Do Liberals ever tire of bashing the South? Of course not, after all, the South IS the most Conservative part of the country, and the most patriotic. And the Left will never forgive the South for taking a stand against a power hungry federal government. McCain has the scoop
[T]he South is once again committed to taking a backward path. By refusing to expand health care for the working poor through Medicaid, which is paid for by the federal government under Obamacare, most of the old Confederacy is committed to keeping millions of its own fellow citizens in poverty and poor health. They are dooming themselves, further, as the Left-Behind States.
Just another historical illiterate who thinks Washington has a grove of money trees or something. McCain eviscerates this tool
Do you believe this? “Free” money from the federal government? Medicaid as a job-creation dynamo? While I have not bothered to dig down on the data here, the basic economics of it is like saying that if you take $5 out of your pants pocket and put it in your coat pocket, you will then have $10. Government has no money of its own to spend. Every cent expended by government must come either from tax revenue or from borrowing, and borrowing — i.e., deficit spending — is ultimately a drag on economic growth, because capital invested in government bonds (which is how deficit spending is financed) is capital not invested in private-sector businesses.
The liberal belief in “free government money” is like one of those quasi-religious magical thinking exercises that Ace discusses here.
To cite X-number of people signing up for “expanded Medicaid” as “success” is simply to say that if you’re giving away the taxpayers’ money, moochers will gladly take their share of the loot.
Is the South doomed to be the “Left-Behind States”? Next time you hear of someone moving from Texas to Detroit, let me know.
OK, to be perfectly fair, there are many odd things about the Left, but for the purpose of this post, allow me to focus on one, and only one. The Left has many sayings they repeat, and repeat, and repeat, and, well you get the idea, but one of their most grating is saying the “science is settled”. When they throw that out they are referring to
global warming er climate change er global cooling, er, whatever they are calling it this week. They also have this quirky, and by quirky I mean obnoxious habit of saying that the Rights “hates science”. But, here is the thing, the odd thing about that, the Left completely ignores other science when it suits them. One example is how medical science has destroyed their argument that an abortion only gets rid of a “clump of cells”. Another example is, well, let me turn you over to Dr. RS McCain
Sex is about reproduction.
Now, before you Liberals start screaming about McCain being weird, and some “fundamentalist”, and how the Right hates sex, allow me to say that we, on the Right LOVE sex, and understand that sometime sex is just for fun, which reminds me I really need to find that hockey mask and fly swatter. Hell, some of us even use different forms of birth control, so no, no, and no again, we do not hate sex! Conservatives DO enjoy sex, yes even with hot Liberal women, ladies you can send your pics and resume to my email, sorry, no Feminists need apply. Now back to Dr. McCain’s lecture
This is the natural function of sex, biologically speaking, and it’s odd how the same liberal fanatics who enjoy endlessly lecturing us about Darwinism and global warming — “The science is settled!” — are so unscientific about sex. Instead, the sexual enthusiasms of liberals tend toward sterile non-procreative acts, while they react with horror at the idea that someone might engage in the normal act of reproduction with the expected result. If they can’t prevent pregnancy, liberals want to kill the resulting baby, apparently believing that motherhood itself is a weapon of patriarchal oppression.
This mentality is what I call “The Contraceptive Culture.” I’ve written about the subject occasionally for years (see “The Pill at 50: Unhappy Un-Birthday,” May 8, 2010) and my emphatic pro-life stance has sometimes led to readers mistaking me for Catholic.
Proudly Protestant, I nevertheless recognize that the encyclical Humane Vitae identified the fundamental problem with artificial contraception: It separates functions that naturally belong together. Whereas love, sex, marriage and parenthood are normally part of the same bundle, The Contraceptive Culture divides them up in a decidedly abnormal way, and once this strange way of thinking takes hold, it becomes difficult for people to understand what’s wrong with it.
My wife and I have six children, so we’ve heard all the anti-”breeder” jokes that are common to The Contraceptive Culture. Sometimes, however, you encounter truly hateful expressions of the anti-natal mindset, as when someone posted a photo of the Duggar family’s appearance at a Ken Cuccinelli gubernatorial campaign event in Virginia:
Head over to The Other McCain to read the nasty Tweets the nasty Leftists wrote about the Duggars, here is just one example
And trust me kids, they get worse. What a nasty bunch of miscreants the Left is comprised of. They call that nasty streak “tolerance”.
I suppose it never dawned on Senator Maverick that the Jihadists might lie to him.
Via Daily Caller:
Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain hotly disputed a study claiming that at least half of Syria’s rebels are radical jihadis, repeatedly exclaiming “Not true, not true!”
“Frankly, I just disagree,”McCain told the Council on Foreign Relations audience, challenging the contention by defense consultancy IHS Jane’s that “the insurgency is now dominated by groups with at least an Islamist viewpoint of the conflict.”
“There’s about 70 percent still who are Free Syrian Army,” McCain said, flipping on its head the consulting firm’s research showing that just 30 percent are fighting for secular values.
McCain has frequently called for an increase in arms shipments to rebels groups fighting the Assad regime, and on Tuesday evening he sought to diminish concerns that these arms may one day be turned against the United States or its allies.
“The point, I think, that you and others are missing,” he told the questioner, “[is that] Syria is a moderate nation. Syria has the highest literacy rate of any nation in the Middle East. They are not going to submit to a jihadis or al-Qaida group governing them. They will not.”
“That’s a really a convenient cop-out to say, ‘Oh, we don’t know who they are,’” he continued angrily. “I know who they are. I was in Syria and I met them.”
Yep, you met them, and I am sure they were completely open and honest right Senator? I mean they would most assuredly never just tell you what you wanted to hear.
A young researcher whose opinions on Syria were cited by both Senator McCain and Secretary of State John Kerry in congressional testimony last week has been fired from the Institute for the Study of War for allegedly faking her academic credentials.
The institute issued a statement on its website concerning the researcher, Elizabeth O’Bagy:
The Institute for the Study of War has learned and confirmed that, contrary to her representations, Ms. Elizabeth O’Bagy does not in fact have a Ph.D. degree from Georgetown University. ISW has accordingly terminated Ms. O’Bagy’s employment, effective immediately.
O’Bagy and her op-ed drew scrutiny last week when the Wall Street Journal failed to disclose O’Bagy’s ties to an advocacy group backing the Syrian opposition and lobbying the US government to intervene in Syria. The Journal was forced to post a clarification that “in addition to her role at the Institute for the Study of War, Ms. O’Bagy is affiliated with the Syrian Emergency Task Force, a nonprofit operating as a 501(c)(3) pending IRS approval that subcontracts with the U.S. and British governments to provide aid to the Syrian opposition.”
O’Bagy wrote in an email this Wednesday morning: “I was just fired from ISW and I’m no longer legally allowed to discuss my employment with them or affiliate it any way.”
In an interview conducted before O’Bagy was fired from ISW, she rejected claims that her research was compromised by her affiliation to the advocacy group, the Syrian Emergency Task Force.
“My research is completely separate” she said. “Every journalist and every researcher goes into the conflict with their own background and their own ideas.”
“Elizabeth is one of the best experts on Syria and her field work inside Syria along with her extensive networks on the ground makes her one of few people that can help inform policy makers on the reality on the ground,” said Mouaz Moustafa, the executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force.
I mean someone needs to answer those tough questions about dating, politics, drinking heavily, cheap sex, and, other important stuff right? Like this question about etiquette. Dear Other McCain how long SHOULD I wait until I say talk badly about a dead Jew-hating old hag? Confused in Columbus
Dear Confused in Columbus,
There are occasions when good taste requires that polite people say absolutely nothing about the latest news. Just in case such an occasion should ever occur (he says, in an entirely random and coincidental way), you should be prepared. It is important never to say the name of the recently deceased Jew-hating liberal hag, because that would not be polite. So I must sharply admonish Jeff Dunetz, who seems to have forgotten the requirements of decorum and propriety, and who also posted this memorably tasteless video:
One should always be polite and respectful, and never mention the name of evil Jew-hating liberal bitches who rot in Hell
See? Solid advice, what person could not use that?