People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

They Just Won't Let It Go

Haven't we beaten that dead and rotting "gun show loophole" horse enough? Apparently not. The Roanoke Times this morning again calls upon the Virginia legislature to "close" that "loophole."

Firing another round at the gun-show gap


"The political challenge will be persuading rural Virginians that closing the loophole is a necessary anti-crime measure, not a first-round salvo to erode gun rights. That case can be made."

That case can be made? Then make it!

Revealingly, they didn't even try. Because the editorialists at the Times know that the incidence of a firearm being purchased at a gun show and used by the purchaser in a subsequent crime is probably remote. Extremely remote.

Why "probably"? Because the FBI doesn't gather and maintain such records.

So the anti-gun crowd gets its information from itself. See the Brady Bunch's GUN SHOWS:

That's right. "Terrorists" are buying their guns at gun shows too.

Can they name one? Even one?

"Uhhhhhh ..."

But we still need legislation.

Fo rthe love of God.

Memo To Washington Post

I've got a bridge in Arizona I'd like to sell you.

Get this. The geniuses at the Post this morning endorse the plan that the House and President Bush have agreed to (see the editorial "Hail the Autocrat: A plausible plan to rescue the automakers,") saying,
The plan does draw a clear bottom line for the companies: They would have to chart a course to positive net present value, meaning that their reasonably foreseeable cash flows would exceed the government's investment.

What has emerged so far is hardly a risk-free framework. Once federal dollars start to flow, it will be that much harder to force GM, Chrysler and the UAW to keep any promises they made to secure the cash. But the fact that the March 31 deadline is firm and enforceable by a single official gives the various stakeholders relatively little wiggle room -- and makes this a fair substitute for actual bankruptcy. Appropriately modified, it might work.
A "clear bottom line" to be provided at a later point in time.

Got that? In return for a reorganization plan that will be submitted sometime in the future, and in return for absolutely nothing now, Congress should give GM and Chrysler billions of dollars of bailout money. Nothing changes. No heads roll. GM will continue to make cars that too few Americans are willing to buy. The cost of bringing a car to market will continue to exceed the gross profit made off of it. Losses will continue to stagger.

And the Post is willing to put you on the hook for this.

Worst of all, the UAW will be back come March looking for a second installment of government largesse. With details of a reorganization plan to follow. Some day. Some day.

I wonder if the nitwits at the Washington Post would be interested in my magic elixir that is guaranteed to grow IQ - if used properly over a period of thirty years.

House Passes Auto Bailout

Yeah, it's money being flushed down the toilet. But the people flushing it aren't providing it, so Who Cares?

Auto Bailout Clears House but Faces Hurdles in Senate

Voting in favor of this monumental waste of YOUR money was 9th District Congressman Rick Boucher, who's never shown any interest in the well-being of those who are struggling to make ends meet, and who now find themselves being asked to provide support to hundreds of thousands of current and former overpaid auto workers and executives, to the tune of $16,000,000,000.

Voting for the people were Bob Goodlatte (VA-6th) and Virgil Goode (VA-5th).

Goodbye 'Energy Independence'

When it comes to the planet's dwindling energy resources, the incoming Obama administration is sending a message loud and clear: We intend to provide no solutions to our energy problems. "The environment" is our only concern:
Browner: Strong Environmental Resume
By the Associated Press

Washington (AP) -- It hit Carol Browner in the final weeks of the Clinton administration: She had been head of the Environmental Protection Agency for eight years, nearly a quarter of the agency's existence, far longer than any other administrator.

And they had been tumultuous years. Conservative Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America, were pushing to reduce government regulations and -- as Browner said at the time -- had her agency ''front and center in its cross hairs.''

Now, nearly eight years later, Browner will soon return to the center of the political battles over environment and energy -- this time as a powerful voice within the White House of President-elect Barack Obama.

Browner brings a strong environmental resume to the White House, having worked as an attorney and management consultant on a wide range of environmental issues, from clean air regulations to climate change. [link]
Amazingly, annoyingly, you have to read well into the article to find out what Browner's role in the White House will actually be. She's going to be "head of Obama's White House energy and environment council."

An environmentalist heading up a group that will advise the president on energy policy.

A portent if there ever was one.

Oil? No. Nuclear? No. Coal? No. 95% of the planet's current energy production capabilities? Not a chance.

Solar? Wind? French fry oil? Yes. We're going to focus on the 5% and see if we can get it up to 6%.

For the love of God.

Quote of the Day

A reaction to the fact that another Illinois governor may be going to prison, from MSNBC:
[W]hile the term “culture of corruption” gets thrown around a lot, the fact is that a state possibly having four governors go to prison in 40 years is most definitely a culture of corruption.
"First thoughts: So who's corrupt now?," December 10, 2008

Boys Will Be Boys

Not sure what to make of this. But a few beers might bring it into focus.

Welcome to the Fire Hose Rodeo:

I'll bet he felt it the next day.

Click on the triangle to activate.

Hello. Earth To Global Warming Alarmists.

Your days are numbered:
UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
From the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works

Poznan, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN.

The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. [link]
Read the many quotes attached to this article from leading climate/atmospheric scientists, physicists, geologists, geophysicists, and meteorologists who disagree with the general consensus that the planet is warming due to the activities of the human species.

In addition, a number of reports (that you'll never see cited in the New York Times) are cited here.

A great read. A vision onto the real science relating to climate. More to come. Much, much more.