Excitable Jen Rubin: Is Santorum The Sharon Angle Of 2012?

With friends like this, who needs enemies? Jen Rubin starts off her article with a mention of an unnamed and completely anonymous Republican Senator “quoted” in an ABC article saying Santorum would lose 35 states, then on to another article using another anonymous “tippy top” Republican discussing the need for another candidate if Santorum wins Michigan. Then we get to Jen’s “take” on the situation

(Washington Post) In other words: “Whom are we kidding? We’ll get slaughtered with Santorum as the nominee.”

You see, right-wing, socially conservative pundits don’t actually have to win elections, but experienced senators and party operatives who know how to win races outside Republican strongholds aren’t putting their heads in the sand. Santorum’s views and persona have limited appeal in a general election, and they know it.

They said the same thing about Reagan. Now, I’m not comparing Santorum to Reagan, but, Santorum is showing that he can compete. At least he actually jumped into the race, unlike others being mentioned for a “brokered” convention, like Chris Christy, Jeb Bush (no matter how good he is, think anyone is ready for another Bush?), Mitch Daniels, and Paul Ryan. That’s not to demean those folks, can you really blame them for wanting to avoid the soon to come smearing from Team Obama, outsourced through all the left wing groups and media?

But, but — you say — these people were the ones who wanted Charlie Crist instead of now-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). But, really, Santorum is no Marco Rubio. Whereas Rubio expands the party’s base of support, Santorum shrinks it. Whereas women, independents and young people see Rubio as a forward-looking reformer, Santorum seems stuck in a time warp from a different era, someone chasing issues that were “lost” decades ago

Obviously, looking to past American values, like family, and an economy not 5 steps behind Greece’s, are bad in Jen’s world.

Republicans should remember 2010. Republicans could well have had control of the Senate had they not nominated characters such as Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle and Ken Buck — fire-breathing Tea Partyers, who were unable to win in swing or blue states.

Those Republicans scurrying for a back-up plan don’t want to lose the White House (and likely the House, in the event of a landslide) as they did Senate seats in Delaware, Nevada and Colorado. Voters concerned about electability should take note.

What do all three have in common? The GOP establishment refused to get behind their campaigns. Right leaning media pundits and establishment big wigs denigrated all three candidates. The NRSC stated they would send O’Donnell no money immediately after she won the primary. With friends like these, who needs enemies? They did the work of Democrats.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Excitable Jen Rubin: Is Santorum The Sharon Angle Of 2012? »

Oh, Noes: “Extreme Weather” Effects 80% Of US Citizens

We are told this because someone driving an SUV caused the extreme weather

(USA Today) Violent and deadly weather events have affected more than 240 million Americans — about 80% of the nation’s population — over the past six years, says a report out today from an environmental advocacy group.

Last year was particularly awful for weather in the USA, with at least 14 weather and climate disasters across the nation that each inflicted more than $1 billion in damage. They included a series of devastating tornado outbreaks in the central and southern USA, the ongoing drought in the southern Plains, massive river flooding along the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, and batterings from Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee.

Environment America’s report looks broadly at county-level weather-related disaster declarations from FEMA for 2006 through 2011 to find out how many Americans live in counties hit by recent weather disasters. The report focused on weather and climate events, and did not include geological events such as earthquakes or volcanic eruptions.

Question: why didn’t they look back further? Every year most people are affected by big weather events, but, of course, that’s not what they want people to know: they want to push their extreme environmentalist/global warming agenda on Everyone Else. As usual, this is highlighted by their “Take Action” page, which fails to highlight how Warmists can make changes in their own lives.

If climate change is helping to fuel some of these disasters, as Environment America claims in the report, the group argues the onslaught of catastrophes could become the norm in decades to come.

If they truly believed that, they’d all become “carbon neutral,” yet, they never do. Of course, natural climate change is always going to occur, it can’t be stopped.

Read: Oh, Noes: “Extreme Weather” Effects 80% Of US Citizens »

If All You See…

…is hot caused snow, you might just be a Warmist

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! A gorgeous day here in America, though a bit rainy with a chance of global warming induced snow here in the mid-South. This pinup is by Al Moore, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Just One Minute has some thoughts on Obama’s need to replace Hope And Change. How about Theft And Graft?
  2. Zilla Of The Resistance has some thoughts on being betrayed on the contraceptive mandate
  3. Raised On Hoecakes points out that hurricanes and wind turbines are a bad combination
  4. Watts Up With That? points out that climate cycles will happen even if they are inconvenient
  5. The Blogmocracy has the latest from PBO on $5 a gallon gasoline
  6. All American Blogger has Mexico’s response to Eric Holder on gun-walking
  7. American Power discusses Rick Santorum and social issues
  8. Bob Owens covers Bruce Springsteen’s new album
  9. Dr. Melissa Clouthier discusses protecting citizen journalists
  10. Flopping Aces has your Sunday funnies
  11. Full Metal Patriot compares Bush vs Obama
  12. Gay Patriot has three points about Obama’s Big Budget
  13. Macker features the hideous artwork for the DNC in Charlotte
  14. Maggie’s Notebook points out that Obama is now giving away…..American owned islands
  15. And last, but not least, Randy’s Roundtable features your tax dollars at work
  16. And one to grow on: The Camp Of Saints features Liberalism 101
  17. And Don Surber highlights feminists with twisted panties

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

The posts do take a long time, so, if you want to send me your links for Rule 5 babeage or links, use ye olde email in the header bar (remove the NOSPAM part). Preferably, create the html link so I can copy and paste how you want it to read.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Sunday’s Worst Person(s) In The World

Late yesterday, excitable John Cole decided to name Tyler Cowen his “worst person in the world” (that’s not particularly civil discourse, but, then Powerline highlights that civil discourse is so 2011) for a tweet that wasn’t necessarily for Virginia’s abortion bill, but simply highlighted Liberal hypocrisy

By informing consumers, he is of course referring to the Virginia bill requiring women to be vaginally probed against their will before electing to have an abortion.

Because, you know, most of those “consumers” were “uninformed” as to what was in there. Every day, somewhere in the country, someone has a sonogram and says “OMG- that is a potential baby up in there? I thought it was a magic 8-ball or a small alien I was getting rid of.”

Now, I’ll admit that perhaps the Virginia legislature didn’t quite think the law all the way through in what would need to happen to do a sonogram so early in a pregnancy. That’s one of the problems when you have people who aren’t experts making law, such as Stimulus (then again, experts were involved with creating ObamaCare, you know, Big Pharmacy and Big Insurance). Of course, we can certainly expect civility from the pro-tolerance crowd, right?

  • Can we stick a probe in his ear and see if there’s a brain in there?
  • I suggest that doctors do Conservative male’s prostrate exams by shoving a rod of white-hot iron up their asses.
  • What an asshole.
  • I think every time you want to have sex, Tyler, the State should put a probe up your bum.
  • Tyler Cowen should be compulsorily anally probed before he can eat a steak. Because it is vital that he be informed about the risk of colon cancer.
  • Cowen should get a mandatory proctology exam before…oh the hell with it. He should get it just because he’s an asshole

That continues on for a bit. Of course, it would be easy to name John Cole or any of his unhinged commentors as the Worst Person In the World, but, instead, let’s just name all of them, along with Barack Obama, Kathy Sebelius, and people who vote Democrat, the Worst People In the World, because they are requiring organizations which are morally opposed to contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients to provide them in their health insurance offerings against their will. Really, the “compromise” essentially does the same thing. These same WPITW also support requiring people to be forced to purchase health insurance against their will or pay a fine/tax. Possibly be forced to have a class II microchip implanted against their will that tracks their health if they choose the public health insurance option. That one might be a stretch, but, then, Pelosi did say we had to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.

Liberals love Central/Big Government that mandates people do things against their will. They love the thought of GPS trackers put in every vehicle (except their own) that allow Government to access a miles traveled tax. Force people to pay higher energy prices and taxes for the climate change hoax. Heck, they can force 4 year olds to eat chicken nuggets.

So, for removing liberty, choice, and personal responsibility, and being complete and utter hypocrites over the issue of Virginia’s abortion requirement, I proclaim all liberals to be the Worst People In the World. Unfortunately, my Greek temple columns are at the cleaners.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Sunday’s Worst Person(s) In The World »

Kids Won’t Know What Women’s Downhill Skiing Looks Like

Won’t someone please think of the children?

KRASNAYA POLYANA, Russia —Skiers and coaches complained there weren’t enough workers to clean new snow off the 2014 Sochi Olympics downhill course on Thursday, forcing training for a women’s World Cup race to be canceled.

It’s so terrible!

Read: Kids Won’t Know What Women’s Downhill Skiing Looks Like »

HuffPo: “You Skeptics Have Declared Our AGW Cult Dead, But, Not So!”

Warmists are so cute when they attempt to prop up their dying cult

(Huffington Post) If you follow the popular polls, you might think that Americans are growing ever more skeptical about man-made climate change — despite the consensus among published climate scientists.

That’s simply not true, Jon Krosnick of Stanford University told an audience of social scientists and cognitive researchers Wednesday, in Garrison, N.Y. He maintained that most Americans do, in fact, believe.

Gallup and Pew polls show that the percentage of Americans that believe in climate change now hovers around 50 percent, but Krosnick’s latest poll — which asked the question in a more detailed way — suggests the figure is 83 percent — up from 79 percent in 1997. Of the global warming believers, the majority also reported thinking that the burning of fossil fuels and other human activities play a role. The trend held after the researchers broke the data down by political party: 66 percent of Republicans said climate change is happening.

Looking at the poll, conducted September 8-11, 2011, what we find is spin. In Table 2, which was “Belief about the Causes of Global Warming”, we find for all respondents

  • Things people do 26.60%
  • Natural causes 26.74%
  • Both equally 44.92%
  • Global warming is partly or mostly caused by things people do 71.52%

Things people do went down 3.96%, and Natural causes went up 3.16% from the survey the previous year. But, that last figure is disingenuous, because, first, you could easily say “global warming is partly or mostly caused by nature and get 71.66%. Secondly, the poll didn’t ask a big question “caused to a small degree by things people do.” That’s where I stand.

And the 83% figure from the HuffPo article? That’s nowhere to be found in the survey. The closest is Democrat belief in the 2010 survey.

For democracy to work, according to Brophy, we need to understand how and why people don’t trust the scientific facts.

Research has shown that people are motivated to find information that supports their beliefs. “Encountering counterarguments causes us to marshal forces like an army of white blood cells to defend against them,” said Brophy.

He pointed to the influence of massive disinformation campaigns such as the recently outed Heartland Institute. “This is a real threat to democracy,” he told HuffPost.

And there’s Democrat Fascist world: debate and disagreement is not allowed. And let’s not forget, some of those documents were faked.

Read: HuffPo: “You Skeptics Have Declared Our AGW Cult Dead, But, Not So!” »

If All You See…

…is snow that is caused by hot temperatures, you might just be a Warmist

(slightly NSFW, so, below the fold)

Read: If All You See… »

Will Women Vote For Rick Santorum?

That’s the question The Politico is asking

Democrats have an unexpected new foil in their effort to label the GOP as hostile to women: Rick Santorum.

After hammering away for a year at the message that Republicans are indifferent to women’s health and economic well-being, President Barack Obama’s party has been handed a nearly perfect political punching bag in the former Pennsylvania senator, whose down-the-line cultural conservatism is a major selling point in the 2012 primaries.

In all fairness, that’s all Democrats have, to personally assault Republicans. They, and Obama, certainly can’t run on their record.

Gender issues have taken center stage in recent days as Santorum has made incendiary comments suggesting women not be allowed to serve in combat roles in the military (he later said he was concerned men would want to protect them). Santorum has also stood by his opposition to contraception, reiterating his position that it shouldn’t be covered by the national health-care law because it is “inexpensive.” While the ex-senator doesn’t favor outlawing birth control, he is personally opposed to it.

Santorum’s opposition is personal, and he further stated in that same interview that he would not push legislation that supports his personal beliefs.

These issues may work in the ex-senator’s favor in the Republican presidential primary. But to longtime Democratic women operatives, Santorum’s rise in the presidential race represents the return of an old rival — a 1990s-era culture warrior whose political comeback is as shocking as it is inadvertently useful for the Democratic cause.

“He constantly says things that are offensive to women,” said Kim Gandy, former president of the National Organization for Women. “Regardless of whether Republican women like some of his policies, I think they’re going to be so turned off by his judgmental stand on the independence and essential rights of women that they won’t be able to vote for him.”

On the flip side, perhaps women should be themselves offended that Democrats think that they aren’t capable of affording the small costs in paying for birth control themselves, and so worthless that women have to get someone else to pay.

But, on the flip side of that, the focus on social issues has always been my concern with Santorum. He’s not a bad fiscal conservative, but, not a great one. But, then, most Republicans aren’t actually great fiscal conservatives, once they actually get elected to the federal Congress. Rick is pretty much the norm. What he is known more for is his social positions, and they can be a good line of attack from Democrats, as we see in the Politico story, which attempts to paint Santorum as anti-women. There was another at Washington Monthly, which paints Rick as a Christian fundamentalist zealot, which even James Joyner bought in to.

As The Politico points out, Santorum rose to prominence debating the dangers of abortion. Politico also has some good points about Santorum losing women big when he lost his Senate seat.

But, Santorum is certainly not “anti-women.” He doesn’t see women as creatures that should simply be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. And, he doesn’t see them as simply a voter block to be pandered to, like Democrats. Santorum will need to head this Liberal talking point off at the pass, without losing the focus on his economic message. Democrats would love to make this election about anything other than the dismal state of the economy, the skyrocketing debt and deficit, the exploding entitlements, people dropping out of the workforce, the high unemployment among blacks and under-30’s, the personal debt of citizens, America’s low standing in the world, and rising energy prices, among others. If Santorum gains the nomination, Democrats will deflect from the real issues this country faces, and attempt to peel off voter blocks by personally attacking Santorum. He needs to get ahead of the curve.

Read: Will Women Vote For Rick Santorum? »

Happy Belated Third Birthday, Stimulus!

I knew there was something else I wanted to write about Friday. The 3rd anniversary of Obama’s massive, pork laden, campaign donor hookup entitled the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, otherwise known as The Stimulus That Didn’t. It’s rather strange that neither Obama nor any Democrats talked about how great Stimulus was yesterday

(IBD) Without any fanfare whatsoever from the White House, February 17 marks the three-year anniversary of the day President Obama signed the much ballyhooed stimulus into law.

At the time, Obama claimed that it would “create or save” up to 3.5 million jobs, and that “a new wave of innovation, activity and construction will be unleashed across America.” The stimulus, would, he promised””ignite spending by businesses and consumers” and bring “real and lasting change for generations to come.”

And then we found out that the jobs weren’t so *Obama laugh track* shovel ready. And the money was wasted on project after project.

So three years later, how do the stimulus results stack up? Here’s where various indicators stood in or around February 2009, and where they stand today.

Unemployment rate: The jobless rate is unchanged from February 2009 to January 2012, the latest month for which we have data. Both stood at 8.3%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Obama’s economists had initially predicted that with the stimulus, unemployment would stay below 8%.

Number of long-term unemployed: The number of workers who have been unable to find a job in 27 months or more has shot up 83%, with their ranks now at 5.5 million.

Civilian labor force: It has shrunk by 126,000. In past recoveries, the labor force climbed an average of more than 3 million over comparable time periods.

The labor participation rate has shrunk by 3%. Household income is down 7%. Deficits and debt are way up. GDP is sluggish. Consumer spending is still down. Not mentioned is that disposable income is still very low. And

Perhaps the best measure of the success or failure of the stimulus, however, is the fact that President Obama in his latest budget plan has called for still another round of stimulus spending, this time totaling $350 billion over the next four years, for what is labeled “short-term measures for jobs growth.”

If the Stimulus had worked, there would be no need for more stimulus to fix potholes, paint bridges, and build turtle tunnels.

Happy Failure, Mr. President!

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Happy Belated Third Birthday, Stimulus! »

Pirate's Cove