Top 10 Worst Federal Rules of 2011

Oppressiveness doesn't mean gulags and Solzhenitsyn or Nelson Mandela in prison. Those are extreme examples. Here are the definitions of the word oppression. Pick any one; they all describe our government today:

1. Burdensome or difficult to bear
2. Tyrannical or exercising unjust power
3. Weighing heavily on the spirit; intense, or overwhelming

Need some examples? How about the Top 10 Worst Federal Rules of 2011? Don't forget my list either.

2012 Restore Liberty Project | Hillsdale for Liberty

Hillsdale College is a national treasure. They are a private college, they accept no government funding of any kind, so they are not beholden to anyone but their benefactors -- and their students. Alas, I wish my alma mater was still like this, but no... instead of pursuing truth and enlightenment, they have sunk into the depths of multi-culti post-modern depravity.

Anyway, Hillsdale College's 2012 Restore Liberty Project is desperately needed at this time in our history. Please read about it, and contribute what you can. Your children, and their children, will thank you. And me, well, thanks in advance.

Merry Christmas, Anti-Kakistocrats!

Peace on Earth, goodwill towards men.

Kakistocrat of the Year 2011

It seems only fitting, on a blog named, "Rage Against the Kakistocracy" that we feature an annual Kakistocrat of the Year. I'm ashamed to admit that I didn't think of it last year, when I would have nominated Nancy Pelosi. Thanking God that she's no longer Speaker of the House, I am obliged to nominate someone else. Barney Frank comes to mind, but he's such a caricature of idiocy, that he hardly needs the help. Besides, he's resigning.

And so, for all of these reasons, and more, I think Barack Obama deserves this year's honor. To paraphrase James Madison, to implement Barack Obama's agenda would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.

The Road to Serfdom

I'm reading The Heritage Foundation edition of The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich A. Hayek. I ran across this passage, which should be of interest to OWS as well as Tea Partiers. According to Friedrich A. Hayek,

Great danger lies in the policies of two powerful groups, organized capital and organized labor, which support the monopolistic organization of industry. The recent growth of monopoly is largely the result of a deliberate collaboration of organized capital and organized labor where the privileged groups of labor share in the monopoly profits at the expense of the community and particularly at the expense of those employed in the less well organized industries.

Hayek also says that it is bad government policy that allows monopolies to develop and flourish. I think OWS is missing part of the picture, and I think some conservatives are in denial about crony capitalism and government. Of course, if our politicians would follow The Constitution, these problems would be much less severe. Unfortunately, politicians being a product of the government education system, know bupkis about the founding principles or The Constitution. So nothing will really change until we fix the ignorance problem.

Hayek wrote this book in 1944, and things certainly appear to be much worse now than they were then.

That's What Christmas Is All About, Charlie Brown

This never fails to choke me up...

This scene from A Charlie Brown Christmas didn't mean all that much to me when I watched it when it first aired in 1965. It does now.

The Only Question(s) You Need

I have had this at the top of my sidebar for over a year:

THE ONLY QUESTION YOU NEED

"Which article of the Constitution gives government the authority to do that?"

If more and more people start asking this question, I think most of our worst political problems, in all branches and all levels of government would go away by themselves, almost overnight. When a reporter asked Nancy Pelosi that question about the healthcare bill, her deer-in-the-headlights response was, "Are you serious?" Well, we are serious, and politicians should be afraid to step out of their offices without a credible answer to that question. It is the only "litmus test" that we need.

It really takes so little effort, that it is at least worth a try. The beauty of it is, this really should appeal to honest people from anywhere on the political spectrum.

But in light of EPA Ponders Expanded Regulatory Power In Name of 'Sustainable Development', I think we have to add another:

Wouldn't it be preferable to protect our natural resources without forfeiting our natural rights?

Of course, if we answered the first question, we certainly wouldn't need the second one, but as I am very fond of quoting,

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson

Resisting the "natural progress of things" is getting to be like pushing a gigantic oppressive sustainable boulder uphill. If we stop to rest, it will roll right over us.

The Watermelons Are Onto the Fact That We're Onto Them

I know you think, you think you know, but I think you don't. ~ Zaphod Beeblebrox

The watermelons are onto us. Lloyd Alter, at treehugger (a discovery company), writes,

This past summer I think about twelve people read my post Agenda 21: The United Nations Threat To Control Our Lightbulbs, Our Lifestyles and Our Lives, where I wrote about how historic preservation, formerly the preserve of conservative types, has morphed into socialist control of private property, a tool of Agenda 21. I called it a Tea Party Theory of Everything:

It ties it all together into one neat package, making climate change, light bulbs, transit, smart growth, fuel economy, everything a plot...It is a spreading conspiracy theory that is becoming the underlying ideology of the crazy right and that has serious legs. It is no joke.

(Continue reading Agenda 21 Wackos On The Move to Stop Smart Growth)

Lloyd concludes with,

Almost every battle over historic preservation is now becoming a property rights battle, and almost every property rights battle now has an Agenda 21 tint to it. We really have to wake up to this threat.

No, Lloyd, Americans have to wake up to this threat to their natural rights. It might not be a conspiracy, but it certainly is an agenda. Agenda 21 uses environmental bait-and-switch to up-sell its illiberal collectivist schemes.

This is no idle threat: We've had multiple executive orders, from George H. W. Bush, William H. Clinton and now Barack H. Obama (constitutional illiterates all, apparently), invoking federal agencies such as the EPA and BLM to implement key elements of the Rio Earth Summit and Kyoto Protocol (even though Congress refused to ratify it). It's called "soft law". Then, flying in below the constitutional radar, ICLEI organizes local governments to implement Agenda 21. Warm fuzzy euphemisms such as Smart Growth and Sustainable Development mislead otherwise skeptical community leaders, businessmen and citizens who ask, essentially, "where do I line up to surrender my civil liberties and right to self-determination?" "Non profit", non-government organizations (NGOs) with names like Sustainable Connections, ReSources, and FutureWise, take government grants (your tax dollars) to "educate" you in the ways of sustainability, and sue you if you don't get in line. You're paying for your own oppression.

Don't just take my word for it, go to their websites and explore for yourself what they have planned for us. I provided the links. Remember, these websites are selling their agenda in glowing terms. You might need some translation. "Smart Growth" is already being implemented in your cities, counties and towns, probably without your awareness or consent -- this is intentional. In the halls of government for Bellingham and Whatcom County where I live, the saying goes, "if it isn't permitted, it isn't permitted". Meaning that if you don't have a permit, you can't do it. Say what?! Hello, commissioner! Government derives its just power from the consent of the governed, not the other way around! These very expensive permits are required to ensure that any development or construction complies with very expensive requirements to satisfy environmental extremist and scientifically unverified measures to protect watershed, airshed (!), habitat and whatever other arbitrary barriers may be erected by planning and zoning ordinances to control normal human activities.

Don't think it's not happening in your town: After you've familiarized yourself with Agenda 21 and ICLEI, a.k.a., Sustainable Development or Smart Growth, start attending your city and county council meetings, and planning and zoning commission meetings. Read the ordinances. Listen for the buzzwords -- they're all over the place. Then, start asking yourself, and others, these questions:

• What does Agenda 21 say, exactly?
• What do Smart Growth and Sustainable Development actually mean?
• What is ICLEI really trying to implement?
• What are the EPA, BLM, parks and recreation, planning and zoning, etc., trying to implement?
• Do you notice any similarities?
• Do you think they're a just a coincidence?
• Does the logical outcome have anything significant to do with the environment?
• Wouldn't it be preferable to protect our natural resources without forfeiting our natural rights?

And then ask,

• Have you ever tried remodeling a place you were renting?
• How much permission and input did your landlord require?
• Have you tried remodeling your own property lately?
• How much permission and input did your government require?
• Do you want to be a mere tenant on your own property?
• Have you ever wanted to own your own property?
• Why invest most of your life's work to purchase something that you have few rights to use for your own purposes?

Now that they know we're onto them, the watermelons are going to start squalling like hammered cats, calling us conspiracy theorists, paranoid nut jobs, and whatever else they can think of. They'll start renaming things -- picking new words to describe their tired old designs. Don't be deterred, because this is important: It is preferable to preserve our natural resources without forfeiting our natural rights!

They'll tell you capitalism, free enterprise, self-determination cannot be trusted to save the planet. What they're saying, in essence, is that government has to force us to go where free people would not go voluntarily. Is that not the definition of tyranny and oppression? I think we can do better than that.

The Rules In Chicago Illustrated by the Six Photographs Below

From an email circulating on The Internet:

Rod Blagojevich is the former Illinois Governor who tried to sell Obama's seat in Congress. Obama was asked by the press if he had ever met Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He replied: "I only saw Rod Blagojevich one time... And that was in the stands and from a distance at a Chicago Bears Football Game." Of course, you can believe him -- he's our President. The picture below? That's irrelevant.

Rod Blagojevich, Barack Obama, and Richard Daley
during a rally in Chicago, April 16, 2007. (Photo Reuters)

Note: Rahm Emanuel has replaced Daley as Mayor! And Daley's brother has replaced Rahm Emanuel as a chief adviser to the president.

Rahm Emanuel, the new Mayor of Chicago

You have to understand "the world according to Chicago". Chicago is almost a completely different country when it comes to politics, with a different set of morals and language. There are three rules and a Prime Directive.

• Rule #1. No matter what you see, hear, or do -- you don't know anybody & you know nothing!
• Rule #2. If you capture something on tape or camera -- it reveals nothing!
• Rule #3. If you know what everybody knows in Chicago -- you still know nothing.

The Prime Directive: No matter what the vote, Democrats win the election.

Now pay close attention! It's very simple. Remember, you know nothing. These two? They never met! Obama said they didn't.

Strangers in the Night

These two? Who are they?

Santa Claus, left; Easter Bunny, right

The guy on the left? He's Santa Claus. And the guy on the right, he's the Easter Bunny! That's all you need to know. These two? Don't ask.

Tweedle Dee, left; Tweedle Dum, right

Remember Jimmy Hoffa? He knew too much. Where is he now? Don't ask. Do you understand? Don't look at these pictures! Remember, you've already forgotten them.

Do you understand? They don't know each other and they never met! How is that possible? Because Obama said so! And don't! you! fergit! it! (As a wise old Cartoon Character used to say!)

P.S. If you pass this on to your friends: you know nothing and they will know nothing. So how's that "Hope and Change" working out for you?

The content is unchanged from the original email. I fixed some spelling errors, formatting errors, capitalization errors, paragraphing errors, removed unnecessary ellipses, added captions to the photos, and changed the crazy internet email font to something sensible.

Public Service Announcement and Editorial Comment

This email came to me from a local technical list server that I subscribe to:

Subject: odd phone call

This scam has been going around but it's the first I've heard of it locally. Apparently they are preying upon people who aren't computer smart... they say the computer is infected and then ask for access to the computer so they can "show you the problem" and then they ask that the victim download a file. I have no idea what happens after that but you know it's not good...

As far as reporting it... this appears to be originating outside of the US, so I don't think reporting it to the FTC and/or state Attorney General (as you normally would with telephone fraud) would really be helpful... but warning friends who aren't real good with computers (and who might believe the spiel) would probably be a good idea.

Okay. Now, 'people who aren't computer smart' and 'friends who aren't real good with computers' should heed this warning. But keep in mind that legislators and even some subscribers to the tech list are 'people who aren't computer smart'. If they need a warning like this, then how susceptible do you suppose they are to being fooled by computer models as proof of a scientific hypothesis?

What Do I Think of Computer Models?

Computer models are buggy self-fulfilling prophecies with circular dependencies.

I write software for a living, so I should know. Computer models can only model what we already know, so they can't actually teach us anything. They certainly are not useful as experiments to prove a hypothesis, because the computer model simply becomes the hypothesis -- implemented as a computer program. It's a tautology; nothing more.

If you're actually trying to prove or disprove a hypothesis, you have to abandon virtual reality, and hie thee into actual reality, run real experiments, and start taking measurements. Only then will you learn anything new. On the other hand, if all you're trying to do is baffle politicians or the media with bull to promote an agenda, a computer model might do nicely.

Top 12 Reasons to Vote Democrat

From an email circulating the Internet:

The Top 12 Reasons to Vote Democrat

1. I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.
2. I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
3. I voted Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
4. I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
5. I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.
6. I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
7. I voted Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.
8. I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.
9. I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
10. I voted Democrat because I think that it's better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.
11. I voted Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world already, I was promised "HOPE AND CHANGE".
12. I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my ass, it's unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view

REMEMBER: Vote Democrat. It's easier than using your brain.

There are a couple corollaries to number four:

• When seconds count, the police can be there in minutes.
• I carry a gun because it's more convenient than carrying a policeman.

Public Comment – Concerns Regarding Birch Bay Watershed Action Plan

Yesterday, I sent the following letter to the Whatcom County Planning Commission:

---

December 9, 2011

Karl A. Uppiano
5988 Malloy Ave.
Ferndale, WA 98248

File Copy – Whatcom County Planning Commission
5280 Northwest Drive
Bellingham, WA 98226

Subject: Public Comment – Concerns Regarding Birch Bay Watershed Action Plan

Dear Planning Commissioners:

I want to share my impressions of the public hearing last night. You may remember me; I was the only one who spoke on the principles of good government.

All through the meeting, I kept thinking of a quote by Ian Malcolm from Jurassic Park: “[they] were so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.” A lot of the second part of the proceedings was devoted to how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but no one questioned the forgone conclusion about whether the Birch Bay watershed actually needs fixing, and if so, whether the government should do it. Where does this authority come from?

• One commissioner noted that there was “overwhelming support” for this measure.

No, there was the predictable parade of NIMBYs, environmental extremists, vested interests (e.g., Sustainable Connections, contractors, consultants, etc., whose job it is to promote these measures), and only a smattering of people, including me, who questioned the fundamental premise – whether the proper role of government is controlling individual behavior.

• Several commissioners expressed concern about the size and complexity of the measure.
• At least one commissioner was concerned about the likelihood that the regulations would change over time.

James Madison addressed both concerns 230 some odd years ago, in The Federalist:

The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessing of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

• One commissioner noted (as justification?) that if the county does nothing (or even if it does something), ever more stringent state regulations will follow.
• More than one commissioner was concerned that what is now voluntary will become mandatory.

Thomas Jefferson: “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” As citizens, it is our duty to resist “the natural progress of things”. The natural progress of things is to deteriorate without maintenance. We the People must maintain our liberty at all levels of government. Government won’t restrain itself – that much is obvious, or should be.

• One commissioner mentioned that the county wants to help the people of Birch Bay, who want this.
• One commissioner suggested CAPR testimony should be disregarded. (Seriously?!)

Jefferson again: “The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.”

• One commissioner suggested that if this is voluntary, why not simply publish the LID materials, and leave it at that?

Why not indeed? Instead of collecting government grants, and lobbying for the government to force people to go where they would not go voluntarily, why don’t the ReSources and Sustainable Connections people (and all the rest of the ICLEI/Smart Growth/Sustainable Development crowd) manufacture environmentally friendly LID products and educational materials that they can sell for a profit, in order to purchase buffers and offsets with their own money, and fund their own environmental public awareness campaigns and how-to programs? For the answer to that question, you need to understand that for many, the environment is nothing more than a convenient tool used shamelessly to promote a collectivist, illiberal agenda.

• Several commissioners expressed concern for the amount of time, effort and expense already spent for research and development on this project and the potential waste if it fails.

That’s a valid concern, but two wrongs don’t make a right. Again, we have to question the fundamental premise: Is this necessary? Is it proper?

I realize that quoting our dusty old founders might seem quaint, except for one thing: They had a lot invested in the American form of government, and the principles that they established as necessary for good government are still the official specification for the United States: the federal, state, and local constitutions and charters. These supreme laws have not been rescinded, but merely disregarded in recent years.

Once government becomes activist, picking winners and losers, working on behalf of one special interest or another, it becomes a fraud magnet – susceptible to lobbying, special interests, waste. Those problems are much less severe when government sticks to its affirmed purpose: that of protecting the civil liberties of all citizens, equally. I believe it is possible – preferable – to protect our natural resources without forfeiting our natural rights.

Respectfully Submitted,

Karl A. Uppiano

---

You may not feel that this is relevant to you if you live outside Whatcom County. If that is the case, then I would encourage you to Google "Sustainable Development", "Smart Growth", "ICLEI" and "Agenda 21". Then, attend your city and county council meetings. Be prepared for a shock. You might discover that, at the behest of environmental extremists, the government has made you a mere tenant on your own property. You can still develop and use your land, but only in very special ways, after paying the government exorbitant fees for the permission to do so. Tried any remodeling lately?

Liszt Rhapsody #12

Here's some food for the soul. Valentina's website says she's working on a "Liszt Project" -- fantastic!

It's all good, but check out from about 6:00 on.

Global Warming 101

Here's another chalk talk.

Times up! Pencils down. Close your blue books!

Economy 101

Bill Whittle voices this handy little tutorial.

2012 will definitely be a "fork in the road". I hope we start back on the right fork.

"Progressives" Successfully Slime "The Conservative Negro" from Presidential Bid

Probably scared spitless over the prospect of a conservative black man running against the Halfrican-American, Barack Obama, the regressive spinmeisters managed to schedule serial accusers of sexual harassment, culminating in allegations of a 13-year illicit extramarital affair against Herman Cain. The one-two-three-four punch proved too much for the man, who does lack the gloves-off campaign skills of the Chicago thugocracy currently inhabiting the White House. They hounded him from the campaign trail.

I suspect that the sexual harassment cases were the typical gold-digger frivolous type. These are commonly settled out of court even if there is no impropriety, simply because it is too expensive, too embarrassing and too risky to fight it. There's always the risk that you could lose even if you're innocent. It isn't worth it. So you settle. So much for equal justice for all.

The final nail in Cain's campaign coffin was the allegation of a 13 year illicit love affair. I don't know if this is true or not. We may never know. If true, then the Cain campaign was naive not to have a credible defense already in the hopper. However... if it isn't true, how could they have prepared? If it isn't true, then this is the scummiest, low-down attack on a good man's honor that I have ever seen. I would sincerely hope that we have higher quality people running our government, but I fear otherwise.

Climategate I and II

Evidence continues to accumulate, that global warming (or the more recently adopted non-falsifiable and self-fulfilling moniker "climate change") is an outright fraud.

Jim Lacey writing in National Review Online states in his article Scientists Behaving Badly,

Last week over 5,000 new e-mails, already dubbed Climategate 2, were released. Anyone still desiring to contest the assertion that only a few persons controlled the entire warmist agenda will be brought up short by this note from one warmist protesting that his opinions were not getting the hearing they deserved: “It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group.” Over the years this core group, led by Phil Jones at East Anglia and Michael Mann at Penn State, became so close that even those inclined toward more honest appraisals of the state of climate science were hesitant to rock the boat. As one warm-monger states: “I am not convinced that the ‘truth’ is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships.” Silly me, how many years have I wasted believing that the very point of science was to pursue the truth in the face of all obstacles. On the basis of this evidence the scientific method must be rewritten so as to state: “Science must be as objective as possible, unless it offends your friends.”

(Continue reading...)

One by one, scientists are beginning to speak up. Karin McQuillan writes in Scientists in Revolt against Global Warming over at American Thinker,

More and more scientists are revolting against the global warming consensus enforced by government funding, the academic establishment, and media misrepresentation. They are saying that solar cycles and the complex systems of cloud formation have much more influence on our climate, and account for historical periods of warming and cooling much more accurately that a straight line graph of industrialization, CO2, and rising temperatures. They also point out that the rising temperatures that set off the global warming panic ended in 1998.

It takes a lot of courage. Scientists who report findings that contradict man-made global warming find their sources of funding cut, their jobs terminated, their careers stunted, and their reports blocked from important journals, and they are victimized by personal attacks. This is a consensus one associates with a Stalinist system, not science in the free world.

(Continue reading...)

But, there is a real possibility that if humans ever are legitimately linked to global warming or climate change -- anything -- that real scientists and principled public servants will have a much harder row to hoe in order to convince people to take the necessary steps to reverse it.

Obama 101

Victor Davis Hanson provides us with one of the more uplifting articles about Barack Obama.

In the last three years, the president has taught us a great deal about America, the world, and himself.

Before Obama, many Americans still believed in massive deficit spending, whether as an article of fairness, a means to economic growth, or just a lazy fallback position to justify an out-of-control federal government. But after the failure of a nearly $800 billion “stimulus” program — intended to keep unemployment under 8 percent — no one believes any more that an already indebted government will foster economic growth by taking on another $4 trillion in debt. In other words, “stimulus” is mostly a dead concept. The president — much as he advised a barnstorming President Bush in 2005 to cease pushing Social Security reform on a reluctant population — should give it up and junk the new $500 billion program euphemistically designated as a “jobs bill.” The U.S. government is already borrowing every three days what all of America spent on Black Friday.

(Continue reading...)

I only hope he's right, and I also hope that America comes to its senses, because as the sign says,

If we have lost the once proud culture and founding principles that made the American form of government the shining example for the world -- and The United States the ultimate destination for huddled masses longing to be free -- then we have lost America. Barack Obama would be a symptom, not the cause of our demise.

Keep the Change

Burning Deceased Humans Will Produce Electricity

According to this article, In Durham, England, corpses will soon be used to generate electricity.

Mark Twain quipped in The Innocents Abroad, that they used to burn mummies to run the trains in Egypt. This is even better. I’m sure the backlog of unburned deceased humans is a huge untapped resource in the energy field. And if we run out of dead ones, we can start killing live ones. We're a scourge on the planet anyway. Win-win!

I’ve thought for a long time that the founders spinning in their graves would be a great source of energy. Just hook a drive belt between the spinning founder and an electric generator. At the rate they have to be spinning today, I'm thinking we could power most of the Eastern seaboard.

"Finish the Job"

Barack Obama says he'll need another term to "finish the job". It strikes me as a decidedly odd turn of phrase. My parents used to use the euphemism "finish the job" to mean "wipe and flush".

I really don't want Barack Obama to "finish the job" he dropped on America. That would stink.

Am I Anti-Environment?

Am I anti-environment? No, I'm anti environmentalist. I don't like watermelons. I want to leave to my children a planet that is cleaner than I found it, with scenic places and fresh air and water. However, I also want to leave to my children a world that is freer than I found it, with liberty and justice for all.

There has to be a balance. The definition of an extremist is someone who prioritizes their cause above everything else at any cost. The cost for environmentalism, is liberty. Environmentalists want government to force everyone to do what environmentalists think should be done to protect the planet. The trouble is, government bureaucracy is much harder to adapt to new conditions and new information than free markets, private enterprise and individual liberty. Private property, vested interest, individual stewardship, are the keys to a better environment. Just look at the evidence: a quick scan of the planet shows that the environment is cleaner where people are freer.

Google Can, You Can't, Joe!

Google runs a private blogging platform, blogger.com. In fact, it hosts Rage Against the Kakistocracy. Now, Joe Lieberman is exhorting Google to ban terrorist content on blogger.com. While I am no friend of Muslim extremism and terrorism, I am also no friend of government oppression, or the infringement of our First Amendment rights. As long as Google decides to ban terrorist content on their own property, that's fine. As an officer of the government, I don't think it's appropriate for senators to suggest it.

Now, Joe has freedom of speech also, and I'm not suggesting that he shut up. But instead of making veiled threats to Google's executives, telling them how to run their private enterprise, perhaps Joe would be more effective if he were to expose the terrorist blogs to the American public, and let us draw our own conclusions. We can shun those sites. We can flag the content or the site as offensive. We can boycott Google. As free Americans, we have all sorts of options. We don't need illiberal control freaks oppressing our civil liberties. That means you, Joe.

The risk is that once government has the power to control terrorist content, what's to stop it from designating Rage Against the Kakistocracy as dangerous to the regime? In fact, it is dangerous to kakistocrats. I intend it to be. And that is the exact reason The First Amendment exists in the first place.

Test Your News IQ -- Pew Research

Here's an interesting quiz. I got 11 out of 13. How about you?

Modern History -- Unrevised

From an email that is circulating on the Internet:

This is just a history lesson and nothing can change it.

The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009. It was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress. The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

• The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
• The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
• The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
• George Bush's Economic policies set a record of 52 straight months of job creation!

Remember that day -- January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? Banking and financial services!

Thank you Democrats (especially Barney) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% unemployment... to this crisis by (among many other things) dumping 5-6 trillion dollars of toxic loans on the economy from your Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiascoes! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 times to stop Fannie & Freddie -- starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a "Chicken Little Philosophy" (and the sky did fall!) And who took the third highest pay-off from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Obama! And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? Obama and the Democrat Congress, especially Barney! So when someone tries to blame Bush, remember January 3rd, 2007: the day the Democrats took over!

Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel. They were driving the economy into the ditch. Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period. If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for, and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th."

I think that just about covers it...

The Truth Will Set You Free!

The truth will set you free -- literally -- if you can find it. Canada is reported to be planning to announce it is leaving the Kyoto Protocols. If that isn't a huge blow for freedom, then I don't know what is. There isn't much of anything more oppressive than the government policies (Kyoto, Agenda 21) intended to reduce "global warming", or "climate change" as they now unfalsifiably call it.

The truth is, there is no experiment that you could run that can verify that humans cause global warming, global cooling, or anything in between. All good scientists are skeptics, in search of the truth.

This could be the best news of the year (read more...). I wonder how long before my own country comes to its senses. Although we never ratified the Kyoto treaty, we've been implementing it like mad.

Be Thankful...

Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for. ~ Will Rogers

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Can You Say "Tone Deaf"? I Knew You Could...

When I first heard about this, I was sure it was a joke. I figured it came from The Onion, or The Nose on Your Face. But sadly, no, it was real -- just when I thought the kakistocracy couldn't get any more outrageous. Withering under well-deserved ridicule, the Obama regime reconsidered, and "delayed" the $0.15 Christmas tree tax.

The tax was “designed to benefit the industry and will be funded by the growers” and is “not expected to have any impact on the final price consumers pay for their Christmas tree.” It would fund a “program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expand existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry” and to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States.” I'm stunned. I never knew Christmas trees had an image problem in the United States.

Just one question: Which article of The Constitution gives government the authority to do that?!?!

Fisker Karma Electric Car Gets Worse Mileage Than an SUV

Government should not be allowed to pick winners and losers. It can't be trusted to be honest about it. This article from Forbes illustrates the problem:

The Fisker Karma electric car, developed mainly with your tax money so that a bunch of rich VC’s wouldn’t have to risk any real money, has rolled out with an nominal EPA MPGe of 52 in all electric mode (we will ignore the gasoline engine for this analysis).

Not bad? Unfortunately, it’s a sham. This figure is calculated using the grossly flawed EPA process that substantially underestimates the amount of fossil fuels required to power the electric car, as I showed in great depth in an earlier Forbes.com article. In short, the EPA methodology leaves out, among other things, the conversion efficiency in generating the electricity from fossil fuels in the first place [by assuming perfect conversion of the potential energy in the fuel to electricity, the EPA is actually breaking the 2nd law of thermodynamics]. (Continue reading...)

