut off at the knees. What a week! Housing prices are going up in my area. Ransom can stay in D.C. with all the other beltway snobs.- Thank Goodness: Obamcare Saves Home Prices in DC Again
Dear Comrade Gosh,
Hate to disappoint but I don’t live in D.C. I live in flyover country with the rest of the great unwashed. And every time an owl farts sideways out here liberals from the east coast blame it on global warming
Obamacare “passed” a long time ago. And you know what the great thing is? Democrats get to defend it between now and the November elections. This is gonna be good. Because that plan worked out so well for Democrats in 2010.
I love when weasels get caught in a trap and have to weasel their way out. You all weaseled your way in in 2008 and now you can weasel your way out in 2012.
Remember when Democrats were anxious to pass Obamacare without much debate? “We have to pass it to find out what’s in it?” Now they’ll have to live with it and debate it too.
“It is absolutely an impossible task to manage risk when an individual can enter or leave a commercial product without any restrictions to pre-exisiting conditions,” said Brett Haugh, principal of Houston-based Employee Benefits Solutions, which helps employers manage health-care costs, according to the Houston Chronicle. “That means the price for those products will increase dramatically.”
Translation: Your insurance premiums will go up. Benefits will go down.
It’s simple math.
Oldschool7 wrote: And the only car company involved in NASCAR . . . where their profits go to a Foreign Country is . . . . . you guessed it Toyota. The company that has had almost 30 MILLION recalls in the last 7 years . . . . sources more parts in China than any other, in fact the Yaris is totally Chinese content. Much of the Domestic content is manufactured in the US even if many of the cars are assembled in Canada or Mexico.- When All Else Fails, UAW Tries Racism
Dear Comrade 7,
Thanks for rebutting my point about the uses of racism by liberals by providing another example of a different type of racism used by liberals.
I don’t care about the color of the skin, or the nationality, the gender or being pen pals with the persons who build my automobile or the parts that go into my car, quite frankly. What I care about is buying the product that makes the most financial sense for me and for my family.
What do you have against Japanese car markers that provide jobs here in the U.S.? What do you have against Chinese people who are just trying to make a living? Or Mexicans? Or Canadians?
You defend a Mexican’s right to come across our border illegally to have a job, but you take away the right to have a job in Mexico.
Typical liberal thinking.
You guys are quite sick.
Really. Get help.
Soon.
Kevin 32 wrote: the truth of the matter is that the only auto plants that are not union are the plants in the southern United States, the plants in Japan, Germany, all of Europe are all union is some way or another! so the argument they give is invalled! On the other side of the coin, you have Mr. Ghosn talking about costs, and just how much $$$$ mula, dinero money, bucks does he make? huh? talk about throwing sones in glass houses? there has to be a happy medium! .- When All Else Fails, UAW Tries Racism
Dear Comrade 32,
Brush up just a little on grammar. I usually don’t say that, but… Yeah.
Now brush up a little on history and economics.
What do unions in Germany, Japan and all of Europe have to do with the United States?
We are not France.
You might have noticed that things pretty much suck in Japan right now. Ditto Europe.
We are not France. Say it with me: We are not France. Post it to Facebook; live it; breathe it. We’re not even much-vaunted Germany. German GDP went from $3.6 trillion to $3.3 since 2008.
We are not France.
We are better than that. Most of us don’t even find Jerry Lewis that funny.
And I don’t like mimes.
That proves it.
Ericynot wrote: The sad truth is that government agencies at all levels overreach. Cops stop you, find that you're carrying $10,000 in cash, and seize it (along with your car) on suspicion that you're involved in the drug trade -- no charges or conviction necessary. Maybe you get your stuff back, maybe you don't. Say the wrong thing to the wrong person and they can lock you up indefinitely on suspicion of fomenting terrorism. Our Constitutional freedoms are under assault at all levels. The EPA can also mess with our stuff, but at least they've done some demonstrable good -- I still remember what the air in Denver looked like 45 years ago.- Going Green is Gauche on Robert Kennedy’s Private Ocean
Dear Comrade Eric,
The EPA has done some demonstrable good? But the police don’t?
Look, you assume that the only way to protect society from pollution is by creating a far-reaching bureaucracy of unelected officials who get to write regulations under authority granted them through Congress.
Here’s a thought: Why don’t we just stick with the idea of private property rights and individual rights, as it is contemplated under the constitution? If someone dumps toxic waste that damages my health, don’t I have the right to both civil and criminal penalties? If someone damages my property through their own mismanagement, don’t I have the right to compensation even without the EPA?
