N U D S

Outreach Republican Style

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 05:12:00 +0000

The election was close. Really close. If more Republicans turned out we'd be singing a different tune today. However, there would still be the demographic shift waiting in the wings to disrupt the GOP in the next general election. Something needs to change within the party and it needs to change soon.

First, let me make a few criticisms of the campaign as the critique will provide some context for my forthcoming recommendations.

Hammering on the food stamp issue repeatedly by simply stating the percentage of increase and total number of people on food stamps was an extremely bad idea. To be sure, this is a huge problem that needs to be solved. However many people know somebody who fell on hard times due to the economy. The sound bite used as scripted, however, only reinforced the impression that Republican's are heartless businessmen who will leave the needy to fend for themselves. If you do not understand how that sounds to someone who has hit a rough patch then you have bigger issues to solve.

This food stamp issue could have been dealt with simply and sympathetically by connecting the dots for people. Bad policies lead to bad economies which lead to job losses and the need for government assistance. Good policies will allow the economy to grow which will allow businesses to hire and help people get back on their feet. Then point out that the government has failed to provide an economy to support the 47 million who need food stamps. Food stamps will be there for those who need them, and by enacting a pro-growth agenda the economy will provide jobs for those who want them. Acknowledge that this will not happen overnight therefore support will continue to flow.

Instead we had the nominee saying something that sounded a lot like "47 million dirt bags on food stamps thanks to Obama." That's not what he said, but in a game where perception is reality that's what it sounded like to those who lost their jobs and for the first time in their adult lives found themselves in need of government assistance. Who are these people? They are part of 2 million who voted for McCain who stayed home this election. Lesson: stop painting with such a broad brush.

Another issue that Republicans should have won was on innovation and technology. Considering all the green job bankruptcies it should be self evident that the only result of the massive energy sector spending was to line the pockets of donors. The Republicans hit hard on this but didn't have a response to the desire of a great many Americans to see a move towards sustainable energy sources. Again, this would be a fairly easy message to craft and have resonate with undecideds. After pointing out that the green energy dollars have been used to line the pockets of donors state that the best way to pursue green technology is not by government directly investing in companies but by funding research that will develop the technology which will be made available to startups to use. This worked for NASA and Americans love NASA.

These arguments make sense and have resonated with every left leaning individual I have discussed them with except for those on the very far left. The question I get asked immediately is why doesn't the Republican party just say that? Quite simply because they have not taken the time to understand the Reagan Democrat segment of the electorate. They are too concerned about straying off message and upsetting their base.

Where to from here?

Many in the commentariat are concerned about outreach and ground game. Ground game isn't just building a GOTV machine, nor is it about glad handling the populace every four years. In many areas the Republican party is simply nowhere to be found. In many districts the people who live there may never see a Republican in person. If they do it is only during elections. You can't simply show up once every couple years and expect to be taken seriously. Instead of raising hundreds of millions for massive ad campaigns the PACs should be using that money to support community outreach programs.

Get involved in the community and show the power of Republican ideas and ideals in practice. Do it and do it consistently. Start with mobile units for a couple years and then open local offices. Obviously the opposition will know the threat this type of outreach poses so resistance is to be expected and welcomed. Republicans are the party of evil corporations and greed. Teach the people how corporations work, how they make money, and how they can use the same strategies to help themselves. We speak a lot about boot-strapping but that advice doesn't help anybody. Teach them how to bootstrap a business, find ways to earn extra money, use planning strategies to get where they want to go, and, yes, how to take advantage of existing government programs to build a better life for their family and themselves. What does it mean and, more importantly, how do you do it. These are the life lessons not being taught in school.

Imagine the power of putting The Richest Man in Babylon and Think And Grow Rich into the hands of those with ambition and aptitude who have been denied this life changing information. That is the type of outreach that needs to be done. Not ad blasts or speeches that smack of smarminess and disingenuousness since the speaker will be bolting never to return again as soon as they leave the stage. Get involved and stay involved. That's the difference.

Mitt Romney wanted to help Americans out of this recession. Mitt is a religious man. Mitt received a message from the heavens and I hope he has ears to hear it. That message was "stick to your knitting". Mitt is, not was, a venture capitalist. He should be forming a fund ASAP that will invest in small businesses. The banking system has failed and new sources of funding are needed. Mitt is great at that and his fund will do a great deal to help his fellow Americans. It could also provide training on how to run and market a business. It would also go a long ways towards building a community network.

Here's a secret: many Venture Capitalists are left leaning. They are providing the funding to the next crop of hungry entrepreneurs. The right is losing this group which is, not surprisingly, made up of extremely intelligent, ambitious, yet financially disadvantaged youths. This next generation of millionaires and billionaires may never see a Republican on their rise from poverty to the penthouse. You can't blame the Democrats for this because all you need to do is show up. Yet you don't. You're nowhere to be found.

It's hard to sell yourself as the party of the hand up when you can't be found. It's hard to sell yourself as the party that truly cares for the people when you can't be found. It's hard to sell yourself as the party of achievement when you can't be found. It's hard to sell yourself as the party of ideas when you can't solve the problems I just outlined. It's hard to sell yourself as the party that's in touch with the needs of the people when it is so easy to nullify the opposition's characterizations but you lack the temerity or understanding to do so.

The road to outreach is the road. The way to help Americans become prosperous is to actually go out to them and show them the ropes, provide the tools, and be there to support them. The way to get your message out is to get out there. The actual cost of doing a road show to actually listen to the people as opposed to speak to the people would be a pittance compared to the vast sums of cash spent on advertising. Do that and win. Don't and lose.

How You Can Help Stop Election Fraud

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 08:38:00 +0000

Are you concerned about possible election fraud? Do you have a smartphone? Here's how you can help.

Some people have complained, but not proven, that the lefties bus the same people to several districts to vote and re-vote multiple times. In order to prove voter fraud there has to be evidence. When you go to the polls use your smartphone to grab pictures of the license plates of the busses and vans being used to shuttle voters. This will have geo-tagged information as well as a time stamp. Then post that pic to your favorite photo sharing site such as flickr.com or pinterest.com.

That's all you need to do.

By comparing photos across multiple districts (geo-tagged and time stamped thanks to smartphone technology) we'll be able to sort out if a bus is going from district to district or polling location to polling location with the same crowd.

By getting the word out on twitter and via the new media we will get the lefties in an uproar. It also might get some fraudsters to stop and reconsider since they will so easily get caught. Especially if you're driving the bus!

Please RT to get the word out!

How Racism & Bigotry Have Ruined The Left

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:16:00 +0000

Remember Chick-fil-a? There was a kerfuffle about donations made by their founder to groups opposing gay marriage. Proponents of free speech were outraged by the attempt to silence and intimidate the founder into backing down. The result was a buycott that swamped the fast food chain with more business then they could handle.

The left, with their trademark snark and sarcasm, responded with kiss-ins, vandalism, and bile. They wrote off everybody who supported Chick-fil-a as homophobic bigots who cling to guns and religion. In so doing they have turned their backs on many who support gay marriage.

The left, in their rush to demonize, has started to believe their own bull. They cannot fathom that people might actually agree on an issue for different reasons. Nor that they might support someone's right to support a position with which they disagree. By being so completely clueless, and intellectually incurious, about their political opponents, they saw hate where they should have seen opportunity.

Instead of freaking out and spewing bile from the shadows proponents of gay marriage on the left could have showed up to the Chick-fil-a buycott armed with petitions. Two of them. One petition showing support for first amendment rights, the second showing support for gay marriage. They would have received signatures in support of gay marriage numbering in the hundreds of thousands if not millions.

Why didn't that happen? Who knows. But because it didn't happen it leaves the subject open to speculation. Is it because those pushing the issue are rent seekers looking for quotas? Are the partisans scared that such a large showing of support from the Right would blow the narrative? Probably neither one. All we know is that bigotry and racism has blinded the left such that they can only see the world through that lens. It might have never occurred to them that those supporting Chick-fil-a might also support gay marriage.

We can see the affects of this mindset playing out in the attacks on Herman Cain, Dana Loesch, Michelle Malkin, Tracy Dash, and anybody else who dares to express an opinion that deviates from the "current truth". The close-minded nature of their attacks and their approach make it difficult to want to work with them. They think in absolutes and lack the ability or desire to to understand the complexities of varied positions which could coalesce around a consensus opinion. By behaving in this manner, and encouraging this behavior from their base, the left is distancing those they purport to champion from potential allies.

And so we see that today's left is anything but liberal. Their tactics are meant to polarize and "other" their opposition. They seek to divide. We've seen this all before played out on the world stage. The manual for oppression has been exposed many times. Those who fall for it can expect the same results. Those who expect the left will deliver equal rights, equal pay, and a classless society are right in one respect. When nobody has any rights everybody is equal, when nobody has a job pay is equal, and I've yet to meet a lefty with an ounce of class.

Have you ever been tested?

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:24:00 +0000

That's a question asked frequently in certain circles. Many people go through life being great at what they do but haven't ever really been put to the test. When they are forced to perform under duress they lock up. They can't find another gear. They've never had to deal with failure or loss and when faced with the challenge they can't adjust. They simply give in, collapse, or walk away.

