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

Wednesday, December 02, 2009

It's For Their Health, You See

Look, there's no arguing the point that cigarette smoking is bad for your health.  It is.  Without doubt.

But please.  Spare me the rejoicing over smokers' health being saved. After all, human beings are now going to be forced by law to stand out in sub-zero cold and biting wind to sate their nicotine habit.  For their health?

Is it really a matter of their health or is it retribution?

Ask the editorialists at the Bristol Herald Courier.  To them, smoking is bad for your health but increased possibility of pneumonia isn't.

So much for the whole health argument.

Here's some irony to consider:
For patrons who have passed on trying certain restaurants, we urge them to make a visit now that these establishments are smoke free.

But to be frank, any business that is so retrenched as to build a separate smoking room will not get our business.
Why couldn't they have simply held that same attitude with regard to any business that is so entrenched as to allow smoking within its confines?  Why couldn't they simply maintain the position that they'd take their business elsewhere?

But no.  A ban was called for.  And a ban they got.

Rejoice.  They should be very proud.  They are, after all, doing smokers a favor.

How very happy they must be.

Reaction To Obama's Afghanistan Speech

From Charles Krauthammer:

"He said in August this was a war of necessity.  And then he gives us all the reasons why we have to start leaving in a year and a half."

"You've got a sense of the man who wants to put the toe in the water, who wants to give it a shot, but he's ready to leave. And that's not exactly a clarion call. It only compounds the uncertainty."

Young American men and women are going to asked to give up their lives for this?

My God.

- - -

Charles Hurt:
Obama told these brave cadets here -- so many of whom will soon be dispatched to the mountains of Afghanistan -- that this mission on which he will send them is worth their lives.

It is worth the total commitment of their very last breath.

Because as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, some of those young men and women listening to their commander last night will not return alive.

But, Obama was telling them, this mission is not worth the total commitment of your country. It is not worth his political sacrifice.

How dare a man sentence so many more to die for a half measure?
Victory or withdrawal.  One or the other.  Instead, our effort is ... what?  When Obama talks about Afghanistan being "a vital national interest,"  what does that mean?

Eminent Domain At Its Most Insidious

There is no one on this planet who can adequately explain what is going on in Roanoke, Virginia:
Roanoke couple's land condemned -- but why?
By Laurence Hammack, Roanoke Times

It seems the only people who want the property that is flanked on two sides by Carilion Clinic's growing medical complex are the current owners, Jay and Stephanie Burkholder.

Yet the government is taking the land from the Burkholders.

Last month, a Roanoke judge approved the condemnation of the 3-acre tract as part of a redevelopment plan closely linked to Carilion's proposal to build a business park and medical school where aging industries once operated along South Jefferson Street.

Only now, Carilion says it has no interest in the Burkholders' property, which will soon be acquired through eminent domain by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

Mark Loftis, an attorney for the housing authority, said the land is being taken as part of a master redevelopment plan for the area, which doesn't necessarily have to involve Carilion. One possibility is that Carilion would acquire the land and then sell it to a developer, as it did with a hotel being built in the area. [link]
Got that?  The property will be seized by the government, sold to Carilion (probably at a loss to the taxpayers), which will, in turn, sell it to a developer (at a profit), who will, in turn, develop the land and sell it (at a profit) to another as-yet-unknown business entity.

The bewildering thing is, there's a business entity there now that is being displaced at the point of a gun by the government entity that started the whole thing.

The Supreme Court needs to revisit this issue and fast.  This ain't right.

Food For Thought

Consider this.  Substitute in this sentence offered up this morning by the Washington Post the name Lyndon Johnson, say, around 1964, for that of Obama and what response does it conjure?

More troops.  Limited mission.  Before long we were waist deep in the Big Muddy.

We know how that strategy worked out for our disgraced 36th president when he tried the same balancing act in Vietnam.

History repeats itself.

What's The Purpose?

Does this news brought to us by the NRA bring back memories?
Bloomington, Indiana Herald-Times Treats Law-Abiding Gun Owners like Registered Sex Offenders!

On November 30, 2009, the Bloomington Herald-Times made the following announcement:

“This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You’ll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street."

The Herald-Times has begun receiving calls and emails, and their response is a defiant defense of their online gun permit database.

Anyone who visits the newspaper website will be able to search the number of permits on a given street or neighborhood. Although at this point the names and house numbers are not listed, the newspaper’s website treats law-abiding Indiana gun owners like sex offenders on a searchable database.

