Gruber was right about the Left

The Left’s lack of outrage over Jonathan Gruber’s comments on the stupidity and lack of economic understanding of Obama supporters proves his points to be correct, and it proves our points about media bias and the tactics of the Left.

You’d think that the Left’s supporters would be offended by what Jonathan Gruber said about them.  “Stupidity of the American voter . . . Lack of economic understanding of the American voter . . . Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.”  Ouch.  That’s going to leave a mark.

But the key point is that he was talking about the Left, not the Right. He knew we were aware the lies.

He has the facts to support his points.  Leftists literally fail at basic economics.  And their lack of reaction proves how uninformed they are.

Could it be that they don’t know what he said, because the hopelessly biased mainstream media is “Gosnelling” the story?*

This will be golden for any election until the last politician who supported Obamacare is retired.  Hopefully some Leftists will notice the ads and wonder why no one told them about the contempt their leaders have towards them.

liberal-logic-101-1151

—–

* Kermit Gosnell is the most prolific serial killer in American history. But he was an abortionist so the media did an embargo on the story.

Trans regret

Something is very wrong with transgender people. While some may think that is mean and politically incorrect to say, Captain Obvious says it couldn’t be more factual. If something wasn’t wrong, then why would they want to undergo a radical surgery to change themselves?

The question is whether the body is wrong or whether the mind is wrong. I suggest working on the mind part, which would be much less expensive and destructive.  It is sad to see people mutilate themselves in the hopes that it will make them happier.  It is more sad to see their regret and how they are ostracized by the LGBTQX community in the same way that any ex-gay people are.

If you really love people, you will never encourage their trans desires.

Via Trouble In Transtopia: Murmurs Of Sex Change Regret:

Our culture seems pretty much “to each his own” when it comes to elective bodily mutilation and the regret thereof. And there’s a lot of regret out there. According to a British poll, a whopping 65 percent of those who’ve had various cosmetic surgeries regret it. People who regret their tattoos, plastic surgery, or more extreme body modifications (here’s a sad Buzzfeed pictorial on the effects of ear gauges) can read up on the Internet and find an open array of remedies. Plastic surgeons make money both puttin’ it in and takin’ it out.

Hollywood stars can speak openly about misgivings over their boob jobs and whatnot. Regarding her lip enhancement surgery, Courtney Love said: “I just want the mouth God gave me back.”

But the difference between Love and the guy with phantom penis syndrome is that the guy isn’t allowed to talk about his regret. Not openly. The transgender lobby actively polices and suppresses discussion of sex-change regret, and claims it’s rare (no more than “5 percent.”) However, if you do decide to “de-transition” to once again identify with the sex in your DNA, talking about it will get you targeted by trans activists. So it’s a challenge to understand the scope of regret for sex change surgery. It’s out there, but…

‘It’s Genital Mutilation’

Let’s start with Alan Finch, a resident of Australia who decided when he was 19 to transition from male to female, and in his 20s had genital surgery. But then, at age 36, Finch told the Guardian newspaper in 2004:

. . . transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists. . . .You fundamentally can’t change sex … the surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My ‘vagina’ was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan . . . the analogy I use about giving surgery to someone desperate to change sex is it’s a bit like offering liposuction to an anorexic.

Finch went on to sue the Australian gender identity clinic at Melbourne’s Monash Medical Center for misdiagnosis. He also was involved in starting an outreach to others called “Gender Menders.” The reaction from the transgender community was fast, furious, and abusive, particularly in the Susans.org discussion forum as described in Sheila Jeffrey’s book, “Gender Hurts.”

Since then, Finch’s outreach website has been archived and there is no further information online. In fact, Finch’s subsequent silence is the norm for those who change their minds. This is perhaps not surprising, given the vigor and vindictiveness of the transgender community in persecuting those who have the temerity to suggest that all is not well in sexual La-La Land. But if you look you can find rogue headlines every now and then that even Hollywood’s fawning over “all things trans” can’t quite control. There’s much evidence that the carefully crafted pictures of transgender “authenticity” and “happiness” are more fiction than fact.

Buried Stories of High-Profile Regret

Rene Richards and Mike Penner remain fairly well known as male-to-female transgenders, the former from the 1970s and the latter recently. Both have stories of misgivings and sorrows that cannot be explained away through the old standard “it’s-society’s-fault” routinely trotted out by the transgender lobby.

Tennis champion Rene Richards was one of the first to go through sex-change surgery and was something of a sensation in the 1970s. As such, you might expect Richards to be a tower of strength, offering encouragement to those in similar circumstances today. Well, not so much. This is what Richards had to say in an excerpt from a March 1999 interview attributed to Tennis Magazine (unavailable in full online):

If there was a drug that I could have taken that would have reduced the pressure, I would have been better off staying the way I was—a totally intact person. I know deep down that I’m a second-class woman. I get a lot of inquiries from would-be transsexuals, but I don’t want anyone to hold me out as an example to follow. Today there are better choices, including medication, for dealing with the compulsion to cross dress and the depression that comes from gender confusion. As far as being fulfilled as a woman, I’m not as fulfilled as I dreamed of being. I get a lot of letters from people who are considering having this operation…and I discourage them all.’ —Rene Richards, “The Liaison Legacy,” Tennis Magazine, March 1999.

I encourage you to read it all.

 

Responding to the Left’s “care” for the homeless

I’m all for finding practical solutions to homelessness and we are long-time contributors to a local Christ-based shelter.  But when the “Christian” Left is busy “caring” about the homeless with other people’s money, be sure to ask a few questions:

1. Are you willing to house them yourselves?  If not, you don’t really care about them.  That’s the homeless version of their fallacious pro-abortion argument claiming that we don’t care about the children after they are born.  We do care, of course, and do a lot with our own time and money.  And we would obviously protest infanticide and toddler-cide just as much as we oppose killing children in the womb.

2. I thought you liked government micro-managing our lives with soda sizes, making people pay for others’ birth control, etc.  Why pull up the drawbridge now?  Have you considered that there are downsides to to giving the government that much power?

3. Have you ever studied the issue carefully enough to realize that if you make it too easy to be homeless that you remove incentives for them to change?  Go talk to them yourselves!

Leftists dominate media, education and entertainment businesses

Yet we still managed to have a great showing on election night.  It shows the power of our ideas.

We should not discourage Christians from being in those businesses.  If we withdraw, what kind of results should we expect?

Also, we need to continue to be wise and work around the mainstream media.  People like Dan Patrick in Texas did it very successfully.

Via Donor Data Show Overwhelming Leftist Bias of News, Entertainment, and Academia

newspaper_print_media_liberal

entertainment_industry_liberal

academics_liberal

Some clever ideas: 6 bills the GOP should pass

Congress has a unique opportunity to not only do a lot of good for the country but to be shrewd and position themselves for the future with young voters.  They would have tons to run on: They would have elected young people, females and minorities and addressed a lot of issues those constituencies care about.  They would also disarm the Left of their silly “war on women” meme.  Even if Obama vetoes them the Republicans would still score points and position the issues for future success under a Republican President.

Via 6 bills the GOP should pass:

1 End the federally imposed 21-year-old drinking age. The limit was dreamed up in the 1980s as a bit of political posturing by then-secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole. It has been a disaster. College drinking hasn’t been reduced; it has just moved out of bars and into dorm rooms, fraternities/sororities and house parties. The result has been a boom in alcohol problems on campus. While drunken driving has declined, it was declining before the age was raised and has declined just as fast in Canada, where the drinking age is 18 or 19 depending on the province.

As John McCardell, vice chancellor of the University of the South in Sewanee, Tenn., writes, “If you infantilize someone, do not be surprised when infantile behavior — like binge drinking — results.” . . .

2 Decriminalize marijuana at the federal level. Many states have legalized marijuana, but it remains illegal under federal law. That’s bound to change sooner or later — and the GOP might as well get ahead of it. Would Obama veto it? Doubtful. . . .

3 Repeal the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This awful law passed in the Clinton era is a giveaway to the entertainment industry. It places major burdens on Internet and computer users and electronic innovators. In fact, we should reform copyright law in general: A 28-year term was good enough when America was new; double that would be fair enough now as opposed to the nearly perpetual duration copyrights enjoy today. Shorter copyrights would encourage Hollywood and the music industry to produce new material, instead of endlessly recycling old stuff.

Bonus for Republicans: The entertainment industries hate them, so this would be a species of payback. Would Obama veto this, protecting fat-cat industry types who were his own big contributors? Probably, but it wouldn’t look good.

4 Make birth-control pills available over the counter. Cory Gardner made this a part of his winning platform in Colorado’s Senate race. Let women choose. If Obama vetoed this, Republicans could accuse him of waging “war on women.”

5 End public-sector employee unions. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker eliminated dues-withholding for public employee unions in his state. The unions were so angry that they organized a recall campaign against him. They lost. They then tried to recall a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who upheld his action. They lost. They then tried to beat Walker in last week’s election. They lost again.

President Franklin Roosevelt opposed public employee unions because he thought that people whose salaries came from the taxpayers shouldn’t have the right to collectively bargain against citizens whose taxes were being collected by force, and that collective bargaining by public employees was a conflict of interest. He was right. Obama would veto this, but his veto would be highly unpopular and set up an issue for 2016.

6 Institute a “revolving door” surtax on those who make more in post-government employment. Leave a Treasury job making $150,000 a year to take one in private industry paying $750,000, and you’ll pay 50% surtax on the $600,000 difference. Most of the increased pay is based on knowledge and connections you got while on Uncle Sam’s dime, so why shouldn’t Uncle Sam get a share? An Obama veto would be unpopular.

 

Great quotes on the minimum wage debate

The minimum wage is proven to hurt the Left’s voters, but they advance the argument anyway to demonize their opponents and buy votes. Here are some great responses. Note the racist beginnings. Thanks to Glenn for the list!

Intervention by politicians, judges, or others, in order to impose terms more favorable to one side – minimum wage laws or rent control laws, or example – reduces the overlapping set of mutually agreeable terms and, almost invariably, reduces the number of mutually acceptable transactions, as the party disfavored by the intervention makes fewer transactions subsequently.  Countries with generous minimum wage laws, for example, often have higher unemployment rates and longer periods of unemployment than other countries, as employers offer fewer jobs to inexperienced and low-skilled workers, who are typically the least valued and lowest paid – and who are most often priced out of a job by minimum wage laws.

It is not uncommon in European countries with generous minimum wage laws, as well as other worker benefits that employers are mandated to pay for, to have inexperienced younger workers with unemployment rates of 20 percent or more.  Employers are made slightly worse off by having to rearrange their businesses and perhaps pay for more machinery to replace the low-skilled workers whom it is no longer economic to hire.  But those low-skilled, usually younger, workers may be made much worse off by not being able to get jobs as readily, losing both the wages they could earn otherwise and sustaining the perhaps greater loss of not acquiring the work experience that would lead to better jobs and higher pay.

Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, p.70

If someone has a right, someone else has an obligation.  But the proposed right to a “living wage,” for example, is not based on any obligation agreed to by an employer.  On the contrary, this “right” is cited as a reason why government should force the employer to pay what third parties would like to be paid.

Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, p.157

Crusaders for a “living wage” or to end “sweatshop labor” in the Third World, for example, may invest great amounts of time and energy promoting those goals but virtually none in scrutinizing the many studies done in countries around the world to discover the actual consequences of minimum wage laws in general or of “living wage” laws in particular.  These consequences have included periods of unemployment, especially for the least skilled and least experienced segments of the population.  Whether one agrees with or disputes these studies, the crucial question here is whether one bothers to read them at all.

Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, p.181

The last year in which black unemployment was lower than white unemployment – 1930 – was also the last year in which there was no federal minimum wage law.  The Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 was openly advocated by some members of Congress on grounds that it would stop black construction workers from taking jobs from white construction workers by working for less than the union wages of white workers.  Nor was the use of minimum wage laws to deliberately price competing workers out of labor market unique to the Davis-Bacon Act or to the United States.  Similar arguments were made in Canada in the 1920s, where the object was to price Japanese immigrants out of the labor market, and in South Africa in the era of apartheid, to price non-whites out of the labor market.

Any group whose labor is less in demand, whether for lack of skills or for other reasons, is disproportionately priced out of labor markets when there are minimum wage laws, which are usually established in disregard of differences in skills or experience.  It has not been uncommon in Western Europe, for example, for young people to have unemployment rates above 20 percent.

Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, pp.450-451

Intellectuals give people who have the handicap of poverty the further handicap of a sense of victimhood. They have encouraged the poor to believe that their poverty is caused by the rich — a message which may be a passing annoyance to the rich but a lasting handicap to the poor, who may see less need to make fundamental changes in their own lives that could lift themselves up, instead of focusing their efforts on dragging others down.

Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, p.544

This is a good start for Republicans

Via Senate Republicans Offer Dem Leader Reid Help Blocking ‘Obama’s Lawless Amnesty’ | MRCTV.

Six Republican Senate leaders wrote to Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) today offering to help him block Pres. Obama’s planned executive order granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.

The Republicans offered to help Reid pass a measure that would avoid a “constitutional crisis” by “blocking any action the President may take to violate the Constitution and unilaterally grant amnesty.”

If Reid refuses “to defend the Senate and Constitution,” the Republicans say they’ll use “all procedural means necessary” to stop the president’s “lawless amnesty.”

“Surrendering to illegality is not an option,” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), one of the Republicans writing to Reid, said in a separate statement. Echoing the letter to Reid, Sessions said a now-Republican Congress will take action – and Democrats will have to choose between defending their constituents and supporting Obama:

“A Republican Congress will defend itself and our citizens from these lawless actions. Surrendering to illegality is not an option. Democrats will have to choose sides: protect the President’s agenda, or protect your constituents.”’

Either way, they win.  If Reid doesn’t join in, the Left will look terrible to most citizens and the Right can get it done anyway, thanks to Reid’s changing of the rules.  Well played, Republicans.  Keep it up!

If you love your neighbors you’ll fight this blanket amnesty.