Oh, yeah. I'll believe that global warming is imminent, and government can't cut spending when I see the people in charge acting as if it were true. Until then, I'll remain skeptical.
Look at what Nancy was doing about global warming. She was flying around in air force jets - for free - and sucking up booze and treats. Over 90,000 miles in a jet, funded by tax payers, in less than a year. Now there's a carbon footprint for you.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Curly lights and the birth of nations . . .
Coupla' years ago I started replacing regular light bulbs with CFLs. You know. The curly bulbs that sequester mercury to be leaked into the environment someplace, somehow, someday. But they use less electricity so less coal must be burned or less water must be dammed to make the electricity to light them up. For using less electricity is is good.
And we are going to need the electricity to run our cars. Or else we are going to grow food and use up lots of energy to turn food into alcohol and run our cars on that. And screw the people who might have been able to use a few extra calories and need the food.
Using less so-called fossil fuel (so called to imply that there is an exhaustible supply of oil left to us by our brothers, the dinosaurs, so we should be frugal as they are making no more oil, being extinct) using less will benefit the environment because we buy oil overseas from people who will screw up their own environment to get oil for us, and maybe fire-off a few suicide bombers with the cash they get from selling oil. For screwing their environment to help our own environment is good.
Anyhow, I stuck some of the curly bulbs in my bathroom about a year and a half ago. These were the bulbs that cost too much but would last six years.
Guess what? I've now got two of 'em sitting on my desk, all used up, as I type this epistle to posterity. Oh, and I didn't replace one of the "bad" incandescent bulbs in the bathroom at the time, thinking I'd put a curlycue in when it burnt out. And guess what. It's still working and I'm perturbed off. This is not good.
I figure there's a worldwide eco-hysteria going on, and only some of the concerns and solutions to eco problems are legitimate. But others are expensive solutions to imaginary problems, constituting commercial windfalls. But I'm okay with that. If you come to believe that wearing a daisy chain of beer can tops around you neck treats your hypothyroid condition -- go for it. If you become convinced that riding a bicycle to work twice a week will prevent male pattern baldness, peddle your silly ass off with my blessing. And if you want to buy curlycue light bulbs, you should be able to do that all you want. And maybe you're right; Mother Nature will love you and will give you a kiss on the cheek and a friendly little goose in gratitude for your use of curlycue light bulbs and a hybrid car to drive your bike around in a bike rack on the back. Wear a knit cap, so we can identify you as "one of those" from afar. For you are good.
And you are not being compelled to be good - you're doing it of your own free will. That's double good. Right?
But when I see that laws have to be passed to make all of us begin buying an expensive alternative to solve environmental concerns, I have to wonder. I particularly wonder when the testing to support the legislation avoids testing the value judgments implicit in the proposition, and tests only the performance efficiency of obtaining the goals implicit in the value judgments.
Hey, if it makes sense, we'll do it. You don't need a law.
But when a great deal of money is involved, like buying stuff like lightbulbs, electricity, and gasoline, I think we should be suspicious. Ordinarily I would say, follow the money. But in this case, there are politicians' sticky fingerprints all over the legislation that changes consumer buying choices, so I would say, you probably don't have to follow the money. Since politicians are involved and laws have been passed, that is enough for me to think we are being scammed again.
Because it is obviou$ly ea$ier to convince a few corrupt and venal politician$ that they ought to pass a law requiring all of us to do buy something then it would be to convince us that we ought to buy that thing. Being free to make our own decisions, we might otherwise conclude that the product is of doubtful utility when it is of doubtful utility. So our freedom to make such decisions must be eliminated. By law.
And we are going to need the electricity to run our cars. Or else we are going to grow food and use up lots of energy to turn food into alcohol and run our cars on that. And screw the people who might have been able to use a few extra calories and need the food.
Using less so-called fossil fuel (so called to imply that there is an exhaustible supply of oil left to us by our brothers, the dinosaurs, so we should be frugal as they are making no more oil, being extinct) using less will benefit the environment because we buy oil overseas from people who will screw up their own environment to get oil for us, and maybe fire-off a few suicide bombers with the cash they get from selling oil. For screwing their environment to help our own environment is good.
Anyhow, I stuck some of the curly bulbs in my bathroom about a year and a half ago. These were the bulbs that cost too much but would last six years.
Guess what? I've now got two of 'em sitting on my desk, all used up, as I type this epistle to posterity. Oh, and I didn't replace one of the "bad" incandescent bulbs in the bathroom at the time, thinking I'd put a curlycue in when it burnt out. And guess what. It's still working and I'm perturbed off. This is not good.
I figure there's a worldwide eco-hysteria going on, and only some of the concerns and solutions to eco problems are legitimate. But others are expensive solutions to imaginary problems, constituting commercial windfalls. But I'm okay with that. If you come to believe that wearing a daisy chain of beer can tops around you neck treats your hypothyroid condition -- go for it. If you become convinced that riding a bicycle to work twice a week will prevent male pattern baldness, peddle your silly ass off with my blessing. And if you want to buy curlycue light bulbs, you should be able to do that all you want. And maybe you're right; Mother Nature will love you and will give you a kiss on the cheek and a friendly little goose in gratitude for your use of curlycue light bulbs and a hybrid car to drive your bike around in a bike rack on the back. Wear a knit cap, so we can identify you as "one of those" from afar. For you are good.
And you are not being compelled to be good - you're doing it of your own free will. That's double good. Right?
But when I see that laws have to be passed to make all of us begin buying an expensive alternative to solve environmental concerns, I have to wonder. I particularly wonder when the testing to support the legislation avoids testing the value judgments implicit in the proposition, and tests only the performance efficiency of obtaining the goals implicit in the value judgments.
Hey, if it makes sense, we'll do it. You don't need a law.
But when a great deal of money is involved, like buying stuff like lightbulbs, electricity, and gasoline, I think we should be suspicious. Ordinarily I would say, follow the money. But in this case, there are politicians' sticky fingerprints all over the legislation that changes consumer buying choices, so I would say, you probably don't have to follow the money. Since politicians are involved and laws have been passed, that is enough for me to think we are being scammed again.
Because it is obviou$ly ea$ier to convince a few corrupt and venal politician$ that they ought to pass a law requiring all of us to do buy something then it would be to convince us that we ought to buy that thing. Being free to make our own decisions, we might otherwise conclude that the product is of doubtful utility when it is of doubtful utility. So our freedom to make such decisions must be eliminated. By law.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Car of the Year . . .
Chevy Volt has just been named the Car of the Year. Seen any yet? Kind of like President Obama's Peace Prize. Seen any?
Saturday, January 08, 2011
This is cool . . .
A whole bunch of Muslims in Egypt have attended Christian Copt church ceremonies to serve as human shields to protect the Christians. A church service was bombed recently, and people worried it could happen again. One of the statements was that the attack was an attack against all Egyptians, not just the Copts. Wow. Just, wow.
Thursday, January 06, 2011
Three fifths of a person . . .
C'mon, people. Oh, I mean those of you over the age of 45. (Those under that age probably weren't provided this sort of an education, as self-esteem has replaced information in the acedemic schema, so it's not your fault.) But the rest of you. Did you skip history class that day?
The U.S. Constitution didn't say that a slave was only 3/5's of a person. It gave representative votes in the House to southern states at a reduced rate, so that the southern states weren't disproportionately over-represented in Congress based on the number of people in the state -- when some of them were disenfranchised by that state by reason of being treated as property.
In short, the writers of the U.S.Constitution used the 3/5 fraction to discriminate against slave holding states when it came to votes in Congress.
It was a compromise. The slave states wanted representation based on the number of people in their state, slave and free. The non-slave states wanted representation in Congress based only on the free population of the slave states. A deal was cut, because there wouldn't be a union if the north got their way altogether, because the slavery south just wouldn't ratify the constitution. And vice-versa.
Those of you who are still yelping about this after all these years are either cynically trying to drum up political enthusiasm, or you are showing your ignorance altogether. Or both.
The U.S. Constitution didn't say that a slave was only 3/5's of a person. It gave representative votes in the House to southern states at a reduced rate, so that the southern states weren't disproportionately over-represented in Congress based on the number of people in the state -- when some of them were disenfranchised by that state by reason of being treated as property.
In short, the writers of the U.S.Constitution used the 3/5 fraction to discriminate against slave holding states when it came to votes in Congress.
It was a compromise. The slave states wanted representation based on the number of people in their state, slave and free. The non-slave states wanted representation in Congress based only on the free population of the slave states. A deal was cut, because there wouldn't be a union if the north got their way altogether, because the slavery south just wouldn't ratify the constitution. And vice-versa.
Those of you who are still yelping about this after all these years are either cynically trying to drum up political enthusiasm, or you are showing your ignorance altogether. Or both.
