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

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Quote of the Day

On Tom Perriello's decision to vote in favor of ObamaCare:
In a conference call Monday, [5th District Congressman] Perriello said his support for the health care bill was a vote for lower premiums, a reduced national deficit and an elimination of regional disparities in payments to health care providers. [source]
Much is being made these days about the fact that our elected representatives never read the bills they vote on.

Had Perriello read this one, he would have found out that (a) the bill did nothing to address insurance premiums, (b) will not reduce the deficit, and (c) the bill will not eliminate regional disparities in payments to health care providers because all private health care providers will be driven out of the insurance business because HE VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC OPTION THAT WILL ULTIMATELY FORCE US TO HAVE ONLY ONE PROVIDER - THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

Talk about clueless ...

Time To Worry

Southwest and Southside Virginia are, increasingly, conservative.  So why are both represented by liberal Democrats in Washington?

More and more voters are wondering.

And certain politicians wish they wouldn't:
Boucher, Perriello in cross hairs as GOP eyes 2010
By Mason Adams, Roanoke Times

With last week's sweeping electoral victories and a national debate over health care and energy reform, Republicans have turned their attention to the 2010 Congressional midterm elections.

Two of the region's Democratic congressmen are dead in the cross hairs: Rep. Rick Boucher of Abingdon and Rep. Tom Perriello of Albemarle County. Six Republican candidates -- the highest profile name being state Sen. Robert Hurt of Chatham -- and a Virginia Conservative Party candidate have announced candidacies in Perriello's 5th District. Meanwhile, an independent, Jeremiah Heaton, has entered the race in Boucher's 9th District, but a substantial Republican challenge may be coming soon.

Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Scott County, confirmed in a recent interview that he is considering a congressional bid. [link]
It's fair to say, if there's ever a year that allows for both Perriello and Boucher to be knocked off, 2010 has to be that year.

Here's to 2010.

Send In The Clowns

There are times when I want to just wait until the environmentalists among us figure out just what it is they want, and then respond to their idiocy.  But they never seem able to get to that point.

The latest: Electric cars are good for the environment, right?

Isn't that the accepted dogma?

Well, not no mo':
The 'dirty' electric cars that can actually increase CO2
By Ray Massey, London Daily Mail:

Electric cars may not reduce carbon dioxide emissions - and could even increase them, a green lobby group warned yesterday.

The Environmental Transport Association said generating electricity - by burning coal and oil - to charge the so-called 'clean' cars could cancel out the benefit of abandoning fossil fuel vehicles.

Even if the National Grid has the capacity and infrastructure to meet the needs of electric cars, demand could lead to greater use of coal and nuclear power. [link]
Oh, dear.  Now even electric cars are bad for the planet.

What does that leave?  Wind powered cars?  Solar?  Pixie dust?

These people crack me up.


This simulation of the take-off and emergency landing of U.S. Airways flight 1549 (that ended up in the Hudson River) is remarkable.  Not just because it is so realistic, but also because it provides, in graphic detail, the cool-headed control that the ship's pilot -  Capt. Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger (as well as the air traffic controller who was in contact throughout)- maintained from beginning to end:


Wacked-Out Environmentalist Sees What She Wants To See

This is beyond idiotic.  It crosses over into the realm of stupid.  New York Times fanatic Elisabeth Rosenthal  is told that the sea turtle population in Costa Rica has declined.  Why?

There can be only one explanation!
Turtles Are Casualties of Warming in Costa Rica

Playa Grande, Costa Rica — This resort town was long known for Leatherback Sea Turtle National Park, nightly turtle beach tours and even a sea turtle museum. So Kaja Michelson, a Swedish tourist, arrived with high expectations. “Of course we’re hoping to see turtles — that is part of the appeal,” she said.

But haphazard development, in tandem with warmer temperatures and rising seas that many scientists link to global warming, have vastly diminished the Pacific turtle population.

Even before scientists found temperatures creeping upward over the past decade, sea turtles were threatened by beach development, drift net fishing and Costa Ricans’ penchant for eating turtle eggs, considered a delicacy here. But climate change may deal the fatal blow to an animal that has dwelled in the Pacific for 150 million years. [link]

Temperatures "creeping upward"?  "Climate change may ...?"

Why no facts?

Because the facts would get in the way of the fiction.

In truth, global temperatures have "crept upward" a whopping 0.2° C. over the last several decades and haven't risen at all this century.

Rising sea levels?  Where's the proof?

There isn't any.

There is only faith.

Faith in that which enviro-god Al Gore has proclaimed to be gospel.

The godless and their gods.  What fools they can often make of themselves.

Consider Me An EarthFirster

As I'm sure you are all aware, the Miss Earth contest is ongoing.  And I'll bet you've been on the edge of your seat waiting to find out who wins (balloting ends on Nov. 15, if you want to get involved).

For the uninitiated, here's the premise:

"Since the Miss Earth pageant has an environmental cause, it is primarily looking for young women who will stand for the protection and preservation of the planet."

One observation:

Obviously, vegetarianism isn't a criterion.


Photo courtesy of Reuters.

This Isn't Even Surprising Any More

Obama Declines To Defend U.S.:

Obama Declines To Defend U.S..

I'm Holding My Breath

My heart is pounding.

Can this be for real?

As real as anything else the Associated Press has printed on behalf of its favored politician.

Food For Thought

Ben T. Briscoe on the government's spending of cash it doesn't have:
As a part of the stimulus package, the folks in Wichita, Kansas recently received $55,000 to help the underprivileged spay or neuter their pets.  That money must be borrowed since it is literally not in the coffers.  The cost is more than the expense: it's a lasting liability that will have to be repaid with interest.  Even though someone was paid to spay or neuter the pets, there is NO long-term benefit to the whole. This kind of support is not worth the cost, nor the added interest, nor the crippling debt; it only hastens the day we'll meet the economic "grim reaper" with a near-worthless dollar and hyperinflation.
You know that $35,000 you've been able to save for your daughter's college education?  When it won't buy her a decent laptop computer, you'll understand the problem with Obama spending cash that he doesn't have.

Inflation is on the way.  And you ain't gonna like it.

When You Have Amateurs Running Armies

You get the Bay of Pigs.

And you get this:
Barack Obama 'risks Suez-like disaster' in Afghanistan, says key adviser
By Ewen MacAskill, The Guardian

A key adviser to Nato forces warned today that Barack Obama risks a Suez-style debacle in Afghanistan if he fails to deploy enough extra troops and opts instead for a messy compromise.

David Kilcullen, one of the world's leading authorities on counter-insurgency and an adviser to the British government as well as the US state department, said Obama's delay in reaching a decision over extra troops had been "messy". He said it not only worried US allies but created uncertainty the Taliban could exploit.

Speaking in an interview with the Guardian, he compared the president to someone "pontificating" over whether to send enough firefighters into a burning building to put a fire out. [link]
Think of the fight in Afghanistan as that burning building.  Then ask yourself: Why is Obama dicking around in Japan while an inferno engulfs the troops he is (supposedly) leading?

This is getting to be shameful.  Irresponsibly so.

Shortsighted. As Usual.

What in God's name were they thinking?
KSM Hits Manhattan—Again
Wall Street Journal editorial

Coming soon to a civilian courtroom blocks from Ground Zero: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the four other al Qaeda planners of 9/11. Be sure to get your tickets early, and don't forget to watch out for the truck-bomb barricades and rooftop snipers.

Attorney General Eric Holder, who dropped this legal bomb on New York yesterday, called his decision to move their trial on war crimes from a military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay to American soil "the toughest" he has had to make. Other words come to mind. For starters, intellectually and morally confused, dangerous and political to a fault.

This decision befits President Obama's rushed and misguided announcement on his second day in office that he would close Gitmo within a year. This was before the Administration had thought through what to do with the 215 prisoners there, though it did win him applause in Europe and on the American left. Yesterday's decision rids Gitmo of these meddlesome detainee cases in order to speed up this entirely political shutdown. [link]
I wonder if Obama and Holder have thought about what the U.S. is going to do with these 9/11 terrorists (who still vow to kill more Americans) when their sentences (9 years?  15 years?) run out and they must be turned loose.  No other country is going to take them back.  So they'll be released onto the streets of New York.  Or the back roads of Kansas, or wherever they end up.

And what if Mohammed and his buddies are found not-guilty?  (New York.  Federal Court.  Democrat judge.  The possibility is there.)  They'll be coming to a neighborhood near you this time next year.  Are you cocked and locked?

The WSJ:

"Most Americans, we suspect, can overlook the legal niceties and see this episode through the lens of common sense. Foreign terrorists who wage war on America and everything it stands for have no place sitting in a court of law born of the values they so detest. Mr. Holder has honored mass murder by treating it like any other crime."

What have they done?

- - -

A few questions:

What happens when the judge appointed to hear this case rules that U.S. civil courts don't have jurisdiction over "crimes" committed in Pakistan and orders the immediate release of Mohammed and his Muslim brethren?

What happens if the case is thrown out because the judge determines that Mohammed was subjected to cruel and inhuman punishment while incarcerated by being waterboarded?

What happens now that it's impossible to read Mohammed his Miranda rights?

- - -

From John Hinderaker at Powerline:
The potential for these trials to turn into fiascoes is large; perhaps President Obama and his Attorney General have forgotten the "political" trials of the 1960s and 70s. But they seem committed to returning to the pre-September 11 model of treating terrorism as a law enforcement matter, regardless of the consequences.

Ask yourself this question: suppose that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's trial results in an acquittal or a hung jury. Would the Obama administration really let him go? If so, they are crazy. If not, why are they holding the trial?
A question to which we'll never get an answer from the Obama crowd.  Until it's too late.

- - -

From Hot Air:

If I were a New Yorker, I'd stay indoors for the next year or so.

- - -

Rudy Giuliani: