OWS Signs I would like to see...

Here are a few signs that I would like to see at the Occupy protests.
                                                                                                                                                                          

We demand

sweeping, unspecified Change!

                                                                                                                                                                          

You will know that

Capitalism

Has

FAILED

When people start swimming from Miami to Cuba!

                                                                                                                                                                          

Screw you

Mr. CEO!

(Unless you are hiring…)

                                                                                                                                                                          


I feel like I owe a great

debt to society. 

And I’ll pay it off

with your money.

                                                                                                                                                                          

I racked up

$100k in loans

for my Art History Degree. 

I am a Victim

of my own stupidity

                                                                                                                                                                          

Make it so

Socialism Works

So I don’t have to

                                                                                                                                                                          

Corporations

Kill

Unicorns

                                                                                                                                                                          
 

I want a

PONY!!

                                                                                                                                                                          
 

Support the Campaign to

END Corporate GREED!

(All Major Credit Card

     Donations accepted)

                                                                                                                                                                          



Thinking about

Evil CORPORATIONS AND BIG PHARMA

Makes me want a

Xanax and a Latte

                                                                                                                                                                          

$100/hr

Minimum Wage!!!

(Heck, Why Stop at $7.25

when we are making

unrealistic demands???)

                                                                                                                                                                          

Make My Daddy

LOVE ME

Please….

                                                                                                                                                                          

Dear Santa,

Forgive all Debt!!

This is not about me… but, It is not my fault

I spent 7 years in college for no apparent reason~!!!

                                                                                                                                                                          



War is not

the Answer*

* Unless the question is “how do you stop Communists, Nazis, or Islamofacists from killing you”

                                                                                                                                                                          

Smoke

a ton of

Pot!

Then our demands
 will start making more sense!

                                                                                                                                                                          

Making this sign is the most

Work

 I have done in years!

                                                                                                                                                                          

OWS: Animal Torture

The Occupy Wall St dregs have enlisted Bill Ayers, Marxist terrorist, to explain then complete nonsense that they have been spouting for the last few days as they squat on the public streets in New York.

Point 2 is:

They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.

This really confused me.  Banks are torturing animals?  But I guess they are talking about corporations in general. In this case, I am assuming the Pharma companies are the target of this rant.

It seems that the grievance here is that in the process of creating life-saving drugs, we test them on animals first in order to ensure efficacy and safety.

This would be a really compelling point if the protesters would swear off the use of any products tested on animals.  No more antibiotics.  No more ointments, pain killers, or other medicine. 

I am not sure about the 'actively hiding them' accusation.  The left has been complaining about these practices for years, so the public is fully aware of how animal testing is conducted.  The drug companies do have to hide their labs, but they are not hidden from the public.  They are hidden from the left wing lunatics that will destroy the labs and set the research back many years.

Let us not forget that most of the testing is require in response to government regulations.  The very rules and regulations that are demanded by the Left in order to protect people from greedy corporations.

So here we have the spectacle of the Left demanding extensive testing to protect people, and then complaining about the testing as cruel to animals.

It seems that they value animal life more than they value human life.

OWS: Mortgages

The Marxist screed that Bill Ayers published as the manifesto of the Occupy Wall St. protests includes the following as the first indictment of the system:

"They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage."

Not being steeped in the memes of the revolution, I am not 100% sure what they are claiming here, but is sounds like they are opposed to the securitization of mortgages, and the subsequent foreclosure on people who do not make the payments on theirs.

Let's look at each of these assertions:

through an illegal foreclosure process -- It does not become an 'illegal process' just because you don't like the results.  If you fail to make the payments, they come and take the home back.  That is the deal.  The home is the collateral you used to get the loan in the first place, and the mortgage is the lien on the home that helps the lender recoup his money.  There are exactly zero examples of banks foreclosing on properties that are not in default on the loans.  The banks have enough problems with non-performing loans.  They are not foreclosing on performing loans.  This is a lie.

despite not having the original mortgage -- This is irrelevant.  The mortgage document is quite clear.  The right to collect the money due under the loan agreement is transferable.  Assignable.  Look it up.  It is in there.  So the fact that the bank that is foreclosing is different than the bank that made the loan is not relevant.  This is completely legal.

It appears then that the primary complaint here is that someone did not read the mortgage agreement before they signed it, and then failed to make the payments they agreed to make.

Morons.

The Left: Jew Hating Morons

The lunatics that are squatting on the streets of NYC have been incoherent and increasingly anti-semitic.

 With their signs, chants, and Marxist trappings, they have finally inspired terrorist Bill Ayers to release the following manifesto to clear up the confusion over what the heck they are protesting:

What follows is the first official, collective statement of the protesters in Zuccotti Park:
As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.
As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

• They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
• They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.
• They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
• They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
• They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
• They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
• They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.
• They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.
• They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.
• They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.
• They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
• They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.
• They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
• They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
• They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
• They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
• They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.
• They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
• They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
• They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
• They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.
• They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
• They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.*

To the people of the world, We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.
Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.
To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.
Join us and make your voices heard!

Frankly, I have no idea what most of this means.  "They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt."  What???

The ones that I think I understand are sheer nonsense: "They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization"  Poisoned the food supply????  We have more and better food than any other place or time in history.  What the heck are they talking about?

Several of them are non sequitors.  "They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them" is not only poor grammar, but has no point. The money that they have donated is within the legal limits, and it is not the companies fault that politicians have overstepped their constitutional authority to regulate every aspect of American life.

While most of the signs mention Jews as the root of all evil, here the culprits are called "they" without any clear statement of who or what is being discussed.

