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

Friday, December 31, 2010

The Roanoke Times Perpetuates a Lie

I'm getting really steamed over this.  It was one thing for our soon-to-be former congressman, Rick Boucher, to use as an excuse for his having voted in favor of that potentially devastating cap-and-trade bill a year ago the "fact" that the Supreme Court mandated that Congress do something about greenhouse gases.  He was desperately searching for an explanation for his having sided with the whacked-out environmentalists in Washington over his constituents.  That's (almost) understandable.  He was in complete cover-his-ass mode.

But what's the Roanoke Times's excuse?  Shared stupidity?

From an editorial this morning:
Now it's the EPA's turn

The Environmental Protection Agency has a New Year's resolution: It will regulate carbon emissions. The EPA will act unilaterally because Congress failed to pass a climate bill. For that, the American people can thank a Republican Party more interested in denying the Obama administration success and rejecting science than in sound public policy.

Congress knew it faced a deadline. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Bush administration had violated the Clean Air Act by refusing to regulate greenhouse gases. That law obligated the EPA to regulate harmful pollution. Because greenhouse gases contribute to climate change, they plainly qualify.

[I]t is exactly what the law and the Constitution now require. [link]
That's a lie and they know it.

The Supreme Court (in Massachusetts et al. v. EPA et al., 2007) ruled in a split 5-4 decision that the EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gases (and required of the EPA an explanation as to why it shouldn't), not that "the law" required regulation.

Let's be clear:

1) "The law" (?) does not require that EPA take action when it comes to greenhouse gases.

2) The Constitution does not require EPA action (and I don't even know what that means; where in the Constitution is EPA regulation stipulated?).

3) And while we're on the subject of the bizarre, the statement that "greenhouse gases contribute to climate change" is so nebulous it borders on the silly.

4) From the Supreme Court's opinion:

"If the scientific uncertainty is so profound that it precludes EPA from making a reasoned judgment as to whether greenhouse gases contribute to global warming, EPA must say so. [snip] The statutory question is whether sufficient information exists to make an endangerment finding.

"We need not and do not reach the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA’s actions in the event that it makes such a finding. Cf. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 843–844 (1984) . We hold only that EPA must ground its reasons for action or inaction in the statute."

In other words, the justices (ultimately) left it up to Obama's radicalized EPA to make an endangerment finding. The Court did not mandate it.

So stop with the Boucher line of obfuscation and deception.  The law requires nothing.  The EPA is simply poised - on its own - to wreck our economy in an effort to chase after another increasingly discredited environmentalist windmill.  That being "climate change."  Or whatever these miserable excuses for human beings are calling it today.

Which brings us to (5): Congress should abolish the EPA - now - before it destroys this once great country.

 - - -

To Dan Radmacher and his team of fabricators at the Times:

"A lie does not consist in the indirect position of words, but in the desire and intention, by false speaking, to deceive and injure your neighbor."
-- Jonathan Swift --

To You Folks In The Coalfields

Know who your enemies are.  Beginning with the Washington Post editorial page

"The slow death of the traditional coal plant - one likely outcome of the EPA's efforts - would be welcome."

Always remember: Liberals, like those who write for the Post, are not to be trusted when it comes to protecting your hearth and home.  You are an impediment to their future.  They will see you destroyed in order to pretend to alter the environment.

Remember that, too, when these same snakes endorse a host of Democrat candidates in the 2012 election cycle.  Beginning with James Webb.

Know your friends.  Know your enemies.

A Suggestion For The Global Warmists Out There

If you truly believe you're going to resurrect your utterly discredited movement from its current state of cardiopulmonary arrest, you'd do well to find someone who isn't a melancholy misanthrope to cheerlead the effort.

Joe Lieberman?

I'd suggest you hire Kim Kardashian for the job.

The facts then won't get in the way.

Why Does The Tea Party Exist?

It's this simple.  A quote from the Wall Street Journal on the accomplishments of Pelosi's and Reid's 111th Congress:

"Never has a Congress done so much and been so despised for it."

So much damage.  So much repair work to be done.

Who To Blame? Who To Blame?

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg famously blamed Virginia for his out-of-control problem with crime.

So who's he going to blame for his failure to respond to the problem of snow-clogged streets?

Where's Michael Brown when he needs him?

Thursday, December 30, 2010

The Coalfields Can Take Heart

Even with the well-funded efforts on the part of the Marxist environmental movement to destroy the coal industry, even with Obama vowing to bankrupt those areas of the country - like Virginia's coalfields - by making coal-fired power plants too expensive a proposition, even with the sinister extra-legal machinations of the radical Environmental Protection Agency, guess what's the world's fastest-growing source of energy over the last eight years. That's right:


But that fact provides a completely misleading snapshot of things. While the future of coal usage in this country is questionable (there are a lot of Obamas here), the exportation of coal is skyrocketing.

And guess where it's going.

That's right.

To the country that is kicking our ass economically. China is gobbling it up:
China has seen the future, and it is coal
By George F. Will, Washington Post

Today, about half of America's and the world's electricity is generated by coal, the substance that, since it fueled the Industrial Revolution, has been a crucial source of energy. Over the past eight years, it has been the world's fastest-growing source of fuel. The New York Times recently reported ("Booming China Is Buying Up World's Coal," Nov. 22) about China's ravenous appetite for coal, which is one reason coal's price has doubled in five years.

Half of the 6 billion tons of coal burned globally each year is burned in China.

Writing in the Atlantic on China's appetite for coal and possible aptitude for using the old fuel in new, cleaner ways, James Fallows quotes a Chinese official saying that the country's transportation system is the only serious limit on how fast power companies increase their use of coal. One reason China is building light-rail systems is to get passenger traffic out of the way of coal trains.

Fallows reports that 15 years from now China expects that 350 million people will be living in cities that do not exist yet. This will require adding to China's electrical system a capacity almost as large as America's current capacity. The United States, China, Russia and India have 40 percent of the world's population and 60 percent of its coal. [link]
We have it.  Lots of it.  And it's still a bargain* compared to oil and natural gas (and don't make me laugh by bringing up solar or wind).

If Obama and his ilk don't want it, by God, we'll sell it to the Chinese.

Wrap your brain around this: The wonderful people of Dickenson, Lee, Russell, Scott, Tazewell, and Wise Counties here in Virginia will not sacrifice their children's future so that leftist do-gooders in this country can high-five one another over brie and Bordeaux, celebrating the impending demise of a way of life being eked out by the great unwashed masses far, far away in the coalfields.  They will survive.

Stick that in your solar generator and use it to power your curlicue light bulb.

- - -

* Think of coal as being the Wal-Mart of the energy world. Low, low prices every day.  From the American Coal Foundation, an eye-opening comparison of energy costs per million British Thermal Units:

● Coal—$1.20
● Oil—$4.45
● Natural gas—$4.30 

** According to this source, the cost of solar power, which brings with it a host of problems, runs as high as $6.00 per million BTU's.

*** I recognize the fact that George Will refers to coal production coming out of the Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana.  But in the eyes of the environmentalists, coal is coal.  And realistically, coal (along with nuclear) will be king for gererations to come. Especially here in the Appalachian region.

To Laugh

It is with a sneer and yet with eager anticipation that one comes across an op/ed headline like this (from the Washington Post):

"Liberals should accept defeat and get back to their goals."

And the heart begins to race when one realizes that the article was written by the Post's resident nitwit (no, not this nitwit; the other nitwit) - E.J. Dionne.

So what is it that he thinks liberals should do to get back on track?

You might guess:

"[L]iberals and Obama need to ... re-engage the country on what can only be called a spiritual level."

Yup. More of that "Hope and Change" horse shit.

Yeah. That'll work.

Keep thinking that, stud.

Maybe We Should Cut Them a Break

It's understandable that a lot of people think the globe is warming.  After all, NASA tells them it is.  And NASA never makes a mistake.

But does NASA make stuff up?

I don't blame the frightened little children for it.  I blame those "scientists" who have no soul and will do anything to further their political cause.

Little Do They Realize ...

I read this and wonder how many of the abortion cheerleaders among us support ObamaCare without hesitation:

"If government can limit Americans’ choice of effective medical treatments, there’s no limit to its control over our bodies, and the right to bodily autonomy is an illusion."

I'll bet every one of the "it's my body" crowd enthusiastically supports the government's new role in health care oversight.

Not even realizing the implications.

The dark side of me hopes that the abortionists have the opportunity to see how ObamaCare plays out and how it comes crashing down upon them.

But "that better angel of my nature" wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Kill it.  And save the morons from themselves.

On Our Way To a Colorblind Society

This I find to be dismaying:
Colorblind America: A Malignant Fallacy
By Chidike Okeem, American Thinker

The fanciful idea of living in a colorblind society is one of the greatest impediments to sophisticated discussions about race in America. If there is going to be a soothing of racial tensions in American society, there first has to be an understanding that race -- albeit a social construct based on some biological realities -- exists and matters, and it is not just a vestigial figment of centuries-old white racism. [link]
To his credit, the author goes on to attack "a band of profiteering, country-trotting black liberals claiming that race matters in all the areas where it clearly does not."

But the premise he starts with cannot go without comment.

We are, if ever so slowly, moving toward that colorblind society. In fact, a raceless society.

Seen the latest Lexus commercial on TV? No? Take a look:

I wonder how many people watched it and never paid attention to the fact that the husband in the commercial is black and the wife is white? I'll bet more than a few.

When that sort of thing goes unnoticed Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton - and all the other slave traders among us who peddle the racism card - should be very afraid.

We are winning this argument. One interracial marriage at a time.

* And when the day comes that our president stops calling himself black, we will have made further strides.

- - -

Okay, we have some work yet to be done. "But whether he’s race baiting or just that dumb ..."

'I'm Sick & Damn Tired Of It'

From the man who brought the title "Marine Corps drill instructor" to the big screen with a flair unique unto himself, R. Lee Ermey on the Democrats' effort to destroy this country:

A patriot speaks.  A patriot with an attitude.  And chain-fed weaponry.

You'd do well to listen.

* Hat tip to Hot Air.

Love Him Or Hate Him

Here's Ted Nugent explaining the 2nd Amendment as only he can:

I'm reminded of the fact, as I listened to his position on his right to be free, regardless whether there's a document that says it's so, that the 2nd Amendment doesn't grant us the right to keep and bear arms. It actually recognizes and codifies a preexisting right in natural law that allows Americans to keep arms and to defend themselves.

Notice it reads: "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed," not "... the people are hereby granted the right to keep and bear arms."

A profound difference.

Anyway, thanks, Nuge Man.

Tell Them To Stuff It

I'll tell you up front, I'm a Brett Favre fan.  So when I see what the NFL has done to him this year, it fries me.

The latest:
NFL fines Favre $50K for 'failure to cooperate'
By Dave Campbell, AP Sports Writer

Eden Prairie, Minn. (AP) — Brett Favre was fined $50,000 by the NFL for failing to cooperate with its investigation of inappropriate messages and lewd photos he allegedly sent to a former Jets game-day employee.

Commissioner Roger Goodell "could not conclude" that Favre violated the league's personal conduct policy based on the evidence currently available to him.

The league said forensic analysis failed to establish that the 41-year-old Minnesota Vikings quarterback sent objectionable photographs to Jenn Sterger. "The review found no evidence ... [link]
Favre has been accused of inviting a woman who was not his wife to his room (which puts him in league with three-fourths of his NFL compatriots who do the same on most any given day), and of sending that woman a cell phone image of his schwanz (which is rather weird but not illegal, doesn't reflect in any way on the image that the National Football League may have, and is no one else's business).

Here's the deal: It's not like he's been arrested and charged with murder and aggravated assault or anything.  He did something that the prudes in the league office don't appreciate.  So they fined him.

It sounds like Favre has refused to cooperate with the busybodies who run the league, essentially saying it's none of their business and to kiss his ass.

Good for him.

- - -

Want some irony so thick that it can't be cut with a knife?  The woman who allegedly received the text message from Brett Favre that included a photo of his male member?  She is reported to be offended by the fact that Favre exposed himself to her.

Here's the offendee:

Exposed for all the world to see.

She is reported to be offended by the fact that Favre exposed himself to her.

Give me a break.

Photo courtesy of the New York Post.

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

There They Go Again

When does 1-1 not equal 0?

When "global warming" is involved.

A sane person would think that warmer temperatures of late in the Arctic (1) minus colder temperatures in the northern hemisphere generally (1) would cancel each other out (0) and put "the planet is ever-warming" argument on ever-shakier ground.

But not in global warming land.  To the strange inhabitants therein warmer weather up north actually causes colder weather here.  Thus 1-1=2.

Think I'm kidding?

Today's belch from the loony warmists:
Holiday Blizzard: More Signs of Global Warming
By Bryan Walsh, TIME

One theory is that a warmer Arctic may actually lead to colder and snowier winters in the northern mid-latitudes. Even as countries like Britain — suffering through the coldest December on record — deal with low temperatures and unusual snow, the Arctic has kept on warming, with Greenland and Arctic Canada experiencing the hottest year on record. Temperatures in that region have been 5.4°F to 7.2°F (3°C to 4°C) above normal in 2010. As a result, the Arctic sea-ice cover has continued to shrink; this September, the minimum summer sea-ice extent was more than 770,000 sq. mi. (2 million sq km) below the long-term average, and the third-smallest on record. Snow may be piling up in midtown Manhattan, but the Arctic is continuing its long-term meltdown.

The loss of Arctic sea ice helps accelerate the warming of ... [blah blah blah] [link]
Now, you're saying to yourself: Can't the opposite be true as well?  Maybe cold temperatures in New York are causing warmer temperatures at the North Pole.  That we're experiencing global cooling.

Shut up.

This is their latest excuse for weather patterns not fitting their mold and they're sticking to it.

You have to admit, it's a creative ditty.  Warmth causes cold.  Someone had to be drunk when they dreamt that one up.

Quote of the Day

Jennifer Rubin on the fantasy land that is liberalism:
You would think the liberal intelligentsia would, with a record of so many misses on so many consequential matters, become chastened. But no. They are filled with certainty: Obama is back, the recovery is around the corner, Russian "reset" is a success, ObamaCare can't be repealed, there are no electable Republican 2012 contenders, and more, they tell us. We'll see if the left's crystal ball is any more accurate in 2011. But for now, let's not forget all the things they told as that simply weren't so.
Read the whole thing. Good stuff.

