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

Sunday, May 23, 2010

The Analogy Is Lost On Me

It pains me to criticize a famous author.  Especially one for whom I have the utmost respect (and from whom I've purchased a large handful of fine books over the years.*  Especially since he's the crown jewel in Virginia Tech's faculty regalia.

But I gotta tell ya, this analogy - from "Slavery was the issue" appearing in today's Roanoke Times - makes no sense:
The 1860 Census, completed under the pro-Southern Buchanan administration, reported a total of more than 1 million households in the 11 future Confederate states. Those same states reported more than 310,000 households owning one or more slaves, almost one-third, not one-sixth.

This only begins to set the real context. Today, our population of 307 million make up 105 million households. Only 2.2 million, just 2 percent, of those households own tractors. So it would appear that the tractor is not significant in American life. But those 2.2 million households are the only ones operating farms. Those who don't farm don't need tractors.

The slave was a human tractor.
Say what? The slave was what? a tractor?

I get his point. Slavery was the bedrock of the Southern economy before the Civil War and slaves were capital assets to hundreds of thousands of southerners in that age, landowners who weren't willing to sacrifice their worldly wealth readily.

But "those who don't farm don't need a tractor"?

Work on the analogy, there, Bill. I'm sure you can do better next time.

* I have in my hand as I write this Breckinridge: Statesman, Soldier, Symbol.  A masterpiece.

Do They Even Get It?

This is humorous.  In an effort to cast Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli as being ignorant, (i.e., unaware because of a lack of relevant information or knowledge) the Roanoke Times editorial page argues that we would all be better off if we remained ignorant (i.e., kept blissfully unaware of the facts) regarding the potential fraud case developing up at UVa over the misappropriation of funds that went to the now-discredited Professor Michael Mann.

As a famous movie personality almost said:

"Ignorant is as ignorant does."

Want To Make Residency An Issue?

Let's talk about what part of the country Congressman Rick Boucher calls home.

And how are things up there in that bastion of liberal lunacy, Rick?  

At least Morgan Griffith lives in Virginia.

Do the Democrats really want to take the discussion down that road?

Count on it.  They have nothing else:
Griffith picked to run in 9th
By Michael Sluss, Roanoke Times

Max Meadows -- State Del. Morgan Griffith of Salem claimed the Republican nomination Saturday to take on U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher of Abingdon, arguing that he can better represent the sprawling 9th District even though he lives just beyond its borders and can't vote there.

Griffith, the majority leader in the House of Delegates, defeated five opponents at a spirited GOP convention in a jam-packed Fort Chiswell High School auditorium. After winning a majority of the votes cast on the first ballot, the feisty conservative lawmaker vowed to wage a "relentless" fight to topple Boucher, a Democrat who has held the seat for 28 years.

"Our country is headed in the wrong direction," Griffith said in his acceptance speech. "It is essential that we win this election and begin the process of repairing the damage that has been done."

Griffith lives just outside the 9th District, which extends from the Tennessee and Kentucky borders to Roanoke County and includes portions of the Alleghany Highlands. Griffith faces no legal requirement to live in the district; the Constitution merely requires a candidate to live in the state he or she represents. Griffith said his Salem property backs up to the district line and that he is a lifelong Southwest Virginian who understands the entire region. [link]
Boucher - through his henchmen - will make a big deal out of the fact that Griffith doesn't live in the 9th District.  But if we were to be real, we'd admit that Boucher hasn't lived here for a quarter century either.  He resides up in Liberal Land.  And is quite content there. Being with his soul mates.

So make an issue of it if they will.  It can only work in Griffith's favor.  If he takes my advice and aggressively attacks it.

The Tea Party Finally Gets Their Attention

And has them running scared.

Ultra-liberal whack job Frank Rich:
Yes, the Tea Party is radical, its membership is not enormous, and its race problem is real and troubling. But you can’t fight an impassioned opposition merely with legislative actions that may bear fruit in the semi-distant future. If the Democrats can’t muster their own compelling response to the populist rage out there, “Randslide” may reside in our political vocabulary long after “Arlen Specter” is leaving “Jeopardy” contestants stumped.
I think Mr. Rich has hit on the answer.

Thhheeeyyyy'rre aaaallll RAAAACIIISSSSTTTS!

It's been their ... compelling response ... to all opposition arguments in the past. Why change now?

Is It Any Wonder?

Two headlines say it all.

Obama goes off to West Point to explain to the cadets that they are no longer to sacrifice their lives to defend the United States of America; they're there to die for a new cause.  Something called "The New International Order."  Hot Air explains:

Matt Drudge:

"Tepid applause from cadets."

Tepid?  I don't understand why the cadets wouldn't be more enthusiastic about defending - with their lives - that organization that we've come to know and love as the United Nations.

- - -

Frank Dane:

The United Nations is an uplifting experiment, dedicated to raising the standards of living in Africa, the consciences of democracies, and the price of prostitutes in New York

Gregory Nunn:

United Nations: Where America feeds the hands that bite it.”


"Most of the voting in the U.N. is for non-binding resolutions that hold no weight. It's like internet polls with more Jew-hating."

Fox News:

Tepid? The cadets aren't willing to die for Obama's "New International Order"?  Get with the program, fellas.

Global Warming? What Global Warming?

We are all going to die from global warming.

Well, we were.

Now we're not.

Somehow the problem went away.

Odd how that happened.

Regardless, we move on to the real ... er, at least the latest global crisis:
UN says case for saving species 'more powerful than climate change'
Juliette Jowit, The Guardian

The economic case for global action to stop the destruction of the natural world is even more powerful than the argument for tackling climate change, a major report for the United Nations will declare this summer.

The Stern report on climate change, which was prepared for the UK Treasury and published in 2007, famously claimed ...

The UN's biodiversity report – dubbed the Stern for Nature – is expected to say that the value of saving "natural goods and services", such as pollination, medicines, fertile soils, clean air and water, will be even ...

The UN report's authors go further with their warning on biodiversity ...

"We need a sea-change in human thinking and attitudes towards ...

The changes will involve a wholesale revolution in the way ...

The report will advocate massive changes to the way the global economy is run so that ...

The report follows a series of recent studies showing that the world is in the grip of a mass extinction event as ... [link
Sound familiar?

Same crap.  Different crisis.

But let's step back.  Before we see global warming - or climate change - finally sink into the sunset, never to be brought up again, a couple of questions:  If it's no longer an issue, should the EPA still be working to declare CO2 a pollutant?  And should John Kerry still be pushing his global warming bill?  And why do we have a (very expensive) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change at all now?  And finally, shouldn't we punish all those who foisted this quackery, which came awfully close to wrecking our very fragile planet, upon us?  Is imprisonment too good for them?

Global Warming is dead.  "Natural World Destruction" lives. 

May God have mercy.

Why We Blog

So that when the mainstream press goes out of its way to distort the truth, we're there to bitchslap the members thereof and set the record straight.

God bless Ann Althouse:
If you're going to criticize the new social studies curriculum adopted by the Texas Board of Education, you'd better quote it.

Or at least link to the text. And if you choose to paraphrase and not even link, and I have to look up the text myself, and your paraphrase is not accurate, it is my job to embarrass you by pointing that out.

Let me embarrass the Washington Post. Below, the material from the WaPo article, written by Michael Birnbaum, is indented. After the indented part, I've located the relevant quote from the Board of Education text, found here.

Virtually everything cited in the article to make the curriculum seem controversial is misstated! Appalling!  [link]
Read the whole thing.  Point by point.

Now why do you suppose the Washington Post would distort the facts so blatantly?  Oh, yeah.  Those citizens running the Texas Board of Education have been deemed conservatives.  So the rules of journalistic ethics are therefore null and void. 

Lies become the order of the day.

Shame on them.  All of them.