If this is the best that the Left has to offer, then not only are the morally bankrupt, but they are scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel as well. .

Does your lack of ID make me a racist?

There is a movement in the states to require ID before you vote.  Texas recently became the 12th state to require some form of identification before you can vote.

This has sparked outrage and indignation from the usual suspects.  They claim such things as:

• Requiring ID is racist
• ID's are hard to get
• This won't help stop voter fraud

All of these objections are patent nonsense.  Worse, they are politically motivated FUD that is designed to scare people away from supporting commonsense ideas.


Voter ID is racist:  There are a number of prominent politicians and others that have taken this approach.  "Jim Crow, move over -- the Wisconsin Republicans have taken your place," charged Wisconsin Democratic State Sen. Bob Jauch, referring to his state's new voter ID law.

The objection is that fewer minorities (read: Black people) possess a government ID than the general population (read: white people).   Therefore, voter ID will have a disproportionate effect on minorities (read: democrat voters), and is therefore illegal.

Paradoxically, these are the same people that pass laws requiring you to show ID to buy cigarettes, alcohol, or otherwise function as an adult in society.

The reasoning is that voting is a an important Right, and therefore cannot be infringed by requiring you to have an ID.  (Wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats felt the same way about the Second Amendment!)

It seems logical, however, to conclude that voting is so important that we should take pains to ensure that only eligible voters are able to cast ballots.

It does not seem like obtaining a government issued ID is an unreasonable burden to place on the would-be voter.  And as we do for other cases where voter registration is in question, the ID-less voter can cast a provisional ballot.  This ballot can be accepted or rejected later once the voter establishes their identity.

The benefits would be huge.

It would make voter fraud much more difficult to execute.  Instead of busing homeless people from precinct to precinct, the fraudsters would be required to get matching fake ID's for each fake voter. 

I think we should actually take this a step further.  The government ID pictures should be attached to the actual voter registration rolls.

When I go to the health club, my ID card gets scanned and my picture pops up. Let's do the same for voting.

Here in Illinois, the state has my picture and it is linked to all of my other records.  How do I know?  Because my FOID card has the same picture as my driver's license.   If those two systems can share a picture, then the voter registration people can be linked in there as well.

I think that voter ID is critical to maintaining the integrity of the vote totals.  It will massively cut down on voter fraud, and the side that benefits the most from voter fraud knows this.

So naturally, they call it racist.

Nobody Gets Rich On Their Own!

Nobody gets rich on their own.....or so Senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren tells us.... 

Aside from the snarky socialist tone  ("You built a factory, good for you, God Bless..), she is wrong in her assertions that business owe more for the things they get from society.


Using the road to take your good to market: Trucking companies pay very high taxes on their trucks, plus the fuel they use is heavily taxed.  These 'use taxes' are just that: taxes you pay for the use of the roads.  Business do not get a free lunch here. In fact, given the overcrowding on the highways and the generally poor condition of the roads, you could argue that businesses and the public are getting shafted here, not getting a benefit.


Workers that the public educated: The factory owner pays the employees a salary.  He is not getting them for free.  And the more educated, the more he has to pay them.  The workers pay taxes, and the factory owner pays payroll taxes.  This is not a freebie.   And of course, given the abysmal state of the public education system, there is not much benefit to be derived.  Business routinely provide additional training, including remedial training that makes up for the lack of basic skills imparted by the 'free' education that was provided by the state.


Safe from marauding bands: The factory owner pays real estate taxes that pay for the police and courts.  He pays any number of federal tariffs, levies, and taxes that pay for the military.  This is not a freebie.


So we can see that the factory owner does in fact pay for all the things that 'enabled' him to get rich. 


Ironically, the most fearsome marauding bands that a factory owner must fear are the politicians themselves. 

Irene Proves Global Warming.....is False!

As Hurricane Irene approached the East Coast, the Global Warming industry got itself whipped up into a Category 5 frenzy with predictions of  how this hurricane would be worse than usual due to AGW.  Finally!  Proof that Climate Change is real!!

Here are some samples:

Irene’s got a middle name, and it’s Global Warming.

As she roars up the Eastern Seaboard, everyone is doing what they should—boarding windows, preparing rescue plans, stocking up on batteries. But a lot of people are also wondering: what’s a “tropical” storm doing heading for the snow belt?

Category 3 Storms have rarely hit Long Island since the 1800s; one was the great unnamed storm of 1938, which sent 15-foot storm waters surging through what are now multimillion-dollar seaside homes. Normally, says Jeff Masters of Weather Underground, it’s “difficult for a major Category 3 or stronger hurricane crossing north of North Carolina to maintain that intensity, because wind shear rapidly increases and ocean temperatures plunge below the 26°C (79°F) level that can support a hurricane.”  The high-altitude wind shear may help knock the storm down a little this year, but the ocean temperatures won’t. They’re bizarrely high—only last year did we ever record hotter water.

“Sea surface temperatures 1° to 3°F warmer than average extend along the East Coast from North Carolina to New York. Waters of at least 26°C extend all the way to southern New Jersey, which will make it easier for Irene to maintain its strength much farther to the north than a hurricane usually can,” says Masters

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/25/hurricane-irene-can-be-tied-to-global-warming-says-bill-mckibben.html

How Global Warming Will Make Hurricanes Like Irene Worse

http://www.alternet.org/environment/152200/how_global_warming_will_make_hurricanes_like_irene_worse

“I think the evidence is fairly compelling that we’re seeing a climate change signal in the Atlantic, ” said Kerry Emanuel,  a professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Citing other recent trends of extreme weather, including hailstorms and catastrophic tornadoes, “one begins to wonder,  if you add all those up,  maybe you are seeing a global warming effect.”

http://www.nationofchange.org/how-does-global-warming-make-hurricanes-irene-more-destructive-1314506530

Hurricane Irene Worse Because Of Global Warming

http://www.alan.com/2011/08/26/hurricane-irene-worse-because-of-global-warming/


So the Global Warming crowd is all in agreement.  Irene will come ashore as a Category 3 or 4, drop unprecedented amounts of rain, and wreak havoc all the way up the East Coast, thus proving once and for all that Global Warming is real.

Well, it did not happen.   Irene was a dud.

Irene came ashore as a Category 1 Hurricane, and was quickly downgraded to a Tropical Storm.  What happened to all the fury driven by the warmer sea surface temperatures?  Where is the massive destruction wrought by Mother Nature as payment for the sins we have committed against her?

This entire storm was a non-event.  Many reporters were embarrassed as they stood in the rain describing the violence of the storm, only to have pedestrians casually stroll though the picture in the background. 

Yes, millions lost power.  Yes, there was some destruction.  But no where near the epic scale predicted by the Warmists.

So, if they were completely wrong about Irene, does that mean we can finally put a fork in the hoax that is Global Warming??

We are doomed when even the Republicans are in favor of Tyranny

This is the end.  After 50 years of public education and brain washing by the media, we are completely steeped in the morality of the collective.

Even the most ardent free market citizens are willing to dispense with freedom and free markets on the slightest personal whim.

Here is an example:

A friend of mine is a capitalist.  Literally.  He is a hedge fund manager that allocates investments.  He is moving capital around for a living, and therefore is literally a capitalist. He graduated from the University of Chicago, arguably the most free market business school in the country where the Austrian School looms large.  He hates Obama and all things Democrat. 

So you would think that this man was a friend of freedom, liberty, property rights, and free markets.

Not so!

Over a lunch, he professed a love for the mandatory calorie counts that must be posted on menus in New York.  He likes this information, and likes to have it posted on the menus, and therefore is supportive of laws requiring restaurateurs to comply with his wishes.

When I pointed out that this was an example of the vast over reach of the government into an area that was none of its business, he objected "But I like having that information".  I pointed out that he was forcing people at the point of a gun to comply with his most whimsical desires.  He has a free market option open to him, namely to not eat at restaurants that do not display calorie counts.  But instead, he chooses to pass laws that make his whims into law.

The one concept that he struggled with was that by giving his whims that force of law, he was claiming the power to have people that do not comply with his whims shot in the face by the police.  He failed to understand that all government power comes from the barrel of a gun; the ultimate recourse after fines and court orders and such fail to produce compliance is to send the police to seize the offender, and if the offender resists, to shoot them.

So we had an interesting conversation:

"I want this information."

Then you should only eat at restaurants that provide it.

"Restaurants have no incentive to provide it, they only want to please their customers with good tasting food"

Restaurants need to attract customers in many ways, and if you only patronize restaurants that give you what you want, then restaurants will start offering this service in order to attract you.

"Not enough people want this to create a market..."

So, then, this is a personal whim that you are imposing on the rest of the world.  You are willing to have restaurant owners shot for the crime of not catering to your personal whims.

"Shot?!?  No!  I just it to be required by law. You know, fines and such."

Meaning what?  That a fine is imposed?  And if the fine is not paid? And when they show up to seize the restaurant and the owner for non-payment, what if he refuses to comply and resists?  At that point the police will call out the SWAT team and shoot that man.  They will shoot him in the face for the heinous crime of not complying with your whimsical desire to have calorie information displayed for you.

"I don't want him shot.  I just want the government to force him to post the information."

Have you ever skipped a meal, or walked across the street to another restaurant when you found out that the one you were in did not provide calorie information?

"No, I have not. Of course not!"

So then this personal whim of yours is important enough to you that you are willing to have other people shot in the face, but not important enough for you to walk across the street or even skip a meal? 

"You are making this sound crazy"

It is crazy.  You are like a modern day Caligula, imposing your whims and ordering the deaths of those who do not immediately comply... You are no different than the Islamofacists who kill people for not wearing the right clothing.  Your desires are paramount, no matter who has to die to satisfy you.

+++++++++++

And so we see that even the most ardent capitalists are willing to impose draconian solutions when they they want it.

When this is the case, we have lost our bearings as a society.  

Global Warming causes...... Alien invasion!

Global Warming causes...... Alien invasion! 

And not the run-of-the-mill Mexican type aliens.  They mean outer-space type aliens:

(Guardian) — It may not rank as the most compelling reason to curb greenhouse gases, but reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim.


Watching from afar, extraterrestrial beings might view changes in Earth’s atmosphere as symptomatic of a civilisation growing out of control — and take drastic action to keep us from becoming a more serious threat, the researchers explain.


This highly speculative scenario is one of several described by scientists at Nasa and Pennsylvania State University that, while considered unlikely, they say could play out were humans and alien life to make contact at some point in the future.

So again we see that the Global Warming crowd has completely lost their collective minds.  In addition to all the bogus claims of terrestrial disaster, apparently now the threat comes from outer space.

Unless we stop Global Warming, aliens will invade us. 

This is absurd on its face, and is yet another indicator of just how desperate the AGW shysters are to remain in the new and remain relevant.

Seriously.  Who can write "reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim" with a straight face???

"Scientists" claim space aliens might attack!?!?

The fact this this is reported as news is an indication of just how much the traditional media have declined.  Just how stupid do they thing we are? 

Wait.  Don't answer that.

A Balanced Budget Amendment

A Balanced Budget Amendment

Spending is out of control, and some people are proposing a Constitutional amendment to force lawmakers to close the gap.  There is a lot of debate about the wisdom, legality, or efficacy of such an amendment, but in simple terms, they are a waste of time as currently proposed.

A Constitutional amendment will do no good as long as the incentives remain in place for lawmakers to spend more.  No matter how carefully crafted, the ingenious minds of the future will find ways to circumvent the rules.  It happens today with off balance sheet expenditures, moving expenses into previous fiscal years, monkeying with all sorts of devices to hide the true extent of the spending.

So the incentives must be removed.   Deficit spending must extract a large personal cost from the lawmakers, one that exceeds the vast benefits they get through spending like drunken sailors.

What do politicians seek by spending?  Power.  They wish to remain in power.

In order for them to have spending restraint, they must feel the pain  -- and that pain must be severe.

Therefore, I propose the following Amendment:

"All revenues and expenditures of the Federal Government will be included in the budget.  Congress shall not spend more in a fiscal year than has been received in revenue.  In the event of a national emergency, Congress may borrow funds and spend more than has been received. 30 days after borrowing is approved during a national emergency, The President and all members of Congress are removed from office and barred from re-election to any office until the debt incurred during the crisis is fully retired. The Vice President shall assume the office of the President, and a special election shall be held  for Congress." 


In this way we can allow the Federal Government to respond to real emergencies, but at a direct and personal cost to the politicians.

All Government programs have the opposite effect, you just watch...

I have the premise that all government programs have the opposite of the intended effect, and I will publish a more detailed post on that later.

But for the moment, bear with me for the following example.

The Federal Government is now putting graphic pictures of diseased organs on packs of cigarettes in order to reduce smoking.   This will, of course, increase the number of people smoking.

How?, you ask?

Easy.  Smoking is at all time lows, and the campaign over the past 20 years to reduce smoking has gotten key stats on smoking to all time lows. 

Now that the government is trying to gross people out on smoking, it will backfire on them.

Adult smokers will simply ignore them, or buy covers for the packs of cigarettes that will render the pictures useless.

But kids and teens will be fascinated.  What teenage boy is not fascinated by the gross and icky?  How many teens will be drawn to the packs just to get a 'eeewww gross!' reaction from their peers?

The Feds are planning to rotate the pictures to reduce the chance that people begin to ignore them.   What do you want to bet that people start collecting the various packs? 

You watch.  3 years from now the study will come out.  Teen smoking will rebound to higher levels shortly after this new law goes into effect.

Global Warming causes......Cooling!

 Global Warming causes......COOLING!!!

We have done a number of posts on the fact that the Global Warming people are completely making this stuff up, and that they are claiming that everything that happens is a result of Global Warming.



But we now have the ultimate in Global Warming hooey:

China coal surge held back warming: study

By Shaun Tandon (AFP)
July 5, 2011
WASHINGTON — China’s soaring coal consumption in the last decade held back global warming as sulfur emissions served as a coolant, according to a study that takes head-on a key argument of climate skeptics.

While 2005 and 2010 are tied as the hottest years on record, skeptics have charged that an absence of a steady rise from 1998 to 2008 disproves the view that people are heating up the planet through greenhouse gas emissions.

Robert Kaufmann, a professor at Boston University, said he was motivated to conduct the study after a skeptic confronted him at a public forum, telling him he had seen on Fox News that temperatures had not risen over the decade.

"Nothing that I had read that other people have done gave me a quick answer to explain that seeming contradiction, because I knew that carbon dioxide concentrations have risen," Kaufmann told AFP.

The US-Finnish study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, named a culprit — coal.

The burning of coal jumped in the past decade, particularly in China, whose economy has grown at breakneck pace. Coal emits sulfur, which stops the Sun’s rays from reaching the Earth


So now we see that the truth has finally emerged: Burning coal causes Global Warming by emitting gases, and it prevents global warming by emitting gases.

If this is true, then we should immediately start burning more coal, not less, as the left has been demanding.

None of this passes the basic smell test of valid science.

Basic science requires that a theory be dis-provable.  That is, you must be able to design an experiment that will prove the theory false.  If you cannot, then it is not a valid theory.

Global Warming cannot be falsified.  It causes rain and not rain.  It causes warmer temperatures and colder temperatures.  It causes every known weather phenomenon, and every weather event proves AGW is true.

This is obviously complete tomfoolery, and a massive fraud on humanity. 

Michelle Bachmann -- Guilty of Raising Foster Children

The mainstream media has sunk to new lows.  I know, I know, how can this be possible, give the depths of depravity we have already seen?

But here it is: Michelle Bachmann and her husband raised 5 biological children and then took in 23 foster children, and the Left and the media are using this fact to attack her.

How is this possible?

Taking in foster children, particularly teenagers, is a selfless and beautiful act that should qualify her for sainthood.  There are few things in life that are perfectly moral, socially beneficial, and an act of pure love and human kindness; taking other people's children into your home to help raise and protect them is one of these things.

The Left realizes that this act alone raises her likability and morality levels way beyond that of any Democratic candidate.   And therefore, this action must be discredited and Bachmann must be destroyed.

It has already started to happen.

She is being questioned in detail about how long she had each child in her home, and whether this rises to the level of  'raising' them.   They are trying to play 'gotcha' with the statement that she 'raised' them.

This is low and despicable, and falls into the category of The Politics of Personal Destruction.

She has committed one of the 'random acts of kindness' that leftist bumper stickers are always stumping for, but now the Left wants to count how many minutes she was doing it for so they can demean and diminish her with some semantic argument over the definition of 'raised'.

Fine.  Let them nit pick, but with the following limitation:  each reporter can ask her one question on this topic for each foster child they have taken into their own homes.

That should settle it.

Know Nothings

Larry O'Donnell: Most Voters 'Don't Know Anything About The Economy'

The key quote here is : 

But a recent poll shows that a majority of voters–a majority of whom don’t really know anything about the economy--don’t believe that the economy is recovering and blame President Obama for the struggling economy


It is interesting how Larry (and the Left in general) define ‘knowing’ something.

A person who runs a small business, buying and selling in the market place everyday, who buys clothes, gas, groceries, etc, but lacks the right college degree: DOESN’T KNOW ANYTHING about the economy.

A person who graduated from a fancy college and took a bunch of marxist-feminist laden courses in economics, but has never had a real job, never made payroll, does not buy his own groceries, has not pumped gas in years: KNOWS ALL ABOUT the economy.


Interesting definitions.

.

Global Warming causes......Tornadoes!

More Tornadoes!!

Billy Nye, the science guy, has become Bill Nye, global warming hack.

Here is how he answered to an interview question on CNN:

BILL NYE: The tornadoes very difficult to mathematically connect to climate change, but the rains, the extra warmth in the atmosphere, the extra water vapor in the atmosphere, that’s, those are facts. That’s the real deal. Now, we, we are patriots. We are from the U.S. I am. And you would like the U.S. to be the leader in addressing this problem. We would like to be out in front in trying to deal with whatever it is that’s holding in all this heat and creating all this extra water vapor in the atmosphere. Tornadoes are almost certainly a consequence.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/05/28/bill-nye-science-guy-falsely-claims-not-many-countries-besides-us-hav#ixzz1NyE4g200

Let's decompose what he is saying here:

The tornadoes very difficult to mathematically connect to climate change:  this translates to "there is no evidence of any connections between tornadoes and global warming".  But couched on the passive voice and made to seem like a verbal throw away.  But the truth is clear: there is NO EVIDENCE of a connection. If there was a connection, no matter how tenuous,  he would be waving is about like a warmist Neville Chamberlain.  But he is admitting here that there is ZERO connection.

but the rains, the extra warmth in the atmosphere, the extra water vapor in the atmosphere, that’s, those are facts. :  Um, no. Those are not facts.  Those are the predicted outcomes of global warming that have NOT been shown to be true.  The theory holds these to be true, but the actual climate refuses to cooperate with the theory.  Every prediction made by this theory has been wrong or wildly overstated.  Look back at every chicken little report for the past 30 years.  Not ONE of these predictions has come true.  So if we are not seeing the large and measurable predictions come true, then why should we believe the small non-measurable ones? 

Now, we, we are patriots. We are from the U.S. I am. And you would like the U.S. to be the leader in addressing this problem. We would like to be out in front in trying to deal with whatever it is that’s holding in all this heat and creating all this extra water vapor in the atmosphere.   This blather is all designed to disarm the opponents of global warming.  If you don't agree, you must not love your country!  It is also designed to create distance between the first statement, and the next thing he says, for reasons you will understand shortly..

Tornadoes are almost certainly a consequence:  What?? This is a direct contradiction of what he said in the opening line.  This is a complete lie.  He already said he has no evidence for this.  At all. 

So if we re-state this more plainly, and remove all the blather in the middle, it sounds like this:

"There is no evidence that global warming is connected to tornadoes.  Tornadoes are a result of global warming."

There.  Now that makes more sense!

Fixed that for ya, Bill.

Global Warming causes......More Tornadoes!

Tornadoes!

It did not take long for the global warming crowd to link the tragic tornadoes that have devastated Joplin to the political cause they hold so dear.




http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-29/global-climate-change-freak-storms-are-the-new-normal/full/#

I will spare you reading to whole thing to sum it up thusly:

• Global Warming is causing the severe weather.
• We are all going to die.
• It is all Bush's fault.

The best quote from the article is here:

The Midwest suffered the wettest April in 116 years, forcing the Mississippi to flood thousands of square miles, even as drought-plagued Texas suffered the driest month in a century.


You see?  Global warming causes floods and droughts.  It causes rain! and not rain!

In another whopper, the article notes that there is agreement that climate change is causing everything:

Scientists disagree about whether climate change will bring more intense or frequent tornadoes, but there is wide consensus that the 2 degrees Fahrenheit of global warming of the last century is behind the rise in sea levels, more intense hurricanes, more heat waves, and more droughts and deluges.

Scary!  Except that it ain't true.   Most of the 2 degrees Fahrenheit of global warming came before 1940, ie, before there was any appreciable build up in CO2.   There is also the inconvenient fact that hurricanes are NOT increasing.  Each year for the past 5 years, NOAA has been calling for 'above normal' hurricane activity, and every year they are wrong.

There is no connection between 'global warming' and tornadoes, despite the implications from the media.

Liberal Fantasies - Stop Outsourcing American jobs and punish those who do with higher taxes

The liberal platform I included in an earlier post also includes the following nugget:

Stop Outsourcing American jobs and punish those who do with higher taxes

Let's take a look at what this means.

Stop Outsourcing:  This means using the power of government to prevent people from seeking the lowest cost solution to problems.  This is a form of protectionism.  History shows that protectionism is a disaster, creating more problems that it solves, and ultimately destroying that which it was intended to protect. And how would you enforce this, anyway? 

Kraft, an American company that operates globally, needs to hire more people for a call center to take complaints.  Their customers are all over the world, and Kraft wants to have the lowest cost solution.  So it hires someone in India.  Is that 'outsourcing'?  What if the new hire only takes calls from people in other countries?  Is it still outsourcing? 

This is non-objective law that would be subject to political interpretation.  It would give the government unprecedented power to question EVERY business decision a company makes.  This would require a massive police state and centrally planned economy to enforce.  Thus, it would destroy all jobs, including the ones that are to be protected from'outsourcing'.

American Jobs:  There is no such thing as an "American Job".  There are only jobs.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Just because someone has a job in the US, it does not belong to the US. The American People do not own this job.  It is a private contract between two individuals. 

Again, we get to the problem of enforcement.  What if a Swiss bank hires a Japanese citizen to do Latin American marketing and their offices are based in Miami.  Is this an 'American' job?  What if an American company hires a Frenchman to run the office in Bangalore.  American job?

This is nonsense that would be impossible to enforce under the law. It would again be nothing more than a way for rent-seeking politicians to hold power over the productive people.

punish those who do with higher taxes:  So somehow we are going to arrive at a non-objective definition of outsourcing, and a non-objective definition of 'American Job', then arbitrarily punish people who violate this code by making them pay more money to the government. 

What could possibly go wrong?

Given that politicians want more power and money, we can safely assume that they will want every company paying taxes at the higher rate.  Therefore there will be powerful incentives to find and punish 'guilty' parties.  The resulting witch hunt will make Salem look tame.

We can see then that every premise of this fantasy is evil, or wrong, or both.

But this misses the essential point:  jobs will be created where the most value is created.  And if there is more value being created somewhere else, the capital and the jobs will flow there like an unstoppable tide.  Politicians demanding that outsourcing be stopped might as well command the tide to roll back. 

The laws of nature and economics are immutable.  No amount of liberal - populist rhetoric will change them.  And passing laws to 'save American jobs' will only transfer wealth and power to the political classes and away from the productive sectors of the economy. 

Ruin will surely follow.

Liberal Fantasies - A Right to a Free, Quality Public Education

So the last item in the list is:

A right to a free, quality public education

Let's look at what this means.

'a right' -- in order for something to be a right, it must be inalienable. That is, it cannot be take away from you as it is inherent.   And a right does not create a burden on other people.  For example, you have the right to free speech, but you do not have the right to have an audience.  You cannot force other people to listen, as that would violate their rights.  The same principle applies to other actual rights.  You have the right to keep and bear arms, but you not have the right to have the tax payers buy you a gun.

A 'right' to education would impose a burden on others.  We would be compelled to teach you.  Or to hire teachers to educate you.  Therefore, this cannot be a right.  It imposes a burden on other people, and therefore fails the test of being a right.    In fact, education is a luxury good.  It is a good that people worry about after they have food in their belly, a roof over their head, and enough spare time to educate.  It is most certainly not a right.

'free' -- they mean free to the consumer of the education, of course.  Not free to the taxpayer.  In fact, 'free' public education is the most expensive education that you can buy.  School districts are spending $10-12K per student on education.  This is far from 'free'.

'quality' -- as the last 100 years have demonstrated, there is not much quality in education.  Because the schools are large government run bureaucracies, they lack the incentives to deliver quality goods and services.  Therefore, they get fat and inefficient.  While Federal spending on schools has skyrocketed into the billions, test scores and literacy continue to decline. 

'Public' -- because the schools are public, they are political.  All decisions about curriculum, teachers compensation, standards, etc. becomes political decisions.  And political decisions are not always based on low costs and efficiency, or even with the best interests of the students in mind. 

So we find that almost every word of this fantasy is the opposite of reality. 


None of it has any meaning in the real world, or if it does, it has the opposite meaning to what they intend.

Liberal Fantasies - Tax Fairness

From the The Norman Goldman Show we have a list of Liberal Fantasies that need some attention.

The top of the list is.... Tax Fairness.

1) Tax Fairness - A Progressive Tax on the Koch Bros. and their top 2% buddies;


Is it pedantic to point out that our tax code is already progressive?  The top 5% of income earners paid ~60% of all income taxes.  The bottom 50% paid near-ZERO in income taxes.  So obviously they mean more progressive than the current system.

Minor quibble: Why is the tax on the Koch Bros. and not on George Soros?  Or Warren Buffet? Or any of the uber-rich Hollywood types that are so famously progressive?

Anyway, what moral code are you using when you declare it to be 'fair' that one group pays huge amounts of income tax while another group pays nothing at all? 

The moral code is altruism.  And the political viewpoint that extends from that moral code is called Socialism.

Here is the fantasy part:  the very rich are able to shift tax burdens and take advantage of the complex and loophole ridden Federal tax code.  Raising the rates does not produce more revenue.  History shows that tax revenue hovers at about 20% of GDP no matter what the tax rate. 

So making the rate more 'fair' will only drive economic activity out of this country, increase tax sheltering, and promote tax evasion.

If the Liberals are so intent on 'fairness' in the tax code, why aren't George Soros and Michael Moore paying more than they owe in taxes?  Why wait for the rates to be increased?  Just pony up now. After all, it is only fair!

Liberal Fantasies

I found the following posted on Facebook, and I thought it might be interesting to share;

From the The Norman Goldman Show

We had a VERY spirited show on Monday, May 23, 2001 - about the differences between Democrats and Republicons - and the fact that we have regular nuclear wars within ourselves over MANY issues. I asked that we focus on our core values and only if we have those, amongst us, wandering away from those core values that we attack them and WRITE THEM OFF. As to the other, non-core issues, we can and SHOULD still fight and disagree, but we should NOT throw each other overboard and rip each other limb from limb.

I submit to you that NOT ALL issues are created equal and that we should focus on the things that bind us and VOLUNTARILY stick together so long as we all agree on the core values. QUESTION: WHAT are those core values???

Here is my suggested list:

1) Tax Fairness - A Progressive Tax on the Koch Bros. and their top 2% buddies;

2) No corporate welfare - end the tax subsidies and write-offs;

3) Protect Social Security;

4) Protect Medicare;

5) Stop Outsourcing American jobs and punish those who do with higher taxes;

6) Clean energy and environmental protection;

7) No illegal wiretapping/Patriot Act "big government";

8) Personal privacy - like a woman's right to choose; legalize gay marriage and end the ridiculous "war on drugs" by starting with legalized marijuana;

9) Public financing of campaigns and clean elections with voter verifiable paper trails and no "voter i.d." disenfranchisement;

10) A right to health care, and;

11) A right to a free, quality public education.


It might be interesting to examine what each of these means.

I will follow up in separate posts.

Obama and bin Laden

Obama made a gutsy call! 

Interesting that Obama and his supporters consider it a 'gutsy call' to order an operation against our #1 enemy,  a man whose capture Obama campaigned on in 2008, when 90% of public opinion and 100% of congress would support the call.

Gutsy?  Really?

I mean, he made the right decision, but it was not a gutsy one.

Warning! Fast Food Wrappers may kill you!

From the latest issue of Men's Health:

FAST FOODS BAD WRAP
Some fast-food wrappers are lined with potentially dangerous chemicals that can leach into foods - and into the eaters bloodstream, a University of Toronto study on rats reveals.  These (chemical name), once in the the body, can be broken down into (another chemical), which at high levels, may be a risk factor for liver damage in animals.  More research may show similar effects in humans.

OMG!  Scary!  My fast food wrappers are deadly!!

But wait, what does this really mean?

This is junk science designed to create more FUD around chemicals and cancers.

Let's break this down:

Some fast-food wrappers...  not ALL fast food wrappers, just some.  How many? Most? One?  Since they did not say MOST, we can assume very few have this lining.

can leach into foods -- how long does this leaching take?  Most fast food is exposed to the wrapper for minutes, not hours or days. Not DOES leach, merely 'can' leach.  Which means it probably does not leach under normal conditions.  The leaching probably takes longer than the actual food remains edible.

"these chemicals...can be broken down"  Again, not ARE broken down, just 'can be".  How often?  90% of the time?  1% of the time?

which at high levels -- this is the phrase that pays.  "high levels" usually means they stuff the rats full of the stuff and see what happens.  When you do the math, it shows you would have to eat 10,000 burgers per day to get exposed to that level of the chemical. 

may be a risk factor for liver damage  -- May be a risk factor.... not IS a risk factor. And it is just a 'risk factor', which really means they cannot find a very strong causation link at all. 

in animals -- this is not even shown to be true in humans!  Just rats.

And the story ignores the most pertinent point: Why are these chemicals in the lining in the first place? The most likely explanation is that they kill germs, thus improving the safety of the food.


So, let's rewrite the story as it should have been written:


Some Very few fast-food wrappers are lined with potentially  dangerous beneficial chemicals that can under extreme circumstances over a long period of time, leach into foods - and into the eaters bloodstream, a University of Toronto study on rats reveals.  These (chemical name), once in the the body, can be rarely are broken down into (another chemical), which at high levels, levels that would require you to eat 10,000 tacos per day, may be somehow loosely linked a risk factor for liver damage in animals.  More research money given to the University may show similar effects in humans.


This is totally bogus scare tactics masquerading as science.

35th Anniversary of a Great Day in Baseball

Some moments require no explanation.

If this video doesn't make sense to you, please close your browser window and never return.

One of the greatest moments in Baseball history:

Global Warming is caused by ice makers!!

According to Time Magazine, the big culprit for global warming is... your ice maker!

So they want to impose new regualtions on ice makers, and raise the cost of them. This sort of ban-tax makes no sense when seen from a scientific point of view.  Ice makers contribute a vanishingly small percentage of green house gasses.


It only makes sense when considered from a religous point of view.

You see, environmentalism is a religion. It requires all the basic elements of a religion: a god, a theology, absolute faith, rituals, and sacrifices.

One of the scarifices is human comfort. Turn your air conditioner off, turn the heat down.

And now, warm vodka tonics.

The automatic ice maker is the pinnacle of human acheivement: indoor plumbing, electricity, refrigeration, all combined into a handy, life saving device.

So naturally, it must be eliminated!

Mother Earth has Rights!

Mother Earth has Rights!

UNITED NATIONS — Bolivia will this month table a draft United Nations treaty giving “Mother Earth” the same rights as humans — having just passed a domestic law that does the same for bugs, trees and all other natural things in the South American country.

The bid aims to have the UN recognize the Earth as a living entity that humans have sought to “dominate and exploit” — to the point that the “well-being and existence of many beings” is now threatened.

This is silly, you think.  

This is crazy, you say.  

My back yard can sue me for getting mowed?  The trees have a right not to be turned into housing?  Mother Earth can "Just Say NO!" to oil drilling?

Go ahead people, laugh now while you still can.

This will be the reality within your lifetime. Gaia will have rights and you will lose yours.You doubt that?

Go back 30- 40 years and ask your grandfather if he thought that Americans would ban smoking in bars. Go ask him if he could have imagined mandatory recycling programs in every city. See if he would envision billions of dollars spent to combat ‘Global Warming”.


Go ask him if the miracle cure for malaria, DDT, would be banned. See if he believes that entire forests and rivers will be placed off limits to humans because a snail lives there. Ask him if Alar would be banned from use on apples.

In short, ask anyone from the previous generation if the things we consider ‘normal’ would have been acceptable to them.

The Left works on a different time scale. The left knows that what sounds bat-crap crazy today will sound perfectly reasonable to a future generation that has been exposed to decades of propaganda.

We are losing this fight because the other team is more dedicated and more organized, and they are working on a different time scale

Global Warming causes......Environmental Refugees!

Environmental Refugees! 

When the earth warms under the influence of man made global warming, many millions of people will be displaced.  They will become 'environmental refugees', wandering the globe in search of food and water. 

According to The Guardian:

Rising sea levels, desertification and shrinking freshwater supplies will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade, experts warn today. Janos Bogardi, director of the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn, said creeping environmental deterioration already displaced up to 10 million people a year, and the situation would get worse.

"There are well-founded fears that the number of people fleeing untenable environmental conditions may grow exponentially as the world experiences the effects of climate change," Dr Bogardi said. "This new category of refugee needs to find a place in international agreements. We need to better anticipate support requirements, similar to those of people fleeing other unviable situations." [...]

Hans van Ginkel, UN under-secretary-general and rector of the university, said: "This is a highly complex issue, with global organisations already overwhelmed by the demands of conventionally recognised refugees. However, we should prepare now to define, accept and accommodate this new breed of refugee."

So this dire prediction demands immediate action!  We must act immediately in order to save the lives of millions of innocents who will surely die before the end of the decade.

Wait.  This article was published in 2005.   So the 'end of the decade' they are referring to is 2010!

Where are these refugees?  Where is the desertification and the  'effects of climate change' that will drive these people into the arms of the world community?

They don't exist, of course.  Because Global Warming does not exist.  Because all of this AGW nonsense is blown WAY out of proportion and is based on the most speculative ideas and tenuous connections.

Think I am making this up?  Here is the link to the original story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1

So when you read the next set of calamitous predictions, keep in mind that they have never been right in the past.

Ann Barnhardt for President!

Ok, so Ann is crazy, but that only adds to the awesomeness of this rant.

Go Ann!

Gasoline is cheap

There has been a great deal of argle-bargle recently on the price of gasoline.  According to the news, it seems we are headed for $5 per gallon gasoline, and the Apocalypse is not far behind that.

Get real, people, gasoline is a bargain at $5 per gallon.

No other source of energy comes close to the energy density of gasoline.  It packs more punch per pound than any other usable energy source we have invented.  We use a lot of gasoline because it works really well.

The average car goes about 20 miles per gallon of gas.  Think about that. When is the last time you walked 20 miles?  Heck, when is the last time you walked 1 mile?

Try this experiment:  take all the stuff you use or need during a typical day; briefcase, laptop, phone, backpack, sports gear, workout bag, golf clubs, whatever.  Put it on your back.  Walk 20 miles.   When you get there, I will offer you a ride home for $5.  A bargain, right?

Think about it this way: a 20oz latte runs $5 at Starbucks, or about $15 per gallon.  A dollar for a water bottle comes out to $16 gallon. 

Coffee is a luxury item.  Really, you can make it through the day without $5 worth of caffeine.  Water is FREE and widely available, yet you will pay $16 per gallon for it.  Yet you complain about $3-4 for gas?

And gasoline does not just magically appear.

Oil companies explore remote, barren, and inhospitable places searching for oil.  They drill down thousands of feet into the earth to tap oil reservoirs.  They built elaborate pumping stations and pipelines to get the oil out of the ground.  They load the oil on super massive ships and transport it across vast oceans. They unload the oil at a complex and expensive refinery, where it is broken down into its component parts.  The gasoline is then sent through pipelines, barges and trucks to the corner of just about every street in the nation, where it sits in underground storage tanks for you to buy whenever you want.

For a few bucks. 

Think about that for a moment.  Billions of dollars of capital deployed to bring you a commodity that you have no hope of ever finding or making for yourself, and then they only charge you a few dollars for a gallon.

And that gallon will perform more work per pound than any other energy source yet devised.

Yup, gasoline is cheap.

Hypocrite, thy name is The Boss

Bruce Springsteen wants you to pay higher taxes while he applies for tax exemptions

So now we have the spectacle of none other than Bruce Springsteen weighing in on the topic of taxes.  And what does the left-leaning crooner think we ought to do about taxes?  Well, raise them, of course.

Bruce wrote an open letter the the Asbury Park Press critical of Republican Governor Chris Christie's tax policy, lamenting that the state is cutting services but not targeting the rich for more taxes.

It turns out, however, that Bruce does not consider himself to be among those that should pay more in taxes.  He is taking advantage of a tax loophole that allows 'farms' to be taxed a lower rate than homes. 

Springsteen pays more than $138,000 a year in taxes on his three-acre Colts Neck home, but just $4,639 on the adjoining 200 acres, which is organically farmed and has horses, according to the report.

So here we have the Boss trying to tell us that taxes should be raised on everyone else, but he personally takes advantage of tax loopholes to reduce his tax burden. 

Nice work, Bruce.