Something is happening that I don't understand . . .
A coupla times a month or more, my bride and I go to a local corporate mega fast burger location, 'cause it's really neat to get your meal freshly prepared and wrapped up in individual paper wrappings, except for frenchfries, which are served in a little carboard holster device. You know these places. They always have some sort of music playing, usually something I don't recognize which evidently appeals to the employees working there. But then one day they put some Country and Western stuff into the mix.
No problem -- it has melody and lyrics.
Of course, for Christas season, Christmas music was used.
Then, things got a little wierder. It was Christmas music with a country flavor. You know. Slide guitars. A banjo here and there. Some honky tonk undertones.
Okay, I said. This will be over in a few days.
Went there today. What was playing was stuff from the thirties and forties. Horns. Clarinets. I recognized some of the songs as stuff my parents had on the old wind-up record player, but these weren't the old stuff. These were old songs with old arrangements and bands, recorded in modern times. How can this be? I am greatly confused.
If I go back there and hear bagpipes, that's it. I'm turning vegetarian and buying a tricycle and a shotgun. And swimfins.
No problem -- it has melody and lyrics.
Of course, for Christas season, Christmas music was used.
Then, things got a little wierder. It was Christmas music with a country flavor. You know. Slide guitars. A banjo here and there. Some honky tonk undertones.
Okay, I said. This will be over in a few days.
Went there today. What was playing was stuff from the thirties and forties. Horns. Clarinets. I recognized some of the songs as stuff my parents had on the old wind-up record player, but these weren't the old stuff. These were old songs with old arrangements and bands, recorded in modern times. How can this be? I am greatly confused.
If I go back there and hear bagpipes, that's it. I'm turning vegetarian and buying a tricycle and a shotgun. And swimfins.
Sunday, January 02, 2011
Politics 2011, version 1.0
The Republicans are planning to open the next Congress by reading the U.S.Constitution out loud. Their theory is that this exercise is likely the first and only time some members of Congress will ever be required to consider the U. S. Constitution.
The New York Times plans to pronounce every word the reading as a collection of "to be expected" right wing lies, secure in the knowledge that conservatives make things up. Twenty-two percent of all Americans, sixty-four percent of all subscribers to the New York Times, and virtually the entire staff of NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Harvard College, and CCNY will believe the New York Times. For they are the smart ones.
The New York Times plans to pronounce every word the reading as a collection of "to be expected" right wing lies, secure in the knowledge that conservatives make things up. Twenty-two percent of all Americans, sixty-four percent of all subscribers to the New York Times, and virtually the entire staff of NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Harvard College, and CCNY will believe the New York Times. For they are the smart ones.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
And not as much rain in Texas . . .
What? people who earn a million will move to avoid taxes? How come? It's only a 2% increase. Let's see, on a million dollars that's merely $20,000 on top of the already high taxes, maybe $90,000, they were paying already, which were on top of the taxes they were paying to the federal government. Probably over half goes in taxes when it's all over.
The fatcats should stay and pay the taxes.
We voted!
The fatcats should stay and pay the taxes.
We voted!
Internet regulation update
It's worse than I thought. We've nationalized car manufacturers, insurance companies, banks, and now communications is next in line. Dammit, the internet was pretty much the only thing that was working to encourage innovation and wealth creation. The rest of the economy pretty much seemed to be rent-seeking and zero sum balance sheet shifting.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Sticky-fingers on the internet . . .
The sticky-fingered commisars of the FCC have been wanting to regulate the internet. We aren't sure how they propose to regulate it or what features of the internet they figure should be regulated. But they went and did it. Their scheme passed today, and pretty soon now, we might learn what it is that they did. But it is a secret for now.
I figure seeing as how they really don't want to talk about what they just did after they done already done it (that's how we used to talk in Kentucky), it's to give them some extra time to either get out of town or to get their stories right.
Maybe I could go along with regulating the internet. I could live with some sort of painful and bloody punishment for spammers, for instance.
But, really! WTF?
I guess its just a whole lot more satisfying and easy to run a democracy if you don't have to put up with a bunch of people yelping about whether or not the rule you are inflicting on the public is necessary, or wanted, or helpful, or even Constitutionally permitted. Next, somebody will say that government should govern with the consent of the governed, and I'm pretty sure, based on the evidence, that that can't be the case.
That's why I always counsel people to vote in every election. You get few enought chances to express yourself to our overlords as it is, so you should never pass up a chance if it comes your way. Because the alternative to voting involves bayonets, ropes, and sturdy tree branches.
I figure seeing as how they really don't want to talk about what they just did after they done already done it (that's how we used to talk in Kentucky), it's to give them some extra time to either get out of town or to get their stories right.
Maybe I could go along with regulating the internet. I could live with some sort of painful and bloody punishment for spammers, for instance.
But, really! WTF?
I guess its just a whole lot more satisfying and easy to run a democracy if you don't have to put up with a bunch of people yelping about whether or not the rule you are inflicting on the public is necessary, or wanted, or helpful, or even Constitutionally permitted. Next, somebody will say that government should govern with the consent of the governed, and I'm pretty sure, based on the evidence, that that can't be the case.
That's why I always counsel people to vote in every election. You get few enought chances to express yourself to our overlords as it is, so you should never pass up a chance if it comes your way. Because the alternative to voting involves bayonets, ropes, and sturdy tree branches.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Double dip for the holidays.
Looks like Portland is experiencing yet another round of home price reductions. A double hit. I was just saying that it really is sad to drive around looking at Christmas lights, and seeing "For Sale" signs at Christmas. I'm doing just fine but there's a great deal of people suffering through no or low work opportunities out there, who wrapped up their families' lives in their homes and retirement plans, who are no longer able to afford either and are unable to liquidate either in any way that offers relief -- and they didn't do anything wrong or do anything to deserve being punished in this way. Except for the way they voted.
Our government, elected officials and civil service types, represent the fountainhead of the nation's miseries.
Bitter? Oh, no. P.O.d
Our government, elected officials and civil service types, represent the fountainhead of the nation's miseries.
Bitter? Oh, no. P.O.d
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Pirates have boarded the Ship of State
The budget was due months ago. But at least one has finally been proposed. Finally.
One point one t-r-i-l-l-i-o-n dollars! 1,924 pages. 6,488 earmarks. And 40% of federal revenue is borrowed, at present, before we even get to this budget.
And when somebody objected that this isn't much time to review the budget proposal before voting on it, Senator Reid said we have until January 5 to vote on it and get it to the House. How much time is needed for people to just do as they are told by their elected betters?
Oh, my poor children and grandchildren, and great grandchildren to come if my grandchildren can even manage to have children when the time comes.
One point one t-r-i-l-l-i-o-n dollars! 1,924 pages. 6,488 earmarks. And 40% of federal revenue is borrowed, at present, before we even get to this budget.
And when somebody objected that this isn't much time to review the budget proposal before voting on it, Senator Reid said we have until January 5 to vote on it and get it to the House. How much time is needed for people to just do as they are told by their elected betters?
Oh, my poor children and grandchildren, and great grandchildren to come if my grandchildren can even manage to have children when the time comes.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Peace be upon the holy business card . . .
Here ya go. A doctor discarded a business card. The card identified a person named Mohomed, that is, he was named after the prophet. It's a common enough name; I've met several "Mo's" in my life so far.
What's the problem? The problem is that by throwing away the card, the doctor was basically disrespecting the prophet because his name was on the card, and Islam, which is a criminal offense requiring punishment.
It seems to me that if one is so insecure about one's religious beliefs that discarding a business card is a threat to one's sense of self, well, maybe the only cure is to just find a warm cave somewhere far from where people are, and spend your days squatting naked in the cave interacting with nobody, right up to the inevitable end. At least it would, anyhow, be better for the rest of us who are cool with throwing away business cards and mean no disrespect to anyone when we do.
What's the problem? The problem is that by throwing away the card, the doctor was basically disrespecting the prophet because his name was on the card, and Islam, which is a criminal offense requiring punishment.
It seems to me that if one is so insecure about one's religious beliefs that discarding a business card is a threat to one's sense of self, well, maybe the only cure is to just find a warm cave somewhere far from where people are, and spend your days squatting naked in the cave interacting with nobody, right up to the inevitable end. At least it would, anyhow, be better for the rest of us who are cool with throwing away business cards and mean no disrespect to anyone when we do.
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Lions, and Tigers, and missiles, oh my. . .
Just, dammit! Iranian missiles targeting us. How many workers' paradises do we have to contain to the south? Didn't the threat of atomic missiles die down after the end of the cold war and the strategy of Mutual Assured Distruction? Do we have to teach little kids, again, to duck under their school desk and cover their ears?
Kennedy scared the U.S.S.R. missiles out of Cuba but left Castro in place, to appropriate the labor and lives of generations of Cubans to come. Obama gives Chavez big wet kisses on the cheek.
For that matter, how long do we have to put up with Islamic expansionism? To them, we are infidels in a world which should be entirely under Sharia, and the best we should hope for is to be dhimmi.
Western civilization has been periodically plagued by Islamic predations necessitating taking up arms, as in the Crusades, among other things. Islamic incursions damn near made it to Paris, and to Vienna, and pretty much ran Spain before being beat back. Temporarily. President Jefferson read the Koran then went after the pirates of Tripoli. This sh8t isn't new.
Here's the deal. When faced with an implacable threat to your civilization, you either have to win, or you lose. You can't just contain and delay them, as has been the strategy of choice for 1100 years. You can't just beat them back. You have to beat them.
Oh, and by the way. Being dhimmi means becoming a member of a barely tolerated indigenous population eking out an existence on the margins of a dominant occupying population.
Kennedy scared the U.S.S.R. missiles out of Cuba but left Castro in place, to appropriate the labor and lives of generations of Cubans to come. Obama gives Chavez big wet kisses on the cheek.
For that matter, how long do we have to put up with Islamic expansionism? To them, we are infidels in a world which should be entirely under Sharia, and the best we should hope for is to be dhimmi.
Western civilization has been periodically plagued by Islamic predations necessitating taking up arms, as in the Crusades, among other things. Islamic incursions damn near made it to Paris, and to Vienna, and pretty much ran Spain before being beat back. Temporarily. President Jefferson read the Koran then went after the pirates of Tripoli. This sh8t isn't new.
Here's the deal. When faced with an implacable threat to your civilization, you either have to win, or you lose. You can't just contain and delay them, as has been the strategy of choice for 1100 years. You can't just beat them back. You have to beat them.
Oh, and by the way. Being dhimmi means becoming a member of a barely tolerated indigenous population eking out an existence on the margins of a dominant occupying population.
Saturday, December 04, 2010
It's for the children . . .
The federal government is now contemplating making back-up cameras mandatory on all new vehicles. Parents sometimes back their cars over their children who are permitted to run any damn place they want to, so as to avoid stifling their little emotional developments.
Well, you have to look, don't you? If you are backing up, you have to look in your mirrors, or swivel around and look out the back window, or something. Right? After all, the lady who backed her SUV into my car down in the basement parking lot had a back-up camera in her car. She didn't look at it.
Not everybody pays attention to what they are doing. Not everybody looks; they merely trust the way is clear.
For this reason the original proposal was that reverse gear just be eliminated from all passenger vehicles, altogether. And it would have passed, too, except that the bureaucrats couldn't figure out whether to make circular driveways or solar-panel powered roundtables required features in all urban areas, so they compromised. They'll revive the reverse-gear elimination proposal after all cars are finally equipped with back-up cameras.
It's for the children.
Well, you have to look, don't you? If you are backing up, you have to look in your mirrors, or swivel around and look out the back window, or something. Right? After all, the lady who backed her SUV into my car down in the basement parking lot had a back-up camera in her car. She didn't look at it.
Not everybody pays attention to what they are doing. Not everybody looks; they merely trust the way is clear.
For this reason the original proposal was that reverse gear just be eliminated from all passenger vehicles, altogether. And it would have passed, too, except that the bureaucrats couldn't figure out whether to make circular driveways or solar-panel powered roundtables required features in all urban areas, so they compromised. They'll revive the reverse-gear elimination proposal after all cars are finally equipped with back-up cameras.
It's for the children.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Jihad in Pioneer Square
The enemy is among us. Surely this guy, thinking about violent jihad since he was fifteen, has associates, people he knows, contacts, who are similarly inclined. They just haven't done anything about it -- yet.
Friday, November 26, 2010
More homeland security on the way . . .
No, that's not my arrest record. It's my resume; why do you ask? It shows job experience pertinent to this job. I'm from the government, and of course you can trust me.
If I can't be paranoid now, when can I be paranoid?
Looks like feeling you up and taking nude pictures of everybody is just the beginning. We are starting to shut down web sites, now., under Homeland Security. Hey guys, there's a modicum of justification in either instance, and maybe a shred of law, too, but there is a whole lot more of WTF! in airport searches and taking down web sites. This could be the thin edge of the wedge.
Nah, that's just paranoia talking. Right?
Nah, that's just paranoia talking. Right?
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)