NYC Seeks Ban On Large, Sugary Drinks

When government pays for  healthcare, consumer choice takes a back seat. How long before mandatory morning calisthenics?

The New York City Health Department plans to propose a ban on the sale of all sugary drinks 16 ounces or larger in restaurants, fast-food venues, delis, movie theaters and sports arenas.

via MediaPost Publications NYC Seeks Ban On Large, Sugary Drinks 05/31/2012.

Advertisements

More media lies on the GOP delegate numbers

Texas held it’s primaries today. In the last hour I’ve heard multiple reports that, with a win in Texas, Romney will have the 1144 delegates needed to secure the GOP nomination. Everywhere I turn, the radio, the TV, Romney, Romney Romney…Blah, Blah Blah.

The truth is that Romney is nowhere close to 1144 delegates. THEY ARE LYING. Either that or they just don’t understand how the nomination process works. In either scenario, they shouldn’t be trusted.

The state primaries and caucuses are just polls. They are not the vote that determines the delegates that will choose the candidate in August at the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Yes, some states bind their delegates to the poll winners proportionately. Yes, some  states bind all delegates to the poll winner.  But there is good evidence that suggest that even these attempts by the states to control the votes their delegates cast at the Tampa Convention are not enforced by the RNC. What does that mean? Well, it means that even bound delegates can vote their conscious on the first round of voting. Many don’t believe that but the rules are pretty clear. Even if this is not the case the option to not vote is always a possibility.

Ben Swann recently did a Reality Check on this topic.

I hope you’re starting to see just how difficult predicting who will win the GOP nomination really is. Yet the media has been certain for months that Romney will face Obama. If you’re not paying attention, you’re being duped.

There is a website, http://thereal2012delegatecount.com/ that has a tally of all the delegates that have been officially awarded so far.

According to this site, as of today the real delegate numbers go something like this.

Romney: 591

Paul: 186

Santorum: 146

Gingrich: 66

Delegates Outstanding: 1297
These delegates will be awarded at state conventions that have not yet occurred.

The Real Delegate Count has this to say regarding why they felt the need to start the site.

The mainstream media is simply not accurately covering the race for delegates in the Republican contest for President.  In fact, if you watch network news you would believe that the Republican contest is over.  It is not.

At this site we are committed to covering the Republican race for delegates by explaining which candidates have committed delegates in which states. We do not “guess” on how many delegates candidates have. We track the results of state conventions where actual delegates are awarded and we report those results without bias or favor.

The Real Delegate Count

So why doesn’t the media give us the real numbers? Why is that they want to have a Mitt Romney president so badly that they blatantly report falsely in his favor? I’ll let you answer that for yourself.

GOP sees mass exodus in U.S. Military donations since announcing Mitt Romney as presumptive nominee

Campaign contribution figures show U.S. Military donations in March favored Obama over presumptive nominee Romney.

The Army Times reported in February that anti-war GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) was at that time, “by far,” getting the most in campaign contributions from members of the United States military. According to a review of Federal Election Commission data, Paul received nearly $250,000 in donations from servicemembers, President Obama, $130,000 and GOP presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney just $23,000.

But now that Paul’s campaign is all but over and presumably, Romney will be the Republican nominee, the military’s donation trend is beginning to shift: away from Paul and toward Obama

Military Shift Campaign Donations From Ron Paul To Obama In March | ThinkProgress

via Military Shift Campaign Donations From Ron Paul To Obama In March | ThinkProgress.

Don’t be fooled by Rex Nutting! Obama is indeed a BIG Spender

You may have heard talk recently about how Obama really isn’t the big spender the Right has made him out to be. This notion stems from a recently published article by Rex Nutting on the Market Watch website entitled “Obama spending binge never happened.

The idea that I had it all wrong caused me a lot of concern. Nutting’s article was very convincing. Take the following chart for instance. You’ll see that Obama clearly has not increased spending at the Rate other Presidents have.