It is NRA's firm belief that there is no public good served by the publishing or cataloguing private citizens’ gun ownership information, and that more harm is done by such an action. Law-abiding Hoosiers should not be subjected to the same treatment as sex offenders, and if the newspaper won’t listen to their constituents and customers, then NRA Members and Indiana gun owners should send a financial message by cancelling their subscriptions to the Bloomington Herald-Times. [link]
I never heard or read a reasonable explanation as to why the Roanoke Times, back in 2007, decided to publish an online database of registered concealed handgun permit holders here in Virginia.  The best the good folks there could come up with was: "The information is there.  It's available to the public.  We had a legal right to do it.  We did it as a public service."  What was never mentioned, of course, was motive.  They hate guns and gun owners.  So why not kick 'em in the shorts.

But the Roanoke Times caught sixteen kinds of hell for its poorly thought out action.  Resulting eventually in the Times apologizing for having done it, saying, "We gave insufficient thought and discussion to the potential that crime victims, law enforcement officers and domestic violence victims might be put at risk if their addresses were published."

So now the Bloomington Herald-Times pulls the same stunt.  Nothing better to do, one would suppose.

And what about the potential harm that this action poses for crime victims, law enforcement officers and domestic violence victims?

As Roanoke Times columnist Dan Casey might put it:


On Obama's Afghanistan Speech Last Night

From Charlie Foxtrot:

"Word Count: 'I' - 45, 'Afghanistan' - 39, 'Victory' - 0"


To Sum It All Up

How about a trip down memory lane?  Barack Obama when he wanted your vote:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s plan strengthens employer–based coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference. Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year. If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance options.
"Your costs will go down ..."

The Wall Street Journal on the latest health care plan working its way through the Senate:
ObamaCare at Any Cost

We have now reached the stage of the health-care debate when all that matters is getting a bill passed, so all news is good news, more subsidies mean lower deficits, and more expensive insurance is really cheaper insurance. The nonpolitical mind reels.

Consider how Washington received the Congressional Budget Office's study Monday of how Harry Reid's Senate bill will affect insurance costs, which by any rational measure ought to have been a disaster for the bill. CBO found that premiums in the individual market will rise by 10% to 13% more than if Congress did nothing. Family policies under the status quo are projected to cost $13,100 on average, but under ObamaCare will jump to $15,200.

But Democrats don't care because their bill isn't really about "lowering costs." It's about putting Washington in charge of health insurance, at any cost. [link]
So why is Obama doing this again?

He Wants Your Two Cents

Dan Casey, Roanoke Times columnist, has asked in an email if I would post a link to his weblog so that you could comment on his most recent piece having to do with cigarette smoking being banned in most all restaurants in the commonwealth.  See my response to his article here.

His weblog post is here: "Tuesday's column: Good riddance to restaurant smoking."

Feel free.

Heads Begin To Roll

The first of many:
UK climate scientist to temporarily step down
Associated Press

London — Britain's University of East Anglia says the director of its prestigious Climatic Research Unit is stepping down pending an investigation into allegations that he overstated the case for man-made climate change.

The university says Phil Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review into allegations that he worked to alter the way in which global temperature data was presented. [link]
1) It's not simply a matter of  Jones having worked to "alter the way in which global temperature data was presented."  It was much more a matter of the data itself being manipulated, hidden, and otherwise faked.

2)  As to that first sentence, the reason the university is launching the investigation isn't so much because Jones "overstated the case for man-made climate change."  It's because the "prestigious Climatic Research Unit" is now far from prestigious.  It is in fact the butt of jokes, ridicule, and condemnation.

3) Expect the "independent review" to be about as independent a review as were all those "peer-reviewed" reports Jones and his sidekicks dumped on the U.N. in years past.  Lies and distortions?  Don't be surprised.

In any case, Jones is now history.  As is the grotesque global warming movement.  Good riddance to both.

Quote of the Day

Someone needs to tell MSNBC's Chris Matthews that his side won.  The military, along with the rest of the country, is run by his Democrats now.  The men and women in uniform, those who are willing to give their lives in order preserve his, are not his enemy.

On the fact that Obama gave a speech to the cadets at West Point last night:
It seems like in this case, there isn't a lot of excitement.  I watched the cadets, they were young kids - men and women who were committed to serving their country professionally it must be said, as officers. And, I didn't see much excitement. But among the older people there, I saw, if not resentment, skepticism. I didn't see a lot of warmth in that crowd out there. The president chose to address tonight and I thought it was interesting. He went to maybe the enemy camp tonight to make his case. I mean, that's where Paul Wolfowitz used to write speeches for, back in the old Bush days. That's where he went to rabble rouse the "we're going to democratize the world" campaign back in '02. So, I thought it was a strange venue. [link] [emphasis in the original]
The U.S. military is Matthews' enemy.

For the love of God.