About Me

Name: Mick O.
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

Ted Turner is a hypocrite!

Today on Rush Limbaugh's show, he played a sound byte of Ted Turner which infuriated me. How dare he blame us for global warming? First of all it's a hoax (just like the global cooling theory many years ago), but when he says it's caused because too many people have too much stuff, I almost exploded!
 
So why didn't the news reporter interviewing him ask, "then why don't you lead by example and start giving your stuff away?" Because the media lies! And for some reason, liberals never see the hypocrisy! Just like Al Gore, Turner is putting the blame on the rest of us while he lives his opulent lifestyle, and flies around in his corporate jets. If global warming IS happening and anyone is to blame, it is the likes of these two!
 
Yesterday I opined about the unintended consequences of rent control; how it hurts the very people it was implemented to help. Today, I wanted to write about the hypocrisy of ethanol and the law of unintended consequences, but reporter, Cinnamon Stillwell at the San Francisco Chronicle beat me to it with a brilliant piece today.
 
As it turns out, producing ethanol may cause more pollution than it saves by being used as a gasoline additive. For those of you who didn't pass 1st grade math, if it costs 10 to produce something and saves 8 to use it, that's a net loss of 2. Okay? Let's move on.
 
Add to that the price of any food that involves corn products (meat and poultry that use corn for feed) is skyrocketing, and you can see that this is a BAD idea. Corn that was once used as food is now being used for ethanol! But here's the kicker... You and I are paying the difference in the form of government subsidies. So not only is it not cost effective to produce ethanol (means they can't make money producing and selling ethanol on its own merit), but we taxpayers must also subsidize the producers so they can make enough money to be profitable. If it's such a good idea it would be able to make it on its own... Like plasma televisions and DVD players that all started costing a lot of money, the price eventually came down and they are still making money... no government subsidies there!
 
I know I read somewhere that Ted Turner owns farm land that is being subsidized by us, either by NOT planting on it or for growing corn that is being used for ethanol. Either way, you'd think we'd at least get a thank you card from the guy. What a jerk.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media lies about good intentions

When the press reports about some bill that is going through congress, all the story focuses on is the intent of the legislation, not the results it will likely cause. Investigative reporting is dead except on the internet, which could be why news outlets are finding their readers bailing by the thousands.
 
Take the rent control laws, for example. Thomas Sowell points out in his book why this never helps the people it intends to help. Why is this never pointed out. All that is reported is how the landlords are taking advantage of the poor renters and something must be done! Nobody ever asks what will happen if such laws are passed. Let's take San Francisco, for example.
 
"Keep the rents low," they cried. So the renters formed the Rent Board and lobbied the city for strict laws that did not allow for rent increases... reasonable rent increases! Landlords were limited to a certain small percentage of increase every year and are therefore disuaded from getting into the rental business. So what was the result?
 
"Landlords are kicking people out of their homes," they cried because landlords were going around rent control by cancelling the rental agreements and re-renting the units for more money. With increased expenses of holding the property, landlords needed to get more money to keep up. However, in response, the city placed strict restrictions on getting tenants out. They also set up certain classes of citizens as protected making in virtually impossible to get them out. Right now, tenants have the upper hand, and it is considered a good deal if a landlord can get them out by paying them off with several thousand dollars! So what was the result?
 
Thousands of units are sitting off the market unrented in order to avoid these problems. And is this the "good intentions" that were originally addressed in the legislation? NO!
 
This is just one example. More to come later.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

If man is not monogamous

After the Spitzer story, liberal media news and entertainment shows brought out all their stories about how man is not truly monogamous. I am not sure it is to justify the behavior like they did when Clinton lied and then experts were trotted out to say how lying is natural and even good sometimes!
 
But I have a couple of questions. If man (and I mean man as is huMAN) is not monogamous, then why do people get murdered when the spouse or significant other is found cheating? Or when couples split up, someone goes in with a shotgun and blows the estranged partner away when he or she is with another lover?
 
Sure, pride and ego factor into the mix, but what the media doesn't point out is that when couples pair up, there is an unspoken bond of loyalty there. Otherwise there would not be shows like Dr. Phil, Dr. Laura or at the worst, Jerry Springer. People get married, whether it works out in the long run, because they intend to be monogamous.
 
So my point is that the media brings out stories like these to push an agenda. Even if they don't mention a politician by name, it is intended to sway people's minds. But they can't change human nature!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media lies about Iraq by omission

The scurvy weasels that call themselves the media have been focused on the anti-war protests going on around the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, but what they do not publish are the following statistics from an e-mail making the internet circuit.
 
Did you know that 47 countries' have reestablished their embassies in Iraq ? 

Did you know that the Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 million Iraqi people? 

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 new schools are now under construction; and 38 new schools have been completed in Iraq ? 

Did you know that Iraq 's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers,
 all currently operating? 

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in January 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program? 

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5 - 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a naval infantry regiment. 

Did you know that Iraq's Air Force consists of three operational squadrons, which includes 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft (under Iraqi operational control) which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 Bell Jet Rangers? 

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion? 

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers? 

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers every 8 weeks? 

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals,
83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities. 

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations? 

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October? 

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%? 

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations? 

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004? 

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a televised debate recently?
 
These are all things you will probably never know unless you go somewhere to find the truth. Our media has all become one-sided and it is not on the side of truth. Every day we are inundated with stories with global warming as the undertone whether it's a story about the environment, energy or animals. Daily we are treated to the wrongs that police perpetrate on those poor, mistreated crimminals so that now only the people who follow the law are in trouble. And finally, we have a presidential candidate who promises to bring us together while he listens to a minister who preaches hate of America and the white race. And he is going to represent all of us? NO THANKS!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What the media doesn't tell you - liberalism doesn't work!

If liberalism worked, then California would not be in the trouble it is in financially. Take this as an example of what liberalism does when it's tried.
 
True we have a Republican governor, but he is by no means a conservative. He is another John McCain... trying to get along with both sides. And what is the result? More and more debt... and that's without an expensive Iraq war to use as an excuse of where the money is going!
 
Example one of how liberal ideas don't work: People in California are being rewarded with a tax credit for buying the Toyota "Pious" and other hybrids because they save gasoline. They get more miles to the gallon than regular automobiles and SUVs. Sounds like a good idea, right?
 
So what happens is that our little lemmings go out and buy the hype. There are probably more hybrids per square mile in California than anywhere in the US. As a result, not as many gallons of gas are being consumed. Good you say? Not for the tax and spend liberals who are running California. Instead of balancing the budget and doing away with programs that don't work, they need your tax dollars. But now that people are not buying as much gas, they are not getting the tax revenue they were expecting!
 
I am told that there are about $0.45 or more per gallon of gas and with people using less gas, that means less taxes for the greedy government. So what are they discussing now? In a place where we already have some of the highest prices per gallon of gas in the nation, they are talking about adding a new gas tax at the pump to increase revenue!
 
But wait, isn't big oil being blamed for the high prices??? And what about all the ethanol (made from corn) that's being used? I thought oil was the problem? So you're saying that if we went to 100% ethanol we would still be paying the same price for "gas"? That's right. In fact, not only will ethanol cost the same or more than gasoline (because it is so hard to transport), it has side effects.
 
Because corn is used for our food sources, those prices are rising as more and more corn is being used as "gasoline". As it becomes more scarce, prices to feed livestock rise and so this cost is being passed on to consumers when they buy dairy or meat products. Corn is also used in many processed foods, so these are going up too.
 
All this because we want to wean ourselves off foreign oil! That's just one liberal idea that has backfired on the powers that be. I for one can't wait to see what they come up with next!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama; what does he really stand for?

Why is Obama getting a pass? Because he is black. Ferraro said it, and it's true. Americans want to see a black president so badly it will ignore anything of substance from this guy.

Ken Blackwell is a black Republican and has been elected twice as Ohio Secretary of State. The fact that I have to say that is a shame. Like white people can't criticize a person's politics because they don't share the same skin color? Isn't the president supposed to represent ALL people? |

Ken Blackwell also writes a column for the New York Sun. This particular column was written February 14, 2008.
Ken Blackwell - Columnist for the New York Sun

It's an amazing time to be alive in America. We're in a year of firsts in this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first front running freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America will be a first.

We won't truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every candidate by where they stand. We won't arrive where we should be until we no longer talk about skin color or gender.

Now that Barack Obama steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.
The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the frontrunner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him.

Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.

Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton.

Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost.

Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant.

Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let's look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."

Start with national security, since the president's most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists - something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who would put our national security at risk.

Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.

Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" - hijacked - Christianity. He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban - ban - on all handguns in the state. These are radical left, Hollywood, and San Francisco values, not Middle America values.

The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don't start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.

But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent a speaker he is and - yes - they're talking about his race. Those should never be the factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama's radical agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs. Clinton.

It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.

More information on Ken Blackwell can be found here: http://www.kenblackwell.com/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Meida lies about illegal immigration

As ususal, the mainstream media is ignoring the story about illegal immigration.
 
Because elected officials, for the most part, are ignoring the problem until after the election, concerned citizen groups are taking it upon themselves to do something about it. So what happens?
 
Radio talk show hosts are taking up the cross and talking about the movement, and guess what? Pro-illegal groups are demanding they be silenced under the guise as hate speech! Telling the truth is now hate speech! Read the story here. What happened to our free country? Little by little they are chipping away at our constitution and changing the rules so that eventually we will be living in a communist society. Government will decide what we can and can't say. They are doing it now incrementally, so it's not a silly notion. It is a fact.
 
I propose we take back America. FREEDOM OF SPEECH! Besides, when is telling the truth hate speech?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Politicians are scurvy dogs!

Republican or Democrat, they are all scurvy dogs. Why do I say that? Most of them are in it for themselves. It's not about serving the public. It is about them getting their way and getting rich. It needs to stop. But will it?
 
The news media will never report it, liars and partisan hacks that they are, so how will people ever be informed? Listen to Rush Limbaugh.
 
A few tidbits:
  • The senate voted to let many of the Bush tax cuts expire. Now why would they do that when our economy is already in trouble? Because they are scurvy dogs with an agenda. Most people will never hear about this because they are not paying attention. Remember that tax rebate many of you are going to get in May? Put it in the bank because you're just going to have to pay it back several months later when the tax cuts expire. I've heard that people earning as low as $30,000 a year will be affected. Don't politicians make more than that? Oh, I forgot to tell you. They are exempt from the laws they pass on the rest of us.
  • Earmarks defeated... Why? Because that's how politicians get paid off!

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Reverse" Discrimination?

If there is such a thing, Obama has gotten away with saying nothing and not having to apologize for his minister's outrageous statements and hate America rhetoric. Why do you think this is?
 
Same as with Hillary who was "attacked" by Lazio in the Senatorial debates because she was the "girl", now Barack is above criticizm because he is black. It is pathetic.
 
If his minister hates America, then he should go somewhere else. The United States gives him the freedom to be a "butthead", but if he hates it so much, why doesn't he go to a country that he does like and respect and begin his life there?
 
Obama owes us an explanation and an apology. ALL OF US.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democrats on the ropes!

If Hillary was really in it to do what's best for the Democratic Party, then she would step aside and let Obama have it. After all, he leads in the delegate count, and there's no way she can catch up. The only thing left to do is pull tricks. First trick? Redoing the Michigan and Florida primaries. Why? Because she needs the delegates. There's one problem...
 
Clinton was the only name on the ticket! Obama and Edwards (and whomever else was running at the time) followed the RULES and did not enter those races because it was already decided that if the states moved up their primary dates, their votes would be excluded at the convention. Since when have rules meant anything to the Clintons? Especially when it comes to their own self-interest. And who is to say that Clinton will win either of those states if Obama's name is on the ticket as a candidate? Nothing is automatic.
 
It's actually kind of amusing to see the Democrats turn on each other and pull similar stunts to the one they pulled in the 2000 election. Once again, rules don't matter. It's the outcome that is paramount. Correction; a Democratic outcome.
 
So let's take this to the convention. Will Hillary step aside if Obama wins the second primaries? Don't count on it. Finally blacks should see that, although they propose to be the party for African-Americans, Democrats are not willing to step aside and actually let a black man win the nomination. Hopefully this will be a turning point for America where Democrats can no longer count on an automatic vote from the black population. It would be about time. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberals are hypocrites!

They say they are peace activists. So what are they doing blowing up a recruiting office in New York? That's not peaceful. Once again it shows how wrong the peace movement. They want peace... but only if they don't have to be. Idiots all!!!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Barack, you've got to be kidding...

Listen to his YouTube video and remember, if he does what he says he is going to do, he would have to run the WORLD. What a wing-nut. He may be popular with his mind-numbed followers, but the general public is way to smart to vote for this foolishness.
 
 
Notice that they have disabled both comments and ratings for this video! Know why? I do!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

One last post today on the election

Here are my thoughts about this year's election. Who cares? I keep hearing liberal commentators talking about McCain and that Republicans should get behind him. Why? He represents nothing that we stand for. We do not want an (R) in the whitehouse that acts like a Democrat. Maybe Democrats feel that way (a Democrat at any cost), but conservatives don't vote that way. We don't usually support someone like Chuck Hagel or Olympia Snow just because they are Republicans. They are LIBERALS first, Republicans second.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More on ANWR - putting things in perspective

Here's the deal. Over and over again, I hear passionate callers complain about the possibility of drilling in ANWR and how it would spoil this pristine wilderness. My question is this... have they ever been there?
 
My recent request from the Forest and Wildlife Service netted the answer that only about 1200-1500 people visited there in 2007. Do you realize that most of these were hunters and fishermen! I hardly think the environmentalists are up there hunting! Regardless, of over 281 million people living in the united states, that is less than .05% of our population saw it last year! Five 100ths of a percent.
 
So what are we saving? The footprint has been projected to be small, yet the amount of oil we will glean from the field will help ease oil prices and give us a domestic source of energy. So when prices keep getting publicized as "going up at the pump" I say thank the liberals. They put us in this position. We need oil, not hybrids!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberals are DUMB!

Rush Limbaugh proved it. Today on his show a caller said her daughter thought Obama looks like Curious George. Rush laughed (maybe at the funny name) but claimed later that he had never heard of the character and was laughing to be polite to his caller.
 
Shortly after his explanation and APOLOGY, an African-American (obviously) named Tanisha (or something like that) called in and basically called Rush a liar. She said there is no way he could possibly have never heard of Curious George, and stubbornly stuck to her belief.
 
My question to her is this... how come she believes that Rush is lying and claims to know when people are doing it, but does not realize when liberal politicians keep lying to her??? Guess she's not as smart as she thinks it is.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive