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

Monday, April 25, 2011

'I'm from the Government & I'm Here ...'

I would suggest that anyone wishing to argue with all those liberals out there who think our government does right by us simply bring up the subject of toilets.  They don't work.  Thanks to the United States government.

I speak from personal experience.

But I will let Rand Paul do the speaking for me:

Here's the problem: Low-flush toilets.

Government types, in their infinite wisdom, decided back in the 90's that they would save us from ourselves by decreeing that flush toilets use 1.6 gallons per flush, rather than the traditional 3.5 gallons.  We'd conserve on water big time.

Gaia was fulfilled.

Only problem is, the toilets didn't provide enough water to flush the turds down the drain.  So one ended up flushing (at least) twice to make the system do what God intended it to do. 

Two flushes.  1.6 gallons + 1.6 gallons = 3.2 gallons.


So much for saving us and our precious water.

Is this any more than an annoyance?  Not really.

But should our government be in the business of annoying the crap out of us?  (pun intended)

Add to this detergents that don't clean (by government decree).

And washers that don't wash.

What next?  Is the government going to tell us where on our persons we can carry an ice cream cone?

Oh.  Wait.

Good grief.

Ronald Reagan certainly had it right: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

Gas Prices Skyrocket. Obama's Happy.

Remember, not that long ago, when Barack Obama's only regret with the rising price of oil was that it wasn't more gradual?  Well, whether it's gradual enough to suit him or not, the outcome should please him:

Rejoice, Barry.

Memo To Obama: The Problem With Trying To Hide Your Past

Here's what happens when a president tries to hide things.  The speculation about who he is just keeps getting more ... speculative. 

The latest having to do with Barack Obama's refusal to reveal his past?

Obama's father may not have been his father.

Good grief.  Did this dude learn nothing from the Nixon saga?

No Rhyme Nor Reason

I read stories like this and I still don't understand why we're killing Libyans but not Syrians.

Hillary claims we had to go to war with Libya to prevent "unspeakable atrocities."  Has she checked out Al Jazeera lately?

In fact, the world is full of bad people doing bad things.  We've decided to put Americans' lives in harm's way to stop the killing meliorate the situation in only a few places, attempting to punish only a few bad guys.

Can someone explain this?

Obama tried, but couldn't.  Hillary tried, by making stuff up, and failed.

Yet here we are.

I just don't get it.

The Verdict Is In. And Shut Up.

Get this: We're no longer allowed to think that maybe "climate change" theory is flawed.

So says a ... journalist.

This comes via NewsBusters:
Longtime Minnesota TV reporter digs into global climate change
After spending 32 years in front of the camera as an anchorman and investigative reporter for WCCO-TV in Minneapolis, Don Shelby wanted to apologize to people about climate change.
By Naomi Yaeger, Duluth Budgeteer

After spending 32 years in front of the camera as an anchorman and investigative reporter for WCCO-TV in Minneapolis, Don Shelby wanted to apologize to people about climate change.

“For those of you who are confused on this issue,” he said, “you’re forgiven. It’s my fault.”

Shelby was speaking at the University of Minnesota Duluth on Tuesday on what he called “The most important story since journalism began — global climate change.” His speech served as the kick-off for a two-day sustainability fair sponsored by UMD’s Office of Sustainability.

The TV newsman’s mea culpa about having misreported climate change came after of years of treating the story the same as he would any other, requiring the views of two opposing parties, Shelby told the packed lecture hall of the chemistry building.

But, he said, climate change is not a pro or con issue; it’s a scientific fact. And journalists who work to “balance” a story present an inaccurate picture when they give equal weight to sources promulgating inaccurate facts. [link]
It's a fact.  So both sides of the warming argument should not be aired.  But wasn't it a fact, not that long ago, that the earth was cooling?  Which fact is a fact?

In fact, here's a fact: "SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore."

Maybe there are other opinions out there still.

This "investigative journalist" has investigated the story and has closed his mind around one theory.

The world should rejoice the fact that he's gone into retirement.  Perhaps he could stay there?