The point is that the EPA stopped being a fair arbiter between sections a long time ago.
They are just a bureaucracy run by special interests to serve the needs of the bureaucracy.
The same can be said about the Department of Education, Department of Energy, the Department of Defense.
We tolerate the Department of Defense because it serves a constitutional purpose. Like those other departments, it too is wasteful, self-serving and prone to fits of ossification. All bureaucracies are. And that’s why they should be dispensed with wherever possible.
The history of the last 40 years has taught us that the last way to solve any problem is by making it a priority under the federal government by creating its own department.
Hoovervilles Follies wrote: Because adherence to a ridiculous ideology prompts extreme conservatives to deny or downplay the environmental issues that normal, well-informed people recognize, they have nothing constructive to offer in that arena. Instead, they are reduced to doing the sort of thing Ransom does in this column -- attempt to portray environmental activism as the province of privileged, hypocritical liberals. Robert Kennedy Jr. may well be wrong on the Cape wind power issue and there may even be some self-interest involved. But on much else relating to environmental sustainability, he is a dedicated, extremely knowledgeable, highly articulate champion. I seriously doubt that Mr. Ransom can say the same.- Going Green is Gauche on Robert Kennedy’s Private Ocean
Dear Comrade Hooverville,
I don’t portray all environmental activists as privileged, hypocritical liberals. I just portray those who are privileged, hypocritical liberals as privileged, hypocritical liberals.
And trust me- I’ve been doing this a long time- there plenty of privileged, hypocritical liberals to pick on, without dragging in the non-privileged, hypocritical liberals.
You might notice the picture I inserted in the column with the little Greenpeace raft in the foreground. Certainly they aren’t privileged, hypocritical liberals. They qualify in the non-privileged, hypocritical liberal category.
They also qualify as misguided liberals; liberals in violation of their occupancy rating for the size and type of craft they are on; and liberals who violate OSHA laws.
Actually, we should probably report the Greenpeace folks to OSHA. That raft looks like it’s not the safest of working conditions. And, I don’t see posted any of the mandatory wage and hour notices, and other employment notices that should be displayed prominently on the side of the raft where Greenpeace employees would likely notice it.
Now, you say that Robert Jr. has some self-interest involved? Self-interest? By a Kennedy? Who would have thought it?
Look, let me put it this way: Kennedys have a really bad habit of having navigation accidents that lead to fatalities. If I were Robert Kennedy Jr. I’d be breaking into a cold sweat at the thought of navigation hazards like wind mills in Nantucket Sound too. Some Kennedys have problems driving across a bridge without ending up in the drink. Hic.
UseYourHead2012 wrote: I appreciate this article. Far too often are articles based on "facts" and "reality." This no-nonsense no-factual basis article is what Real Americans (TM) really believe in. - Obama: "The Joke's on You"
Dear Comrade Head,
I appreciate this reply. Far too often comments from liberals grammar problems have. Liberals America ™ repeat like to words too often mouth full of foot.
Thank.
352 wrote: For those interested in actual research, most studies examining this issue note that while the short-run effect of oil price increases on aggregate employment is negative, the long-run effect is negligible. There typically is also a general decrease in the real wages of all workers but an increase in the wages of skilled workers. A number of econometric analyses (tracking employment data and energy prices) come to this conclusion. Interestingly, I am at a loss of how Ransom can critique the president's energy policy while oil/gas prices are dropping - showing that US policy (action or in the argued case, inaction) seem to have a minimal effect on global oil prices. - Energy and Money Fuel Obama’s Plague
Dear Comrade 352,
Typical liberal who talks about “actual” research findings, but is too lazy to actually, you know, provide “actual” proof or citations.
Typical Liberal Part II: So like your fellow comrades you think that high gas prices are OK for the economy? Congratulations: You might have what it takes to be Obama’s go-to guy on energy.
Typical Liberal Part III: I can critique Obama’s energy policy because it doesn’t produce actual energy despite having the greatest energy budget in the history of our Republic.
Your analysis is false in this: Falling prices aren’t proof that US policy has minimal effect on oil prices. It just means that demand is falling faster than our crappy policies can account for.
My criticism isn’t just of energy policy but of monetary policy too.
Loose money policies are providing liquidity that has been pushing energy prices- and often other prices- higher.
Truth001 wrote: Ransom: "Why would something that didn’t work previously work now because you are using a smaller version of it?" I rest my case with the Bush tax cuts. Same concept same bad idea coming from Willard and his 20% tax cut. - Nice Try Shrum, but Obama Ain't Truman, and this Ain't 1948
Dear Comrade Pravda,
The Bush tax cuts worked. That’s why Obama has extended them more times than he has passed a budget. That’s why Bill Clinton has advocated for them. That’s why the CBO has warned against allowing the tax cuts to expire.
But I do agree that we have to get spending under control if we plan on cutting taxes. We should comprehensively reform both taxes and spending at the same time and balance the budget.
Fat chance you’ll agree to that Pravda.
xjnyc90 wrote: Awwww. Look at Johnny trying his turn at the Watergate Anniversary Right Wing Nitwit Spin Story by trying to "Connect The Dots" between Nixon and Obama. I've read several of them this weekend -- All these snarling little Conservative pundits in their desperate attempts ranging from "Nixon was just misunderstood," to "Well yes he engaged in criminal activity but (insert whine) so did everyone else" Nixon was the Thug's Thug -- the epitome of the Republican Party at it's worst -- paranoid pols intent on steamrolling over the Dems. Greedy, nasty, will stop at nothing - The Repubs revealed then and there the kind of people they are. - Watergate at 40: Obama is the Democrats’ Nixon
Dear Comrade Big Onion,
I don’t excuse Nixon. I never have. One of my earliest political memories was of watching the hearings about Watergate on TV.
As I have said before, Nixon was a troubled man who did many, many wrong things, perhaps even criminal things. We don’t know exactly because there will never be a trial.
But what’s your excuse for Obama? What’s your excuse for a deliberate attempt by the administration to foster gun violence on the US-Mexican border? What’s your excuse for the deliberate attempt to allow voter intimidation by the Black Panthers? What’s your excuse for a deliberate attacks on religious institutions, supposedly protected by the constitution. It’s supposed to be Freedom of Religion.
I live in a country where one of the most prominent clerics and a very reasonable man, Cardinal George of Chicago- who probably knows a bit about Obama- has said:
“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”
Liberals should be outraged by those attacks on religion. But you all stopped being liberal a long time ago. Now you are statist progressives who demand that we all bow down and worship at the altar of government.
I grew up in country that was supposed to be colorblind, and where the laws were meant to apply equally to all.
I live in a country where because of your partisan agenda, if often now prefers to look the other way when your side breaks the law, mutilates the constitution and makes a mockery of the great Republic a generation of giants founded.
Bring it.
DG wrote: "The buck stops here." .... Harry Truman. "The buck stops with GW Bush." ..... Barack Obama. Nice Try Shrum, but Obama Ain't Truman, and this Ain't 1948
Dear DG,
Or how about this one: “Did someone say bucks?”- B. Obama
Or this: “The bucks never have to stop!”- B. Obama
Or this: “Stopping bucks? Are you crazy?” B. Obama
Or this: “Bucks for everyone! But more bucks for some and less bucks for others.”- B. Obama.
Or this one: “This president thing really bucks.” B. Obama
5Mentarios wrote: So, if I understand this correctly, you're saying that 1) Stimulation of the economy increases demand for gas which prompts OPEC to raise oil prices and 2) people quit their jobs or get laid off when gas prices increase. But....but....I thought the conservative position was that any increase in taxation or materials prices is simply passed on by the corporations (i.e, the "rich") to the consumers. So why the layoffs?
And I though OPEC set oil prices and they weren't subject to supply and demand?- Extra Legal Stimulus Means Extra Legal Taxes
Dear Comrade 5,
Of course, no; you don’t understand what I am saying. Duh. You’re a liberal. You failed Real-World Econ 101.
I’m saying that when you add liquidity, especially through banks, those dollars tend to chase up the price of things, including oil. Companies lay off workers because more GDP is devoted to buying energy and less can go to wages.
And yeah; the higher prices are passed on to the consumer- that’s why gas prices go up- so the consumer has less money to buy things with, so more people get laid off.
And no; OPEC doesn’t set prices. If they did, prices would be at $110 per barrel at least instead of $78.
What OPEC does is set supply.
Read a book or something next time.
NFL this week:
Bears 24, Colts 10
Pittsburgh 21, Denver 17
Upset: St. Louis 23, Detroit 14
That’s it for this week,
V/r,
JR
______________________________________________
To read another article by John Ransom, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment