Friday, August 24, 2012

Abort! Abort!

It was a real fluke of luck for Democrats when Republican senatorial candidate Todd Akin declared that there's no need to have legal abortions for rape victims because victims of "legitimate rape" don't get pregnant - a statement so mind-bogglingly stupid that experts are still trying to figure out how it didn't come out of Joe Biden's mouth.

Which is why pro-abortion activist Sandra "I spend more money on birth control than NASA spent to reach Mars" Fluke has been dragged out of bed and shoved back into the spotlight to become Barack Obama's spokeswoman for good old fashioned fetacide.

Fluke, whose name rhymes with her favorite pasttime, put her name on a fundraising letter for Obama in which she declares that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are "in lockstep with Akin on all the major women's health issues of our time," assuming that the only major health issues in women's lives are having taxpayer-funded sex more frequently than Old Faithful blows and getting easy access to abortions.

And why do they need so many abortions? Because while Akin was too dumb to make the connection between rape and pregnancy, the Democrats have still failed to make the connection between pregnancy and sexual intercourse.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are so thrilled at the opportunity to pull their discredited "War on Women" meme back out of the mothballs, they're actually restructuring the upcoming Democratic Presidential Convention to feature Fluke and other activist speakers and be a wall-to-wall celebration of abortion. Because in their minds, next to Obama's record on the economy, even killing babies looks good.

Over 200 years ago, Benjamin Franklin observed that in this world, "nothing can be certain except death and taxes." Little could he have imagined that in 2012, the Democrats would make those words of warning into their party platform.

And you won't die from abortion. Someone else will.


Angry Hoosier Dad said...

This only makes sense if the perception is that a vast majority of women support abortion and only vote on that issue. I'm no pollster, but I've done a poll of the two women in my house (cat and dog excluded) and they are both of the archaic opinion that life is a gift from God and deserves to be protected. Then again, they are Catholic and we know how evil and controlling they are, so their opinion would be tossed out of any "rational" sample.
You and Rush (who said this yesterday) are both right, Stilton. The Democrat Party truly is the party of "death and taxes". And I would add...the party of pants-wetting desperation.

Coon Tasty said...

Not to defend Akin but how do we know that he was not correct? - I would like to see empirical evidence on the number of pregnancies that result from genuine (as opposed to "I got drunk and hooked up with a stranger, then claimed I was raped") rapes.

The Left has rushed to condemn Akin for his statement...but what if he was right? Perhaps it is true that the shock/trauma of a rape does in fact usually mean that a pregnancy does not result.

Unknown said...

@Coon Tasty - Somewhere in the back of my mind I remember a news blurb, either on Fox or Drudge that reported a study by a doctor re the legitimate rape, and it was 2-3 days prior to Akins statement.

A while back, a survey found that a respectable majority believed that we would be better served in Congress if we just picked the names out of a phone book. I'll go a step further, go back to the concept of citizen-farmer. Pick the names from the jury pool, do a due diligence, and pay a salary equal to jury duty for a six month term. Build a 600 unit apartment complex and have it run by an extended stay company for their living while in Washington. On the Presidential side, limit the candidates to $x of public funding, and the media must give y minutes for free airtime rationed through out the day for 30 second ads - no private contributions, PACs, etc. May not get us the 'best and the brightest', but sure as h*** gets us a majority of better than what we've got, and also it would be hard to explain how you became a multi-millionaire on a $150K annual salary.

Unknown said...

OT - "General Motors announced plans today to invest $220 million into two Ohio plants to build the Chevrolet Cruze. The money will be spent on “tooling and equipment”. Coincidentally, Lordstown was an existing GM plant, and mid-summer retooling and assembly line changes are common among the manufacturers. Couldn't be that GM, in step with it's gov't masters, arranged the 'announcement' in a swing state, before the election because it was so elated with their sales figures and cornering the share on the mid-size market? Any percentages of how much of the GM line is still assembled in Canada and Mexico? By all analysts accounts, GM is heading for another bankruptcy due to overwhelming debt (UAW wage and pension, $559M to advertise on an English soccer team uniform, etc.) and a complete misread of the market, especially in Europe where it's trying to replace it's 'local' brands with Chevrolet (incidentally, the majority of the best selling vehicles in the GM line (Buick especially) are copies of the European vehicles).

Irene Peduto said...

Akin has tainted the Republicans simply because he IS a Republican. This is nonsense - so bring in more nonsense aka Fluke! Sorry that our country has so deteriorated into this sort of distractions rather than the real issues.

Unknown said...

@Irene Peduto - Sandra Fluke, pro-abortionist, etc., enrolled in Georgetown, not to get an education but to specifically challenge Georgetown's medical policy. Great keynote speaker choice Dem's, hopefully you'll keep stepping on your thing so that even the SEIU/UAW thugs won't make a difference.

My Dog Brewski said...

@ Irene Peduto:
We will find out in November is the country has truly deteriorated or if we are prepared to stand against and reject the Democrat distraction machine. I know with certainty that we can and must stand against it. I am only 75% sure we will.

Colby said...

What a shining example of a human being Obama is holding up for our youth! A clueless nymphomaniac that not only has no problem with infanticide, but believes the rest of us should give her the money to pay for it! I find Sandra Fluke disgusting and would wager the majority of Americans agree with me.

This issue alone is more than enough reason to remove obama and the rest of the baby killers from office, but then there's the out of control spending, crony capitalism, anti-church, anti-constitution, anti-AMERICAN beliefs that he is trying to shove down our throats. Mr. President. If your ideals and your record are so damn good, why are you not using these as reasons for us to re-elect you?

Sorry for ranting - murdering babies is a hot topic in the Colby household. My awesome 12 year old grandson came oh so close to being aborted at the insistence of his other grandmother (not my wife). Thank God his parents stood firm!

Sarah Rolph said...

Coon, the empirical evidence goes back thousands of years. Don't you remember the mass rapes in Bosnia? It was part of the genocide, Serbs forcing the enemy to bear their children. Google it if you have the stomach for it, there is a lot of information available.

And that's just one example of this longstanding barbaric practice. Rwanda also comes to mind.

If it didn't work, I think someone would have noticed.

I am sorry to put this so bluntly. It seems somehow disrespectful to state it in such dry terms. May God hold and keep those who have suffered in this way.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

@ Colby:
I'm delighted that you have your 12-year-old grandson as a living testament to love and not just a fleeting "what-if". Personally, I would keep that kid far away from the "other grandmother" but I'm a vindictive SOB that way.

Pete (Detroit) said...

Todd Aikin - proving that at least one R is as dumb as D's like to think they ALL are...

Coon, I think there are many eastern Europeans w/ Mongol blood that would offer testimony that rape can / does result in pregnancy... just sayin'

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

One more post and I promise I will shut up...
I made up a sandblasted plaque several years ago that we keep on display in our home. It reads:
Heavenly Father,
May all the tiny souls who fly to you too soon be cradled in your gentle arms and comforted through eternity.

I have so many sins to answer for, but I cannot imagine standing before God and explaining the decision to kill your baby.

John the Econ said...

Maybe Todd Akin is pissed that he didn't get chosen for the VP spot and is now flouting his overqualifications.

It's crap like this which is why the GOP so often loses, even against complete losers. The Democrat's whole "GOP war on women" meme had totally backfired on them, at least until this Akin boob opened his mouth, and then refused to quit. So the Democrats will continue to control the Senate, we'll go another 4 years without a budget, and another 5 or 6 without a recovery. Like I've said before, welcome to "the new normal".

However, Sandra Fluke provides an opportunity to mitigate the damage. I believe that the Democrats have a massive blind spot on this; not so much regarding abortion, but with the notion that it's our collective responsibility to be paying for Fluke's recreational sex.

For generations now, one of the rallying cries of liberals and feminists was that they wanted to "get the government out of our bedrooms". Today, Sandra Fluke is literally inviting it back in.

Remember that the root of "socialism" is "social". In order for socialism to have any chance at all of functioning efficiently, much less at all, citizens must be held accountable to each other. An individuals actions have an effect on other citizens and the body politic. (After all, isn't that now the accepted Democrat interpretation of the "commerce clause"?) Citizens must now have the right and responsibility and responsibility to examine the lifestyle of other citizens since they now explicitly bear the burden for it.

By insisting that we all pay for her recreational sex, Sandra Fluke implicitly invites us into her sex life. What types of contraceptives should we provide her? Are her sexual practices safe for both her and her partners? Perhaps some of those practices should be discouraged or even outlawed for health reasons.

In fact, if I were to be a true socialist, I'd have to question the logic of allowing Sandra Fluke to participate in recreational sex outside of marriage at all. I don't see how we can afford it.

Quite frankly, the vast majority of our social, health and political problems today have their roots in recreational sex and the "sexual revolution". Over 70% of the criminals filling our nation's prisons come from single-parents, many of which haven't a clue as to who their father was. Deadly diseases like AIDS are spread almost exclusively via recreational sex. Billions-more a year are spent on lesser sexually-transmitted diseases. Simply eliminating recreational sex alone would save Social Security and Medicare by improving national health and reducing the number of future dependents. Within a generation, we'd have more healthy people working and fewer people in prison. The numbers on this are undeniable.

One must be in a serious state of denial to say honestly that they can't see the collateral damage this has done to our economy, culture, and society.

So is paying for Sandra Fluke's recreational sex worth all that? As a socialist, I'd have to say "no".

Liberals have literally been using "sex" to seduce the young since the '60s. It's not a hard-sell to hormonal teenagers and post-adolescents an ideology that not only permits, but encourages them to toss the seemingly archaic moral laws of their elders to follow their drives with seemingly guilt and consequence-free abandon.

But these people are still a minority, and the rest of America is tired of it. I'd like the GOP to sponsor an episode of "Jersey Shore" or "Snooki & JWoww" and at the end, ask the question: Do you think your tax dollars should be subsidizing these people?

@Seadog: Yes, isn't that interesting? Expect more gimmes in swing states in the coming weeks. Just another example of what happens in a fascist-democracy.

Emmentaler Limburger said...

@Stilton: a statement so mind-bogglingly stupid that experts are still trying to figure out how it didn't come out of Joe Biden's mouth. <=-Coffee-spew award for the day

Originally, I thought that Akin should be left to run, and those talking heads and Republicans urging him to drop out were being stupid. Now, frankly, I see they are right: whether there may be fact to Akins comment or not, it has become "Distraction Royale" for the democrats - however, I believe it will continue to be characterized in their usual us vs. them mindset whether he pulls out or not. Still, I'd advise him in a manner similar to how Fluke should advise her lovers that she might avoid the extreme cost of birth control: pull out.

@SeaDog: Being experienced with a major automaker, I can confirm that the GM investment means nothing new to the local economy. $220M in tools and facilities within an assembly plant is not a terribly large program - what is called "a freshening". It creates few jobs in the area in which the plant exists as the contractors who install the facilities and tooling design and build them in their home locations (typically companies like Comau, Gonzales production Systems, Kuka, Valiant Tool, etc - we all use the same people, and they're all pretty much based in and around Michigan) and, for the most part, bring their own hired hands (with the requisite per diem and other costs built into that F&T number, by the way). Generally, no new operators are hired for the plant, and a few local "heavy" contractors may be hired to help as millwrights and program managers. These folks number in the tens. It will, ostensibly, prolong the employment of those who are not displaced by any advances in production methods and technology, though - and the local hotel and restaurant industry will get a brief boost. Nothing to crow about in the grand scheme of things; just status quo.

@AHD: Amen. But in their twisted minds, I think some libs - those that genuinely believe affirmative action helps the afflicted - may believe are simply fulfilling Jesus's "suffer not the children come unto me". Much as they believe taking money at gunpoint and passing it out to the welfare recipients fulfills His call to care for the least amongst us. Abortionists are, in my opinion, evil money-whores, and no-one is safe around those types of people. If they were killing adults, they would be psychopaths, and they have no place in "medicine". Those who press for it in law are simply selfish, evil people - either because they don't want the "inconvenience" of a young life (most of the feminist cloth), or because they believe humans are a scourge that should be obliterated (most "animal rights" activists fit this mold), or they believe that every addition life is a competitor for resources they believe to be theirs (zero population growth folks.

As I say: I truly believe that liberalism is a mental illness.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Angry Hoosier Dad- The Left doesn't much like complexity in demographic groups. So rather than seeing women as independent human beings, it only sees them as dimwitted sex objects who occasionally need abortions to remain in good working order. And even more appallingly, there are women voters who agree with that assessment.

@Coon Tasty- I think there's probably a teeny tiny amount of scientific evidence which might support Akin in the event of a violent rape by an unknown assailant (Akin's so-called "legitimate rape"), because the storm of chemicals and hormones released by the victim would make conception less likely (but not impossible). But let's throw that out; Akin is personally against any abortion, even in that terrible rape/pregnancy scenario because he believes the resulting fetus to be innocent of any crime. So the argument is really between those who believe that every life is sacred, and those who believe that abortion should be easy and taxpayer-funded.

@SeaDog- I've got to admit that whether or not it would actually work, it's pleasant to imagine the "pulling names out of a hat" method of selecting our representatives in Washington. It really is hard to imagine getting a worse crop of bureaucrats. I would, however, limit the pool to people with a certain minimum level of either education or accomplishment.

@SeaDog- I hadn't seen the GM news, and I think you're absolutely right that this is pure vote-buying with our money. Barry also recently authorized something like $400 million in old earmark funds to help local governments meet payrolls instead of laying people off before the election, he's thrown some godawful amount of money into Medicare Advantage to keep it health (and disguise the fact that Obamacare has gutted it) until after the election, and on and on.

@Irene Peduto- I wish Akin would step out of the race, but I also wish we didn't live in a screwed-up culture that made it a political necessity. His crime is believing in the sanctity of life. Meanwhile, how does Barack Obama feel about the fact that illegal aliens he released from prison committed 142 sex crimes includling rapes.

Anonymous said...

There is truth in what Akin said. There is a lesser chance of a woman conceiving under extreme stressful conditions of duress, as in a "legitimate" (perhaps "actual" would have been a better term) rape. That is not to disrespect in any way women who do conceive after such a tragedy has happend to them.

The real problem with Akin is the media latching on to his comment, and causing all the consternation by widely reporting the GOP leaders and shot callers demanding he step down.

I wonder why all the people who were supposedly going to vote for conservative Akin in the election are now supposedly voting for liberal McCaskill--she of the party promoting higher taxes, more entitlements, a weaker military, secularism, diminished Constitutional authority, and abortion rights. Something does not ring true, but perhaps people are more easily duped and led to slaughter than I previously believed.

graylady said...

A friend of mine showed a group of us the ultrasound pictures of her soon-to-be-born granddaughter. She is BEAUTIFUL. Every woman considering abortion ought to be made to see the pictures of their yet-to-be-born child. They are REAL people, not the dead lumps of flesh the abortionist leaves in his wake

side comment: It has never failed to amaze me that every pro-abortion advocate I have spoken to is perfectly all right with the murder of unborn human beings but is horrified that I hunt, kill and eat "Bambi"!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@SeaDog- Fluke is an abortion radical, and she's been tied into Obama's inner circle for a long time. For her to pose as a simple college coed is just another in a long, long, long list of lies from this administration.

@Colby- Fluke disgusts me. And I say that even though I'm not quite a pro-life hardliner. I support legal abortion in certain circumstances, but am beyond appalled at the way abortions are actually performed and thought of in our culture. And it isn't lost on me that my own father was born "out of wedlock" and sired by a traveling musician. If abortions were easy back then, I probably wouldn't be here.

@Sarah Rolph- Good points. And because I'm always honest and open with everyone here, I've got to say that I absolutely support abortion in the event of rape (assuming that it's the mother's wish). I'd even go a step farther and say that if she does decide to terminate such a pregnancy, I'd like to see the rapist charged with manslaughter for causing a life to be lost.

@Angry Hoosier Dad- Perhaps we need fewer sandblasted plaques and more sandblasted Democrats.

@John the Econ- Great comment, and I completely agree. The much vaunted "sexual revolution" was largely about telling women that they'd be empowered and liberated by putting out for anyone and everyone - and now they wonder what's happened to courtship, "nice guys," and lasting marriages.

Recreational sex without consequences is at the heart of myriad Liberal policies which have decimated our families and culture. The "war on women" is real - it's just being waged by the Left.

@Emmentaler- With your permission, I'm stealing your "pull out" line. Like, immediately. I'll post a response to the rest of your comment shortly...I'm off to Photoshop!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Emmentaler- Okay, I'm back. Slapped a "pull out" cartoon on Facebook and gave you credit. Funny stuff!

Regarding the $220M for automakers, maybe the money won't make much impact - but it probably buys some good news coverage in Ohio for a couple of days, and that's how Obama is fighting his battle: on a day to day basis.

Getting back to abortion, I absolutely have greater sympathies with the pro-life crowd than the pro-abortion crowd ("choice" my ass). That being said, I personally believe that humans can and do make life-and-death decisions. I just wish so many of them weren't made my complete jackasses.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Anonymous- I hugely agree that the media's handling of Akin's remark is far more damaging than what Akin actually said. And like you, I find the huge swing in the polls to be a little hard to believe. Maybe some of those polled say they no longer support Akin because they're hoping he'll drop out...but will still vote for him if he stays in. But anyone who has actually switched loyalties from Akin to McCaskill is simply a damn fool.

@graylady- The Left howls in horrified outrage that some states are requiring women to look at ultrasounds of the person in their womb before having an abortion. Is that harsh, traumatic, and possibly emotionally scarring? Yes - and I'm fine with that. No life should ever be terminated casually or without thought. And for those to whom thinking doesn't come naturally, additional measures are required.

By the way, per your hunting analogy, if we referred to fetuses as "human veal" do you think PETA would fight to end abortions?

Cookie said...

Why do I feel like I need to take a shower after just looking at a picture of Sandra Fluke?
AHD--I'm right there with you in trying to explain killing your baby. Jesus said, "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." What is more offensive than murdering an innocent child?
SJ--The Joe Biden comment is one of your best lines ever!!!

P.S. Some day I've got to proofread my comments before I post them. *sigh*

alan markus said...

After many attempts at assisted reproduction, we gave up and did foreign adoption.

One phenomenon experienced by many couples we met during that process was that sometimes they became pregnant unassisted after having had children via assisted reproduction, giving up, or adopting. One couple adopted, celebrated with a cruise when the child was old enough to be left with family, and returned home pregnant.

Stress does impact fertility.

Also, lost in the discussion is how many women actually become pregnant after a rape - I thought part of the emergency treatment is administration of a drug that prevents conception.

JustaJeepGuy said...

When I heard Akin's "legitimate rape" comment, the first thing I thought was, "Hasn't he ever heard the story of the Rape of the Sabine Women?" It's not just a famous painting, there's a story that goes with it. You'd have to look it up to get the whole thing, but the end of the story is that the Sabine Women kept their husbands from killing the men who raped and kidnapped them--and their resulting children--because of those babies. We ignore history at our own peril, as usual!

Colby said...

Why are we called pro-life, but the killers are called pro-choice? Talk about twisted and turned around! If a woman "chooses" to have a baby, the friggin' libs have a hissy fit. Remember when Sarah Palin was getting lambasted for "choosing" to have a Downs Syndrome child?. From now on, let's call these sub-humans pro-death, or better yet, pro-murder.

And what's with this complete horse shit about abortion being a women's HEALTH issue?! 'Scuse me? Is pregnancy typically a disease? How long before we start killing off seniors because they are "unhealty?"

I'm sure everyone on this blog has heard a Democrat quacking about "The Republicans want to send us back to the 50's" meaning that we want to make abortion illegal again. What clued you in, Brainiac?

Sandra Puke can buy her own damn birth control, forget about killing babies, or stop screwing everything that moves. Or, how about we take up a collection to have her tubes tied, and she can f**k to her hearts content. An added bonus to this is we would never have financially support any of her offspring.

Colby said...

... and another thing (I'm on a roll)! If this country ever gets to the point where scientists can determine if a fetus will have "sub-standard intelligence," and the mother can choose to abort, the population of liberals would decrease dramatically. Hmmmm.....

OK - done blathering for now...

Stan da Man said...

I'd happily contribute to a fund that would pay for 'permanent birth control' (sterilization) for anyone who wants it, especially libs and lawyers. If I were in charge, I would mandate norplan or similar for any female on welfare. A cheap, effective, reversible shot for men is avail, being field tested in India - make all guys get THAT before getting a driver's license...
But paying for pills that may not work, especially if not taken properly, is just fookin' silly

I am firmly pro-choice - giving it up for adoption is a choice. Not tarting yourself out in the first place is a choice. keeping it is typically a poor choice (single parent stats on poverty and crime are just appalling) but beats heck outta being dead...

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

@ Alan Markus:
My wife and I tried for many years and couldn't conceive. After much heartache and a river of tears, we gave up and asked Catholic Social Services to put us on their adoption list. Two years later we had not moved up one space on the list. We cried some more and surrendered to our fate. Within a year, and sixteen years after we were married, we were pregnant. Every time I look at our beautiful adult daughter, I am awed by the power of God.
(I know I said I'd back off on commenting, but you guys keep pulling me in)

Pete (Detroit) said...

AHD - Congrads on your blessing!

TheOldMan said...

@AHD "...only vote on that issue." I know several women who would enthusiastically support and vote for Stalin (or Mao or Adolf or Pol Pot or Putin etc...) if he guaranteed the right to unfettered abortion at any time up to and including labor. No other issue even remotely enters their consideration. I asked one once to tell me exactly what abortion laws were put in place during the six years (01-07) that the GOP had Congress and the WH and she could not povide an answer for the simple reason that there weren't any. But the evil boogieman is useful for the DNC.

alan markus said...

@ Angry Hoosier Dad - that is absolutely terrific! I do hope that to her you are "Happy Hoosier Dad". I've always taken note of your moniker because that has been a joke between my daughter & I - when she was a toddler she talked about one of her friends dads being the "angry dad" and to this day I always remind her that I am the "happy dad". Of course now that she is almost a teenager, not always very easy to convince of that.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Cookie- Regarding your quotation from Jesus, I don't mean to seem blasphemous but I think our country is in desesperate need of a bunch of heavy millstones about now.

@Alan Markus- I have a good friend who has adopted from overseas (more than once) and you couldn't want to meet a more beautiful family. And regarding anti-conception drugs being standard after a rape, I think that's a pretty standard practice. Akin's comment really had almost no bearing on any real world scenario - but it was enough to send the Left-leaning loonies off on their "war against women" tangent again. Although they don't like to talk about the millions of unborn women they want dead.

@JustaJeepGuy- But those poor Sabine Women were metaphorically raped twice by not being able to kill their children, right? (Shaking head)

@Colby- Like you, I don't accept the "pro-choice" label. There's "pro-lift" and "pro-abortion," period. And I'm also sick of easy abortion being the sum total of "women's health issues." As you so correctly point out, pregnancy is not an illness (although to Barack Obama, it is a punishment).

Regarding Sandra Fluke, I mentioned to Mrs. Jarlsberg the other day that she must not throw much of a party in the boudoir if a guy isn't willing to cough up $5 for a dozen condoms.

On your final point, don't forget that the popularization of abortion came about specifically because Margaret Sanger wanted to kill off the fetuses of dimwitted minorities and social undesirables.

@Stan da Man- I'm reluctant to enact mandatory birth control, but I could see offering rewards for being ON birth control. If we pay farmers to not grow crops we have too much of, it seems like we could do the same with what we have waaaaay to much of in the way of humans. And I, too, am in favor of adoption rather than endlessly repeating the cycle of children being raised by children.

@Angry Hoosier Dad- I'm delighted that you got pulled back in to share such a wonderful story.

@TheOldMan- Exactly!

Emmentaler Limburger said...

@Stilton: glad to be of service and loved the pic

...anyone who has actually switched loyalties from Akin to McCaskill is simply a damn fool... ...or a falsified statistic.

BTW: I just finished drinking a beer from Stone Brewery that, had it come from Ă˜bama's "People's House" brewery would have been eponymous: Arrogant Bastard ale. The beer is not much like the president, by the way. It is strong, well-liked, somewhat refreshing, and left me feeling a bit better than before I encountered it. It also has a good head. Like the president, it did hinder production as I'm finding typing this particularly difficult to type. But I repeat myself. Still, in its sum, I found the beer to be much, much better than its namesake...

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Emmentaler- You do a nice job of making your Arrogant Bastard sound a lot more appealing than the one I'm currently concerned about. I may have to research this topic further!

Unknown said...

A learned pundit quoted recently that 46% would vote for Obama, no matter what because that was the percentage not paying any taxes and/or on gov't assistance. While I do not really take any poll seriously until after labor day, and then only those that use 'Likely Voters', I think the polls are missing something that is below the surface. I know of basically only one out of ten people that I have talked to that will vote for Obama, and that's not from asking directly, but from comments made during the conversation - and this includes two stoic 'yellow dog Democrats' and some of 'ethnic heritage'. The polls (with the exception of Rasmuessen and We Ask America) totally missed in the Wisconsin recall, and somehow I think that the election won't be as close as many are predicting. I was a statistician, so I know how the statistics game is played, I wonder how many times the polling questions are framed to elicit a favored answer, or how many polled are not giving a truthful answer due to being 'polled' in a public environment where peer pressure would come into effect? Most polling demographics I see from 'media associated polling' are usually weighted to heavily favor Democratic responders, way past the historical election balance.

Never-the-less, one thing we should keep in mind, besides all the other horror scenarios of Obama getting another term, is that in the next four years, more than likely, two Supreme Court appointments will need to be made, and we've all seen how that has worked out with the past two.

John the Econ said...

@Seadog: Don't fall for observational bias. Remember the infamous story about the reporters who said "I can't believe Nixon won; everyone I know voted for McGovern"?

There are still plenty of places where Obama will get near-100% for reasons we all know. And the biggest reasons will be completely selfish; Democrats are where people think the money comes from.

Speaking of money: Opened up a letter from my health insurance company this morning. It's going up another 15%! It's now gone up over 50% since Obama has been in office. I thought the "Affordable Care Act" was supposed to fix this. Didn't Obama promise he'd slash family premiums by $2,500 a year by the end of his first term? Mine have gone up twice that!

And I assure you that my income has not gone up proportionally.

So as both candidates boast about what they are going to do for the economy, consider this: This single price increase alone times a dozen or so other people like me represents another job lost somewhere in the economy as I have less to spend or invest.

Like I've said: It's the "new normal". Get used to it.

Unknown said...

If the RNC was smart, they would pull all the tapes of Obama's years supporting late term and partial birth abortion, demagoguing providing medical care for survivor's of partial birth abortion, and the interview they had broadcast with a survivor of partial birth abortion. That might actually sway some 'pro-choice' people away from Obama, because I believe that even those who are pro choice draw the line at late/partial abortions.

Unknown said...

@John The Econ - I'm not falling into the 'Dewey Won' trap, these were friends and the conversation wasn't directed at that topic, it came out as a side topic, somewhat akin to your complaint about the health insurance premium. I just don't believe these polls are correct, but I don't expect a 'sure thing' or an easy cruise to victory, and I'm sure as h*** going to vote.

Sparky said...

Who knew that Joe Biden is actually a ventriolgist?! Todd Akin was just playing the part of his dummy. [sarc/] ;)

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@SeaDog- I try not to pay much attention to polls for the very reasons you mention. As a onetime advertising man, I know I could structure questions in such a way to get whatever results I was hoping for. Plus, how are poll results supposed to make us react? If they're negative, we might give up - if they're positive, we might get complacent. Neither is acceptable.

By the way, if there were no other issues on the table, I'd feel just as passionately about dragging Obama out of the Whitehouse just to deny him more Supreme Court picks. Although John Roberts shows that even a seemingly good pick can end up delivering awful rulings.

@John the Econ- A month or two ago, I received a $1000 refund check from my insurance company, along with a letter saying that the refund was due to Obama's Affordable Care Act. And they said that because Obamacare not only demands such refunds, but also made it a matter of law that the insurance companies MUST give the credit to the Affordable Care Act. However, my insurance went UP far more than $1000 this year - and the insurance company didn't state the obvious: that it was the "Affordable Care Act" which caused the spike in cost. So again we get the government illusion of putting money in one of our pockets while it takes MORE money out of another pocket.

@SeaDog- If the Dems really want to center their campaign on abortion, I say "let's go" - and I would take the reality of Obama's support for late-term, partial birth, and post birth abortions and shove it in America's face. There may be no better way to show how little Obamacare will respect human life than to make explicit that Obama himself does not believe a newborn infant is a "person" until and unless the state says so. That's a pretty bold (and frankly evil) mindset for the man who famously declared that the decision about "when life begins" was above his paygrade.

John the Econ said...

Isn't that something @Stilton? A law that actually requires that a company aggressively raise it's rates, and then kick some the money back to you praising the law. And you are supposed to feel good about it.

In a previous age, such a scam would raise the ire of leftist consumer activists. Not any more.

I didn't get anything back. Guess I'm the one stuck subsidizing Sandra Fluke's sex.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- I almost have a grudging admiration for the slickness of their scam: make it look like it's the greedy insurance company jacking up your rates, and Robin Hussein Obama is forcing them to send back a little. And sadly, a lot of people won't see through it.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering if I'll be penalized for having "too good" a policy next year. Not because I have great coverage (I don't), but because preexisting conditions in my family have forced me to buy insurance at a higher cost than Obamacare thinks I "ought" to. Therefore, in their opinion (and the law), I should be fined because my lack of discretion in buying an expensive policy theoretically drives up costs by allowing the insurance companies to be noncompetitive.

Bottom line: I'll be fined into dropping my policy and suddenly find myself on Medicaid (or whatever they care to call it: more studies are showing that people who end up with Obamacare coverage will essentially be getting Medicaid-style coverage...or worse).

Unknown said...

@Stilton: I wonder about the insurance thing myself, since my health insurance is provided by my company as part of my retirement package, and I get a W2 for the 'excess compensation' to add to my annual income. Interestingly, I am eligible for Medicare in a couple of months, and the company policy will become the 'second' payer. Since it is a HD policy with a $1200 deductible, I'll have to wait and see if the $500 Medicare Part B deductible will be included towards meeting the deductible or whether I'll have a $1700 deductible; and also if the $45/month Part B premium rebate they give me will be in the 'Excess Contributions' and if it will be considered 'too good' a policy (even though I was management, our healthcare is included in the provisions negoitiated by the union). Guess I'll have to see it to know what's in it.

John the Econ said...

I feel for you @Stilton. As I have long argued, ObamaCare is simply absurd on an economic level. (For example, if you're un-or-under-employed, you're even more punished) "Single Payer" is downright elegant by comparison, which I believe is their point.

For my family (which is healthy), we're only 15 months away from the point where it will make more sense to go uninsured and pay the fine. After all, in 2014, I can just go ahead and buy the insurance when I need it.


Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- We both know that the plan isn't truly "insane" - just truly evil. By instituting a small fine for non-insurance and forcing insurers to accept pre-existing conditions, Obamacare encourages people to drop out of private sector insurance programs (and make those programs unaffordable to run) with the end goal of eliminating private insurance. And depending on what happens this November, it could happen.