Nutting: Obama low spending rate increase

How could this be? Had I been duped by those who had painted Obama’s first three years in office as a spending frenzy?

A follow up article published on the Cato Institutes blog entitled “Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall, Which President Is the Biggest Spender of All?” attempted to clarify the issue but I was  just as confused after I read it.

I even emailed Robert P. Murphy to see if he could help me figure out what was going on. He was kind enough to email back the same day by the way. But, alas, I didn’t quite get the clarification I hoped for. I was still uncertain about what this all meant.

Well it struck me the other day that Nutting’s argument is a total sham. While the rate of spending increase may have flattened out the real amount of money spent under Obama’s watch is still far greater than any president before him. I felt stupid that hadn’t realized it earlier.  The second graph on his article totally disproves his own premise.

Nutting: Obama Spending

Yes the rate of increase in spending was greater under Bush from 2007 – 2008 or 2008 – 2009 when compared to Obama from 2010 – 2011 or 2011 – 2012, but that doesn’t change the fact that Obama is the biggest spending president ever.

Just because Obama has not increased spending at the rate that Bush did, his annual spending consistently tops even Bush’s highest spending year. All Nutting is really saying is that Obama has consistently spent the same HUGE amount each year. Well who the heck cares about that?

So now I can sleep at night knowing that I wasn’t wrong. Obama really is a big spender. The BIGGEST ever in fact. So Nutting was just playing with the numbers to make them say what he wanted them to. He nearly got me too. How many didn’t catch this? How many will now head out into the great wide world, honestly believing that Obama is the fiscal conservative?

Robert Pape’s insights into the causes of suicide terrorism, including 9-11

Robert Pape is/was an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and founder of Chicago Project. Shortly after 9-11 he began compiling the worlds only comprehensive database of all known suicide terrorists. He has spoke before Congress and the Department of Defense on insights he has gathered from his data. He has written 2 books that I know of on the subject which I admit I have not read. This post is sort of a note-to-self in some regards as I have not yet watched all four parts in this series. I know just enough about his findings to know that I want to know more. I’m posting all four videos here for easy watching later for myself as well as anyone else who is interested.

If you want the abridged version, here is a 28 minute interview where Pape discusses his book “Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism“, including the profile of suicide terrorists, their goals, and his ideas on effective means of combating suicide terrorism in the Middle East.

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four



Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism

Is Ron Paul’s foreign policy really ALL crazy?

Islamic radicalism is dangerous. The religious components of the ideology are diametrically apposed to Christianity and its social components are diametrically opposed to freedom. I believe there is room for an honest debate on whether or not the U.S. should be in the Middle East. That may be surprising given my unwavering support for Ron Paul in his bid to become the President of the United States.

I’m sure you are aware that Dr. Paul has made the case many times for why we should not be involved in entangling alliances and policing the world. He has stated that acts of war against foreign peoples and governments serve to increase the threats against us and jeopardize our national security more than support it. He has said that fear is propagated amongst the citizens of the United States by the Military Industrial Complex so that they may profit from war and that profits rather than good intentions to topple ruthless dictators and spread democracy is often the true motivation for U.S. war. These are positions that I generally sympathize with and have from time to time defended.

Many have dismissed Paul based entirely on their opposition to these positions, declaring that he doesn’t understand the threats that we face as a nation. Because of their strong belief in the threat of Radical Islam, they are willing to, for lack of a better phrase, throw the baby out with the bathwater. They dismiss the fact that despite the disagreement over U.S. involvement in the Middle East, Dr. Paul has a lot of good points on foreign policy in general that deserve discussion.

I imagine many ardent believers in the dangers of radicalism could sympathize with the notion that the U.S. military, after more than a decade of wars, is overextended and the cost associated with those wars are part of the environment that is perpetuating our weak economy. I also believe that every warm blooded American would agree that Paul’s sympathy for all those who have lost and suffered in war is admirable and could support his desire to bring our troops home.

Continue reading “Is Ron Paul’s foreign policy really ALL crazy?”