The free market works on the principle of natural selection. It has no agenda. Politicians, statists and bureaucrats always have an agenda. They cannot abide allowing citizens to make their own choices. There's always the risk that We the People might make choices that the illiberal control freaks might not agree with.

The First Manifesto of the Wall Street Protesters

This video pokes the "Occupy Wall Street" brats' manifesto full of holes. It's almost thirty minutes long, so get comfortable.

Although he makes many very good arguments, I believe this guy is an anarchist. I am not an anarchist. Our founders were not anarchists. I believe as they did, that government is necessary to protect liberty, but they also knew that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So they invented a representative democracy, which was designed to limit government power. I strongly believe that if we still followed The Constitution, we would still have the system of government that the founders designed, and the problems that we now face would be much less severe.

Are You Kidding Me? We're Mad as Hell...

Now here's a guy who can Rage Against the Kakistocracy with the best of them (and I think I know who I am):

Yeah, what he said.

My Letter to Puget Sound Energy

Dear PSE,

About six months ago, I started receiving "energy report cards" in the mail, telling me that I'm using significantly more energy than my neighbors. Several of my friends and co-workers have received similar notices. I understand the desire and the need to save energy, but I find this comparison to be intrusive and sanctimonious. I'm not in some contest to see who can be more "green". I'm trying to live my life as frugally and responsibly as practical, and I don't need unsolicited advice about how I should do it.

It isn't my concern how much energy my neighbors are using, or vice-versa. If I can afford to pay my electric bill according to our terms of service, then the issue should end there. We happen to have four active adults and one teen-ager living in this household. People are here all day. Some of us work from home, saving on transportation! I believe our energy consumption is legitimate.

I do not appreciate the "big brother" approach being employed here. I believe that you are being pressured by agents of Agenda 21 -- Sustainable Development/ICLEI to do this kind of thing, and I think that it is a diminishing matter of time before we lose yet another civil liberty, ushering in government control over our energy use with so-called "smart meters" and similar technology. Sure, it will start out voluntary, but the historical, natural progress of things is for it to become mandatory. This country used to be based on economic liberty, but increasingly it is based on government mandates and centralized control.

If you think this is conspiracy theory, you need look no further than Community Energy Challenge, shown on your Home Energy Report letterhead. This is conspiracy fact! Community Energy Challenge is supported by Sustainable Connections, ReSources, BALLE, and many others. These are NGOs and non-profits, using my tax dollars and the force of government to promote "sustainable development" all wrapped in a pretty green bow, in direct opposition to our property rights, economic freedom, free markets, capitalism, national sovereignty -- in short, our civil liberties -- and I strongly resent it! The website indicates that it is paid for in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. Thanks a heap, DOE. Which article of the Constitution gives government the authority to do that?

In a free market, I could simply say, "if you persist in this Orwellian scheme, I'll just take my business elsewhere", but of course we both know I can't do that.

Sincerely,
Karl Uppiano

Which article of the Constitution gives government the authority to do that?
www.antikakistocrat.blogspot.com

You're the 99%? What's the Problem?

Dude, if you're the 99%, then what in blazes is your major malfunction? Are you telling me that one percent of the population has you and all of the world's power and wealth cornered? Tell me another!

I certainly do not support corporatocracy (or union-ocracy) but if it weren't for the kakistocracy, we wouldn't be in this mess. An activist government is a fraud magnet. When government goes around trying to make the world "nice" by choosing winners and losers, and regulating everyone "for the good of the planet" or "for the good of society", that's when the special interests selfishly begin lobbying government to make their lives easier. If everyone had equal justice instead of social justice, then everyone could duke it out in the real world of good luck, bad luck, and the school of hard knocks and real work, on a truly level playing field -- not a government mandated one that gives special advantages to arbitrarily chosen "victim" groups, species and planets.

Here's life's first lesson: life ain't fair. I don't expect it to be. You shouldn't either. Government cannot make it so. Any government that governs against natural law is bound to fail. It is our individual duty -- not government's -- to help those less fortunate among us, including nature. True, some people are greedy, heartless bastards. But using government to force them to "play nice" (who gets to define "nice"?) always has, and always will, backfire.

Hear me now, and believe me later: to make the world a better place, the founders gave us the First Amendment. It's a great tool; you should try it. You can convince people to follow your lead -- voluntarily. You can convince people to join your church -- voluntarily. But the non-establishment clause says that you cannot make it mandatory.

If our politicians would follow The Constitution that they all take an oath to uphold and defend, the problems that we are facing today would be far less severe. Bailouts to large banks? Unauthorized. Take-over of the automobile industry? Unauthorized. Fraudulent grants to "green" industries? Unauthorized. The enumerated powers are very short, but the list of shame goes on.

Why I Deny Global Warming | Western Journalism.com

I'm not a denier, I'm a heretic, but News Editor over at Western Journalism reiterates what I have been saying since day one:

I’m a denier for several reasons. There is no substantive evidence that the planet has warmed significantly or that any significant warming will occur in the future. If any warming does occur, it likely will be concentrated at higher latitudes and therefore be beneficial. Climate research has largely degenerated into pathological science, and the coverage of global warming in the media is tendentious to the point of being fraudulent. Anyone who is an honest and competent scientist must be a denier.

(Continue reading...)

The alleged degree of global warming over the past 150 years is less than 1 deg C. Yet even in a technologically advanced country like the US, the inherent error in over 90 percent of the surveyed meteorological stations is greater than the putative signal. And these errors are not random, but systematically reflect a warming bias related to urbanization.

Urbanization, as in Agenda 21's "pack & stack". He continues:

Watts has documented countless instances of air temperature sensors located next to air conditioning vents or in the middle of asphalt parking lots. A typical scenario is that a temperature sensor that was in the middle of a pasture a hundred years ago is now surrounded by a concrete jungle. Urbanization has been a unidirectional process. It is entirely plausible – even likely – that all of the temperature rise that has been inferred from the data is an artifact that reflects the growth of urban heat islands.

The thermometers at KCID AM 1490, where I worked as an engineer just out of college was one of those reporting stations that started out in a field of grass. Don’t even get me started on the poor practices of the operators responsible for reading those thermometers. At least half the time, the temperature wasn’t taken at the right time, or wasn’t taken at all, but filled in from memory based on what the announcers were reading off the indoor/outdoor thermometer mounted above the mixing console.

Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 5, "Emperor"

Sometimes I just have to give my soul a rest from all of the tyranny, oppression and corruption. Valentina Lisitsa may very well be the most talented pianist of our time. I fell in love with this concerto when I first heard Andre Watts play it 25 years ago. I hope you enjoy it.

Valentina Lisitsa, Pianist

This was recorded live in Mexico City, but I cannot find out which orchestra or which conductor it was.

There must have been something in the water in the 1700s, what with Sir Issac Newton, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Ludwig van Beethoven...

Obama: America Has a Debt Problem and a Failure of Leadership

In an email circulating the Internet, then Senator Barack Obama is quoted from 2006:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America 's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

This just seemed too good, so I snopesed it. It's true! Barack Obama did say that. Later, someone asked President Barack Obama about that quote, and he said:

I think that it's important to understand the vantage point of a senator versus the vantage point of a president. When you're a senator, traditionally what's happened is, this is always a lousy vote. Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit — for the United States by a trillion dollars. As president, you start realizing, you know what, we, we can't play around with this stuff. This is the full faith and credit of the United States. And so that was just an example of a new senator making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country. And I'm the first one to acknowledge it.

I'm sorry, Mr. President, but I have to take issue with your answer. You can't have it both ways. It sounds like you're just playing politics. You say you were grandstanding in the senate. A real statesman would do the right thing at all times. Sound economics isn't rocket science. I took economics and physics in college, and let me tell you, physics is much harder. I cannot accept the argument that you were just ignorant. What do you really believe?

Deficit Reduction: I Want to Hear from You

I received an email from Patti Murray:

Over the next few months, the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction will need to find a balanced approach to addressing our debt and deficit, growing our economy, and putting Americans back to work. As Co-Chair of this bipartisan commission, I am working hard to bring members together around a bipartisan plan that works for families in Washington state. But I also know that we have a difficult challenge in front of us and that we need to marshal every idea and resource we can to complete this difficult task. That’s why I want to hear from you.

Please go to my comment form where you can submit your new, innovative, and most importantly – practical – approaches that could be implemented by the Joint Select Committee to help move our country in the right direction. At this critical time for our country your involvement is important to ensuring that we can find common ground solutions that work for real families. I look forward to hearing your ideas.

So, I responded with this:

Follow the Constitution

You're not going to like this, but the best way to improve the economy, the environment, prosperity and quality of life is to follow the official specification for the United States of America: The United States Constitution.

We're so far off the beam right now that to demand limited constitutional government seems extreme to some. Sadly, they might be right, since so many have become dependent on unlimited government for their livelihood, their subsistence, medical care, retirement, or just plain fraud.

To restore constitutionally limited government overnight would be inhumane and politically unfeasible. But we must begin the process. Because any regime that distorts or disregards The Constitution that they took an oath to uphold and defend is illegal, untrustworthy and dangerous.

Simply shutting down all of the unconstitutional government programs (and there are literally millions of them) would balance the budget overnight.

Our Governmental System

From an email making the rounds on the Internet:

The folks who are getting free stuff,
Don't like the folks who are paying for the free stuff.
Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff,
Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they're getting already.

Now, the people who are forcing people to PAY for the free stuff,
Have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff, that the people who
Are PAYING for the free stuff, are being mean, prejudiced and racist.

So, the people who are GETTING the free stuff, have been convinced they need
To HATE the people who are PAYING for the free stuff because they are selfish.
And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force
The people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.

And -- when the free stuff stops we will riot, burn, steal and commit mayhem.
For the "rich" owes us! It is happening in England and coming here soon.

And that's the Straight stuff!

And that's the ungrateful entitlement mentality. I'll give charitably to those who are down on their luck, but the rest of you can take a hike. The government is not authorized to take what I earn and redistribute it as they see fit.

Online Gamers Crack Scientific Puzzle

My wife found this article on The Bellingham Herald website:

For more than a decade, biochemists could not fully decipher the structure of a key protein, called a protease, that retroviruses such as HIV need to multiply. Knowing it would be a key step toward developing better anti-viral drugs.

So University of Washington scientists unleashed an avid group of online gamers. Within three furious weeks of play, pitting teams of non-scientists against each other, the gamers delivered the first accurate model of a retroviral protease. Knowing the structure is a key step toward finding better anti-viral drugs.

(Continue reading...)

As you know, I have been very critical of using computer modeling as a substitute for actual experiments. Computer models are tautologies.

This is different. This is computer-aided problem solving that leverages human strengths, such as pattern recognition, the ability to reason, and our natural propensity for competition. Cut-throat competition is harmful, but as in any successful government, when human nature is harnessed for good, it is very powerful indeed.

Constitution Day Tea Party Crashers

Yesterday, I attended the Constitution Day Tea Party on The Guide sponsored by The Bellingham Tea Party. It was windy and chilly, threatening rain, and turnout was less than usual. The people who attended were very enthusiastic, as was the reception by passers-by. We had a lot of honks and waves, along with the usual number of extended middle fingers (from those who disapprove of The Constitution, I guess).

The crashers were interesting, though. They were in their late teens or early twenties. A young woman was carrying a sign that said, "SATAN loves you, just the way you are". A young man, wearing green eyeshades (they weren't glasses, exactly) had a sign that said, "I [heart] Dick" (I assume he wasn't referring to his good friend Richard). He spent a lot of time having simulated sex with his sign. The signs and behavior were obviously intended to attract attention, and to offend as many people as possible. They must assume tea partiers are a bunch of board-up-the-butt fogies that would be easily offended. Really? Most of us were raised on Monty Python, Saturday Night Live, National Lampoon, to name just a few. We were all young once, if not now, and we've seen it all, and done a lot of it ourselves.


(Crashers toned down their rhetoric and antics for this video, courtesy fellow tea partier)

If they object to tea party principles, it was impossible to tell how, or what. Their protest was too generic. So what was on display by the crashers was a complete lack of perspective and maturity, and complete lack of gratitude for the rights that they were abusing. I think our public schools are responsible, for not teaching young people about the brilliance of the form of government that the tea party was assembled to celebrate. If We the People fail to uphold and defend The Constitution, these crashers' generation will lose, within their lifetime, the right to poop on the very document that they mock.

Hilarious Global Warming Song Parodies

I don't know if these guys paid the license fees to perform these songs in public, so they might be pulled soon. Get 'em while they're hot!

Mugged by Mythology

Jeff Bergner at The Weekly Standard debunks the myths perpetrated by the illiberal control freaks:

Liberals believe the darnedest things.

Sometimes talking with liberals is perplexing. You never know what claim they will make next or what name they will call you. Take David Axelrod’s response to Standard & Poor’s recent credit action: He calls it the “Tea Party downgrade.” Amazingly, he blames the United States’ loss of its AAA bond rating on the one group that has sounded the alarm about our fiscal crisis. How did the president’s leading adviser come up with a label so detached from reality?

Comforting as it would be to dismiss this as a one-off comment, Axelrod’s words spring from the mental universe of liberalism. It is a vast sphere of assumptions that are found nowhere else. In an effort to promote the civility of debate that is so much in demand these days, here is a compendium of the myths underlying some of the strange things liberals say.

(Continue reading...)

Some highlights:

Myth #7: Liberals take the country forward and conservatives take it backward. Behind all these illusions lies a deeper notion: History is moving “forward,” and liberals are on the “right side of history.” But there is no intrinsic forward and backward in the historical process; there are only competing visions of America, none of which is guaranteed to succeed. If history is marching somewhere, we don’t know where. And at any given moment, the cold night of tyranny is just as possible as the clear day of enlightenment. Every step has to be won and defended on the basis of what best serves the interests of the American people. That’s why earlier generations believed that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. And, by the way, wouldn’t it be interesting to know where liberals find the metaphysical foundations on which to rest their notions of “forward” and “backward”? Liberal orthodoxy denies a God-given moral order to the universe. Its secular “progress” is nothing but the fantasy of long-dead German philosophers.

Or this one:

Myth #10: No logical arguments need be made against conservatives. For liberals there are never two legitimate sides in a debate. There are only forward and backward, good intentions and bad intentions. It is not necessary to argue the merits of an issue with someone who is pointing backward; it is enough to locate that person as pointing backward. To do so is to make the case and prove the case. The result is predictable: The essence of liberal argument is ad hominem attack. Liberals do not confront arguments directly, any more than they confront religious claims directly; they go behind conservative arguments to vilify the messenger. If you disagree with liberal policy you are a xenophobe, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, a racist, an extremist, or lately a “terrorist.” As the president has said, you are too scared to think straight. Instead of answering your arguments, liberals aim to shut you up with snarky TV entertainment shows.

09/11/2001 -- Never Forget

We were attacked. It was exactly as it seemed: evil people following an evil man, misled by an evil doctrine, killed thousands of innocent men, women and children on that fateful day, destroying the lives and families of many thousands more innocent men, women and children -- the husbands, the wives, the kids.

It was not an inside job. We must not shrink from calling the enemy by his real name: Islamic Extremism. To use euphemisms, or to avoid "offending" people or their culture, is equivalent to committing national suicide. We must not allow the construction of a "ground zero mosque". Militant Muslims historically build a mosque at the site of every conquest. Don't be fooled. We cannot allow them to claim victory in that way.

Quote of the Week

It is incredible to think that in the Obama White House we went from passing bills without reading them to passing bills without writing them.

~ Michele Bachmann

 ...referring to Barack Obama's job speech, in which he exhorted congress repeatedly to "pass the bill" when there is in fact, no bill.

It's Dead Simple

I was inspired to make this simple little image:

I hope this image goes "viral". Feel free to use it any way you like (right click and save as...).

I'm praying for a Great Tea Party Uprising (GTPU) in 2012 -- in November, at the ballot box -- to finish what we started in 2010, replacing the rest of the dim bulbs with constitutional literates.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." ~ Thomas Jefferson

For my entire life, I have watched helplessly as the liberal illiberal progressives regressives gain ground while our liberties vanish. It is definitely time for a change -- away from oppressive, big, central government... back to the freedom and the responsibility to care for ourselves, our families -- and our neighbors -- as we see fit.

It is time to tell the illiberal control freaks that they can't have our property or our liberty! We own it!

On Being Governed By Scientific Frauds

This article over at American Thinker is a tad hyperbolic, but this paragraph makes it all worthwhile:

Nothing is as toxic as a really bad idea. Hundreds of millions of dollars are still being spent in "scientific" pursuit of disaster scenarios about the earth, fiddling with infinitely variable computer models. This isn't science; the burden of proof has flipped to the skeptics, which does not happen in real science. Albert Einstein had to predict observable outcomes before his ideas were accepted. Watson and Crick had to prove the helical structure of DNA before anybody took them seriously. But in Global Frauding it's the skeptics who are supposed to prove that the latest computer model is not true. If they manage that, the crooks just make up a new computer model. It's a sort of card sharper trick. A con artist can always move faster than the suckers.

(Continue reading...)

Truth, My Truth and Opinion

Arguing with progressives regresssives. I can't say it any better than Bill. Take it away, Bill!

Gore: Global warming skeptics are this generation’s racists

I don't know if Al Gore truly believes the junk science, or if he is deliberately trying to pull the wool over people's eyes:

One day climate change skeptics will be seen in the same negative light as racists, or so says former Vice President Al Gore.

(Read more...)

“This is an organized effort to attack the reputation of the scientific community as a whole, to attack their integrity, and to slander them with the lie that they are making up the science in order to make money,” Gore said.

No, Mr. Gore, it isn't. It is about watermelons subverting the scientific method for political reasons!

Government Mandated Compact Fluorescent Lights

I don't mind using CFLs where dimmability doesn't matter; where instant brightness doesn't matter; where a balanced, continuous spectrum doesn't matter; where operating cost is important; where longevity is important. Hey, EPA, I am quite capable of making the appropriate illumination choices for myself, thank you very much. And if someone can convince me that using these devices will be beneficial for the environment, I'll support that too -- voluntarily. But government mandates are usually a clear indication that there is no other sufficiently compelling reason for people to do something.

Not Debunking the Laffer Curve

I was discussing the Laffer Curve with a co-worker today, and I argued that it is just as real and just as valid as the effect of price on the law of supply and demand. The difference is in the shape of the curves. In a free market, people pay for things voluntarily, so the peak price point is where the selling price matches the perceived value of the purchase. The peak revenue point on the Laffer Curve is much higher because taxation is compulsory. The Laffer Curve peaks at the point where the oppression from taxation equals the people's will to persevere. What a grim prospect!

I had to admit, the theory that raising taxes would lower revenue, or that lowering taxes would increase revenue is probably a fallacy at our current tax rate, because the Laffer Curve peak is probably close to an 80% tax rate. We're still below that tax rate today. That is not to say the economy wouldn't tank at our current tax rate, but I digress...

It got me thinking, though. If you wanted to know what people really think government is worth, make taxation voluntary. Then, the amount of tax that people would be willing to pay voluntarily would exactly equal the amount of government that We the People think we really need and want. Wouldn't that be interesting?!

The New Counterculture

Fifty some years ago, the 1960s brought forth on this continent a new counterculture, conceived in sex, drugs and rock'n'roll and dedicated to peace and love. They said, "If we were in charge, things would be different." Now, they are in charge, and things are different. It turns out that their leaders are bigger tyrants and oppressors than the ones they criticized. They're using the force of government to compel We the People think and act the way they do.

Today, we have a new counterculture: the tea parties. What are we dedicated to? Well, we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

We are the new counterculture; they are the establishment! And when we regain control, I hope we remember these principles - embodied in The Constitution of the United States - and that we live by them.

Resisting the Natural Progress of Things

Are biodegradable plastic shopping bags the biggest problem Bellingham faces? I think not, because few people were talking about it until a few days before the city council shoved the shopping bag ban down our throats. If it isn’t high on the Bellinghamsters’ agenda, then whose agenda is it? And why is it being imposed on us?

In a free country, when consumers identify a problem, they demand solutions from their producers. Then consumers vote with their dollars for the preferred solution. But no, here we use the force of government to compel everyone to adopt The Agenda, and implement the prescribed solution – under penalty of law.

