atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,
atomic_fungus
atomic_fungus

#3563: Denying Him three times.

Quoth the Anchoress:
Yesterday, the DNC had to pretend it had a 2/3 vote to assert that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and for the inclusion of the phrase, “God-given gifts” into their national platform, because three attempts to vote couldn’t bring it. Whether it was the “God” language or the “Jerusalem” language they resisted more is hard to say.
The Democrat leadership pretended it had the 2/3 vote because they know there are a bunch of people out there who would be horrified to learn what the Democrat party actually thinks of God and Jesus. (And Israel.)

Vox Day points out:
As a general rule, aggravating Christians and then pissing off Jews is not a viable election strategy. The closer the Democrats come to becoming the Atheism+ party, the more they ensure Republican dominance of Karl Rove's dreams.
...which is why the DNC had to pretend the pro-God, pro-Israel language had been approved by the rank-and-file.

Doug Ross comments at Michelle Malkin's place:
Obama wanted the language inserted into the platform. It’s possible internal poll numbers are showing the Jewish vote peeling off fast, causing the order to be given to add the Israel language to the platform.
Yeah, Jews tend to be pro-Israel, even as they keep voting for the anti-Israel party...but they're wising up fast.

* * *

I don't remember where I saw it, but Og points to a Velociman post that describes it in detail:

The only extremists in the abortion debate are Democrats. By insisting on abortion-on-demand-as-contraception-even-if-the-baby-is-born-alive-during-a-botched-late-term-abortion.
Watching the Democratic National Convention last night I was nonplussed at the raging pro-abortionism being displayed. It was rabid, and incessant. And totally distasteful.

Regardless of where one stands on this particular issue, it is simply amazing that the Democrats felt the need to fight a battle they won 40 years ago, as if that victory had never existed. Good Sweet Christ, 55 million abortions have occurred since 1973. Who, precisely, is being denied? And why this fight? Why now? Is this, finally, the only thing the Democrats have to run on?
Well, let's look at the things they can't run on:
1) The economy. (Horrible.)

2) Obamacare. (Most Americans hate it, and it's already contributing to #1.)

3) Republican extremism. (Their guy's been in charge for four years and has exactly failed to reverse most of the Bush policies post 9/11.)

4) Anything, really.
Every issue they've tried to bring up (Bain Capital, Romney's dog, Romney's God, etcetera) has either backfired or--at best!--completely failed to resonate with the voting public. Meanwhile you've got Boss Tweek telling small business owners "you didn't build that" and Vice-Boss Dipstick telling black people "them 'Publicans gonna put y'alls back in chains, yo!"

What else can they do but stand up and start screaming, "IF YOU LET THE REPUBLICANS WIN YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO GET AN ABORTION!" It's all they have left. It's how they've felt about abortion all along, but only recently were they able to get away with telling it like it is.

Velociman concludes, "Our descendants will look upon us as murderous lynchers." They'll be right.

* * *

Obama has great confidence in his ability to sway the American people. He is perhaps over confident in his ability to do so.

Remember that budget deal that got nixed at the last minute? The one which the media played as Boehner and the Republicans being meany mean-heads? Well, some stuff has been leaked from Bob "I brought down Nixon!" Woodward's new book.
...[T]he parties had an agreement, but the president thought he could do even better and killed it with an absurd deal-breaker. Then, of course, when the deal fell through, he reacted with rage. Someone with executive experience wouldn't have handled things that way.
Do you know what it means when someone reacts with "rage" at a reversal in this way?

It's not fair it's not fair IT'S NOT FAIR I WANT IT WANT IT WANT ITso you have to HAVE TO HAVE TO--

Any time a narcissist suffers a reversal it's a direct hit on his self-image, and he reacts with rage when reality refuses to conform to his worldview. It's essentially a temper tantrum from a spoiled brat, is what it is.

* * *

Karl Denninger thinks the latest jobs report is pure fiction. I've been predicting this for nine months. Longer--Barack Hussein Obama needs unemployment to be below 8% in November, so by God it's gonna be below 8% even if the real unemployment rate doubles.
it does set up an interesting dynamic for tomorrow and forward until the election -- the possibility that there may be outright false numbers published from now until that point for the purpose of swaying the electorate.
I left in the emphasis this time because it's not that much HTML to add, for once.

I don't think it's merely possible but probable that there will be "outright false numbers published" until the election at least.

* * *

Another one from Denninger: an example of health care rapine.

Okay, scorpion antivenin that costs $100 per vial in Mexico, being sold for

FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS PER DOSE

in the US.

That's what the hospital charges the patient for one vial of scorpion antivenin. The hospital pays about $4,000 for that vial.

...and a few hundred miles south of the site of this travesty, the exact same medicine sells for $100 per vial.

This is bullshit.

It's so expensive, we are told, because only about 200 Americans per year need the stuff. Denninger says,
Right, so instead of importing it from Mexico we just screw everyone to the tune of 40x as much money -- before the hospital marks it up another 100 times.

That would be a 40,000% mark-up, which could never exist except for the actions of specifically enabling monopoly behavior by these companies.
Price competition must be returned to the medical industry. That's the only way to fix the high cost of medical care in this country.

* * *

Yesterday I was trying to remember the details of an image I saw on-line. It was a photo from a guitar shop or instrument store where the proprietor told patrons trying guitars they were not allowed to play certian songs while trying out the instruments.

Reason: he was sick to death of hearing them EVERY FREAKING DAY.

I remembered being surprised by one of the banned songs, and yesterday I remembered all this and was trying to think of what the songs were. I came up with:
1) "Dazed and Confused" by Led Zeppelin;

2) "Smoke on the Water" by Deep Purple; and

3) "..." by the Beatles.
I could remember the first two, but couldn't remember the third one.

The thing they have in common is that each has an instantly recognizable sequence of notes which are bonehead simple to play, even for a complete guitar novice. But no matter how I cudgeled my brain I could not think of the Beatles one. The other two are obvious, but that one....

Finally, this afternoon, as I was taking a pre-therapy shower, I thought, "'Day Tripper'! That's it!" I only remembered it because there's a scene in The Compleat Al where Al and his manager are auditioning band members, and one guy wearing '60s clothing stumbles through the intro for that song, is rejected, and says, "No, wait, man! I'll get it!" Stumbles through it again only to be rejected a second time, more vociferously.

To be sure, the intro to "Day Tripper" is more complex than the other two, but the more I thought about it the more certain I was that I was right.

At this point I was finished with my shower and remembered my resolve, yesterday, to look up the image on the Internet. I think this is it, but I'm not entirely sure:



..."Stairway to Heaven"? "Smoke on the Water" is there, but "Sweet Child of Mine"? WTF?

Guns 'N' Roses. *sigh* And it's another intro that's not for the novice, though I suppose someone could learn that arpeggio with a few hours' practice even if he's never picked up a guitar before.

I knew it would be instantly recognizable if I heard it, and it took exactly four notes for me to do so. But I had to go to YouTube and hear it.

"Stairway to Heaven"--okay, I can see getting sick of hearing it; it's the one song by Led Zeppelin I like and since I heard it sometime in the past year or so I'm good for a while. And of course the guy running the instrument store is going to ban the songs he hears far too often.

But I think mine should be added to his list. Or maybe there aren't any people brazen enough to try playing those in a guitar store where he is.
Subscribe

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments