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

Sunday, July 10, 2011

A Reply To Jennifer Rubin

She asks:

... "We should expect Virginia to be easier for Obama in 2012 than Pennsylvania?"

I can't speak to what's going on in the Keystone State.  But I know Virginia.  And the answer is: Don't dismiss the notion out of hand.  Virginia may very well be easy for our hapless president when the next national election rolls around.

After all, this ain't ol' Virginny (in fact, it literally isn't recognized as ol' Virginny) any more.  As the manufacturing sector in Southside and Southwest Virginia have crumbled, and as the federal government has grown exponentially over the years (and with it, the sundry ancillary industries that support and sustain it in the private sector), sweeping population shifts have occurred.  It's no accident that as Tazewell County empties out Fairfax County has exploded.  And with Tazewell relying primarily on private business for sustenance and Fairfax relying on government, it's no surprise that Virginia is slowly becoming less business-friendly and far more liberal.

The same with Hampton Roads and its dependence on the military.  It too has seen substantial growth.  And, because Obama now has us involved in God knows how many wars, it can expect to see growth for the foreseeable future.

So red Virginia is suffering while blue Virginia is livin' large. 

Another reason why Obama doesn't lose sleep over the federal debt.  It keeps him in the White House.

And, Jennifer, based on the most recent poll numbers, it could very well mean he'll win here in Virginia again in 2012.

After all, it's said that people vote their pocketbooks.  And in much of Virginia, unlike ever before,  Barack Obama is Sugar Daddy.

The Case For Casey Anthony

It all - in my humble opinion - comes down to this, as written by New York Times columnist Frank Bruni:
As a reflection of the criminal justice system, the not guilty verdict for Casey Anthony — who in all likelihood bore responsibility for her 2-year-old daughter’s death, but will never pay for that particular crime — was reassuring. Juries are supposed to presume the innocence of even the vilest defendants. Evidence must outweigh emotion. And in the end there simply wasn’t enough lucid, specific proof that Anthony had murdered her little girl.
Now that all the evidence is in, it's fair to ask everyone who watched the saga from start to finish: Did Casey Anthony murder her child?

A respectable answer would be: We don't know.

How about another question: Is it reasonable to assume that Casey Anthony contributed to her daughter's death?

Answer: Without (reasonable) doubt.

As they say, hindsight is 20-20. But with all that we now know, did the prosecution overreach with a charge of 1st degree (premeditated) murder? Was the accusation that Ms. Anthony suffocated little Caylee with duct tape a reasonable assertion?

It seems clear that the answer to the first question is YES and the second NO.

It seems just as clear that had the prosecutor announced years ago that Casey Anthony was going to be charged with involuntary manslaughter (an accusal very much supported by the facts but a conviction for which provides for only jail time and a fine, perhaps), all hell would have broken loose once his intentions were made known.

So he went for 1st degree murder. Lost. And all hell has broken loose anyway.

The one thing that will gnaw away at everyone involved in this sordid affair? Casey Anthony walks away a free woman on Wednesday.

We can only hope the court of public opinion is more exacting going forward.

Why Bother?

I read the following and ask: Why not just join the Boy Scouts?

From "At 50, Unitarian Universalists examine mission" (Daniel Burke, Washington Post):
A recent Sunday service at the First Unitarian Church of Baltimore ended with an apology.

Laurel Mendes, a neo-pagan lay member who led the service, feared that a reference to God in the hymn “Once to Every Soul and Nation” might have upset the humanists in the pews. So, Mendes explained to the congregation that religious doctrine had been duly scrubbed from hymns in the Sunday program.

“I didn’t want to make anyone uncomfortable by reciting something that might be considered a profession of faith,” Mendes, 52, said after the service. “We did say ‘God,’ which you don’t often hear in our most politically correct hymns.”

Welcome to a typical Sunday in the anything-but-typical Unitarian Universalist Association, a liberal religious movement with a proud history of welcoming all seekers of truth — as long as it’s spelled with a lowercase “t.”
The Unitarian Universalist Church, where congregants come together to profess their shared belief in nothing.

How uplifting an hour or two of that must be.

Oh, by the way, the article also mentions the fact that the UU population in America is on the decline.

Go figure.

Sing it with me! We gather together to ask the Lord's blessing share pudding pops ...

For the love of God.

I Don't Even Know How To Respond

Sometimes, or oftentimes when we involve ourselves in discussions about "climate," those who espouse their profound belief in certain dogma - in the case of "climate change," a code of tenets not backed up by proof of any kind - they become downright silly in their dicta.

Take Nancy Abrams and Joel Primack for example. A seemingly cute couple who write the following in the San Francisco Chronicle (in "Hidden cost to religion of climate change denial," a side-slapper of a title in itself):
Glaciers will melt, the ocean level will rise, tornadoes, floods, wildfires, and heat waves will become more brutal and frequent, because their physical causes have already occurred and are working their way through the atmosphere and oceans. These climate changes cannot be cancelled, but they can be minimized -- or greatly amplified into utter chaos. Climate change will come in degrees and terrifying jumps, leaping around the globe, scattering disasters on multiple time scales. But this may not be the final insult. The repetition of disasters, the millions of refugees, the endless cries for help and pleadings for financial contributions may numb us and make compassion a sentiment whose evolutionary cost becomes too high. If that happens, we lose not only the climate but our souls. And ironically, leading the charge toward soullessness are so many religious people.
Say what?

Leading the charge toward soullessness. Religious people?

Unlike climate change true-believers - like this pair of nitwits - who divest themselves of all considerations religious and instead turn their belief systems to the less ethereal notion that a 0.6° C. increase in atmospheric temperature that has occurred around the globe in recent decades but hasn't increased at all this century has caused glaciers to melt, the ocean level to rise, tornadoes, floods, wildfires, and heat waves to become more brutal and frequent ("because their physical causes have already occurred and are working their way through the atmosphere and oceans").

They claim religious people are soulless?

For the love of God.

The Nanny State Encapsulated

The philosophy that drives Washington to want to rule every aspect of our lives, as summed up by Obama's Energy Secretary, Steven Chu:

"We are taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money."

He's referring to the incandescent light bulb. A waste of our own money. A choice that he and his kind have taken away from us. For our own good.  Because we are too stupid to know it's a waste of our own money.

Which makes one wonder if the electric car is next to be banned because of its inefficiencies, impracticalities, and eye-popping cost.

Or, for that matter, will Chu and his ilk ban $6,000 bicycles (now there's a waste) when a $149 Huffy will do the same thing?

Right.  Hold your breath on that one.  His kind like outrageously pricy (and ever so trendy) bikes.  So the CervĂ©lo R5 stays. And the light bulb that the masses can actually afford goes.

So this Energy Secretary knows, I have my list of items to be banned too when the revolution comes and We the People take charge of this country.  At the top of my list?

Assholes and Energy Secretaries.