Mind you, this is not about the bags. This is about freedom. Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." To preserve our freedom, we must resist "the natural progress of things", even over silly things, such as bag bans.

Retailers supporting the ban include Fred Meyer, Albertsons, Haggen, Village Books, Paper Dreams, Terra Organica… maybe others. Please vote with your dollars to let them know, they can promote environmental awareness without disrespecting your freedom so trivially.

Deniers and Heretics and Skeptics -- Oh My!

Many watermelons argue that preservatives are all a bunch of dogmatic Christian fundamentalists who reject science. I don't think that's true. Let's consider the history of science and the role of skeptics and testable hypotheses in the quest for the truth. Following the line from Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Einstein...

The Americans With No Abilities Act (AWNAA)

This is from an email circulating on the internet (it appears to be a modified version of an article that originally appeared in The Onion):

Washington, DC May 31, 2011 - The Obama Administration is urging Congress and the Senate to pass sweeping legislation that will provide new benefits for many Americans: The Americans With No Abilities Act (AWNAA). President Obama said he will sign it as soon as it hits his desk.

The AWNAA is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

'Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society,' said California Senator Barbara Boxer. 'We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing. We are legalizing another protected class of Americans.'

In a Capitol Hill press conference, former House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) pointed to the success of the U.S. Postal Service, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. Private-sector industries with good records of non-discrimination against the Inept include retail sales (72%), the airline industry (68%), and home improvement 'warehouse' stores (65%). At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has an excellent record of hiring Persons of Inability (a whopping 83%).

Under The Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million 'middle man' positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance.

Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given so as to guarantee upward mobility for even the most inept employees. The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability into middle-management positions, and gives a tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the AWNAA contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the Non-abled, banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as, 'Do you have any skills or experience that relate to this job?'

'As a Non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them,' said Ken Cox, who lost his position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, Michigan, due to his inability to remember 'righty tightey, lefty loosey.' 'This new law should be real good for people like me,' Cox added. With the passage of this bill, Cox and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL): 'As a Senator with no abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her inadequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation and a good salary for doing so.'

New Video Proves -- Tea Partiers Are B-B-B-Birthers!

This video is being posted as a "video response" on tea party YouTube channels:



In case you couldn't stand to watch the badgering and lack of meaningful dialog to the bitter end, I'll summarize it for you. The interviewer has two or three questions for unprepared tea partiers. A pattern emerges (paraphrasing):

Interviewer: "Do you believe that Barack Obama was born in the USA?"
Tea partier: "I dunno."
Interviewer: "He says he is. Do you believe him?"
Tea partier: "No."

Conclusion: Tea partiers are b-b-b-birthers! That conclusion misses the point. The real conclusion should be that tea partiers don't trust Barack Obama. That should come as no surprise, and here's why: In stark contrast to 'progressives', most tea partiers believe that The Constitution of the United States is still the official specification for the USA; that it is still the binding contract between We the People and the US Government; and that any regime that denigrates, distorts or disregards The Constitution is untrustworthy and dangerous.

In a few instances in the video, the badger interviewer followed up (paraphrasing):

Interviewer: "Why don't you believe him?"
Tea partier: "He lies."
Interviewer: "What does he lie about? Name one lie he has told!"
Tea partier: (unintelligible)

I was disappointed that no tea partier responded with something like, "Hello! How about the oath of office? As his very first official act, President Obama swore an oath to God and everybody to uphold and defend The Constitution. The very document that he cunningly denigrates as the fundamental flaw in American politics. The very document that as president, he immediately proceeded to distort and disregard. Barak Obama's oath of office was a pants on fire moment!" So, tea partiers don't trust Barack Obama. Or maybe we do, but not with our liberty.

Obama's unwillingness to take concerns about his constitutional eligibility seriously gives 'progressives' just another loose thread to further unravel constitutional government. They coined the pejorative term "Birther" to discredit anyone who demands that a presidential candidate produce credible evidence that s/he is constitutionally eligible to serve. That should be fundamental, not fringe! The birth certificate is merely one element of Barack Obama's entire crypto-synthetic history. Playing cat and mouse with his credentials is to Obama's political benefit, but it is to the detriment of We the People and the general welfare of the United States. That is not trustworthy behavior.

It isn't just Barack Obama though. G. W. Bush and Republicans in the legislature were none too strict either, constitutionally speaking. But it was in 2006, when the balance of power in Washington, D.C. shifted entirely to the Democrats, that we really came off the rails. In fact, the tea parties got their name from a rant by Rick Santelli on CNBC. So anybody who tries to label the tea partiers as b-b-b-birthers is completely (and deliberately) missing the point.

The Pessimistic Thomas Jefferson

I was thinking about current events, and the extreme divergence of our government from The Constitution, and the dramatic infringement on private property rights at all levels of government, and it made me think of a couple of quotes from Thomas Jefferson:

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson

For whatever reasons, the government that Jefferson helped to design, is no longer working the way he and Madison, et. al., intended. I don't think he would be surprised, but I don't think he would be happy with the current situation either. I do think he would be surprised that what they created, lasted as long as it did.

When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe. ~ Thomas Jefferson

I think this describes our present situation. I wonder what kind of government the founders would have devised to counteract that, if any. Given that the founders believed that a virtuous populace and honest politicians were essential to self-government, I wonder if the necessary conditions for their constitutional republic still exist.

The Green Thing

From an email circulating the Internet:

In the line at the store, the cashier told the older woman that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment. The woman apologized to him and explained, "We didn't have the green thing back in my day." The clerk responded, "That's our problem today. The former generation did not care enough to save our environment."

He was right, that generation didn't have the green thing in its day. Back then, they returned their milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But they didn't have the green thing back in that customer's day. In her day, they walked up stairs, because they didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. They walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time they had to go two blocks.

But she was right. They didn't have the green thing in her day. Back then, they washed the baby's diapers because they didn't have the throw-away kind. They dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts - wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

But that old lady is right; they didn't have the green thing back in her day. Back then, they had one TV or radio, in the house - not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief, not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen, they blended and stirred by hand because they didn't have electric machines to do everything for you. When they packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, they used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, they didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. They used a push mower that ran on human power. They exercised by working so they didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But she's right; they didn't have the green thing back then. They drank from a fountain when they were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time they had a drink of water. They refilled their writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and they replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But they didn't have the green thing back then. Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or rode the school bus instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. They had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And they didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint. But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful the old folks were, just because they didn't have the green thing back then?

We might be more "wasteful" in some sense, today than we were 40 years ago, but our environment is actually cleaner than it was back then. Don't be fooled; the environment is not a cause, it's a tool -- used by watermelons to destroy the American way of life. The free market, with millions of people voting with their dollars in their own personal best interest, will converge on the best solutions for the environment -- but it won't grant political power to sanctimonious elites who want to control the situation. And therein lies the problem.