• AlchemyToday commented on the blog post Beavis & Butthurt

    2011-08-03 03:39:41View | Delete

    “President Obama is holding the full faith and credit of the United States hostage so he can continue his spending spree.” – July 13, 2011.

    I realize that metaphor is sometimes too nuanced for the Tea Party, so that “hostage-taker” and “gun-to-the-head” type comments are somehow different from directly comparing someone to a terrorist.

  • AlchemyToday commented on the blog post The Innumerate’s Apprentice

    2011-08-02 07:52:00View | Delete

    Given that those attributes are some orthogonal to McArdle’s, I can only assume that they’re grooming a replacement a la Breaking Bad.

  • AlchemyToday commented on the blog post Sarah Palin Wants To ICE Mexican-Kenyan Singer Lady

    2011-02-08 08:38:01View | Delete

    “For more Election 2012 laughs, visit http://www.SuperTuesdayNews.com – political satire served up daily!”

  • AlchemyToday commented on the blog post You Gonna Eat Those Fries?

    2011-01-03 13:46:12View | Delete

    All true; anyway, it’s not really worth pointing out the factual errors and deceit in an attempt to rationalize an end that’s so plainly wrong in the first place.

  • AlchemyToday commented on the blog post You Gonna Eat Those Fries?

    2011-01-03 07:50:29View | Delete

    “Abortion should not only be safe and legal, it should be rare.” – Bill Clinton

    “But it can also be a form of cultural denial: a way of reassuring the public that abortion in America is — in Bill Clinton’s famous phrase — safe and legal, but also rare.” – Bill Clinton as related by Ross Douthat

    And it’s not like the left has tricked the world into thinking that Bill Clinton’s wish has come to pass. Here’s Obama three months ago: “I think Bill Clinton had the right formulation a couple of decades ago, which is abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.”

    He doesn’t regard his readers very highly if he’s going to present something as the exact opposite of what it is.

    And there are so many things wrong with these two sentences: “Prior to 1973, 20 percent of births to white, unmarried women (and 9 percent of unwed births over all) led to an adoption. Today, just 1 percent of babies born to unwed mothers are adopted.”

    1) Why focus on white women?
    2) We get 9% -> 1%, but 20% -> ?
    3) If you’re pro-life, pro-family, etc, what’s wrong with people raising their own kids? How is this remotely tragic?

    He’s also abusing statistics by saying that 1 in 5 pregnancies are aborted (the statistic is 22%, but it’s 5 years out of date; following the trend, we are probably right about at 1973 abortion-per-capita levels). 20% of unaborted pregnancies are terminated naturally, which isn’t unrelated to the fact that over half a million pregnancies that are annually afforded inadequate prenatal care. Regular doctors visits would also reduce the over half a million women who smoke or drink during pregnancy annually. Surely he spends as many column inches talking about these issues as abortion? Douthat’s preferred health plan was the Wyden-Bennet proposal, in which we’d cross our fingers and hope that the magic of the free market would be an adequate substitute for Medicaid and SCHIP. He was also fond of the Ryan/Coburn proposal that would gradually decrease the quality of medical services subsidized for the poor, disabled, and elderly.