2004 was the first election in which I voted. Yes, I was first legally eligible to vote in 1994, but took no interest in politics until 9/11/2001. I didn’t vote in 2002, because I still did not know enough about mid-term local candidates to know for whom I was voting.
But by Summer 2004, I was PSYCHED to cast my first ever vote to re-elect President George W. Bush.
In 2008, I was energized by GOP VP-candidate Sarah Palin, but not so much about GOP Presidential candidate John McCain. I was ready to not vote for President in the 2008 election… until I spent 2007 and 2008 researching the radical, despicable history of Barack Hussein Obama. I then spent all of 2008 doing my best to inform people of how radical was Obama and why we needed to vote for McCain/Palin simply to keep this radical and his radical associates from taking power in our government.
I managed to convince some, but, more often than not, I was faced with ignorance, apathy and racism. Not only people saying they were voting for Obama, because he was Black (the ultimate slap in the face to MLK, Jr’s dream), but also people calling ME racist simply because I disagreed with Obama’s policies…. none of which had anything to do with his skin color.
By the time November 2008 came, I was SO UTTERLY PISSED THE FUCK OFF at being called a racist for holding the same views I had held since 9/11/2001, that I was energized more than ever to vote for McCain/Palin and AGAINST Obama.
But, to no avail. I went into work that night (I was working 3rd shift as a CAD designer at the time) and was literally in tears of disbelief that America had voted Obama into office. It was one of the first slaps in the face of reality my naive self had experienced (the Islamic terrorist attacks of 09/11/2001 being the first), seeing bad triumph over good. I could not believe my countrymen could do such a thing. I was utterly heartbroken. And, as I said, I was holding back tears as I was utterly heartbroken, having my positive view of my fellow Americans utterly shattered in one night.
That night was arguably the night that I ‘became’ Rorschach: cynical, pessimistic negative about — and having lost all faith in — my fellow Americans.
The last four years have not gotten much better. Watching the utterly despicable behavior of the mass media serving as the propaganda outlet for the Obama Administration and Democrat Party; watching as every Democrat, every liberal, every media outlet turned every single criticism of Obama into accusations of “RACISM!!!”; watching as the Obama Administration did everything to actually make the American economy WORSE, yet seeing his poll numbers still stay high.
The last four years have been an absolute nightmare of epic proportions. Economy, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, unemployment, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, healthcare, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, demonizing “the rich”, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, promoting redistribution, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, foreign policy, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, religious freedom under attack, Democrats crying “RACISM!”, freedom of expresion under attack, etc RACISM!!! etc.
This is why I am even more psyched here in 2012 to vote for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and to evict the disaster that is SCOAMF Obama, his busy-body wife Michelle “you’ll only eat what I allow you to eat!” Obama, Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and all the rest of his radical czars and incompetent Administration cohorts.
November 6, 2012: the date my faith in America will be restored…
Well, it actually will not be me breaking it down for you, but rather one of the great military veteran commenters in the comment thread of this post at This Ain’t Hell: Obama: You Just Don’t Get How Great I Am
The following comment was in response to the nonsense spewed by the liberal ignoramus “Anonymous”:
As for oil, it topped out June 2008 at 132.68 a barrel, but is now at 86.80 a barrel. And as for “We should drill here, now”. Don’t you see the genius of not doing that? We use the rest of the world’s oil, and then we use ours. Sure, we might not have it better, but our children and grandchildren will.
I referenced the price of oil, not gasoline. The gasoline companies set those prices (and get record profits doing so). [ … ]
We have to buy gas, and they set the prices. Go ahead an look at some yearly statement of some of these companies, profits don’t lie. [ … ] since June 2009, gas price has increase 85.33%, while in the same time period, oil price has increased only 22%. I’m all ears for a better explanation.
July 13th, 2012 at 3:33 pm
Anonymous: the fact that “oil companies set the price of gasoline” is nothing but a persistent myth.
The actual breakout (as of Jan 2012, when gas prices were virtually identical to what they are now) of the cost of a gallon of gasoline is as follows:
Marketing and distribution costs: 6%
Refining costs: 6%
Crude oil costs: 76%
Oil companies thus “control” only approximately 12% of the retail cost of gasoline; taxes and raw material costs account for 88%. And half of the part that oil companies “control” is the cost of refining the gasoline from crude. That is rather essential in having gasoline. The process is very mature and likely cannot be substantially reduced any time soon.
Bottom line: except for panic spikes (like those occurring after Katrina), gasoline prices are pretty much pegged to the cost of crude. Cost of crude goes up, gasoline will go up. Cost of crude goes down, gasoline goes down. They operate generally almost in lockstep.
And supply and demand controls the price of crude. Oil companies don’t.
July 13th, 2012 at 3:58 pm
I would have thought someone who worked in the financial industry would understand the concepts of fixed costs and variable costs. However, here’s a simplified explanation.
Gasoline costs have 4 components. One is fixed, two are partially fixed, and one is variable.
The fixed component is taxes. (These actually can vary, but in practice do so so slowly that they can be considered fixed.) At current prices, these are about 12% of the total of each gallon of gasoline (on the order of 40-45 cents per gallon).
The two partially-fixed components are (1) refining costs (which include refinery profits) and (2) transportation and distribution costs (which include profits for distribution companies and gas stations). Each of these is about 6% of the cost of a gallon of gas at current rates – or about 15-18 cents per gallon. The former (refining costs) generates some profit for oil companies. The latter (transportation/distribution) generally does not. Both include huge amounts of fixed or otherwise necessary overhead costs (costs a bundle to refine the oil and to distribute it to gas stations).
The last component is the raw materials costs – e.g., the cost of crude. At current gas prices, this component accounts for about 76% of gas prices – or around $2.60 per gallon.
Now, cut crude prices by 1/2. That drops the share of a gallon of gasoline due to crude to approx $1.30 – but it has little effect on refining costs (maybe those costs drop by 10%, or about 2 cents per gallon) or on distribution and transportation (say those costs drop by 20%, or 4 cents per gallon). It has no effect on taxes per gallon. So the new cost of gasoline becomes $1.30 + $0.45 + $0.14 +$0.16 = $2.05.
This is a “quick and dirty” calculation, so it’s not exact. But it should be fairly close. So let’s check this analysis against history as a sanity check.
Crude oil cost $46.47/barrel on January 23, 2009. Regular grade gasoline cost $1.84/gallon on average.
Crude oil cost $84.96 about 2 weeks ago (June 26, 2012). Regular grade gasoline today costs $3.41/gallon on average.
Crude oil cost went up about 83% between January 23, 2009 and 2 weeks ago. In the same period, gasoline prices went up about 85%.
And that is why I love being a conservative: we have the facts on our side. It is also pretty obvious that the liberal was ‘reasoning’ with emotion (he started out whining about oil company profits and then assuming things based off that incorrect emotional assumption), while the conservative laid out the facts and then came to the conclusion. That’s the difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals make up ‘facts’ to try to fit their worldview, while conservatives form their worldview after collecting the facts.
And Hondo’s takedown of the ignorant liberal is why I love This Ain’t Hell. The military veterans there are some of the most educated and informed and common sense conservatives online in addition to being great military heroes. Not to mention, they know how to take down liberal nonsense with some flair and humor!
Of course, as is to be expected with liberals, “Anonymous” could not admit to the fact that s/he was wrong, even in the face of facts completely destroying his/her ignorant opinion:
no, you obviously know more about the complexities of oil precaution then I do. I understand fixed costs and variable costs, but you’ve calling into question my knowledge of finance because I’m not as well informed as you about oil precaution. With that sort of hubris, I guess that you are well versed in fixed and variable costs of almost every industry out there.
Typical liberal. When they get owned by facts, instead of admitting they are wrong, they turn it around and throw insults at the conservative providing the facts. Pathetic.
Of course, as is the brilliance of the military guys on the site, Hondo gets in a nice jab in return:
July 13th, 2012 at 4:19 pm
Anonymous: no, I don’t claim omniscience in that area. I actually don’t work in either finance or the oil industry. But I would have thought you could have figured this out for yourself after you looked at the first article I cited, given your background in finance and the raw data contained in the article and otherwise readily available.
It only took me about 20 min to do the research and write each of the above comments relating to gasoline pricing. And I’m no expert in economics, finance, or the oil industry.
Heh. And with that, the “Anonymous” ignoramus did not return. Again, typical liberal. When faced with facts that discredit their ignorant worldview, instead of changing their worldview to fit reality, they fling some insults before stomping away in continued ignorance. Maybe he’s going to find out where to sign up for a class to teach him how to do simple research, since it’s pretty obvious he did not learn that while going to school for finance.
This is also an example of another debating trick that liberals love to use: appeal to authority. “Anonymous” started out claiming that s/he was an expert in finance, thus his/her *opinion* on gasoline prices and profits must be the right one. Yeah, not so much. A piece of paper from a university does not make one an expert. Appeal to authority means nothing. Facts mean everything. A high school freshman could have researched those facts and put the ignorant liberal snob in his place.
Heh, I forgot to include NHSparky’s great takedown of the ignoramus as well:
July 14th, 2012 at 8:26 am
Go ahead an look at some yearly statement of some of these companies, profits don’t lie.
Yup – Exxon/Mobil makes a profit of about $40 billion on revenues of $450 billion. That comes out to about 9 percent. Pretty shitty if you ask me, especially compared to banks which have profit margins in the 30-plus percent range.
Also, I’ll trust Hondo @41; since June 2009, gas price has increase 85.33%, while in the same time period, oil price has increased only 22%. I’m all ears for a better explanation.
Not true. In January 2009, the average pump price was $1.81/gallon, and crude price was $43.91/bbl. In June 2009, gas price was $2.74/gallon, and crude was $69.13/bbl. Today, the average price is $3.43/gal with a crude price in June of $90.73/bbl, which is down from the post-2008 peak in March of this year of $117.79/bbl and gas nationall at that point was $3.97/gal.
So no, you fail.
Oh, and before you think that $40 billion in profit on revenues of $450 billion is a lot, consider this, anon – in that same year, the federal government got over $105 billion in taxes, for doing nothing more than sitting on their asses with their hands out.
Amazing how someone supposedly educated in finance cannot do simple math.
If you like that, go read the rest of the comments. They also take down this liberal clown with regards to its claim that unemployment has improved under Obama. Yeah, the ignoramus actually made that comment.
”‘One man with courage is a majority.’ Andrew Breitbart was that one man.”
I was devastated when I read about Andrew Breitbart’s passing this afternoon at lunch. I’m still in shock. There are some great tributes to this great man and his great life’s work in many places online which I will add later.
The Man We Lost
An hour ago, Mr. Onesty said “We have lost one of the best attack dogs we have had in a generation. He was fearless and determined and smart and funny and principled. We MUST take up the baton he has handed off to us and take up the race with vigor… join the fight with abandon.” We feel his comment accurately expresses the sentiment we’ve heard all day.
We never considered how the loss of Andrew Breitbart would affect us. We guess we always viewed him as just another pundit fighting alongside many others: Limbaugh, Beck, Malkin, Hannity, O’Reilly, Carlson, Ingraham, Savage, etc. We were wrong. You don’t realize what you have until it’s gone, and so we’d like to drop our usual pretense to properly address our loss of a great man.
I’m listening to Grassroots Colorado, a local talk radio show that airs out here. They opened their show talking about Andrew Breitbart. The hosts discussed how they had a short-notice need for a speaker for their local 09/12 rally. They were referred to Andrew, so they called him up and asked if he’d mind flying out and speaking. He made his demands: pay for his flight, his hotel room, a dinner, and a beer. That’s it. There was no speaker’s fee for thousands of dollars; he just wanted his basic expenses covered and a beer. That’s the man we lost.
This 09/12 event was before the radio show, which only started last year. The hosts spent several hours talking to Andrew. He was happy to stay a few extra hours to get to know fellow conservative activists. That’s how the hosts first got to know each other. One of them said that, “in a roundabout way, Andrew was responsible for me sitting here right now.” That’s the man we lost.
Jon Caldera, of the Independence Institute, went on the show and said that he thought of Andrew as “the opposite of a pundit.” I realized then why his death was so meaningful, not just to me, but to all of us.
Andrew Breitbart got his hands dirty. I was discussing his death today with a coworker, who remarked that Andrew was more conservative than he had been led to believe. We’re not sure where he’d gotten his information, but Andrew wasn’t like all those other pundits. He never discussed his own views much. He was, as James Taranto (of the WSJ) has often remarked, the perfect Alinskyite. Breitbart realized that making a positive claim left one open to analysis. He realized that, if you seek authority, then the Left will have ground on which to stand in their quest to destroy you. So he never sought authority. He never made positive claims: I support X because of Y and Z. Instead, he beat the Left at their own game. He purposefully gave up any pursuit of his own authority, which is why the Left’s attacks against him never worked. He never sought the moral high ground or acted like he was God’s greatest gift to the Truth. He just made the Left look stupid, and he was brilliant at it. That’s the man we lost.
Andrew Breitbart got the President of the United States to fire Shirley Sherrod with a single, well-edited video. Imagine that! A simple blogger/pundit/journalist/whatever he was got the most powerful man in the world to act rashly and drastically! That’s the man we lost.
Andrew Breitbart got Representative Weiner to resign. At the press conference, the uninvited Breitbart grabbed the mic and launched into a long tirade against the Leftist Media, sitting right before him. That’s the man we lost.
Andrew Breitbart stood before 2 thousand Occupiers. As they screamed their drivel at him, he shouted back: “Behave! Behave! Stop raping!” That’s the man we lost.
On Twitter today, I saw a woman say that Breitbart not only responded to her once, but followed her back. He responded to me once on Twitter too. He had mentioned Arianna Huffington. I asked him if she’d ever apologized to him for her hypocrisy and for throwing him under the bus for his HuffPost article. He replied, “No she hasn’t. Thanks for asking!” He made sure to keep her tagged in the response so she could see it. That’s the man we lost.
All this shows why Andrew’s death has hit us all so hard. It’s not just that he was so young, or influential, or passionate. There’s a lot of conservatives out there who fit that bill. Andrew was something special, because he got his hands dirty: not just once or twice, but over and over again. He stared the lion in the maw as it roared, and he roared right back.
That’s the man we lost. There will never be another just like him, but he left us all with a lot of lessons to learn. When the Left shouts, shout back. Don’t be afraid to speak the truth. Obama is a radical, so say it! The Government is corrupt and bloated, so say it! When they call you racist or stupid, shrug it off and keep shouting! Fight for what you believe, and help other conservatives do the same, because you never know what kind of impact you can have. That’s the man we lost, but with his death, we can gain a million more.
One last thing crosses my mind. The nice thing about being a conservative is that you don’t have to apologize for believing in God. You don’t have to hide it. So we leave you with this: a tornado in Heaven, Andrew Breitbart is with God now. Make him proud.
Via the Maha Rushie today:
Here’s Paul Johnson in the Wall Street Journal: Sarah Palin “is in the good tradition of America, which this awful political correctness business goes against. She’s got courage. That’s very important in politics. You can have all the right ideas and the ability to express them. But if you haven’t got guts, if you haven’t got courage the way Margaret Thatcher had courage — and [Ronald] Reagan, come to think of it. … It’s the central virtue.” Courage is the central value of American politics. If you don’t have that the rest is irrelevant. Paul Johnson, brilliant British historian and journalist.
“Sarah Palin has more courage in her little finger than our presidential field. Same thing with Michele Bachmann. The gonads on our team happen to be wearing skirts.”
Sad, but true.
Speaking of the courage of Ronald Reagan, here he is in 1961 in the Operation Coffee Cup campaign against the Democrats’ proposed socialized medicine policy:
RUSH: Let’s listen to Reagan, 1961. This is the Operation Coffee Cup campaign against socialized medicine, as then proposed by the Democrats. This is a portion of Citizen Ronaldus Magnus from a recording distributed by the American Medical Association.
REAGAN: Back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas — six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket — said, “The American people would never vote for socialism, but,” he said, “under the name of ‘liberalism,’ the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.” One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.
RUSH: This is Reagan. This is 1961, fifty years ago. Fifty years ago! Another portion of what he said.
REAGAN: Let’s also look from the other side at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I’m only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms. It’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients; they’re equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town, and the government has the say to him, “You can’t live in that town. They already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else,” and from here it’s only a short step to dictating where he will go. This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being.
RUSH: Amen, and that is a superb way of looking at it: Do we have the right to take that way from anybody else, to dictate where they have to live. By the way, this was in HillaryCare. HillaryCare was going to apportion doctors geographically. Pure and simple. Here’s more: Operation Coffee Cup campaign against socialized medicine proposed by the Democrats, 1961.
REAGAN: You and I can do a great deal. We can write on our congressmen, to our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms, and that at the moment the key issue is we do not want socialized medicine. Write those letters now; call your friends and tell them to write them. If you don’t, this program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow, and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country, until, one day — as Norman Thomas said — we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and if I don’t do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.
RUSH: Fifty years ago. Five-oh, five-oh years ago. Now, many things become obvious and apparent, that is the left never goes away, they never stop. Look how patient they’ve been, 50 years they’ve been pushing for this. That health care bill’s been written, sitting in some staffer’s draw for who knows how many decades with just modifications made to reflect current times. Philosophically, they’ve had that health care bill that’s now Obamacare written for who knows how many decades. Now, how do you interpret Reagan describing this? I mean, that’s pretty tough here to talk about losing our freedoms. We’re losing our freedoms! That’s not an idly irrelevant thing to say.
It’s pretty hard hitting, but how many Republicans these days want to talk about in terms of the Obama agenda resulting in loss of liberty or freedom? Oh, no, no! I don’t know too many, how many, if any. When you constrain yourself simply to talking about policy, freedom and liberty are kind of tough to integrate as a policy. Now, how can you have an honest debate on policy when the other side simply lies about their policies all the time? It’s why it’s so important to talk about where they’re coming from and who they are, so that their real agenda — what the real policies are — can be explained and exposed.
She goes on about Palin shaking feminists by presenting a different ideal, an idea that others have noted.
And as I always note: Yes, that’s true, but liberal men were just as aghast at this performance. Sarah Palin committed two crimes that night: She spoke of Obama as if he were not, in fact, an earthbound god, but an unqualifed, shady pretender, a figure not ripe for worship but for lampooning; and therefore she threatened the chances of a liberal winning the White House.
It has to be remembered that before her speech, Obama won every poll, easily; it was no an election so much as a coronation. After that speech, at least for two weeks, McCain/Palin surged ahead of Obama/Biden; she scared the shit out of them. I still think that when they see Sarah Palin, she reminds them of those weeks of terror, the same way you’ll always be reminded of a death if you see the person responsible for it. It’s emotionally wrenching just to be reminded that for three weeks in September and October of 2008, A God Bled.