On This We Disagree

Sometimes we let our opposition to a particular argument or practice so steel cloud our viewpoint that we let it skew our thinking toward an alternative that can be, in fact, quite acceptable.

Take Congressional earmarks for example.  We all hate them, right?  The practice involves the acquisition of funds by a particular congressperson for a specific project in his district.  A really out-of-control process, as it turns out, that allows one congressman to help gain approval for someone else's pet project in return for approval for his.  Thus the twelve thousand earmarks in a transportation bill a few years ago (and well over six thousand in the omnibus bill that failed two weeks ago).  For that reason alone, they breed waste and corruption.

More importantly, they come with no oversight.  See John Murtha's personal airport for the most egregious example.

My Democratic congressman (for another week, then he's gone forever) once said in an attempt to justify this thievery, "I frankly think the members of Congress are far better situated to understand the priorities of their districts."  My reaction at the time was to ask, "Better situated than those trained professionals who are paid handsomely by the taxpayer to analyze projects based on the need, their merits, their cost/benefit ratio, and their anticipated rate of return?

Based on recent history - think John Murtha again - what kind of "priorities" do you mean, Congressman?

So you know, there is a viable alternative to earmarking.  That's to have our elected representatives take their requests to those professional analysts in the executive branch and ask for a fair study to be conducted and, if deemed appropriate, to approve allocation of funds.  As it was done for many, many years before earmarking became so popular a practice.

Here's the problem.  Some see any request for appropriations coming from Congress to now be a bad thing.  When it really isn't.  An example:
Great news: Congress discovers exciting new ways to earmark
Hot Air

Maybe I’ve been wrong all along. Maybe it really is time for a third party.

Though Mr. Kirk and other Republicans thundered against pork-barrel spending and lawmakers’ practice of designating money for special projects through earmarks, they have not shied from using a less-well-known process called lettermarking to try to direct money to projects in their home districts…

Lettermarking, which takes place outside the Congressional appropriations process, is one of the many ways that legislators who support a ban on earmarks try to direct money back home.

In phonemarking, a lawmaker calls an agency to request financing for a project. More indirectly, members of Congress make use of what are known as soft earmarks, which involve making suggestions about where money should be directed, instead of explicitly instructing agencies to finance a project. Members also push for increases in financing of certain accounts in a federal agency’s budget and then forcefully request that the agency spend the money on the members’ pet project…

[A] New York Times review of letters and e-mail to government agencies from members of Congress shows that the practice is widespread despite the fact that both President George W. Bush and President Obama have issued executive orders instructing agencies not to finance projects based on communications from Congress.

According to the Times, there’s basically no way to track these requests short of using FOIA to demand correspondence between Congress and various agencies.

What’s most depressing about this, I think, isn’t the betrayal of transparency or even the hypocrisy of being loudly anti-earmark yet quietly pro-lettermark, it’s that it’s yet another example of government trying to do an end-around recently imposed limits on its own power. [link]
I don't see it that way at all.  Congressmen sending letters of request to the executive branch of government for special consideration of a particular appropriation is a perfectly legitimate alternative to earmarking.  Can it be abused by some nameless, faceless bureaucrat in an agency of the executive?  Sure.  But what's the incentive?  To make a congressman happy?  What does the bureaucrat care?

Besides, realistically many if not most of the appropriations that the government deals with come from individual requests from citizens.  None of which are "transparent."  It's how things are done.  And it works.  Because trained project professionals are involved in analyzing the requests.

So.  Let's continue to be vigilant when it comes to the discredited and abusive practice of earmarking.  But let's not get our undies in a bunch over other spending practices/processes that might seem to stem from similar motives.  Let those who are paid to allocate based on worth do their thing.  America will do okay.

- - -

See "NRV Airport's new runway 'looks good, rides smooth'." A few questions worth asking: Is it viable? Is it cost effective? Would it exist if a project manager had been involved in appropriating funds to keep it going rather than Rick Boucher? What does it accomplish that an underused Roanoke Regional Airport can't?  Or an expensive and underused Virginia Tech Montgomery Executive Airport, for that matter.

Me?  I'm betting some number cruncher in Washington would laugh uproariously over that spaghetti factory.

How We Got Into This Mess

And how we get ourselves out.

The Wall Street Journal:
The Right Way to Balance the Budget
By Andrew G. Biggs, Kevin Hassett, and Matt Jensen

The federal debt is at its highest level since the aftermath of World War II—and it's projected to rise further. Simply stabilizing debt levels would require an immediate and permanent 23% increase in all federal tax revenues or equivalent cuts in government expenditures, according to Congressional Budget Office forecasts. What's clear is that to avoid a crisis, the federal government must undergo a significant retrenchment, or fiscal consolidation. The question is whether to do so by raising taxes or reducing government spending.

To be blunt, countries in fiscal trouble generally get there by making years of concessions to their left wing, and their fiscal consolidations tend to make too many as well. As a result, successful consolidations are rare: In only around one-fifth of cases do countries reduce their debt-to-GDP ratios by the relatively modest sum of 4.5 percentage points three years following the beginning of a consolidation. Finland from 1996 to 1998 and the United Kingdom in 1997 are two examples of successful consolidations.

The data also clearly indicate that successful attempts to balance budgets rely almost entirely on reduced government expenditures, while unsuccessful ones rely heavily on tax increases. On average, the typical unsuccessful consolidation consisted of 53% tax increases and 47% spending cuts.

By contrast, the typical successful fiscal consolidation consisted, on average, of 85% spending cuts. While tax increases play little role in successful efforts to balance budgets, there are some cases where governments reduced spending by more than was needed to lower the budget deficit, and then went on to cut taxes. Finland's consolidation in the late 1990s consisted of 108% spending cuts, accompanied by modest tax cuts. [link] [emphasis mine]
This goes to the heart of the Tea Party movement.  We've been down the "raise taxes to reduce the deficit" path time and time again with absolutely nothing to show for it except more government profligacy.

We must cut spending.  In every department, every agency.  And not in a small, token way.

Otherwise there's a train wreck coming.  And it ain't gonna be pretty to watch or be a part of.

The Democrats' Legacy

My God:

It's as if they wanted to destroy this country.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Be Careful When You Call Someone Asinine

Adjective: asinine ˈasəˌnīn
1. Showing a lack of intelligence or thought
2. Of or like an ass

- - -

Here's your chuckle for this morning.

From "the Roanoke Times editorial board":
Natural gas is not a renewable energy source

Del. Will Morefield of Tazwell [jf: Tazwell?] says he has prefiled legislation for the upcoming General Assembly session to count natural gas — primarily coalbed methane — as a renewable energy source. Companies that burn the gas to generate energy then could benefit under the state’s renewable energy programs.

We’re writing an editorial for later in the week in which we will point out what an asinine idea this is. Coming from Moregield [jf: Moregield?], though, it is hardly surprising.   [link]
Asinine is as asinine does.

Put The Blame Where It Belongs

You've heard that old adage: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

The same applies to our youth and education.

We can set all the textbooks and laptop computers on the planet in front of our kids but if they prefer to grow up ignorant, but skilled at playing Halo Reach, who's to blame?

That's why you'll never hear me complaining about the quality of teachers in this country.  Or about the relative effectiveness of public education.

In the end, it comes down to one unshakable principle: Schools only provide the learning tools; they don't teach; it's up to ... our future leaders ... to use those tools and educate themselves.  If it were up to me, I'd scrap the system entirely, hand every young American a library card, point him and her in the general direction of the local book repository, and tell them to have at it; we'll get back with you in twelve years.

Many will choose not to rise to the occasion. To not take advantage of the wonderful opportunity.  Oh, well.

That's why the Roanoke Times this morning has it half right:
Too dumb to serve?

Nearly one-quarter of the nation's high school graduates who took the Army's entrance exam failed. Virginians fared even worse than their fellow countrymen.

The U.S. Army's report, released last week, is an indictment of the public education system. Instead of casting blame yet again on the soldiers on the front line -- in this instance, the teachers manning classrooms -- policymakers need to take a good, hard look at how effective they've been in command. [link]
"An indictment of the public education system."  Not in my mind.

Yes, it's fair to criticize "the system" for graduating illiterate, ignorant students who are woefully unprepared to enter the world, but let's put the real blame where it should lie.  Students who show up in class over a period of twelve years and who leave the system illiterate and stupid can blame only themselves.  And, until someone figures out a way to inject books into the veins of these unmotivated, disinterested dead-enders - future hamburger flippers at McDonald's all - it will forever be that way.

You wonder how the Chinese are kicking your ass?

Add this to the long list.

And look no further than that kid of yours with the Wii controller in his hand, the glazed look on his face, and the immense void where his brain should be.

A Bit Of History

For those of you who don't get around much, here's something you might find interesting.  President Woodrow Wilson (the first from the Old South to be elected after the Civil War) was born this day 154 years ago.

More interesting:  His wife, Edith - the "secret president of the United States" - was born right here in Southwest Virginia, over in Wytheville.

It's a fascinating period in our nation's history, one that gets little attention these days.

The Age In Which We Live

Slipping the surly bonds of ... marriage:

She was screwing her ex-husband. Her now-husband faces prison time.

Beam me up, Scotty.

Don't Ya Just Love Liberals?

Here you thought the Democrats were crushed in the last election.  And that they are in retreat on all fronts.  And that their standard-bearer has poll numbers that are so low they rival Nancy Pelosi's and Josef Mengele's.

What little you know.

From the Washington Post's strongest liberal - and weakest link - Eugene Robinson:

May God have mercy.

Headline of the Day

Kill ObamaCare Before It Does More Harm

Put a bullet in its brain pan and you, Mr. Legislator, will have the unflinching support of the American people.

When you get polling numbers this skewed, you know you're on safe ground.

From Rasmussen:
Health Care Law
Support for Health Care Repeal At 60%

For the second time this month, 60% of Likely Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the national health care law, while the number who expect health care costs to increase is at its highest level since August.

Support for repeal has ranged from 50% to 63% in weekly tracking since the bill became law in late March. Last week, support for repeal was at 55%.

But last week also marked the first time a majority of voters believe the measure is likely to be repealed. [link]
I think there's a reasonable chance that the Senate, once the House passes repeal (a given), will go along with the outright voiding of the entire ObamaCare monstrosity now that the members thereof have wet their pants over the November election results.  But the question is, will Obama veto repeal legislation?

There's a win/win here for the GOP.  Stop the nationalization and ruination of our once great health care system, start over, and the people will rally behind the effort; let Obama veto repeal and, as deterioration of the health care system accelerates and costs mushroom, he'll be tarred and feathered for that which he's done to our country.

In either case, press forward.  The American people are behind you.

To Those Who Are Absolutely Certain ...

You don't know as much as you think you know:

Researchers: Ancient human remains found in Israel
By Daniel Estrin, Associated Press

Jerusalem (AP) — Israeli archaeologists said Monday they may have found the earliest evidence yet for the existence of modern man, and if so, it could upset theories of the origin of humans.

A Tel Aviv University team excavating a cave in central Israel said teeth found in the cave are about 400,000 years old and resemble those of other remains of modern man, known scientifically as Homo sapiens, found in Israel. The earliest Homo sapiens remains found until now are half as old.

"It's very exciting to come to this conclusion," said archaeologist Avi Gopher, whose team examined the teeth with X-rays and CT scans and dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found.

He stressed that further research is needed to solidify the claim. If it does, he says, "this changes the whole picture of evolution."

The accepted scientific theory is that Homo sapiens originated in Africa and migrated out of the continent. Gopher said if the remains are definitively linked to modern human's ancestors, it could mean that modern man in fact originated in what is now Israel. [link]
Does this disprove the theory of evolution?  Hardly.

But it does prove once again that it's best to be skeptical  of anyone who comes to you absolutely, positively certain of something so shrouded in the mysteries of the unknown.

We Live Worlds Apart

Exaggerated perhaps only slightly:
To My Democratic Friends and Family:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or explicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2011 but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere . Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

To My Republican Friends and Family:

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Received via email

- - -

To put a face to this liberal mindset, here's the Clown Prince of Progressivism, Michael Moore:

"Hey Everyone,

"I just wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas (or a Merry Everything) and hope you are all well today."

A merry everything?  Why pick on those who don't find themselves to be, or don't want to be, or are incapable of  being merry?  What do you have against the suicidal, the morbid, and the depressed, Michael?

And Speaking Of Those With Blind Faith ...

See "The Abiding Faith Of Warm-ongers."

No amount of contradictory information with regard to "climate change" is going to shake their institutionalized belief system.

Monday, December 27, 2010

Yeah. Right.

New Yorkers don't want a Wal-Mart in town.  That ...

Oh.  Wait.

It's the rabidly anti-Wal-Mart New York Times pushing the tale.

Never mind.

For Those Who Love History

And intrigue:
Coded American Civil War message in bottle deciphered

A message in a bottle delivered to a Confederate general during the American Civil War has been deciphered, 147 years after it was written.

In the encrypted message, a commander tells Gen John Pemberton that no reinforcements are available to help him defend Vicksburg, Mississippi.

"You can expect no help from this side of the river," says the message, which was deciphered by codebreakers.

The text is dated 4 July 1863 - the day Vicksburg fell to Union forces.

The small bottle was given to the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond, Virginia, by a former Confederate soldier in 1896.

Earlier this year the museum's collections manager, Catherine Wright, decided to investigate the wrapped note it contained. [link]
"You can expect no help from this side of the river."  One wonders why that news had to be encoded.  After all, General Grant was sending that message to the beleaguered Confederates trapped in Vicksburg every day.  Without need of code.

Anyway, this makes for a nice story, don't you think?

There Is a Glimmer of Hope

Things are sure to start turning around now:
Kennedy's exit from Congress leaves a family void
By Andrew Miga, Associated Press

Washington (AP) - The Kennedys have held congressional seats, the presidency and the public's imagination for more than 60 years.

That era ends when Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island vacates his U.S. House seat next month, leaving a City Council post in California as Camelot's sole remaining political holding.

The son of the late Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy says he has no qualms about walking away from politics. His departure marks the first time in 63 years that a Kennedy won't be serving in elected office in Washington.

The 43-year-old Kennedy says in his family, "the legacy was always public service, and that didn't necessarily mean public office."

Kennedy plans to continue the tradition by championing a national effort to boost brain research. [link]
(Kennedy is hoping that his brain research will lead to the discovery of one.)

So the Kennedys are out of politics.  Americans can rest a wee bit easier tonight.

Commerce Goes Underground

I read the other day an article that gave out the news that the rate of cigarette smoking in the state of California continues to decline.  While I have little doubt that that's true, my first thought was: At some point (and I think the city of New York has reached that point), so much of the business goes underground that there's no real way to tell.  Think of the burgeoning marijuana business as a good California example.  How much dope are they smokin' out there?  It's anyone's guess.

That thought takes us to light bulbs.  Soon they too will be sold on the black market.  And you might guess why:
Bootleg Lightbulbs Coming to California
American Thinker

Old reliable, the 100-watt light bulb -- safe, cheap, and bright enough to read, write, cook, shave, and put on your makeup by, will be gone January 1.

The California Energy Commission in September 2010 published its 226-page Appliance Efficiency Regulations, whereby the 100-watt incandescent light bulb will be outlawed at midnight on December 31, 2010.

Californians with self-imposed rationing, running out of both energy and common sense, have declared that consuming electrical power is a social vice. Electric power must be curbed, along with banning Dr. Pepper and Happy Meals. And it's not just light bulbs. These appliance standards will regulate and ban hundreds of products including ...

"... refrigerators, air conditioners, space heaters, water heaters, pool heaters, pool pumps, electric spas, pool pump motors, plumbing fittings, plumbing fixtures, showerheads, spray valves, faucets, tub spout diverters, water closets, urinals, ceiling fans, ceiling fan light kits, dehumidifiers, fluorescent lamp ballasts, lamps, general purpose lighting, emergency lighting, exit signs, traffic signal modules, traffic signal lamps, luminaires, torchieres, portable lighting fixtures, metal halide luminaires, high intensity discharge fixtures, HID fixtures, under-cabinet luminaires, dishwashers, clothes washers, clothes dryers, cooking products, food service equipment, electric motors, low-voltage dry-type distribution transformers, external AC to DC and AC to AC power supplies, consumer electronics, consumer audio and video equipment, televisions, compact audio products, digital versatile disc players, digital versatile disc recorders, digital television adapters, battery charger systems[.] [link]
In the land of the free. My God.

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Memo To Roanoke Times:

Practice what you preach.

See today's editorial "Remembering the Civil War."

It includes this truth:

"Remembering [the Civil War] at significant milestones is not only right, but also helpful and even necessary to understanding the shared history of a diverse country once at war with itself."

It also includes this, a request: "Remembering so tragic an event as the Civil War, though, must be, above all, civil." An attitude and a hope with which we can all agree.

All except the lowlife who wrote the editorial. For he or she immediately went on an uncivil attack:
South Carolina's Secession Gala -- hoop skirts, frock coats and all -- which last Sunday marked the day of the first secession among the Confederate states, carried the particularly bad odor of glorifying an Old South of elegance and extravagant wealth built and supported by human slavery.

Reports of other events -- all, like the gala, privately sponsored -- seem similarly nostalgic for the Lost Cause: a re-enactment in Georgia of the state's 1861 secession convention; a mock swearing-in of Confederate President Jefferson Davis in Alabama.

Events that led up to the bloodiest conflict in U.S. history, fought in defense of slavery.

No wonder Benard Simelton, president of the Alabama conference of the NAACP, recoiled, saying, "It's almost like celebrating the Holocaust."
"Celebrating the Holocaust." In an editorial calling for civility.

Is that civil?

To the editorialist, a plea: Let those people in South Carolina have their fun. They do you no harm.

Another: Learn the meaning of the word toleration.

Then look up the word hypocrisy.

Let's Name a Trail After Him

In fact, since he's "one of Southwest Virginia's most important figures," let's name every freaking hiking trail and bike path (not to forget the horse trail in Scott County) in Southwest Virginia that he wasted our hard-earned tax dollars on after him.

We'll call them all "The Rick Boucher Memorial Taxpayer Funded Trail To Nowhere."

That's his 28 year legacy.  He should have to live with it.

See "After almost three decades in office, outgoing congressman Rick Boucher has cemented his status as one of Southwest Virginia's most important figures."


Quote of the Day

From George Will:
San Francisco is spending $400 million a year on public employees' pensions, up from $175 million in 2005. In November, San Franciscans voted on Proposition B, which would have required city employees to contribute up to 10 percent of their salaries to their pension plans, and to pay half the health-care premiums of their dependents. Michael Moritz, a venture capitalist, says: "A typical San Francisco resident with one dependent pays $953 a month for health care, while the typical city employee pays less than $10."

San Francisco voters defeated Proposition B.
The most liberal city in America will soon be coming to us begging for a bailout. I say let them reap the whirlwind they they themselves sowed.

Let's Have a Party

Think what you will of Oprah, this from a gathering assembled to pay homage to her is very cool:

I'll try to avoid mentioning anything about this being "a new strain of populism, metastasizing before our eyes, nourished by the same ... impulses that have unsettled American society for half a century now; anarchistic like the Sixties, selfish like the Eighties, contradicting neither, estranged, aimless, and as juvenile as our new century." Or that Oprah "appeals to petulant individuals convinced that they can do everything themselves if they are only left alone, and that others are conspiring to keep them from doing just that; the one threat that will bring Americans into the streets."

It was simply an assemblage of Americans, motivated by a common influence, doing that which they felt moved to do.

"Today's gonna be a good day." We could use that thought on a day like this, with a blizzard descending ...

'Global Warming' - Time For a Reckoning

Is prison appropriate?  Or do those who plotted the greatest scam to have ever (or nearly ever) been pulled off deserve more harsh a punishment?

One thing is certain: The jig is up:
Weather Channel boss calls global warming 'the greatest scam in history'
Telegraph of London

The founder of the The Weather Channel in the US has described the concept of global warming as 'the greatest scam in history' and accused global media of colluding with 'environmental extremists' to alarm the public.

"It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM," John Coleman wrote in an article published on ICECAP, the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, which is known for challenging widely published theories on global warming.

His views challenge the consensus of the international science community that it is at least 90 per cent certain that temperatures will continue to rise, with average global surface temperature projected to increase by between 1.4 and 5.8ºC above 1990 levels by 2100.

This increase will be accompanied by rising sea levels, more intense precipitation events in some countries, increased risk of drought in others, and adverse effects on agriculture, health and water resources.

A recent joint statement by the scientific academies of 17 countries, including the UK's Royal Society, endorsed the theory of climate change and dismissed doubts raised over the need for action to mitigate possible damage caused by climate change.

"We do not consider such doubts justified," the group said in a joint statement, urging prompt action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

But Mr Colemen slams their views as part of a global conspiracy: "Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in [sic] allusion of rapid global warming."

"Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the "research" to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

"Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild "scientific" scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda.

"Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens.

"Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minutes documentary segment."

He added: "I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct.

"There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril." [link]
The last words.  Our planet is not in peril.

- - -

As a side note, it's at least interesting that the founder of the Weather Channel considers global warming to be a hoax while the founder of the CNN news channel considers it to be an impending catastrophe.  Both can't be right.  As for me?  On this subject, I'm going with the weatherman over the crackpot.

- - -

A portent of things to come: Here's how they're explaining these days the fact that the globe's temperature quit rising years ago.  It's cold here, but warm somewhere else.  And that warmth there brings cold here.  So, yeah, it's cold.  But that cold is being caused by warming.

And they soooo want to believe that bit of idiocy.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

In May of last year the really smart Barack Obama and his equally brilliant Democratic colleagues gathered in the Rose Garden at the White House for a signing ceremony. A sea of smiling faces. Each more liberal than the next.

Why the party?

They "solved" the credit card debt problem by stroke of pen. With the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act (or Credit CARD Act) of 2009.

Said Obama: "With this bill we're putting in place some common sense reforms."

One of those "common sense reforms? Putting limits on when, how, and how much lenders could raise rates.

Another "common sense" reform? Limiting the practice of raising interest rates on customers based on their payment records with other unrelated credit issuers. (source)

Also the right to "opt out" of changes in the way lenders intend to do business with customers.

And the right of cardholders to take longer to pay that which is owed lenders.

And limits on fees.

And limits on how much lenders can charge for a new card offered to a consumer with bad debt.

And the "common sense" requirement limiting late fees.


Seems so ... perfect.  So born of ... common sense.

Here's a second truism for the day: The words "Democrat" and "common sense" should never appear in the same sentence.

So how have those lenders and, in turn, America's consumers reacted to this new law?

In what can truly be seen as the most predictable - and most common sensible - manner:
Payday Lending Booms as Credit Cards Become Less Available
By Todd Zywicki

A nominee for least-surprising business story of the year–payday lending booms as new credit card regulations and the credit crunch reduce access to credit cards, especially for higher-risk borrowers.

“'We believe that we’re starting to see a benefit of a general reduction in consumer credit, particularly ... subprime credit cards,' Patrick O’Shaughnessy, Advance America’s chief financial officer, told investors in November. The Spartanburg, S.C., company has 2,360 payday-loan offices, including 13 opened this year. Company officials plan to open an unspecified number of additional offices, partly to take advantage of the upheaval."

Unintended consequences really suck sometimes. Hmmm, I’m starting to question whether mindless moral outrage that wishes away unintended consequences is the best way to think about consumer credit regulations. Maybe instead we ought to acknowledge that there will be unintended consequences, such as by making credit cards less available regulation will drive many consumers to substitute to more expensive types of credit, such as payday loans? And just wait until the well-intentioned bureaucrats at the CFPB really start protecting those poor folks, then they are really going to get it. [link]
Expect another "common sense" fix to emanate from those über-intelligent smiling faces seen above that will target the "common sense" fix that they all signed into law last year.  If enacted, expect another fine mess.

Common sense dictates.

Photo courtesy of MSNBC.

This Is Not Encouraging

You're familiar with that famous George Santayana quote, I'm sure:

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

That's what we call a truism.

But learning from history is one thing. Learning it at all is another. Ignorance puts the odds of repeating the most egregious sins of humanity much greater.

I read the following and wonder: Where are our schools?
Historical Illiteracy
By Eileen F. Toplansky, American Thinker

The results from the schools of higher learning are very discouraging. This confirms the findings of David McCullough, who, in a 1995 address at the National Book Awards Ceremony in New York warned about the steady decline of historical knowledge among American students. He wrote in "Why History? Remarks by David McCullough in Acceptance of the National Book Foundation Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters, how "a young woman told [him] how glad she was to have attended [his] lecture, because until then, she explained, she had never realized that the original thirteen colonies were all on the eastern seaboard." This student was from an Ivy League university!

here we are in 2010 where in Massachusetts, a school now issues permission slips for the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and my own students repeatedly display abysmal ignorance about basic American history. This semester alone, my students did not know when the American Revolution occurred, who Dwight D. Eisenhower was and most astonishing, who the President was during the Civil War.

[A]ccording to the findings of the ICI group, when tested as freshmen, "half of the incoming [college] freshmen tested fail the 60-question multiple choice [history] quiz." Three years later they have learned very little, with seniors scoring a mere four percent higher. In fact, "no school, not even Harvard or Yale, got above a 69 percent average among seniors. Worse still, in some schools, students did less well coming out than going in." [link]
Just to put a fine point on it, we lock our students in a room (figuratively) for sixteen years, their one and only assigned goal being to learn, and this is the result?   What were they doing those sixteen years?

This is beyond pathetic.  It's troubling.

Another quote, one that should force us to remedy this problem now, before it's too late:

"Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever."
-- Lenin --

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Merry Christmas

To you and yours:

Have a wonderful Christmas Day.

Lest We Forget

On this day when families gather to feast, to commune, and to celebrate ...

... in lands far, far away, they're still out there manning the walls.

May they too have a Merry Christmas.

If Only They'd Paid Attention In Math Class

Anything about this (schadenfreudistic) statistic about ABC's "This Week" strike you as odd?

Chris Ariens:
“Meet the Press with David Gregory” was the #1 Sunday public affairs show again last week, with a 660K Total Viewer lead over #2 CBS’ “Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer.”

But the bigger story is the loss of viewers of ABC’s #3 “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A year ago (Dec. 20, 2009) as the show was preparing for a host change, “This Week” drew 2.79M Total Viewers. Last Sunday it drew 1.91M — down -46% in one year. 
You guessed it.  Amanpour's torturous show wasn't down 46%.  It was down 31.5%

Not that that's anything for her to cheer.

Friday, December 24, 2010

To Those Who Take Global Warming On Faith

This must be discomfiting:

New Zealand Climate Scientists Admit To Faking Temperatures: The Actual Temps Show Little Warming Over Last 50 Years

What is it about climate scientists and fraud, deceit, and prevarication?

Obama Brings Change

Did he fix the problems at America's airport terminals?


Change you can believe in.

Earth To Politico:

You somehow find this to be a change of course:

"Lisa Murkowski isn’t gunning down caribou on national TV like that other famous Alaskan, but the Republican lawmaker is going rogue in the Senate just weeks after staging the most stunning back-from-the-dead political win of the 2010 cycle."

In fact, that's what got her in trouble with Republicans in the first place, wasn't it?  Going "rogue"?

Just as it will again next time around.

And the next.

Till she's finally tossed.

ObamaCare Embarrasses Our System of Gov't

A message from the Tea Party: We deserve better from our overpaid elected representatives and the bullshit must stop:
Congress's Monstrous Legal Legacy
By Kimberley A. Strassel, Wall Street Journal

The historians will long be fighting over the legislative legacy of the 111th Congress. As to its legal legacy, the only real question is whether this just-finished Democratic Congress was the most unserious in decades, or the most unserious in history.

That much is clear from the recent ObamaCare court proceedings. Federal Judge Henry Hudson, responding to a lawsuit by the state of Virginia, last week struck down the core of the law, the individual mandate. His decision came the same week that a coalition of 20 states presented oral arguments against the health law in front of Florida federal Judge Roger Vinson. In October, Judge Vinson ruled against the Obama Justice Department's motion to dismiss the states' lawsuit.

[ObamaCare] is "in its design, the most profoundly unconstitutional statute in American history; in its execution, one of the most incompetent ones," says David Rivkin, the lawyer who represents the 20 state plaintiffs in the Florida suit. [link]
I'm reminded that it was this same shockingly unserious Congress of the United States of America that didn't feel it necessary to even meet its first obligation to the people of this country.  The Democratic leadership thereof decided that it didn't have to even pass a budget around which the government could effectively operate.  So it went about its business, for the first time in this nation's history, without one.

And then there is ObamaCare.

"[T]he only real question is whether this just-finished Democratic Congress was the most unserious in decades, or the most unserious in history"?  Is there any doubt in anyone's mind?

A Shining Example

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel asks (see "ObamaCare Embarrasses Our System of Gov't"):

"The historians will long be fighting over the legislative legacy of the 111th Congress. As to its legal legacy, the only real question is whether this just-finished Democratic Congress was the most unserious in decades, or the most unserious in history."

How unserious are these clowns?  Showcasing Robert Menendez, United States senator, New Jersey:
A Letter to Santa Claus
Huffington Post

December 23, 2010

Dear Santa Claus,

I am writing out of concern, because you may have to move from the North Pole due to the dramatic melting of Arctic sea ice. The Navy's chief oceanographer says that by the summer of 2020 the North Pole may not have summer ice and other scientists project that an ice-free Arctic is possible as soon as 2012!

Scientists overwhelmingly agree that polar ice is melting because of greenhouse gas pollution and I am working hard to reduce these emissions. But there is probably nothing we can do in time to save the North Pole. I am worried about your safety and your ability to deliver billions of Christmas gifts if the ice cap on the North Pole no longer stays frozen all year. What will happen to your house, your workshop, the elves' houses and your reindeer barns?

I want you to know that if you want to ... [link]
For the love of God.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Earth To Roanoke Times:

I think I understand why you people are so wrong so often.  You haven't the first clue as to what you're talking - or writing - about.

The following, a glaring example of your cluelessness, having to do with Governor Bob McDonnell's call for ending state support for public television, is beyond boneheaded:
Again, the governor has PBS in his sights

[Governor McDonnell] proposes cutting $2 million in each of the next two fiscal years to phase out state support. With so many "content providers" in today's media marketplace, he argues, it just doesn't make sense to use taxpayer dollars to give one a competitive edge.

This is a tired argument that conservatives have accepted unquestioningly for many years, but it simply is not true.

Public television and radio stations do not compete with private broadcasters for advertisers. They do compete for viewers, with content driven not by its commercial appeal, but its value to education and public service.

With a mission to meet identifiable public needs, rather than advertiser expectations, public broadcasting has carved out a unique niche to become, as McDonnell himself acknowledged, "a wonderful resource, providing quality programming." [link]
Where to start?

1)  "This is a tired argument that conservatives have accepted unquestioningly for many years."  Wrong on both counts.  The argument is not tired (see below) and conservatives, by their nature, question everything.  See the six year history of "From on High."

2) "Public television and radio stations do not compete with private broadcasters for advertisers. They do compete for viewers, with content ..."  What?!  I've got news for you woefully uninformed twits: While it's true that public television station managers don't "compete" for advertisers (they compete with Medicaid for taxpayer funding), private stations, in fact, "do compete for viewers" too.  You see, the number of viewers - here's a shock! - determine whether or not advertisers flock to a particular station.  So, in reality, private owners aren't really competing for advertising either.  It's all about body count.

I've been a purchaser of advertising on a pretty large scale.  The first things I wanted to know, when I sat down with advertising managers for a station, are reach, penetration, and demographics (and then cost).  It was my job to deliver open wallets to my employer.  And lots of them.  Viewers/listeners are what we are all about.  Did stations profit from any ad buy that I made?  Certainly.  Did my company profit from the size of the station's listening audience?  See how this works?

3) "With a mission to meet identifiable public needs, rather than ..." Really?  Public television has a mission?  What incentive do public stations have to produce anything?  "Public needs"?  If public television or radio were working successfully to satisfy public needs, wouldn't those stations have an audience?  And if they have an audience, why couldn't Virginia's taxpayers ask (demand) that they stand on their own and stop robbing us of our children's college education fund?  Could it be that PBS really has no audience beyond the small set of effete snobs who occasionally tune in? What does the lack of viewership say about their ability to satisfy that public need?

4) "With a mission to meet identifiable public needs, rather than advertiser expectations ..."  I've got a news flash for you people, from Marketing 101: All "advertiser expectations" involve meeting "public needs."

Remember "Air America"?  Neither does anyone else.  Had it not had to compete for listeners, like PBS doesn't, it too would still be around serving no real purpose and meeting the needs of ... well, except for the same handful of PBS loving people who want us to believe that it's vital to our national interests, no one.  Where were the Democrats and our tax money when that jewel was going under?

5) In truth, every provider of news, information, and entertainment on this planet has a mission "to meet identifiable public needs."  Or they go out of business.  But not PBS.  It's on the public dole.  It just needs a good lobbyist.  And a few effete snobs who write duncish editorials about the virtues of a worthless segment of a medium that is, on the whole, resplendent in its offerings and hugely successful at "meeting public needs."

Reality Slowly Sinks In

While New Yorkers were devoting their every waking moment to saving the environment, opening their doors to illegals, and helping those who couldn't - or wouldn't - help themselves, a funny thing was going on.  A whole lot of other New Yorkers - those who were more focused on income and family - packed their bags and left the state.

Reality bites:
Wake Up, NY
By John Faso, New York Post

The news that the Empire State will lose two more seats in the US House of Representatives should be an urgent wakeup call to all New Yorkers, particularly our elected officials.

We'll drop to just 27 House seats after 2012, the lowest number in 200 years -- because the latest Census reveals that our state's population grew at about half the national rate over the last decade.

Many New Yorkers have no choice but to flee our confiscatory taxes and dismal job climate. Can our policymakers turn things around?

The immediate future is going to be difficult. [link]
The op/ed is a plea for tax and regulation reform, as well as a call for New Yorkers to take a more wholesome (and self-preservative) attitude toward business.

It won't happen, of course.

Not anytime soon, anyway.

And New York will continue its inexorable decline.

Meanwhile, with regard to the real problems that face New Yorkers, like salt in restaurant food ...

'God Bless America'

Maybe they do have reason to fear us since we own all the guns. And we ain't talkin' just Grandad's old pea shooter:

Oh, and we got all the babes too.

Why is it I feel this overpowering need to shoot the crap out of my Chevy truck this morning?

What Christmas Is Really All About

Read "Saved by Christmas."


And So Our Military Becomes Stronger & More Effective

Just Asking

Why can't Obama do what most of us do when we go on vacation, mow the lawn and fix the porch swing?

But no.

I work - sometimes exhaustingly - so that he and his family can party in breathtakingly expensive places around the globe.  There is something wrong with that equation.

Why The Internet Must Be Free

So that the millions of voices out there of those who yearn to express themselves can be heard and the words of those participating can be printed without fear of government retribution. And so that the wondrous creativity that abounds will never be stifled.

Speaking of which:

You won't be reading that in the mainstream media.

Quote of the Day

From Instapundit:

"[Arlen] Specter is a rare creature. Most Senators only disgrace one party, but he’s managed to embarrass both."


Maybe Someday

Matt Drudge sees a pattern developing (click on the image to enlarge it):

Yeah, 17 million are unemployed.  But look at the bright side.  Gays can serve in the military.

ONE YEAR FROM NOW: Obama to focus his entire being on ...

- - -

It's interesting that Glenn Reynolds had the same cut-and-paste idea at almost the same moment.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Let's Celebrate a Healthy Planet

While "scientists" see it as being Armageddon, in fact the trend is a healthy one.

Carbon dioxide levels - (carbon dioxide being the giver of life to all the world's flora)  - is accumulating in the earth's atmosphere.

We're talking only trace amounts in accumulation, but it's still a wholesome trend.

Pay no attention to the frightened little children who think it spells doom for Mother Earth.

Headline Of The Day

On the just-released 2010 census results, the bottom line:

And it was no accident.

Things Aren't Bad Enough For Ya?

Stick around.  They're about to get much worse:
EPA to double down on climate
By Robin Bravender, Politico

The Obama administration is expected to roll out a major greenhouse gas policy for power plants and refineries as soon as Wednesday, signaling it won’t back off its push to fight climate change in the face of mounting opposition on Capitol Hill.

The Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to a schedule for setting greenhouse gas emission limits, known as “performance standards,” for the nation’s two biggest carbon-emitting industries, POLITICO has learned.

The standards are part of a series of climate rules from the Obama administration that have faced fierce opposition from industry groups and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. And while the policies won’t go final for more than a year, the political ramifications will come immediately.

They will come as welcome news to environmentalists who want the administration to flex its regulatory muscle following the death of climate legislation this year, but EPA can expect its foes on the right to blast the move as another example of regulatory overreach.

GOP lawmakers slated to claim the gavels of powerful House committees next year have already vowed to launch probes into a host of EPA regulations – including the administration’s suite of climate change rules – arguing that the regulations will further damage the already ailing economy. [link]
What does this punitive action on the part of the EPA have to do with you?  Your electric bill is going to skyrocket.  And jobs for you folks in Dickenson, Lee, Russell, Scott, Tazewell, and Wise Counties here in Virginia - where coal is king - are in jeopardy.  Again.

This to solve a problem that doesn't exist.  Global warming.

On November 2 Obama and the EPA were sent a message by the voters in this country.  What part of HELL NO! don't they understand?

Why I Don't Care About The Start Treaty

Why is it humans always seem to want to prepare to defend themselves against the last war rather than the next one?  Like the French, who built and maintained a magnificent and complex series of impregnable fortresses along their eastern border in the 30's, block, steel, and concrete structures that Hitler's armies found to be marvelous for storing beer in for their Oktoberfestivities in the 40's, and like Saddam Hussein's "hardened bunkers" that he went to great effort to construct to protect his fleet of Russian Migs, bunkers that were perfect for shielding his armada from the blast effects from 500 pound munitions dropped from above, even with direct hits, and that made for delightful target practice for the U.S. Air Force with its precision weaponry that rocketed directly through side doors and windows, so Obama is preparing to shield us from the impending ...

... Cold War?

We're signing a treaty with the Bolsheviks Soviets Russians.  Wake me when it's over:
New Start's Old Illusions
Wall Street Journal

The Obama Presidency wouldn't have been complete without an arms-control treaty. Since at least the Kellogg-Briand pact in the 1920s, which outlawed war, it has been an article of faith in some circles that reasonable men everywhere could be brought to see the unreason of armaments and would sign binding treaties against them.

And so it came to pass this year that President Obama traveled to Prague to sign the New Start treaty with our Cold War arms-control sparring partners, the Russians. The treaty reduces ...

Perhaps it is fitting, even useful, that a largely irrelevant artifact such as New Start should appear as a footnote to the Cold War years. This means we may finally be forced to confront the real world of the nuclear present, one inhabited not by Mikhail Gorbachev but by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and whichever North Korean is playing with the nuclear button this week.

It is the arms-control ideology behind New Start and even Kellogg-Briand that carries over into something like the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea, violated with impunity, or the utterly failed multiparty "talks" with Iran, a nation with no-one-knows-how-many uranium-enriching centrifuges. Egypt, the Saudis and Turkey can't be far behind.

This is a dangerous world that will require new, hard-headed antiproliferation strategies, not the irrelevancies of New Start. That no doubt will require a new generation of policy makers in Washington. [link]
That's really what it boils down to: In this modern era a nuclear treaty with the Russians is irrelevant.  It simply doesn't matter.

Meanwhile some asshole in Tehran is sailing full speed ahead with his plan to turn the western world into a sand box.  And Obama does nothing.

Foresight, fellas.  Foresight. Mixed with a little fortitude, please.

We Want Gov't Out of Our Lives!

Yet another example of the federal government doing what it does best - suck out our life blood:
Government Gobbles the Web
Wall Street Journal editorial

To health care and financial services, add one more industry that the federal government has drawn into that huge gray cloud called "economic uncertainty."

Yesterday's action is breathtaking: At a stroke, the Democratic-controlled Federal Communications Commission circumvents Congress, defies the courts and declares itself overlord of the Web.

Under the "net neutrality" rules adopted by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and two fellow Democrats on the five-member panel, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and other Internet service providers will have less say over how they manage their networks and serve customers going forward.

Earlier this year, a federal court ruled that the agency lacked legal authority from Congress to regulate Internet service providers. More than 300 Members of Congress from both parties have urged the FCC to stand down on net neutrality regulations. That number surely will rise next year.

There is no compelling reason to subject the Internet to more regulation. New devices and applications proliferate. Competition among broadband providers is robust, barriers to market entry low, and evidence of market failure nonexistent.

What the FCC has done here is a naked lunge for political power. It forces every player in this crucially important industry to first clear what they can and can't do with their Washington masters. Minimizing the inevitable damage ought to be a top priority of the next Congress. [link
America to Obama and his lackeys: We refuse to be your subjects.  And if the last election didn't teach you anything, it should have made you understand that we will not be subjugated.

This action exceeds your authority.  And is un-American.  We will not accept it.

- - -

Another way to perceive this the latest invasion of our private lives, here's the New York Post this morning:

"'Net neutrality': ObamaCare for the Web."

What's Really Behind 'Net Neutrality'?

And Obama.

We Live In Different Worlds

It can be said without equivocation that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in her few short years in office, presided over a train wreck.  Not only has Congress - under her guardianship - achieved the distinction of garnering the worst public support in the history of Congress (at least since polls began to be taken) (see "Congress' Job Approval Rating Worst in Gallup History"), her steadfast adherence to her liberal worldview brought about a crushing defeat of her political party last month.

And for that she'll be missed.

For that she'll be missed?

Seems so:
MSNBC's Mitchell Mourns 'Painful' End of Nancy Pelosi's 'Historic' Speakership
By Kyle Drennen, NewsBusters

During her 1PM ET hour show on MSNBC on Tuesday, host Andrea Mitchell sympathized with exiting Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, remarking that the California Democrat having to hand over the gavel to John Boehner in January has "got to be painful," but that Pelosi is "doing it with class."

Mitchell made the comments after talking to Politico's congressional bureau chief Martin Kady about a recent interview Pelosi conducted with the political website. Mitchell cited excerpts: "Pelosi says quote, 'I'm obviously devastated by the loss we had' but she also says she 'feels serene' and is already working on getting Democrats to win back the House, a tall order."

Mitchell then became nostalgic, as she longingly recalled: "It's incredible, Martin, it just seems as though it were yesterday, but it's really four years ago that she was – that historic moment, taking up the gavel with all the children and grandchildren, you know, collected around her. We were anchoring from the Hill that day." Kady replied: "I remember." Mitchell lamented: "And it was such a big step. And now – how things change in politics." [link]
Yeah, things have changed, all right. Satan's spawn has been driven from her lair.

And while Andrea Mitchell (and her ilk) mourn her passing, America rejoices.

She's gone.  May she stay gone.