1 - 10 Next
I suppose it would be even worse with abc if the kid was a Kennedy. They'd probably skip the royalty part and declare the kid a deity. But this is extremely offensive. It isn't just a gaffe. Not that it would ever happen, but the Klintons should call out abc on this one. We don't have royalty in this country. Of course, abc is doing two things by proclaiming the baby as "royal": they are looking fondly back to the days of stained dresses in the Oval Office, and looking forward to the Hildebeest's election in 2016, which the consider assured. And that is even more offensive than calling the Klintons "royalty."
In response to:

Overtaxed and Underpaid

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 15, 2014 1:22 PM
Good ideas, I suppose, but unless I missed it, Santorum missed the single most important thing that could be done to help the economy: repeal Obozocare. No one is hiring anyone (at least not for full-time work) because of the bloated cost of Obozocare. That should be put into the context of getting rid of a huge part of all federal regulations. I'm not a libertarian who opposes all regulation, but a great part of fed regulations are far out of date, and another huge part is far past the point where diminishing returns make them worthwhile. As bad as our tax code is, I believe that the regulations are even more destructive.
You apparently don't get the meaning of "Congress shall make NO LAW." All of the rules that determine whether churches can act politically or not are unconstitutional because they infringe on both freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The IRS code does not trump the Constitution, Get it? When the IRS code is used to determine what can be said from the pulpit of any church, synagogue, mosque, you name it, it's unconstitutional. Period.
No. Period. The IRS rule that forbids politicking in churches is blatantly unconstitutional. It openly and directly violates the first amendment twice: it violates freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Under the first amendment, if a pastor wants to say from his pulpit that the congregation must vote for candidate X or spend eternity in Hades, he might be a fool, but he has every right under the constitution to do so. The first amendment begins with ":Congress shall make NO law..." "No law" means NO law. This IRS rule was pushed into law in the 1950's by an astoundingly corrupt member of Congress from Texas named Lyndon Baines Johnson, who wasw mad that a certain clergyman back home opposed him.
In response to:

The Great Divide in America

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 13, 2014 2:21 PM
Bialosky: " He went on to invoke the two issues that burn in every liberal’s heart – global warming and abortion..." Bialosky is right, those two issues seem the heart of the prog agenda. Abortion has been there at least since the 60's, and global warming has joined their short list in the last 25 years. Abortion is nothing more that the murder of innocent unborn human beings. As such, it is evil, and irredeemably so. (Note that I did not say that abortionISTS are irredeemable.) Global warming is a lie in the simplest sense: there hasn't been any for 16 or 17 years, when one looks at average global temps. So the computer models that the Algorians rely on for their doomsday positions are wrong. And lying is EVIL. So, the prog agenda is evil. And some might wonder why I oppose progressivism or liberalism or whatever they want to call it these days.
In response to:

Will China Dominate the 21st Century?

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 12, 2014 2:52 PM
China's economy will stagnate when their one-child policy causes their population to age to the point where the primary purpose of their economy is taking care of the elderly. The same thing happened in Japan, though not by government fiat. The Japanese have so few children that recently the sale of adult diapers (Depends, etc.) exceeded the sale of infant diapers. In the '80's lots of people were saying that the Japanese would take over everything. They were sunk by demographics: the primary purpose of their economy is now taking care of the elderly. Such an economy does not grow.. What happened in Japan will also happen in China, only more quickly and more violently, as the population ages even more quickly. So I don't see China dominating the 21st century.
In response to:

A Republican Vision for Health Reform

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 12, 2014 2:04 AM
By the way, if you don't think these reforms would reduce costs severely, take you dog or cat in for some serious surgery and see how much cheaper it is. In December my cat had her spleen removed. The entire cost -- including all tests and medications -- was about $1K. It would have been many times that if she had been a person instead of a cat. Part of the reason pet healthcare is cheaper than human healthcare is that we most properly use more safeguards when dealing with people. But far more important is the fact that most people do not sue over a cat.
In response to:

A Republican Vision for Health Reform

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 12, 2014 1:58 AM
Goodman's plan is as uninspiring as any that the Repubs have come up with. I read through it and I can't remember even one detail. A real reform has to have two items: (1) SEVERE tort reform. Until you cut "Scheister and Shylock" out of the loop, health care is going to cost far too much, no matter what else you do. (2) A change in what I call "the bias in the law" away from the current law, which basically says that you need a Dr.'s prescription for any medical procedure, device, or drug that does anything, to the opposite. The way to improve health care (and reduce its cost severely) is to allow people to, as much as possible, TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. Prescription should only be required for those medical procedures, devices, and drugs that cannot be taken care of by a normally intelligent person. For example, you do need a Dr. to do heart surgery, but you don't need a Dr. to prescribe a CPAP machine. You need a Dr.'s control over those heart drugs that have to be carefully regulated, or else you die. You don't need a Dr. to prescribe standard blood-pressure medicine. Without those two reforms, health care will continue to cost far too much, no matter what else you do. And even if Oblahmacare gets repealed, the progs will be back with something worse the day after tomorrow, because no one will be able to afford health care.
In response to:

A Republican Vision for Health Reform

tgwWhale Wrote: Apr 12, 2014 1:44 AM
Graf -- is that the German word for "Sybil?" Flagged, for off-topic cut-and-paste trolling. The trolls have to know that TH troll hunters are off on weekends.
What is needed are "cookie-cutter" nuke plants where the design is already accepted, and they can simply be installed and turned on. This would get away from the need to spend 10 years to qualify every new design. The "mini" nuke-plants they are now talking about would work this way. They would be primarily built at a factory and assembled on-site. They have passive cooling -- which means that even if all power (and cooling pumps) fail, they still wouldn't melt down. I read that we have something like 30,000 years of reserves of nuclear fuel. If we use that, we won't have to worry about supply. If we would reprocess the fuel like other countries do, we wouldn't have to worry about storage of waste. But the lefties would scream about it anyway.
1 - 10 Next