Archive for January 16th, 2008


A dim idea from Congress

Does the Congressman yeild for a question?Congress is banning incandescent bulbs. Thomas Edison invented them, and they’ve only worked for 120 years. Since the government knows what is good for you, they are banning these bulbs for the collective good of everyone. Global warming fanatics and reality deniers, rejoice. For now.

The replacement bulb is the Compact Fluorescent Lightbulb (CFL). They supposedly last longer and use less electricity, and will be your only bulb of choice as of the year 2014. These bulbs are 6 to 8 times more expensive than the bulbs currently available. So while saving dimes a month on your electric bill you get the privilege of being robbed at the store. Since Congress wants to outlaw competition, don’t expect the bulbs to become cheap. If that sounds like a kick in the pants, it’s only because it is. (And fear not, this is the government, they’ll get around to kicking you in the other side soon enough.)

Another reason that Congress should not play with the free markets: These bulbs can kill you. The CFL’s contain mercury, a toxic substance. One woman broke one of these bulbs in her house by accident. Knowing they had mercury, she wisely called in for help. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection showed up at her home and found the mercury level to be 6 times the state’s safe rate. Estimate for clean-up? $2,000. (Either start stocking up on the old bulbs before they disappear, or buy a hazmat suit.)

So thanks to Congress, in 6 years, hundreds of millions of Americans will be bringing billions of bulbs of mercury poisoning into their homes, and then discarding the mercury into trash heaps. Seven years from now, look for the headlines about the mercury problem in America’s landfills and streams, and get ready to pony up to clean it up.

Global warming fanatics and reality deniers should be the first in line to volunteer to clean this up, without them we would never have this problem. We have our doubts as to whether they will take responsibility.


Reality Deniers

And they say “kill all dogs!”

“If I’m wrong, all we have done is increased the quality of our water and air, and become less dependent on fossil fuels; if you’re wrong, we’re screwed.”

This the plea from the global warming fear mongers when discussing global warming.  The Rainbow-Warrior liberals want to save humanity, even if it doesn’t need saving, by imposing “solutions” from which the country would actually need saving.

The typical liberal fallacy is that the world is not in black and white.  They believe there is a magical energy source out there that will just replace everything, and we should chuck fossil fuels to the wind.  Roy Spencer illustrates this point brilliantly for the National Review:

“The energy demand by humanity is simply too large – and it is growing rapidly in developing countries like India and China. Electricity in the United States is supplied by the equivalent of 1,000 one-gigawatt power plants. It would be a major feat, both politically and monetarily, to replace 50 of those 1,000 power plants with solar and wind generation facilities.

Then, once we have patted ourselves on the back over that accomplishment, we could start working on replacing the other 95 percent of our electricity needs.”

Until those liberals quit denying reality, the rest of us will have to take charge and look for solutions.  The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Feulner proposes just such a thing.  Imagine that, advocating a real solution, something not heard of from the reality deniers.

For number oriented people, the U.S. alone uses about 100 quadrillion Btu’s of energy a year, we currently import 30% of that energy.  As the rest of the world becomes more energy hungry, prices will go up.  Simple economics.  We are really going to have to compete with international markets.  Private oil companies hold about 5% of the world’s oil and gas reserves (hardly “Big Oil”), the other 95% of the world’s oil reserves are held by state-owned oil companies.  Large portions of the 95% comes from Russia, Venezuela, China, Iran, Nigeria, Algeria, and Iraq.  Hardly the bastion of stabilized and free trading countries, and does not bode for a secure future of relying on international oil.

 What can those of us back in reality-land do?  Well, the U.S. has energy it can develop in terms of coal-to-liquids, coal for electricity, drill offshore for oil and gas, drill onshore for oil and gas, or build nuclear.  The reality-deniers are against all of this.  They advocate clean energy.  Clean energy simply does not cut it.  To comprise the Btu’s the U.S. produced and consumed on domestic soil last year (per the Department of Energy) coal produced about 23 quadrillion, petroleum 13 quadrillion, natural gas 19 quadrillion, and nuclear 8 quadrillion.  Roughly 30 quadrillion Btu’s were imported last year (from the government owned companies, as if foreign aid was not enough already).  The green energy that reality deniers advocate, which is hydro (unless it’s killing fish in streams), geothermal, wind, solar, biomass, tidal, ethanol, and millions of gerbils on wheels created a whopping 6.7 quadrillion Btu’s.  Okay, so we made up the part about the gerbils.

Clean energy is land intensive, not to say that it is bad.  Ted Kennedy clearly opposes it, at least when he has to look at the windmills in his yachting bay.  Solar energy is land intensive; windmills are large and can only be placed where the wind blows enough to make it worth while.  Hydro power is maxed out.  These new power generators are nowhere near energy grids, and grids will have to be built.  Even if this industry is increased (Congress wants all power to be 15% renewable by 2020 at the latest), it will have to be built with the energy of fossil fuels. 

With reality deniers and their friends in Congress hell-bent on starving America of its own natural energy resources, a crisis does loom in the not too distant future.  The next time a reality-denier claims they simply want to save the planet, be sure ask them if they really know what is going on.


More Democratic infighting, this time over Florida

Ugh, I wish this song would end already!With the primary shuffle that happened last year, several states were penalized with a loss of delegate for moving their primary dates forward and challenging New Hampshire’s supremacy.  Michigan and Florida essentially lost their delegates when they crossed Howard Dean on this. 

A Gentleman’s Agreement was reached among the viable candidates to avoid campaigning in those states to save money that would otherwise have been spent fighting over was amounted only to bragging rights in the hope of getting some momentum.  Hillary broke that agreement when she had her name added to the Michigan ballot, though she only won 56 percent of the Democrat vote, 39 percent went to uncommitted.  (So when Hillary is on a ballot open to Democrats and opposed only by Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, she pulls barely more than half.  Kind of weak.)

The Clinton Cabal took some heat last night for this, to little notice outside of Michigan.  But their perceived attempt to do the same in Florida is not going unnoticed

An Obama campaign memo Tuesday pointed to “signs . . . that she may be planning to campaign in the state, inquiring about large venues and increased organizing activity.”

In fact, the Clinton campaign inquired Tuesday if the Miami Beach Convention Center will be available for a “rally” on Jan. 27, two days before the state holds its earliest primary in history. City officials said there’s no agreement yet because they are checking whether the massive hall is available.

If this is true it is yet another example of how the word of a Clinton isn’t worth a damn.


A flip, a flop, and then surrender.

Edwards, Clinton, and Obama all run their campaigns based, in part, on the idea that the Iraq war is so unsuccessful that it must end right away.  They took a semi-hiatus from that stance on Sept 26th, 2007. 

When asked by Tim Russert if there would be troops in Iraq at the end of their potential first terms in office, none of the candidates would promise complete withdraw:

Obama:  “I think it’s hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible.  We don’t know what contingency will be out there… believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don’t want to make promises, not knowing what the situation’s going to be three or four years out.”

Clinton: “I agree with Barack; it is very difficult to know what we are going to be inheriting.”

Edwards:  “I cannot make that commitment.  But I — well, I can tell you what i would do as president.  When I’m sworn into office, come January of 2009, if there are, in fact, as General Petraeus suggests, 100,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq, I will immediately draw down 40,000 to 50,000 troops; and over the course of the next several months, continue to bring our combat out of Iraq until all of our combat are, in fact, out of Iraq.”

At least Edwards admits to an immediate draw down, but still leaves troops in Iraq.

After last night’s debate in Nevada, the candidates flopped back to their original anti-war platforms as Jonathan Last at the Weekly Standard points out:

 “The debate featured only a single serious question concerning foreign policy, during which the three Democrats tried to out-do one another in their commitment to speedily withdrawing from Iraq. Clinton said that she’ll start within 60 days of taking office; Obama said he would have complete withdrawal by 2009; Edwards said that he’d leave no combat troops whatsoever, would conduct no more combat missions, and that ‘the occupation must end.'”

Nothing like hanging an ally out to dry.  The last time the U.S. backed out on a Middle Eastern ally was when Jimmy Carter refused to support the Shah of Iran.  How has that worked out again? 

President Bill Clinton sent the troops into Kosovo to stop genocide, and sent the troops in to Somalia to combat war lards starting an era of using the U.S. military for goodwill missions.  Would any of these jesters send the troops back into Iraq after Al Qaeda starts to take revenge on the population that finally got brave enough to kick them out? 


Former Senator blasts Clintons on Michigan “vote”

“What happened in Michigan is not very different from what used to happen in the old Soviet Union.  The Clinton machine manipulated the ballot. They don’t care how they win, only that they do. It’s wrong and people need to know that.”

That’s not a quote from a member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, though it could be, it’s from former Michigan Democratic Senator Don Riegle.  Seems even he realizes the Clinton’s word isn’t worth at paper it’s misprinted on.

In other news, the Net-Nuts are still on the “Hillary stole New Hampshire” trail. 

They don’t like voting machines, they don’t like punch-cards (think Florida and the allegation that Democratic voters couldn’t punch through a freaking chad when a child could) and you begin to wonder how these people propose we vote. 

We will say, however, since voter fraud is a hallmark of the Democrats, we wouldn’t at all be surprised if it were true…


It’s The Economy, Stupid

A sign hanging in the Clinton campaign headquarters read, “The economy, stupid.”  No, not the campaign headquarters of Hillary Clinton; it hung in the campaign headquarters of Bill Clinton.  Those words penned by Clinton campaign strategist James Carville led Bill Clinton on to victory in 1992 and rang true again last night for Mitt Romney who is enjoying a big victory in yesterday’s Michigan primary. 

In 1913, Henry Ford opened his first automotive plant in Highland Park, Michigan, changing the fate of a state forever.  The manufacturing of automobiles became the major industry of Michigan and at the same time altered the American way of life for perpetuity.  To this day, the auto industry remains important to the citizens of Michigan and as the economy goes so goes the auto industry.  This and the fact the state has lost nearly 80,000 jobs in the past year are the likely reasons 55 percent of Michigan primary voters cited the economy as their top concern.     

With 99 percent of precincts reporting Governor Romney enjoys 39 percent of the vote followed by Senator McCain with 30 percent, Governor Huckabee with 16 percent, Congressman Paul with 6 percent, Senator Thompson with 4 percent and Mayor Giuliani with 3 percent. 

With his win tonight, in what was billed by many pundits as a must-win, Romney catapults himself back into the thick of what has become a muddled Republican primary season.  McCain’s finish in Michigan, a state he won in 2000, was disappointing, but not catastrophic to his chances.  For Huckabee, chalk up another “moral” victory – probably the last of the “moral” victories his candidacy can sustain as the election season moves into the South.   

What is next?  In a campaign season with lots of questions, but few answers, it would only seem fitting that Thompson will pick up his first win in South Carolina followed by Giuliani enjoying his first win in Florida.  Here are a few possibilities that might happen: 

1.      On Saturday both Huckabee and Thompson need a win in South Carolina.  A loss by either of these candidates may reveal the door at the end of the road for their campaigns.  It is unlikely that a finish lower than second can do anything but signal trouble for either of these candidates.  At the same time, a win for either of these candidates will cement their status as a top-tier candidate heading into Florida and Super Tuesday.    

2.      McCain must learn from Michigan that he must go beyond National Security when on the stump as he moves forward.  That being said, South Carolina is certainly a state where McCain’s National Security story is compelling and could propel him to a big South Carolina victory. 

3.      With last nights must-win win for Romney he has essentially been granted a bye in South Carolina and need not finish any better than third to move into Florida and Super Tuesday on a high note.  Anything above third would be a strong finish for Romney and signal that he can compete in the South. 

4.      Look for Romney to finish strong in Saturday’s other contest in Nevada. 

5.      Florida remains a must win for Giuliani. 

The only certainty on the horizon is that the next three weeks are going to be very interesting for conservatives and the Republican candidates.  Stay tuned!        


It couldn’t happen to a nicer douchebag.

Hey brother, can you spare a dime?Mike Nifong, the persecutor, er, prosecutor in the alleged Duke Rape case fraudulently brought by Crystal Gail Magnum, and pursued with a vigor and love for media attention, not to mention a desire for reelection and a disregard for facts, is broke.  Actually, to say Mike Nifong is broke is an understatement, he’s seriously in debt – if you buy his version of things.

We aren’t ones to dance on people’s graves, but someone of Nifong’s ilk deserves no special consideration at all (his family, sure, feel sorry for them, but not him). 

In a move Helen Keller could’ve seen coming, Nifong has filed for bankruptcy.  What’s amazing is he lists $180 million in liabilities in his filing.  That’s right, $180 million in debt, essentially.  While the number is high, seems low compared to the damage he did in his attempt to win reelection.

January 2008
« Dec   Feb »