Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Limericks

Sunday, October 4th, 2009

What follows are my entries to Ben Schott’s Limerick contest in this weekend’s NY Times. He gives bonus marks for those using any of the following words:

Birthers · Darwin · Surge · Olympian · Swine Flu · Clunker · Gubernatorial · Stimulus · iPhone · Madoff · Google · Blackmail · Uranium · Irony · People’s Republic of China · Extradition · Congress · Wikipedia · Euthanasia

My entries:

The Birthers would have us believe
Obama, when he was conceived
His mom was in Kenya
With such an agenda
She took more than nine months to leave

The People’s Republic of China
Why can’t it be gentl-ah and kind-ah?
Chairman Mao was a brute
He gave not a hoot
How many were sent to the grind-ah

Schott’s Vocab Is Splendid Because
He wants us to make no faux paux
“Use ‘Darwin’ and ’surge’
But don’t get the urge
To send me an x-rated clause”

What a con man was Bernie Madoff
As with people’s money he made off
Now he sits in a cell
And if he behaves well
He will still not get any time off

As Polanski fights extradition
He appears to show no contrition
He’s a dirty old man
Who’s been on the lam
Who decent would back his position?

An attempt to blackmail Dave Letterman
Was made by a man named Joe Halderman
Joe needed the money
Knew one of Dave’s “honeys”
So which of the two is the better man?

Obama as Icarus

To help make his hometown Oh-lym-pian
Obama did fly to Co-pin-hagin
He flew too near the sun
‘Twas Rio who won
Now he’s lost his wings, too bad for him!

No More Obama Mania for Me

Thursday, September 10th, 2009

I have unsubscribed from President Obama’s “Organizing for America” email list.  When asked the reason, I stated “I’m tired of all the hype.”  For me, the last straw was his health care speech last night, which I turned off after the first two paragraphs.

And what did these paragraphs consist of?  Health Care Insurance Horror Stories.  Well, there are also Health Care Horror Stories, Hospital Horror Stories and the like.  I don’t need to hear anecdotes.
Obama wants to ram the whole thing through. He told Congress last night that he was not the first president to try to reform health care, but he is determined to be the last.  I think he should start at the bottom and work up.

We elected a president, not a king.  Just because Obama says or thinks something is true doesn’t automatically make it so.  Unfortunately, the Republicans are good at heckling and not much else.  Hopefully, “centrists” like Joe Lieberman (my favorite) can slow down the “Obama Express”, which is beginning to look more and more like a train wreck.

Is It a Sin to Listen to Rush Limbaugh?

Tuesday, August 11th, 2009

“Is It a Sin to Listen to Rush?” is the title of a great column in today’s Washington Post by Anthony Stevens-Arroyo.  Here is the comment I posted.

Your comments are right on the mark. Limbaugh is not simply an entertainer. And his so-called logic is atrocious. The MSM continues to embrace him, and he has more listeners than ever.  Recently, he compared Obama to Hitler. Father Coughlin was reined in by the Detroit Bishop, but I fear that the only way Limbaugh will be stopped is by his own excesses. And this may take a while. (end of comment)

I have had numerous posts, including a video, on Limbaugh.

MITCH ALBOM MISSES THE MARK ONCE AGAIN (on town hall protests)

Sunday, August 9th, 2009

“Town hall protests on health care are American, too” is the title of a howler of a column in today’s Detroit Free Press by Mitch Albom.  Here is the comment I posted. (They seem to have only threads, and no place for general comments.)

Mitch Albom is way off on this one. For example: False equivalence with the sixties, smearing all legislators for the crimes of a few.

There were protesters at one town hall meeting who refused to believe that Medicare is a government-run program.  Were protesters in the 60’s and 70’s that ignorant? I don’t think so,   Also, the stakes were a lot greater then. Obamacare isn’t killing anyone, although some ignoramuses like Sarah Palin claim that it will.

Most of the protesters are an angry, ignorant mob; they don’t like Obama and are spurred on by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who recently compared Obama to Hitler!  Obama is seeking healthcare reform in a legal manner, and he is not trampling on anyone’s civil rights in the process.

But I fear my arguments are made in vain, since, after all Mitch Albom is omnipotent.  If you don’t believe it, just ask him. (end of comment)

I have an earlier post on Albom which you might find entertaining.

The Pew Poll About Obama’s Polarized Early Job Approval Ratings, and The Trouble with Percentages

Thursday, April 9th, 2009

First, the statement at the Pew website.

Partisan Gap in Obama Job Approval Widest in Modern Era
April 2, 2009

For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades. The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama’s job performance is the result of a combination of high Democratic ratings for the president — 88% job approval among Democrats — and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans (27%).
By comparison, there was a somewhat smaller 51-point partisan gap in views of George W. Bush’s job performance in April 2001, a few months into his first term. At that time, Republican enthusiasm for Bush was comparable to how Democrats feel about Obama today, but there was substantially less criticism from members of the opposition party. Among Democrats, 36% approved of Bush’s job performance in April 2001; that compares with a 27% job approval rating for Obama among Republicans today.
1178-1
The partisan gap in Bill Clinton’s early days was also substantially smaller than what Obama faces, largely because Democrats were less enthusiastic about Clinton. In early April 1993, 71% of Democrats approved of Clinton’s job performance, which is 17 points lower than Obama’s current job approval among Democrats. Republican ratings of Clinton at that point (26%) are comparable to their current ratings of Obama today (27%).
The growing partisan divide in presidential approval ratings is part of a long-term trend. Going back in time, partisanship was far less evident in the early job approval ratings for both Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon. In fact, a majority of Republicans (56%) approved of Carter’s job performance in late March 1977, and a majority of Democrats (55%) approved of Nixon’s performance at a comparable point in his first term.
***************************

This item has been picked up on by right-wing demagogues like Rush Limbaugh, but also by serious conservative columnists like Michael Gerson, whose column , “The Most Polarizing President,” is in the April 8th Washington Post.

There are a few problems with the Pew Research Center statement. First of all, its conclusion ignores the approval rating by Independents, which is 57%. Second, and more importantly, all the results are stated in percentages, or differences in percentage points, with no mention of the underlying numbers

For example, we need to know the number of people of voting age who consider themselves Republicans, as a percentage of the total voting age population (TVAP). Let me give an example to illustrate my point

Suppose that, in 2001 the TVAP was 40% Rep., 20% Ind., and 40% Dem. Suppose further that since then, there has been a migration of Republicans to Independent status,(and there is reason to believe this), so that now the TVAP is 30% Rep. 30% Ind. and 40% Dem. Assume, for lack of anything better, that the 2009 approval rating of Republicans turned Independents is the same as all the Independents, 57%. Thus, since ¼ of 2001 Republicans are now Independents, the correct figure from 2009 to compare with 2001 is the weighted average of 27% and 57%, (¾)27% + (¼)57% = 34.5%. So the difference in the approval ratings, R+(R turned I) – D = 34.5 -88 = -53.5%, which is much closer, in absolute value, to the 2001 R – D = 51%.

The situation is even more stark if there has been migration from Independents to Democrats since 2001, which is probably also the case. We need all the relevant facts, and Pew hasn’t supplied them.