When that happens to someone, especially if they're not prepared for it, it has some serious affects on their psyche. Some deem themselves a failure and spiral out of control until they hit rock bottom. Others have sour grapes. Some go back to what they do best. Others learn from the experience and come back stronger, with a better attitude, and more humility.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Obama loses the election. It is obvious that this campaign is his biggest test as a politician. His team has not been able to regain the initiative and he has been outmaneuvered by a savvy opponent at every debate. The current president is still young with a long career ahead of him.

If he loses to Romney what will be his reaction to failing the test?

Unemployment Rate & Conspiracy Theories

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:05:00 +0000

Only 114,000 jobs were added according to the numbers. What was publicized was a poll that is rarely cited in the jobs numbers due to its inaccuracy. This is not 'cooking the books' it is merely shining the light in a different direction to to draw attention away from the poor 114,000 number. The reason for the focus on the poll this time is to obviously sway the Honey-boo-boos who aren't really paying attention. However the reality of the economic situation is such that few people will be fooled by the tactic. Nobody is feeling an economic recovery in their lives, or seeing a recovery in the lives of their friends and families, hence the vast amount of disbelief in the numbers.

All the hand wringing by the commentariat, all the tut-tutting about how can people mistrust the government, is frankly quite laughable. How out of touch must these people be. Instead of proving the numbers or pointing out that this is merely a poll that typically goes unreported they instead choose to blame the victim. Trump and Welch must be conspiracy theorists that should be forced to apologize for their lack of reverence. The fact that the math doesn't add up has nothing to do with it. Unlike Romney who has to release his tax records to respond to the charge from Reid, the media has no obligation to support their reason for publicizing the poll for the first time this year.

The charge has been made, prove them wrong. Play by the rules you set for Romney or lose the last shred of credibility the legacy media has. We all know they won't.

Romney Had a Good Night, Don't Get Cocky!

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:18:00 +0000

Mitt had a great night. He should be congratulated. Instead of rehashing the previous debate and cheering the good moments I'd rather discuss strategy and the upcoming debates.

With all the management of expectations by both parties before the first debate there has to have been some discussion of strategy going on in the background. First debate you make your points and let your opponent show their cards. Obama stood his ground and Mitt showed his hand. There will be a week of hand wringing by some, high fiving by others, while adjustments are made for the next debate by each candidate.

What will surely be a line of attack against Romney is how he intends to reconcile what appears to be contradictions in his proposals. How can he increase revenue to pay down the deficit while reducing taxes? How can he lower tax rates for everybody yet have the top 1% pay the same percentage of the tax burden? The answers are obvious to the informed, but for those who have not been studying the topic for years won't be able to relate to those answers. The difference between dynamic and static analysis is a fun topic for wonks but is just gibberish to the laity.

The challenge for Romney is to answer those questions in a way that resonates with average Americans. Relating the cost of a gallon of gas and how its price affects all your purchasing decisions would be a great start. If the price of gas doubles (and it has) then you will buy less. If you can't buy less then this well hurt your family budget in other areas where you need to cut back. It's not simply a matter of doubling the price and bringing in double the amount of money.

Same for taxes. If you double the cost then people and businesses will adjust their activities. Some out of a desire to seek a better deal, others because they have no choice. That's the dynamic effect of price action. Thus, by lowering that cost then money is encouraged to move into the market segments that produce higher returns on taxable income. This is why Tax Cuts For The Rich™ have a history of increasing tax revenues while tax increases have led to decreases in tax revenues.

The numbers are irrefutable but there is always an attempt at obfuscation or playing with effective dates to attempt to prove the opposite. Any serious study of the numbers, however, shows that lower taxes increase revenues. Romney is right, but he needs to do a great job of explaining a difficult concept to those who will benefit the most: the middle class.

Are Actors Really Out of Touch?

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:37:00 +0000

The case for telling actors to shut up is too big to squeeze into a single blog post. Instead of rehashing the whole debate I'd like to focus some attention on the notion that Actors have become so rich that they are out of touch with the real problems people face.

In truth if these rich actors really want to know how hard things are for those looking for work they need simply consult the person sleeping on their couch. Far from being removed from the pain of funemployment® many actors deal with it every day. They see it on their friends faces, in the dirty bathroom, and in the dishes in the sink they should have been put in the dishwasher.

I mock, but there is a deeper truth to this. In the world of entertainment, as in other industries, the stars make the money and the rest are left to fight for crumbs. If you hit it big it is because you worked hard, did a great job, and -- gosh darn it -- people liked you. Yet you know plenty of your colleagues who also work hard, are extremely talented, liked, but for some reason haven't been able to break through.

How does that make you feel? Bad. So you share the gifts you've received. You open your house to friends, you open your wallet, and you support charities the best way you can. To claim that those struggling need only work harder is a slap in their face, and in yours. You know you could be replaced by a nutless monkey™at any time. In a New York minute you could be back on the couch.

Many of those on the couch aren't just simply holding out for some prime time show to come calling. They are working on their craft while waiting tables, washing cars, or making YouTube videos exploiting cats.

Where I differ is in how these observations translate into politics. Many industries only offer rewards for a small minority, yet other industries don't have such lopsided outcomes. The problem is trying to find a policy of taxation and governance that doesn't solve problems for one type of industry at the expense of another.

This is the problem we face today. Solving one side of the equation has adverse consequences on the other side of the equation. This supposed battle between freeloaders and the heartless is really a battle to find balance. Demagoguery hasn't helped, nor can it.

So, no, the actors aren't out of touch. They realize the solutions that will work for the other side of the equation will be a disaster for their side of the equation. Many on the right aren't out of touch, either. They, too, realize that the policies that may work for other industries have had disastrous consequences on their side of the equation. They, too, have friends on the couch. They, too, see people truly hurting.

Can we just once have a debate where we just put all the cards on the table and say we need a solution that works for everybody? The swinging of the pendulum back and forth isn't going to solve anything.

What Romney Can Learn From Quarterbacks

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:40:00 +0000

Roger Kimball has an intriguing post today about momentum, gaffes, and the need for Romney to man up. Hopefully Romney's recent encounter with the state run media has disabused him of any notions that they are impartial. If not then he should quit now.

What Romney needs to understand, which is what everybody in his corner already knows, is that the spin doctors are there to attack him. That Romney was unprepared for such an onslaught has caused me, and by the tone of Kimball's post everybody else on the right, great concern. How could you not expect that? I mean really.

So in the hopes of helping the campaign let me offer some simple advice. Stepping up to the podium is like being a quarterback getting under center. You walk up slow and read the defense. Then you make any adjustments based on what you see. When you walk up to that podium look the press in the eye, give them a knowing smile, and let them get the feeling you're in charge. Understand they are not there to report the news but to defend their ground.

When the play starts and they put up their defense call them on it. Attack their defense. Once the play is over then call that, too. Do you want to hear that answer again? Did you miss it the first time? Then laugh it off.

Respect your opponent, but understand they are your opponent. Remember your sportsmanship. No need to get angry or defensive, it's just the name of the game. They exist to sack the quarterback. That's you. So when you read the D know it's always going to be a blitz. They're all coming for the quarterback. Your advantage is in knowing that they always call the same play. It's a blitz every time.

Hike the ball and step into the throw.

New Tactics of the MSM

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:11:00 +0000

I asked in a previous post what the response would be to the New Media being able to get into the OODA loop of the Main Stream Media. Breitbart and others were able to release just a little bit of information and that would start the spinners spinning. Then, after the old media settled in on a narrative the rest of the information would follow in subsequent posts on the new media site, each post more damning than the last. The result was the complete embarrassment of the old media where they were scooped by jammie wearing fools and shown to be the partisan journOlist hacks they truly are.

This was quite an effective tactic by the new media, but it has since lost the power it once had. As we have seen recently the old media have changed tack. Instead of going into spin mode directly they've chosen to isolate and dominate a specific news item disallowing anything else to get airplay until they've set the narrative and then quickly move on to the next crisis du jour. This has been particularly effective in that it allows the old media to paint the picture and before the truth comes out, or even allowed to air, they proclaim that topic old news and simply move on.

Check out Kaus' post on Faster Politics for an introduction into the new news cycle. Then read Zombie's post on the Honey Boo Boos. The sad truth is the new faster politics is aimed squarely at the Honey Boo Boos and it works. The New Media needs to adjust to the new tactic. It would help if the politicians would wise up and not take the bait. Ever.

Call the press out on their horse hockey.

They hate that.

They are surrogates for the DNC so making them squirm and outing their bias is good sport.

Taxation and the Ignorati

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 09:04:00 +0000

The progressive tax system is extremely regressive for entrepreneurs and business owners. It has been designed to extract cash from pay checks on a regular basis. Therefore the economy is reliant upon the creation of as many wage slaves as possible. There are many reasons why this is an incredibly bad idea. It was such a bad idea that the founders strictly prohibited income taxes.

I want to focus on one reason in particular. If you start a business you will not be making enough money to pay yourself at first. In some cases it might be years before there is enough money at the end of the day to pay the owner. That is a huge risk for those starting their own business. After five years they may have built a business of value and seek to cash out. After working non stop for five years with no pay all while being told "you didn't build that" they deserve a rest.

If their business sells for $250,000 then they've earned only $50,000 per year for their efforts. Instead of being taxed at the rate for their average annual income level they are instead subjected to the higher tax rate for their single year income. How is that "fair"? And what is being incentivized by this system of taxation?

Small business is always claimed to be the backbone of America yet the system is set up such that only if you go for the multi million or billion dollar exit will you actually make enough to take home more than simply being another wage slave.

A flat tax is neutral in this regard. Whether or not the business owner chooses to reinvest for a big exit later, or take a salary every year, the tax penalty will be the same. As will be the revenue to the government. Only the wantonly ignorant could pretend a flat tax isn't the most fair.

Tiger's Tale

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:17:00 +0000

I'm not going to defend adultery. I'm not looking to excuse any philandering. What I'm trying to do with this article is help people answer the question 'why?' Why do men do this? Are they drunk with power, self-importance, a sense of entitlement? Well that's certainly plays a significant role. I've also heard that it's just natural born instinct. This supposes men aren't meant to be with one partner and cannot resolve the internal conflict of societal expectations with animal instinct. None of these satisfy the question, and have more often than not been used as dismissive, quick one liners to deal with a very complicated topic.

If you are seeking truth you need to dig a little deeper. If you are a woman that wants to really know why so you can get closure and move on, the one liners won't help you. If you are a man who wants to know why you did what you did even though you knew the dire consequences, the dismissive male bashing won't help. So far the current national discourse on intercourse has done nothing in the way of providing a deeper understanding of the issue so as to provide helpful advice. It's all blame and excuses, and no problem solving.

I came to this realization years ago. It was true with Gary Hart, true with Clinton, Sanford, etc., etc., etc. I also noticed that there were all kinds of college courses on Women's Studies and absolutely no Men's Studies. Again, the snappy one liner is that all the other courses are Men's studies. Snark. In truth there are no real courses to help men deal understand and take control of their mind and bodies. Part of the reason is that most men wouldn't take the course. 'How To Be a Man' and the companion 'Guide To Hooking Up' are more like oral traditions passed down from generation to generation. Something seems to be missing in the translation, however.

The machismo that prevents any Men's Studies course from taking the academic world by storm also leads to acceptance of bad solutions to vexing problems in gender relations. For the most part the way to keep a man's libido in check has been through demonization that leads to self-repression. This bottles up the problem only to be unleashed and a very unhealthy fashion later in life. Sure, the macho man thinks he's walking the line, right up until he has his first indiscretion. Then his world comes crashing down around him. So what happened? Why did he do it?

Two contributing factors that most people don't talk enough about are sex drive and how men separate sex and love. Sure, it comes up in the form of dismissive one-lines, but it's never really explored deeply. Again, this is not an excuse, just an explanation.

The truth is different people have sex drives of varying intensities. Sure, you may think you have a healthy sex drive, but there are people out there that have been wired differently. Everybody is different, and this includes their sex drive. Imagine it as a scale of 1 to 10. The reality is that some people go to 11. It's not about self control, or being a dirty person, their sex drive is in overdrive. All the demonization and self-repression the world can muster is not enough to keep their libido in check. The worse thing that could happen is that this individual buys in to the claptrap and tries to suppress their desires. That is a time bomb that will blow up their life.

This doesn't mean they should be allowed to cheat. They just need to understand themselves better, their own needs, and be honest with themselves and their partner. This dovetails into the next topic, the difference between love and sex.

As has been said time and time again, men separate love and sex. A guy might love the woman he has sex with and he might not. Sex is something you do with someone, true; but it can also be something you do to someone. To put a finer point on this, making love is being with someone, carnal pleasure is doing it to someone. A man looking for release through sex will find someone to do, not someone to be with. Being with someone is special and carries great meaning. You look to be with someone you love and respect. Doing someone is down and dirty and is not something you want to do to someone you love and respect. It's fine to have some naughty time with your lovely lady, but when there is a baby in the crib, or kids down the hall, it ruins the perception she's your shagadelic minx forever.

Again, I'm not trying to excuse this. But if you're a woman reading this, doesn't this sound a lot like your cheating boyfriend or husband? If you're a guy, isn't this true? You want to do the Pamela Anderson type, but you want to be with the Hayden Panitierre type. If you want to do both, then you, sir, are an 11. Either that, or you haven't had enough experience and will encounter the with v. do paradox later in life and at great personal cost, Mr. Clinton.

The with v. do paradox creeps into the relationship slowly. As a guy you think you've got the best of both worlds at first. A woman that can be both a lover and friend. Then life gets in the way. The relationship morphs form one of dating and passion, to cold pizza and netflix. You are now with someone, but feel the need to do someone because of your sex drive, the need for release, and that base animal instinct. The person you are with doesn't fulfill that because of your new perception of them, and then you are susceptible to external influences. It usually takes years, maybe even decades, for this pent up passion to lead to an affair.

This disconnect arises in part because a man's sexuality is demonized and is sought to be repressed. Hence, his desires are seen as dirty and shameful. So much so that he won't consider his partner as the person to explore this side of himself with, but instead look to another to sate his lust.

The sad truth is that if he was open with his partner, more often that not, she'd be more than happy to help. She'd probably be ecstatic since more women complain about lack of sex after marriage than men. He just needs to get past that mental block, embrace his inner beast, and get down to business.

Sure, there are guys that are jerks and just have an affair because that's who they are. Just as sure as there are home wreckers who try to take a man away from his wife just for the joy of doing it, to see how far they can get. This doesn't explain why good seeds go bad, though. But for the others, it's important to acknowledge the truth that you can be with the person you do. It's just as likely that the person you are with wants you to do them and are wondering why you don't.

This is what I think happened to Tiger. A life of self-repression, living up to others ideals, and then encountering the paradox. Not knowing what it was he couldn't resolve the conflict between with and do. This problem coincided with outrageous fame and fortune in his case. We know women throw themselves at guys with money and power regardless of marital status. So right when he would be looking to find release by other means all these women were eager to do him. It's so hard to resist temptation when you are at your most vulnerable. He caved. Maybe he felt bad about it, figured he was just a bad guy for having dirty desires, and didn't look to resolve the problem. It was just par for the course for a top tier male athlete. Surely we know he wasn't the first and won't be the last. Maybe he's an 11, maybe he's a jerk, or maybe he needed to learn about men's sexuality from someone who wasn't trying to repress it.

Climaquiddick :: Fake But Accurate

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 04:15:00 +0000

So far the few news outlets are reporting on the leaked e-mails concerning Global Warming. The bottom line is that they cooked the books. The only defense they have is the same as Dan Rather's; fake but accurate. We know that strategy is a loser.

There is evidence of several crimes in these e-mails. The most egregious is their crime against the planet. By cooking the books they've hurt the very movement they supported. Hopefully this will be the death of alarmism and pragmatism can take its place. While I know quite a few warming skeptics I have yet to meet anyone who is pro-pollution. We can work toward a future of clean energy without the hype.

V is for Victimization

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:07:00 +0000

There is a new storm brewing about the new TV series 'V'. It would appear to be taking pot shots at the new Commander in Chief and his supporters. What is amazing is how closely art imitates life. But is this really ABC taking on the White House? Or, as discussed over at Big Hollywood, the story was actually done before The Won was even nominated!

It would seem that Big Hollywood got caught in their own trap. The current crop of politicians just can't help themselves and wind up making the Theater of the Absurd look mainstream. This reminds me of the remake of The Manchurian Candidate. The character played by Meryl Streep actually many viewers thought was styled after Hillary Clinton. While attempting to slime the Republicans, the fact that her actions seemed completely in line with what Clinton would do wound up backfiring.

This seems to be a common phenomenon where whenever left leaning writers try to gin up fear of what Republicans might do they inadvertently expose the Democrats actually in the act of doing the dirty deed. Expect 'V' to be cancelled as there is no way to write about a wild eyed populace high on hope getting eaten up by their own ignorance without damaging the DNC.

ACORN and The New Tactics of the New Media

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 06:25:00 +0000

Over the past couple decades politicians and political groups associated with both parties have been caught doing bad things. Whether or not getting caught leads to removal or sanctions has usually depended on how long they stay in the media cycle. If the media is out for blood they won't move on until they've achieved their goal. Claims of media bias arise when Republicans get the klieg lights while Democrats won't even get their party affiliation mentioned. The tactic has been to bury the scandal on a late Friday for Democrats and open wide on a Monday for Republicans. Fairly transparent, and fairly successful.

In response to real and perceived media bias there has been a rise in citizen journalists doing exposés. Without the same size megaphone they were able to annoy, but not unseat. It was easy enough for the old media to bury the report and then simply move on. Finally somebody figured it out.

The revelations about ACORN from the first video shocked the country. Except Charlie Gibson, of course, who was left unawares. Yet, a single video would be easy to refute and bury. In response they posted a second video. Now we start to see a trend. When the third video came out the game changed forever.

There is no real way for the opposition to know how many more videos there are. Also, when somebody releases a series of anything they usually save the best for last. Why have the US Census, the House of Representatives, and the US Senate moved so quickly against ACORN? Fear of the unknown. More shoes will drop and they cannot afford to be on the wrong side of the issue.

They also know that they can no longer control the message. Being on the wrong side of an issue has not been detrimental for certain members of the political class through the years. Since the media are willing lap dogs they know they won't be savaged on the nightly news. The difference now, after the Van Jones scandal, is that the nightly news no longer controls the story. Nor does the print media.

From now on, when a story hits the internet, damage control must start immediately. However, when it hits, those in the crosshairs must wait to find out if the other shoe drops. In waiting they risk losing control of the narrative, but the only other option is to come clean. We know that won't happen. Those providing cover won't know the extent of the damage and thus the whole apparatus will be frozen.

Can't stop the signal.

Male Bashing Stimulus?

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:45:00 +0000

Over at the Weekly Standard Christina Hoff Sommers explains how the 'shovel ready' stimulus package got derailed by feminist activists. What she'll soon find out is that those chickens will be coming home to roost pretty darn soon. What we're seeing in various states is that the so-called recession proof jobs such as education and healthcare are taking a beating.

Many school districts are losing population due to the economic downturn, lowering their student population, and accordingly their funding. School funding is allocated on a per pupil basis. Fewer pupils means less money. This has resulted in many first year teachers being let go, next in line are the second year teachers. Now this is based on seniority, not actual number of years in the profession. There are many teachers with decades of experience that are considered first year because they relocated from another state. The stink of it is they relocated based on marketing programs by various school boards pleading for more teachers to fill the demand. Now that demand is gone and therefore so is the money. Keep in mind that education is a profession that is part of the 'human infrastructure' - code for female dominated.

Another profession that is part of the 'human infrastructure' is nursing. It seems there has always been more job openings for nurses than nurses to fill them for the past several decades. It's been a complete crisis. Part of the problem, however, has always been the exceptionally poor working conditions and low pay that nurses receive. They enter the profession with high hopes, then bail out once they find a better paying job or a job with a better work/life balance. It just so happens a lot of those higher paying jobs were related to the construction industry. Mortgage brokers, title agents, insurance agents, and other related professionals that were formerly nurses are now unemployed. They've returned to nursing, and in many cases have many years of nursing experience to draw upon. While we certainly don't have a surplus of nurses, we no longer have the incredible demand we once did. Further, as more people lose their jobs and stop paying their health insurance premiums we can expect the formerly recession proof healthcare industry to start feeling similar pains to those in the education business.

What all this comes down to is a very simple principle. There are jobs that generate tax revenue and jobs that consume tax revenue. An inbalance in favor of generation will lead to more revenue and can lead to a reduction in taxes (LOL!) or an increase in consumption. When the inbalance tips in favor of consumption there needs to be a decrease in that consumption (ROFL!). Any attempt to raise tax rates to make up for the lost revenue will further erode revenues by disincentivizing business. Then the imbalance will accelerate in favor of consumption until the whole system falls over. See: U.S.S.R.

So, bottome line here, is that in an effort to make the stimulus more fair for a certain portion of society we find out that this particular portion has been a net consumer of tax revenues and not a generator. As such, they've been riding on the backs of those that have been paying into the system. If they don't get thrown off they'll wind up killing the golden goose. It's a pity those reposonsible for education couldn't see this coming.

Great Video about 'ISMs'

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:47:00 +0000

Barney Frank Denies Housing Bubble

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:15:00 +0000

Barney Frank caught in the act.

h/t Pat Dollard

Lower The Bar

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:41:00 +0000

We all knew after the election there'd be the need to manage expectations. After all the hype over the course of two years there'd be need for some serious lowering of the bar, otherwise those expecting the whole world to love us and the economy to bounce back would start having second thoughts. With the mid-term election a mere two years away if those lofty goals were not met then team Donkey might be in for a reversal of fortune. So now, instead of merely lowering the bar, they've gone and lowered the DOW. With their actions and talk of nationalizing this and that they've managed to encourage investors to exit the market in droves sending the DOW below 7,000 points.

Freddie, Fannie, and the Democrats have accomplished what Al Qaeda could only dream. Now that they are in a hole they just keep digging by adding to the debt. Many people, even some of the new administration's supporters, wonder why. Well I'm here to tell you, so pay close attention. The electorate are known for one consistent quality, and it's the only constant in a game with thousands of variables. That constant is known as the short attention span. In general elections nothing really matters but the six months before the election. That's the only time people are really paying attention and they'll most likely forget the previous misgivings they've had if they are doing good, relatively speaking, at that point in time.

Did you see the catch? I wrote 'relatively speaking'. That means relative not to their best ever condition, but thanks to their short term memory, it means their most recent condition. In 18 months, if there happens to be any upward movement in the market the press will be singing 'Happy Days Are Here Again' and the entire left will be chanting, to borrow a phrase, "stay the course."

It's true, as things get worse over the next 18 months, the new President will continue to lose favor and therefore political capital to advance his agenda. This, however, doesn't matter since with the new bailouts and budget he will have what he needs to press on without any new appropriations. That is why it was so important for the Democrats to get their bailout and budget passed. It's a fait accompli. They now no longer need popular support to advance their agenda.

What the Democrats are banking on is at least some semblance of a recovery from this new lowered bar within the next 18 months to pin their re-election hopes on. If they don't get that, and lose control of congress, they still have the veto pen and still have another two years to show results. For even if the Democrats lose both houses, which is The power of this huge stimulus action is that they've cleared the path ahead of any possible resistance and can just get on with it.

The RNC needs to respond to that, worry about the bigger picture, and not keep crying over spilt milk.

Sarah Palin Abused Power

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 01:48:00 +0000

Further proof that government jobs are jobs for life. If someone is dangerously incompetent they cannot be removed from office. Will this kangaroo court decision get airplay? Much more than the strong ties between Ayers and Obama, that's a guarantee.

If team McCain is smart, and that is a really big if, they will use this as an opportunity to show the problems with government and the dangers reformers face when they attempt to 'clean house'. They should also point out that if the McCain Palin ticket is elected that the public can expect even more of this type of squealing as they clean up Washington D.C. Thus, every time the Dems try to bring this up it will turn into a negative for their side.

According to McCain he's taken off the gloves. He hasn't thrown any punches, though, and seems to be playing patty-cake with Obama. The Republican nominee has been getting all kinds of grief on the campaign trail for not fighting back, for not talking about Raines, Rezko, Wright, and all the other friends of Barack that have been responsible for bombing the US economy. Obama has had absolutely no problem blaming the economic meltdown on Bush. Neither the Republicans nor team McCain has answered that charge.

Anybody that has been reading this blog knows that most of my predictions and pronouncements have accurately predicted far too many moves during this political season to be a coincidence. I'm not Nostradamus, just someone who is actually 'in touch'. My latest prediction is as follows. If Team McCain continues this gutless campaigning, the same kind of gutless campaigning that angered conservatives when Bush ran for his 2nd term, he will begin to lose the base. He has until October 15th, the date of the last debate, to tell the American people the truth about the economy or he's an also ran. The media need to know he means business in a way they cannot ignore (what better venue than an unfiltered debate) and the Republican faithful need to know he understands their frustrations.

Largest Audience Ever for VP Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:12:00 +0000

The AFP notes that the Palin-Biden debate was the most watched VP debate ever. It also drew a larger audience than the McCain-Obama debate. Despite the post debate snap polling declaring Biden the winner the real winner was the one person that could draw that large an audience. It wasn't McCain, it wasn't Obama, and it most certainly wasn't Biden. There was only one reason that the viewership for this debate was so large: Palin. That reality must send shivers down the spines of those that know what that means. The silent majority has found their candidate and they will turn out in droves come November.

Compare and Contrast

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:00:00 +0000

After watching Burnin' Down the House the following ad from the Obama camp is laughable.

Sorry, Barack, but it wasn't Bush that stifled oversight of Freddie and Fannie, it was the Democrats. Watch the video and learn something.

This ad, released today, by the way, looks like it was designed to dovetail with Pelosi's speech before the roll call vote for the bailout. She reiterated that it was eight years of failed Bush policies, not the Democrat run Freddie and Fannie scandal, that led to the current meltdown. Very similar language to that of Barack. Coincidence?

Methinks the Democrats were hoping for a passage of the bill and then use that as proof with Republicans ratifying the notion that it was failed Bush policies that led to the crisis. Now the Democrats are squealing that the Republicans had their feelings hurt and should have voted for the bill anyway. I think the House Republicans were smarter than that and recognized a setup when they saw one.

The Republicans need to make sure that the Democrats own up to their obstructionism of regulations for Freddie and Fannie. That should be a condition of any Republican support for the bill. Further, it should come from the mouth of one Nancy Pelosi, and no other.

Burnin' Down The House

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:26:00 +0000

Temporary link here until the original gets new music. They should have never used copyrighted material considering there is plenty of royalty free music available online.

Bridge to Nowheres

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:22:00 +0000

Check it out over at Hotair. CNN actually takes on Biden and Obama. Not sure if this is to maintain some semblance of balance, but there it is, nonetheless.

$700,000,000,002.00

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:57:00 +0000

How did the Treasury Department come up with that number? Check it out, of all places, at the LA Times.

"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

noreply@blogger.com (Ken) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:41:00 +0000

A very lengthy article full of quotes and links over at American Thinker. Definitely worth your time to read the whole thing. This will answer the question of 'why?' for so many conservatives. While this may be rejected by the left as conspiracy theorist pap, the truth is out there for all to see. Key paragraph:

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.