Some things just don't need an explanation.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
The Insane Base, and Why McCain Needs Fraud to Win
It is obvious by his choice of Sarah "I don't need to answer no steenking questions" Palin as Veep that John McCain's strategy is to focus on his Creationist, AGW denialist, tax-cut worshipping base at the expense of everything else. This can't work, because there just aren't enough votes there. Look at this graphic:
Sure, it shows that the Republican voters, especially the delegates, are out to lunch, especially the last one. No one, no one, in their right mind with all the information available, can think that going into Iraq was a good idea, regardless of what we need to do now to dislodge ourself from it. There is a reason the Republicans sold the war by claiming it would be easy and quick.
However the really revealing thing about the graph is that in each question the "Democratic voters" figures are closer to the "All voters" figure than is the "Republican voters" figure. This suggests there are more Democratic voters, or that the independents agree more with the Democrats. Either way McCain is screwed. If we assume the proportion of independents is zero, and estimate the D/R percentages from the polling data, we get somewhere between 54.0% and 60.6% Democrat.
There is not a shred of evidence so far that McCain will win this election. Every piece of polling data I have seen that didn't use grotesquely flawed techniques (like Gallup polling equal numbers of both parties) shows Obama clearly ahead in electoral votes (countrywide polls are meaningless), and prior to the GOP convention bounce, the gap was widening. If none of that changes, and that's a big if, and we get a McCain surprise victory in November, we'll for the first time in my political life have iron-clad evidence of voter fraud. The Gore-really-won crowd has some interesting circumstantial evidence, but nothing like this would be. Gore wasn't consistently beating Bush in the polls while everyone but Bush's base laughed at the GOP as they are now.
Sure, it shows that the Republican voters, especially the delegates, are out to lunch, especially the last one. No one, no one, in their right mind with all the information available, can think that going into Iraq was a good idea, regardless of what we need to do now to dislodge ourself from it. There is a reason the Republicans sold the war by claiming it would be easy and quick.
However the really revealing thing about the graph is that in each question the "Democratic voters" figures are closer to the "All voters" figure than is the "Republican voters" figure. This suggests there are more Democratic voters, or that the independents agree more with the Democrats. Either way McCain is screwed. If we assume the proportion of independents is zero, and estimate the D/R percentages from the polling data, we get somewhere between 54.0% and 60.6% Democrat.
There is not a shred of evidence so far that McCain will win this election. Every piece of polling data I have seen that didn't use grotesquely flawed techniques (like Gallup polling equal numbers of both parties) shows Obama clearly ahead in electoral votes (countrywide polls are meaningless), and prior to the GOP convention bounce, the gap was widening. If none of that changes, and that's a big if, and we get a McCain surprise victory in November, we'll for the first time in my political life have iron-clad evidence of voter fraud. The Gore-really-won crowd has some interesting circumstantial evidence, but nothing like this would be. Gore wasn't consistently beating Bush in the polls while everyone but Bush's base laughed at the GOP as they are now.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Darwin Wall Stain Satire Sails over IDers Heads
The Onion strikes again with a wonderful satire of the religious tendency to see holy figures in everything, and the contrast of this behavior with how scientists act. It shows just how ridiculous the notion that evolution or science are religions. Try to imagine the following exchange actually occurring:
"I have never felt closer to Darwin's ideas," said zoologist Fred Granger, who waited in line for 16 hours to view the stain. "May his name be praised and his theories on natural selection echo in all the halls of naturalistic observation forever."
Despite the enthusiasm the so-called "Darwin Smudge" has generated among the evolutionary faithful, disagreement remains as to its origin. Some believe the image is actually closer to the visage of Stephen Jay Gould, longtime columnist for Natural History magazine and originator of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, and is therefore proof of rapid cladogenesis. A smaller minority contend it is the face of Carl Sagan, and should be viewed as a warning to those nonbelievers who have not yet seen his hit PBS series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage.
Still others have attempted to discredit the miracle entirely, claiming that there are several alternate explanations for the appearance of the unexplained discoloration.
"It's a stain on a wall, and nothing more," said the Rev. Clement McCoy, a professor at Oral Roberts University and prominent opponent of evolutionary theory. "Anything else is the delusional fantasy of a fanatical evolutionist mindset that sees only what it wishes to see in the hopes of validating a baseless, illogical belief system. I only hope these heretics see the error of their ways before our Most Powerful God smites them all in His vengeance."
Satire is merely proof by contradiction in artistic form. Of course, the Intelligent Design crew misses the point entirely, which was completely predictable.
"I have never felt closer to Darwin's ideas," said zoologist Fred Granger, who waited in line for 16 hours to view the stain. "May his name be praised and his theories on natural selection echo in all the halls of naturalistic observation forever."
Despite the enthusiasm the so-called "Darwin Smudge" has generated among the evolutionary faithful, disagreement remains as to its origin. Some believe the image is actually closer to the visage of Stephen Jay Gould, longtime columnist for Natural History magazine and originator of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, and is therefore proof of rapid cladogenesis. A smaller minority contend it is the face of Carl Sagan, and should be viewed as a warning to those nonbelievers who have not yet seen his hit PBS series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage.
Still others have attempted to discredit the miracle entirely, claiming that there are several alternate explanations for the appearance of the unexplained discoloration.
"It's a stain on a wall, and nothing more," said the Rev. Clement McCoy, a professor at Oral Roberts University and prominent opponent of evolutionary theory. "Anything else is the delusional fantasy of a fanatical evolutionist mindset that sees only what it wishes to see in the hopes of validating a baseless, illogical belief system. I only hope these heretics see the error of their ways before our Most Powerful God smites them all in His vengeance."
Satire is merely proof by contradiction in artistic form. Of course, the Intelligent Design crew misses the point entirely, which was completely predictable.
The Fraud Continues: Palin Repeats the Script, Refuses to Take Questions
The fraud of the Sarah Palin candidacy continues, as she makes her little fake political tour making speeches while avoiding the critical component of such tours: answering questions from the media and voters:
"So far, Palin has barely spoken with voters either. Since the convention, she and McCain have breezed through a Wisconsin ice cream shop, a New Mexico restaurant and a Missouri barbecue place, shaking hands with diners but not taking any questions. Photographers and television cameras have been allowed full view while reporters are typically ushered too far away to ask questions or hear most of the conversations.
To be sure, all candidates running for office give the same remarks over and over — Barack Obama's stump speech has hardly changed throughout the campaign, and McCain has been telling familiar stories and jokes for months.
But none of the candidates in this race has been so shielded from the media, so protected from any spontaneous situation, and Palin's unvarying remarks give the impression that she and her message are being tightly controlled. As before her convention speech, McCain's campaign is briefing Palin for her first TV interview."
"Tightly controlled" is a euphemism for "keeping her from revealing her ignorance and unfitness for office", as her clueless comments about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac illustrate. You can read a more detailed analysis here, where even conservatives admit her statements made no sense. The ignoramus clearly speaks as though they are government programs.
The Sarah Palin candidacy is a fraud, identity politics and nothing else, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together, and unencumbered with GOP bloodlines, should clearly see. In these troubled times, we cannot afford a vice president who is image and nothing else.
"So far, Palin has barely spoken with voters either. Since the convention, she and McCain have breezed through a Wisconsin ice cream shop, a New Mexico restaurant and a Missouri barbecue place, shaking hands with diners but not taking any questions. Photographers and television cameras have been allowed full view while reporters are typically ushered too far away to ask questions or hear most of the conversations.
To be sure, all candidates running for office give the same remarks over and over — Barack Obama's stump speech has hardly changed throughout the campaign, and McCain has been telling familiar stories and jokes for months.
But none of the candidates in this race has been so shielded from the media, so protected from any spontaneous situation, and Palin's unvarying remarks give the impression that she and her message are being tightly controlled. As before her convention speech, McCain's campaign is briefing Palin for her first TV interview."
"Tightly controlled" is a euphemism for "keeping her from revealing her ignorance and unfitness for office", as her clueless comments about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac illustrate. You can read a more detailed analysis here, where even conservatives admit her statements made no sense. The ignoramus clearly speaks as though they are government programs.
The Sarah Palin candidacy is a fraud, identity politics and nothing else, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together, and unencumbered with GOP bloodlines, should clearly see. In these troubled times, we cannot afford a vice president who is image and nothing else.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Bush and Dole Jeopardy
The answer: 36 years
The question: How long has it been since the Republicans did not have a Bush or a Dole on the ticket.
Don't forget too that the Kennedies and Clintons had their share of ruling time at various levels. Didn't we fight a war a few centuries ago, in part, to get away from inherited political power? America the Beautiful, meet America the Oligarchy.
The question: How long has it been since the Republicans did not have a Bush or a Dole on the ticket.
Don't forget too that the Kennedies and Clintons had their share of ruling time at various levels. Didn't we fight a war a few centuries ago, in part, to get away from inherited political power? America the Beautiful, meet America the Oligarchy.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Palin: McCain's Challenge for America, but its not What You Think
John McCain has challenged America. He has challenged our identity politics in the most extreme way, by choosing a VP candidate who has little else to offer. Sarah Palin's speech was so much bluster and so little substance. Who with two brain cells to rub together really cares that much about her family, even granting the entertainment value of seeing the Family Values (tm) candidate sporting the first baby daddy in modern political history? It was a speech aimed right at the choir, offering nothing of substance to those with doubts about her, aside from all her blatantly lying about her supposed opposition to earmarks and the infamous bridge to nowhere. She is being carefully kept away from live reporters who (gasp) might want to see exactly what the potential Vice President of the United States knows, and how she handles herself in the face of antagonism. We already know she is a creationist and global warming denialist, and there is considerable reason to wonder what her secessionist and dominionist views are. Her views on warring for the sake of what you think your gods are telling you seem more in line with Osama Bin Laden than John McCain.
John McCain has, at the most essential level, selected the most deranged, unqualified candidate ever for the office of Vice President solely because she shares attributes with a key voting demographic. He has her lie about her record in a way that any grade schooler should be able to see through, and hides her from the press. John McCain has thrown down the gauntlet to the few thinking Republicans left. Will you really debase yourself that much over your hatred of the Democrats and your confidence in the Republicans. Will you REALLY vote Republican no matter what they do? Cause brother, it doesn't get much worse than this.
Luckily, so far the polls are returning to their pre-olympic levels with Obama having a small-to-comfortable lead in the projected electoral votes. So there is room for optimism. There is also a ton of pessimism in the fact that the issue is in doubt at all.
John McCain has, at the most essential level, selected the most deranged, unqualified candidate ever for the office of Vice President solely because she shares attributes with a key voting demographic. He has her lie about her record in a way that any grade schooler should be able to see through, and hides her from the press. John McCain has thrown down the gauntlet to the few thinking Republicans left. Will you really debase yourself that much over your hatred of the Democrats and your confidence in the Republicans. Will you REALLY vote Republican no matter what they do? Cause brother, it doesn't get much worse than this.
Luckily, so far the polls are returning to their pre-olympic levels with Obama having a small-to-comfortable lead in the projected electoral votes. So there is room for optimism. There is also a ton of pessimism in the fact that the issue is in doubt at all.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Republican Pundits say Palin Shouldn't Have to Answer Questions about her Pro-Life Stance: and for Good Reason
Friday I watched a couple of Republican pundits on MSNBC, Joe Watkins, and Ron 'I'm not going to fall for the banana in the tailpipe' Christie, wiggle around madly as to why Sarah Palin shouldn't have to explain her pro-life position. Christie was asked if she would criminalize doctors who performed abortions, and had the audacity to claim he didn't "understand the premise of the question".
OK Ron, let me explain it to you. No pro-life politician really wants to get into detail about what she believes, because when one gets into the gory details, it gets ugly. She wants to overturn Roe Vs Wade and make abortion a state issue, sure to be illegal in some states. But then what happens? If we are to treat fetuses as babies, then is not a woman getting an abortion in a state where it is illegal an accomplice to murder? After all, if she took her one year old child to an executioner, she would be so charged, and rightly so. The pro-life position leads inexorably to this, which is why they avoid talking about it like the plague.
But it is logically unavoidable. Making abortion illegal turns women who seek them accomplices to murder, and makes the doctors that perform them murderers. Pro-life people are loath to accept or talk about this, which is why Sarah Palin should be asked this question as often as possible, at least, if she ever allows reporters to ask her any questions.
OK Ron, let me explain it to you. No pro-life politician really wants to get into detail about what she believes, because when one gets into the gory details, it gets ugly. She wants to overturn Roe Vs Wade and make abortion a state issue, sure to be illegal in some states. But then what happens? If we are to treat fetuses as babies, then is not a woman getting an abortion in a state where it is illegal an accomplice to murder? After all, if she took her one year old child to an executioner, she would be so charged, and rightly so. The pro-life position leads inexorably to this, which is why they avoid talking about it like the plague.
But it is logically unavoidable. Making abortion illegal turns women who seek them accomplices to murder, and makes the doctors that perform them murderers. Pro-life people are loath to accept or talk about this, which is why Sarah Palin should be asked this question as often as possible, at least, if she ever allows reporters to ask her any questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
