Monthly Archives: October 2009

If You Could Go Back In Time

AND RAT OUT George Soros to the commies, would you do it?

How ’bout now?

Need You To Read

href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/28/the-"statisticians-'global-cooling'-a-myth"-story/#more-12221" target="_blank">THIS, THEN COME back and think about this:

What temperature is it now where you are? Not the “official” weather service temperature from a station which might be miles away from where you are, but… where you are? What was the low this morning, (it would have fallen right before dawn, around 5:30-7:00 AM local time)? What will the high be?

What are the “official” numbers for each of those readings?

How do all of those differ from yesterday? Tomorrow? Is there more than a 1 degree difference day-to-day in any one reading?

What are the averages for your state? Don’t worry that your state may contain as many is four or five different climate zones, just moosh them all together? Now average those three numbers. Does that provide you an accurate idea of what the weather was yesterday where you are?

Of course not. Weather and climate are essentially local phenomena. Each is the sum of myriad continua that vary widely over time and space — both ground location and altitude. To use a single number (temperature) derived from statewide averages of high, specific time, and low for three days to establish weather conditions for a specific location is… silly. Witless. Meaningless.

And yet… The warmistas want to use a single number to define the temperature for the entire planet.

Weather changes — climate changes — second-to-second (faster, even, but the measurements would rapidly degrade into noise). Neither a single, global average, NOR ANY SINGLE TREND, has any meaning for any given location on the globe. Nor is the theoretical delta — less than a degree C per century in any way significant — even for a single location on the planet, let alone for the globe as a whole.

So: what are these guys on about?

Er…

Hiawatha Bray emails with context: “Somebody left off the end of Frank’s remark, and so they left out words that seem to change his meaning considerably. He said, ‘We are trying on every front to increase the role of government in the regulatory area.’ You see the difference?”

No. Not really.

(Hat tip: Insty)

CognDis Dept

SEEMS A LITTLE ODD… As Joe observes one of the more common tactics street thugs will use to get inside your defensive perimeter is to ask for “spare change.” Stopping to give it to them is a good way to get mugged. I always burn them off.

Every once in awhile, the bad guys will try the wrong target. And, most times, the bad guy is lucky enough to survive the encounter.

I’ve always believed that, when rights are in conflict, the aggressor is in the wrong. The person who’s just going along — fat, dumb and happy — minding his own business, when attacked, can be presumed to be the injured party, no matter the “provocation” asserted by the instigator.

And, yet… Most polities have laws against the use of weapons in self-defense — as a precautionary measure, we are assured — but no particular laws against begging.

Hmmmm.

Disconcerting

FTC DISCLOSURE: I’ve been professionally involved in The Who’s tours since 1981. I have not, however, received any special remuneration for this post.

Just watched a Rock Doc on VH1, Amazing Journey: The Story of the Who.

Minor confession: I didn’t really like The Who when I was a kid. There was a pair of guys from my neighborhood who would get together on the concert grand in the high school’s auditorium and bang out Who songs. They were really bad — then. (One was bluesman Steve Tracy’s brother Dave.) That and what they played on the radio was all I knew about the band. I didn’t like Roger Daltrey’s voice — or, as it turned out, his interpretation of songs — until bits of Tommy, and not really until Who’s Next.

But, when Who’s Next came out, I became an instant convert. And I haven’t really heard anything from the band together or from Daltrey or Townsend solo that I haven’t liked a lot since.I put it down to the maturation of Daltrey’s singing, and how that brought forth the meat of Townsend’s songs.

And, since I was receiving emails regularly from the tour and reading the news and box office reports, I was, of course, keenly aware of John Entwhistle’s death when it happened. The documentary made it clear — however cursorily — that the event had a traumatic effect on the remaining founders of the band — Daltrey and Townsend. It also made clear that the relationship between Pete and Roger deepened a bit and stabilized. Say: matured.

In the empty space where Entwhistle’s bass and Moon’s drums used to be there is silence that allows Daltrey and Townsend to exercise powerful artistry — perhaps less frenetic than in the mod days of yore; more contemplative … deeper; but also more powerful.

It struck me — and I really told you all the above to get to this — that my belief that retirement is a death sentence is really true. These guys are OLD by rock-and-roll terms (as Liam Gallagher tried to say in the doc), but they’re still out there, working the art, performing, stretching, doing new things, keeping their chops up, and providing the depth-of-field view that maturity supplies. Other acts have given up, lost members, broken up and reconstituted, with less dedication to their art, and in the end, they are… dust.

No matter what you do, do it. Don’t expect you’re ever going to get to stop, except to do something new. Because, when you stop … you stop.

Really deep, Alger.

You’re too young, yet, Dolly. You’ll get this some day.

Public Option With

STATE OPT-OUT clause == the government thinks you’re stupid.

You’re not, are you? You do understand that any government meddling in the marketplace means that the government sets all the rules of the game, including that the government option will be lower-priced (at least, on the actual invoice to be paid), and will thus drive the private option out of the marketplace.

Don’t fall for this BS. Tell your congresscritter to keep the government out of the market. Relay to them that delightful promise: you ram it down our throats in ’09, we’ll ram it up your ass in Oh-10.

OK

YOU GO first.

Do You Wonder Why The Warmistas

FREAK OUT WHEN you offer any substantive challenge to the notion of catastrophic anthropological global warming?

In the usual history of science accounts, it’s not supposed to happen this way. Roemer had performed an impeccable experiment, with a clear prediction, yet Europe’s astronomers still did not accept that light traveled at a finite speed. Cassini’s supporters had won: the official line remained that the speed of light was just a mystical, unmeasurable figure; that it should have no impact on astronomical measurements.

— David Bodanis, E=MC2

Roemer, it should be noted, was right. Cassini was wrong.

About.com describes an “urban legend” as an apocryphal (of questionable authenticity), secondhand story, told as true and just plausible enough to be believed, about some horrific…series of events….it’s likely to be framed as a cautionary tale. Whether factual or not, an urban legend is meant to be believed. In lieu of evidence, however, the teller of an urban legend is apt to rely on skillful storytelling and reference to putatively trustworthy sources.

I contend that the belief in human-caused global warming as a dangerous event, either now or in the future, has most of the characteristics of an urban legend. Like other urban legends, it is based upon an element of truth.

Dr. Roy Spencer, Official Climatologist
of the EIB Network

The politically-connected James Hansen (not, incidentally, a climatologist) proposes a conjecture — not even rigorous enough to be called a hypothesis — and, with virtually no supporting evidence, his notion is accepted as sufficient to turn the world’s economies upside-down and inside-out.

Less well-connected scientists, not operating outside their fields of expertise, but using actual data, demur and are demonized by Hansen’s political supporters.

As the line goes, if you’d listen, history wouldn’t have to keep repeating itself.

I Don’t Care WHO Y’are

THAT THERE’S fuckin’ stupid.

Which, as is written in the Gospel According to Ron White, you can’t fix.

Oh, and Oh Yeah

DID I remember to mention: Doug Hoffman for Congress. Remind the GOP that RINOs won’t do.

Down the Rathole

IN A POST PUT UP BOTH here and at Eternity Road, I tossed off, as a tangential aside, my personal contention that the notion of “non-profit” is a bad one. Twice, first by Alex Vander Woude, then by our own Neanderpundit, Og, that was challenged in comments. Enough so, and with substance enough, to make me want to expand on the idea.

Let us lay this out as an informal thesis. I will begin by attempting to explain my premises, then move on from there. Given my not being of a rigorous bent, this might get a little hairy, so please bear with.

First, I believe in God. Not, perhaps, as some bearded patriarch with powers of prestidigitation, but… The structure and history of the Universe as Man has been able to apprehend it fairly demands a creator.

I do suspect that mankind, playing the losing game of trying to apprehend the mind of God, has gotten the facts wrong on most points, which is why I probably can’t be a true Christian — I don’t do well in churches, where hewing to an accepted theology is pretty much a requirement for membership. But, here and there in all the tall tales and jeremiads of all religions, I get glimpses of notions that seem to have managed to duct tape a flimsy handle on some slick surface of The Truth, and that, taken together, they seem to form a fairly coherent cosmological and theological world view. No rigor, understand — I’m too lazy for that — but occasional flashes of insight.

One of those can be encapsulated in the Biblical notion that Man was/is/has been created in the image of God. Now, unless God is an upright, bipedal ape, I suspect that means the mind of Man is made in the image (like the image of a hard drive) of the mind of God. That every one of us — individuals — is so made. The mind of the individual is the apotheosis of humanity — that which makes us in apprehension so like a god. It follows, therefore, that that which denies the divinity of the individual — including especially collectivist political philosophies — is blasphemous. Perhaps one might tentatively think to consider thinking about saying, “affirmatively evil.”

Or, one might make that assertion more … um … assertively.

Now, I’m going to make a little leap that must sometimes leave my readers’ heads spinning. There is a connection, I promise. But, if I took the time to “show my work” as your math teachers used to say, I’d never get to the point. Just… trust me on this. Or go do your own research and come to the same conclusion on your own.

The graduated Federal Income Tax.

See? Dolly’s head is spinning around like a hoot owl’s.

Those of you who have done the research into Marxism understand that the income tax is a specific prescription, direct from the great Marxman himself, for the “progress” of society toward a communist utopia. Its purpose is manifold. First: to provide the state, which is to be taken over from within by good socialist revolutionaries, with aready source of cash which citizens of a country in the grip of income taxes cannot lawfully avoid. (And it doesn’t matter to the revolutionary which choice a People might take — whether to suffer the slings and arrows, or to become outlaws by evading them. Es macht nichts — either way, the revolutionary thinks, he wins.) Second: the income tax is meant to provide a levelling of classes, by impoverishing the wealthy and enriching the less-wealthy, through the largesse of the state. That the fact it only has the effect of impoverishing the entire society seems to have escaped our revolutionary geniuses is a tart bit of mordant irony.

You may see this next as a bit of a leap. You can trust me on it or you can do your own research. Es macht mir nichts.

The Federal graduated income tax is the paymaster of both the leviathan nanny state and the Gramscian Marxist Long March through the institutions of Western Civilization. And the core perversion it proposes is that income — profits — are evil and subject to state confiscation on that basis alone.

One of its subsidiaries (yet no less odious for all of that) is the requirement that organizations — free associations of notionally free individuals for their own, non-nefarious purposes — submit to a financial anal exam by — of all people — tax collectors (for Christ’s sake!) in order to be permitted by the government to continue in their purposes for another year.

How odious is that?

When I asked Alex Vander Woude in comments over at Eternity Road, “Why is it that your school is non-profit?” the answer I was looking for is, “Because of the perverse incentives in the Internal Revenue Code.” There is no other reason that a private, co-op school should not be a for-profit entity. And, indeed, there are myriad reasons it should be.

The same mind-set which embraces income taxes, class warfare, wealth-envy, and anti-free-market ideas also sees profit as a dirty word. It is somehow seen as unearned or “found” money. A windfall. A close examination of this notion reveals to an open mind exactly how wrong-headed it is. Absent coercion — of the type that, in a free republic, only a government can muster — a profit will always be earned — albeit perhaps sometimes less-than-honorably. One cannot have a return on investment greater than 1.0 unless one has provided goods and services that people are willing and able to pay for. The only way you can get around that rule is by collusion with government to distort the laws of the natural marketplace. If the merchant is behaving honestly and the government is doing its job, coercive monopolies, price-fixing, barriers to entry, and the like are virtually impossible. But, these days, economic ignorance is widespread (by design, I hasten to add), and so, when demagogues inveigh against profits — obscene, record, unheard-of, windfall — they have a ready audience.

Profit, well-earned by a cleanly-run enterprise, is an indicator of good performance, of prudent operation of the enterprise, and of how well said enterprise serves its purpose, and of its perceived value to the individuals who purchase its goods or services. Profits are, in part and in one sense, the votes made flesh of the individual customers of an enterprise. Profit is increase: in value, in strength, in reach, in ability. In this, profit can be seen to be analogous to nature’s drive to increase. Nature understands (in a metaphorical sense: obviously nature collectively has no brain to understand anything literally) that to diminish is to die, that survival demands growth, demands increase — demands profits.

As such, profit must be seen as being godly. As being demanded of us by nature’s God. In the Parable of the Talents, which which I tasked Alex Vander Woude in the comments to the earlier post, I see the master as being a standin for God. Each of us is given a lot in life, and what we do with it tells how we serve ourselves, our fellow man, and our God. His (or hers or its) judgement of our lives (or perhaps, our own judgement of our lives, seen in the light of the perfect knowledge we suppose will be ours in the next life), must surely rest at least in part on what we did with our God-given talents (either in the monetary or moral sense) in this one. When we meet with Him again, by whatever myth you choose to call it, the question we will face is, “What have you done with that which I gave you?”

And, even if you are an atheist or an agnostic, unless you are an amoral lackwit, you must surely recognize that your own self-worth stems, at least in part, from how you have played the hand Fate has dealt you.

I don’t doubt that all of this has been recognized by collectivist theorists down through the years — as much as they must despise it — and that it is one of many reasons such people act to degrade the moral sense of their target societies — the societies they seek to bring down by their subversion.

Thus the income tax. Thus the special requirements for tax exemptions for churches, charities, et al. Thus the requirement that such entities not make a profit.

That’s not to say that a private association be required to make a profit, merely that it’s odious that the state require that it not. Except that the state has arrogated to itself the power to tax incomes — as insidious as that is — what business is it of the state whether an enterprise earns a profit?

A school, as in Alex’s example, could use profits for much the same things a commercial enterprise might: maintaining and improving its physical plant; making other capital improvments, such as buying lab equipment, text books, library books; giving raises to its staff, or hiring additional staff; saving for the future. The organization of such an enterprise so as to allow it to make a profit — to require it, even — would give the “owners” (or stewards) real, clear, and invaluable signals as to the health of the enterprise.

“But, Alger,” Dolly says, being a good little shill, “Wouldn’t that lead to decisions’ being made with an eye toward profitability? Wouldn’t that in turn lead to facets of the organization’s life — facets that are desirable, even required by the organization for its charter purpose — being given short shrift because they contribute little to the bottom line?”

In a poorly-run enterprise, Dolly, that might be so. But why is it that such an enterprise deserves to survive — sometimes at the expense or to the detriment of a better-run one? Surely you’re not claiming that every for-profit commercial enterprise, all activities in which it engages must contribute directly to the bottom line? That no business anywhere ever does anything that might, in the short run, or in a purely local sense, can be seen as a pure cost center? That all businesses are all profit-center?

Er… No. I guess not. Not when you put it that way.

Of course. This whole post is an exercise in “putting it that way.”

So, we’ve established that profits are a good thing, and that there is nothing inherent in the mission of a religious, charitable, or cooperative venture that requires it to abjure profits, and that there is much to be said against that requirement. Can we not therefore flip the coin over and argue the opposite — that an organization which fundamentally abjures profit can be seen to be failing at its godly duty to increase its patrimony — to be (in effect) pissing it down a rathole?

Not if it serves its purpose?

OK. Fair enough. If an ad hoc organization fulfills its purpose and thereafter folds its tents, it need not show a profit. Its profits, in a sense, might be seen to be being distributed among the recipients of its largesse. But any organization which perceives its mission as being ongoing — as being, for all intents and purposes, permanent — owes it to its mission to grow, to increase, to — in a phrase — show a profit. Be it the Prairie Home Co-operative Comprehensive School, or the Knights of Columbus, or the ASPCA … or General Motors, or Microsoft, or Mom and Pop’s Corner Independent Grocery — any enterprise which serves the public good owes it to itself, its mission, its employees, its beneficiaries, and its stakeholders to earn a positive return on the money invested in it.

And the only reason it cannot is due to the perverse provisions of the tax code — a tax code which, as we can see, is driven by an evil ideology.

As a perspicacious reader may detect, this thesis, as long as it is for this medium, is sketchy, leaves a great deal of its argument unexplicated. Some of that is doubtless due to my not having as thoroughly explored all the nooks and crannies of my basic, aphoristic notion that “Non-profit is a dirty word.” Some of it is surely due to my own human limitations. After all, who among us can apprehend the mind of God? Yet, surely, fully understanding the structure of the Universe and the natural laws which govern it, requires that one do just that. In the aid of developing (or debunking) this notion, of refining it and any possible corrolaries, I would be churlish to not invite discussion — even a lively and contentious one. So, have at it. I will not, however, brook ad hominems at BTB and would attempt to prevail on Fran to remove them at Eternity Road. Keep it clean, keep it civil, or I’ll knock your heads together (to quote my sainted Mother).

Cross-posted at Eternity Road.

Practice Makes Perfect Dept.

I’VE TWEAKED KEVIN BAKER at The Smallest Minority for his long-windedness upon occasion, although not a lot lately. One thing about putting a lot of words down is that the practice makes you more fluent. It’s certainly working for Kevin.

But enough strokage.

Lately, Kevin has been studying education. What he’s learned is not terribly surprising to me, but might be to you. Especially if you think that American public schools might be a bit sub-par, but the still mean well. They. Do. Not. The purpose of pedagogy as practiced by the educationist establishment since the days of John Dewey and the early “Progressive” movement has been to destroy Western civilization. Given that Western civilization is the light of the world, this purpose may be seen to be affirmatively evil. No points off for good intentions, even if the road to that place weren’t already paved with them.

As the teaching of the young is the one and only way to preserve a culture or a civilization, having our pedagogy perverted like this for so long — well, it’s no wonder we’re living in a decadent society. The wonder is that we’ve survivedd at all.

Wednesday’s epic at TSM: Go. RTWT.

Just Heard John “Fuckface” Kerry

(Who — by the way (did you know?) — served in Vietnam.)

ACTUALLY SAY (the noive!) “Rule of Law,” and the radio report said nothing about his lying tongue jumping out of his mouth and run screaming down K Street.

Because, you know, if the Democrats actually believed in the rule of law, they wouldn’t treat the Supreme Law of the Land as an obstacle on the field of play, rather than the field itself.

Perverts!

Quote of the Day

‘Don’t worry about the world coming to an end today. It’s already tomorrow in Australia!’

– Anon. homage to Charles Schultz

Rob Allen

TAKES ON A SERIES of stupid TV ads for Broadview (nee: Brinks) Home Security with a similar outlook to the one I’ve expressed here before.

These commercials are utter crap. The threats are real (although probably not as cliché as the ads make them appear), but the sense of security of a beeping alarm and a reassuring phone call are, quite possibly, lethally naive.

Sure, there are a few idiots who will run at a high pitched siren, but even the most sophomoric criminals know that the cops are a long ways away and have plenty of time to ply their trade.

Seriously, so what if Broadview calls you? What good is that going to do someone? “This is Broadview Security, we’re calling because there’s an alarm and we want to record the sounds of you being raped and stabbed to death”. That’s a lot of good.

RTWT.

G.M. (Gesundheit) Roper

REPOSTS AN INTERESTING article explicating as to whether and why the Obamunists’ attempt to bring about One World governance, as warned of by Lord Christopher Monckton here and on the Glenn Beck radio show Monday, may not be as game-changing as folks on either side may think.

Which may be interesting and all that, but I have only one question: would you bet your life on it?

Mama Mia Culpa

JUST TO GET OUT IN FRONT of the scandal, I want to let everybody know that Toni and I went back out to Ikea in Westchester (or, as the sign on the exit ramp says, West Ohio Chester). Despite my vow to never buy furniture for myself there, I actually colluded in the purchase of three club-ish chairs for use at Casa d’Alger.

Three chairs.

$600.00

For those of you in Port St. Lucie, that means that each chair is cheap enough that, if it REALLY sucks and we can’t find anybody to foist it off onto, we can kick it to the curb with few if any regrets or even qualms.

I still think their cabinetry sucks big dead donkey dicks and I won’t have any of THAT.

On a related note: when I grow up, I want to be Norm Abram. Or, at least, have his workshop.

Update: It seems The New Yankee Workshop is going off the air. While I imagine it will remain a valuable property for a little while, the dearth of new product spells its eventual doom. So, if you ever wanted to get videos and/or plans of stuff you saw on the show, you better get it while it lasts.

Another Not Getting It

JAMES TARANTO in the Wall Street Journal, interviewing Andrew Breitbart, boo-hoos over the demise of the legacy partisan press.

…[N]obody should root for [the legacy media’s] downfall or destruction. Their role — that of impartial watchdog and broker of information — is a vital one, whether or not they perform it well.

It’s not a matter of whether or not they perform their intended role well; it’s whether or not they collude with the state in not only misinforming the public, but actively — with malice aforethought — disinform the public. They propagandize for affirmative evil. They willfully spread lies. They conceal information they know and can verify in order to support their favored candidates and issues and then try to deny that’s what they’re doing.<?p>

I’ve said for a long time I’d sooner trust the Manchester Guardian than the New York TImes. At least I know where the Guardian is coming from.

Me, if I thought one could trust a government watchdog of the watchdog media, I’d require that, in order to enjoy First Amendment press protection, a media outlet would have to FIRST: tell the truth. But, of course, statists in government are past masters at pettifoggery, and such a rule would only lead to deeper mischief.

Still and all, I can’t see where an industry that’s begging the state for handouts and can’t please its audience even well enough to keep their print operations afloat has got any room to complain.

Cross-posted at Eternity Road.

I’ve Long Maintained That The Tragedy

OF THE COMMONS is a tragedy of the commons — fundamental, systemic, intrinsic to the very notion that goods can be held in common. My aphorism for this occasion is “What is owned by all is owned by none.” That is: what anyone and everyone has a claim of ownership on, nobody will own up to the responsibility for. It seems self-evident to me, and history bears me out — from ancient times to the Pilgrims of the Massachusetts Bay Colony to the utter failures of the 20th Century Marxist socialist states. Goods held in common degrade. Goods held by individuals with exclusive ownership rights, at least have inherent to them the possibility of increase, given prudent management.

Which brings me to an interesting tangent: “Non-profit” is a dirty word. If an enterprise does not both repay its capital investment and increase in value, it is a waste. Its operation amounts to pissing money down a rathole. And, as all good liberty-loving Americans know, money represents people’s lives. It’s called a medium exchange for this reason: one exchanges bits of a person’s life for goods and services through the medium of money. Wasting money wastes lives. It must be seen as a cardinal sin in a free society. I would urge those who love liberty but seek outlet for their altruistic impulses to eschew non-profit or not-for-profit enterprises, and instead invest in economic activity which at least hopes to provide a profit. I submit you do more for your community thereby in the long run.

Cross-posted at Eternity Road.

Asked in Passing

WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION does the phrase “compelling government interest” appear?

In Case You Missed This

THE UNITED STATES IS about to be over if Obama can garner 67 votes in the Senate to ratify the Copenhagen treaty.

Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty in Copenhagen, Claims British Lord Monckton

At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed. Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it.

I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” — because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it — Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.

[laughter]

And the trouble is this; if that treaty is signed, if your Constitution says that it takes precedence over your Constitution (sic), and you can’t resign from that treaty unless you get agreement from all the other state parties — And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out of it.

Skimming through the treaty, I came across verification of Monckton’s assessment of the new entity’s purpose:

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

World Government (heading added)
a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

To Redistribute Wealth (heading added)
b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts [read: the “climate debt” Monckton refers to], including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, (c) a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.

With Enforcement Authority (heading added)
c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; (c) a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange [read; enforcement].

If we do not raise holy Hell — up to and including violent action in the streets — this will pass, and you can kiss your American ass goodbye. I would wager that, if the abomination comes to pass, no election will ever be permitted in America again, because if it were, the party on the Left would be voted out and the party on the Right would have a clear mandate to repeal the whole ball of wax — which would be intolerable to the enemies of America.

A Day For Not Getting It

FIRST WE HAVE GOP campaign folk who don’t get that an appeal to the Left (which is what an appeal to so-called “moderates” really is) is a losing proposition.

THEN THERE ARE those on the Left who don’t get that … what? Their public policy prescriptions are not only wrong, but they are illegal, and that people in the Right notice and don’t intend to take the impositions lying down.

The Left’s not getting it can be seen in places such as Salon.

American political discourse has gotten increasingly nasty over the past 10 months, with brutal rhetoric spilling from talk radio to town hall meetings to the very halls of Congress. When anti-government protesters openly carry loaded weapons at rallies and Texas Gov. Rick Perry hints at the possibility of secession, you might wonder whether the nation is actually at the brink of civil war over the unlikely issue of healthcare reform. Sadly, the commentators and politicians who exploit such threats of violence and revolution seem to have forgotten what the real Civil War was about, and what it was like. Now would be a good time to start remembering, because, as it happens, the first pitched battle of our bloodiest war began exactly 150 years ago today.

Sadly, the commentators and politicians who push and cover for ever-worsening outrages against the liberty of the People fail to apprehend how close to the boiling point the People are. They seem resolutely unwilling to take the hint, and in doing so, drive the wagon of state ever closer to the precipice.

At Sipsey Street, Mike frequently quotes his grandfather saying something to the effect, “If you don’t want the wolverine to rip your balls off, don’t corner him.” Somehow, the Left doesn’t get it. Oh, how badly they don’t get it.

Meantime, Mike has been trying to get the attention of Eric Holder. I won’t say it’s a quixotic quest — stranger things have happened — but, were I a betting man, I’d give short odds against.

GLENN BECK HAS BEEN EXPOSING DOCTRINAIRE MARXISTS in the Obama administration a lot here lately, and there’s been some discussion of the myriad and manifest sins of collectivists — particularly with respect to an utter willingness to encompass the deaths of millions in the service of a cause, without pause or let, without remorse, utterly without ruth.

The White House media tsarina charged with correcting the errors of conservative spokesfolk (sorry, I can’t be bothered to remember the name of a person shortly to become an unperson as the hot glare of a public spotlight focuses on her) has been soundbitten as citing Mao Zedong’s relentless pursuit of his goal of the rule of glorious communism over China as “thinking outside the box.”

People around him at the time had the foresight to challenge his continued military struggle against the vastly superior forces of the Kuomintang. He is reported to have responded that this was the way he chose to fight. “You fight your war; I’ll fight mine.” Forward-looking. Original thinker.

And as bloody and destructive as his revolution was, it was nothing compared to the spasms he forced his country into in order to HOLD ONTO power.

This week, we are met with the spectre of the President asserting the same relentlessness. “I’m not tired,” he avers. “I’m just getting started,” he asserts. “I don’t quit,” he threatens.

Just like that revolutionary Mao — already a veteran of the bloody Long March. Already guilty of thrusting internecine warfare on his countryman to no good end. Already up to his neck in the blood of people over whom he sought to assert stewardship as well as power, but not yet seated firmly in that position of power. Just like that.

Obama has no concern for the utter witlessness of his cause. He has no concern for the actual — you know — people he is breaking like eggs-to-omelets. He has utter contempt for the wealth he is destroying in the process, in his Long March to glorious socialist victory.

They aren’t going to quit. If they cannot be politically defeated, utterly deligimated for all time, there may come a time when a more … permanent … solution may be called for.

::sigh:: Dammit.

Knowing That

WOMEN DON’T REALLY care for pink guns, I feel a lot better for thinking that the move to pinkify guns “for the ladies” might have been be a tad condescending. Patronizing, evennn.

(Hat tip: Uncle.)

And Interesting and Tutelary Bit

OF GUERILLA THEATRE comes to us from up the road in Columbus, where, it seemed a woman ran a “The Dude’s Buyin'” scam on a Burlington Coat Factory outlet store. Only problems: 1) she didn’t get away with it and B) the wrong lesson was imparted. The moral should have been arranged to be: Free stuff never is; don’t trust anyone promising you something for nothing. Instead, things got muddled due to poor delvery. One trusts that, next time, the script will be better-written.

One Can Hope As

MEGAN MCARDLE asks, “Is health care reform falling apart?”

Pusillanimous Pussyfooters

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, feigning to want to avert a nuclear war in the middle east with their feckless…

“Feckless?” FECKLESS? I’d say it’s all fecked up.

(Your accent is slipping, Dolly.)

…feckless dealings — or lack of them — with the thugocracy of Iran and their throwing of Israel under the bus, will — as all such leftist pusillanimity always does — actually bring about that war.

Hasten it, even.

By withdrawing support from Israel — possibly, as one “wit” (quoted here by Flea) couched it, cutting off the fuel and ammunition — Obama will force the Israelis to act precipitously in order to avert (there’s that word again) a plainly inevitable catastrophe. Foreseeing that emboldened Arabs and Persians, perceiving a possibly fatally weakened Israel will attack — possibly on multiple fronts — Israel will seek to protect its tiny and fragile core by striking outwards at a time and place of its own choosing.

Probably against Iran’s nukes.

Probably indecisively.

Probably sparking a conflict which will quickly reach nuclear temperatures.

Thus so-called “progressives” (scorn quotes) and their desires for “peace” actually bring about war.

Idiots.

Not to mention that the abandonment of Israel to its own devices is morally indefensible.

That, too.

*Bill Safire, R.I.P.

The News Junkie

AT MAGGIE’S FARM asks

Is mass transit really green? Probably not, but could you imagine NYC without trains, buses and subways? It just wouldn’t work.

Can’t disagree with the conclusion, but possibly with the implied reason on offer. I might humbly suspect that the fact above recognized forms more of an indictment of New York and of statist solutions than any endorsement of mass transit.

Perhaps, without the various statist intrusions in the marketplace which the very existence of infrastructure in New York implies, the city might not have grown so large and densely populated. And, perhaps then, mass transit wouldn’t work as well.

Health Care Bill Passes

LIKE A TURD out of committee. CBO says the scoring may change when the bill is translated from conceptual (read: airy-fairy) language to legal language.

Here’s a clue:

FUCK THE COST!

It doesn’t matter. What matters — the point that ought to be the focus of debate — is that Congress isn’t allowed to do any of it! There is no authority in the Constitution for this shit! Stop it. Go back to committee and design bills which repeal the OTHER un-constitutional laws that CREATED this problem in the first place. Back the fuck away from the health care, put down the bill, and clasp your hands together behind your neck.

Sheesh!

Quote of the Day

…[T]he Gay Left and Tea Party Right might even want to talk to each other; they may find they’ve got more in common than they realize…

Instapundit

Aqua Sky Jazz Front Windowsill — October 10, 2009

Our babies — the triplets. Aqua is on the left, Jazz on the right, and Sky is sandwiched in between the two girls. Aqua got weighed last week and tipped the scales at 10 pounds 2 ounces. They are eight months old. They are on a reducing diet.

Sky is the least demonstratively affectionate of the three, but is by no means standoffish, just not as aggressively friendly as the girls. Aqua and Jazz both get right in your face and demand you pet them.

Loving pets are said to be good for your blood pressure. The way the world goes these days, we all need some of that.

Don’t Sugar Coat It

SOME CHOICE RANTS in the ‘sphere this Sunday.

Eternity Road co-conspirator Chris Muir turns in a stellar rant by his character Damon. Ever since Our Curmudgeon announced Chris’s addition to the roster at ER, I’ve been wondering what Mr. Muir might have to say when he steps out from behind the gang at Day by Day. I suspect this one might be a clue.

Brigid, at Home on the Range, answers the eternal question — prompted by her description of a HOTR man — how do you spot a Home On The Range woman? HOT-chaaa!

That’s not really a rant.

True. At least, not in the sense of being semi-deranged. But then, it surely is heart-felt.

And good-old Ragin’ Dave tees off on the M-16/M4. (Frank James has a few choice words on the same topic, inspired by the same report from the sandbox.Frank’s a bit more measured than Dave, but I can imagine he’s about as pissed neveretheless.

Me, I don’t have the throw weight to really comment, except to say I’ve always wondered how sensible using a round with a cross section under a quarter-inch could possibly be effective in combat. Yeah, they say you can carry SO MUCH more ammo than with .30 cal. Yeah, they say most rounds fired in combat A) never connect anyway and 2) serve to make the other guy keep his head down. But… jeeze! There’s a reason Kim du Toit calls it a poodle shooter. (And, I should probably point out, refers to miniature or toys, because a standard poodle might keep comin’ at ya. Might even be a tad annoyed that you shot him with such a puny round — as that old joke goes.)

Toni and I Have Been Meaning To

GET OUT TO THE NEW Ikea store in the northern suburbs since, well, since before it opened. This morning, before we officially got out of bed, I proposed a field trip. (And, yes, it was to get out of doing work around the house.)

I am both impressed and unimpressed.

Back in my stupid youth, in the early ’70s, when I could be said to have been employed as a cabinetmaker (read: furniture maker), I got the notion — derived from campaign furniture dating back to Roman times — of a line of furniture which could be sold knocked down, and yet would serve as the owner’s own packing crates for his possessions. In other words, you would simply twist some catches and the drawers and doors of your casework would be latched and could be broken down into easily-carried units and moved from one domicile to another without the need to remove the contents and separately pack them.

At about the same time, some space-saver freaks in Sweden were starting Ikea.

You have, no doubt, heard of Ikea. My idea died stillborn. One very crude prototype got built. The business foundered, its participants scattered to the winds.

The success of Ikea’s model impresses me. Their furniture designs … m’eh. Not so much. Although the modularity and adaptability is neat, the materials choices and fit and finish strike me as… bottom of the market kind of stuff. I am reminded of Sippican’s dictum: never put anything in your house that subsequent owners wouldn’t have to seriously examine their souls before removing or altering. I think that goes for furniture as well as architecture. This stuff is not timeless or heirloom quality. In fact, I doubt most of it would last a one-year lease in a college rental.

The store is roughly twice the footprint of your average Home Depot or Lowe’s, but two 15-foot (approx.) storeys tall. It is HUGE. It is deliberately organized to be confusing. The first-time visitor will perforce visit all of the various departments — furniture, lighting, storage, organization, textiles, bed and bath, kitchen, and so-forth — in order to make it from ingress to egress, despite ubiquitous signs directing visitors toward the latter. The layout is like a maze, with “shortcuts” from one department to another. Possessed of a map and the desire to skip certain departments, one could save time, but the whole is designed to keep you passing more and more displays, to be distracted by shiny objects, your cupidity piqued into making you buy more.

That ranted, we’ll be going back. However, next time, we will BOTH take our cell phones. It’s too easy to get separated and too hard to find someone once you do.

I spotted one marketing misfire, which may or may not matter to the Swedish giant. They don’t get American consumers, and their labelling bears that out. Over and over again, I had to wade through metric size labelling to find dimensions of a product in “real” (English) units. Although the metric system is the official system of the United States, sensible American consumers still think — and buy — in feet, pounds, and seconds (fps). Talk about your cultural imperialism!

This mislabelling — minor as it may be — also extends to terminology. Although there were bins and bins of compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) — carefully NOT labelled as such — there were ALSO fixtures designed to burn, and including, light emitting diodes (LED), a cool-burning technology with FAR lower power requirements than anything else on the market, and a far longer instrument (bulb) life. Orders of magnitude longer.

But they were not labelled as LEDs. Nor would a search of Ikea’s website turn up practical fixtures burning LEDs. Instead, they are called light diodes. In my opinion (and that of a lot of other people) — and please understand I DO NOT accept catastrophic anthropogenic global warming as anything other than a warped leftist fantasy — LED lamps are the wave of the future — literally, the Way, the Truth, and the Light for illumination purposes. And here is a merchant with practical (albeit limited) fixtures and instruments ON THEIR STORE SHELVES, using the wrong terminology for them, thus rendering them impossible to find by a simple text search.

Smooth move, exlax.

I bought a garbage can for the office, and some organizer boxes for my desk area. Toni got some dish towels, a clock, and a plant. We also got a chance to look at a bunk bed for the grand-daughters, which was the proximate purpose of the expotition. All-in-all, no surprises, some disappointments, but nothing to turn us away, with that codicil that I’ll never buy furniture from the place for myself.

FedGov: Reducing Our Dependence

ON FOREIGN OIL, one bureaucratic overreach at a time.

Not fair, Alger! The bureaucrats opened the leases up to drilling. It was the over-the-top, preservation-at-all-costs types who actually did the dirty deed.

Right you are, Dolly. I sit corrected.

Took A Bag of Poop

UP TO THE ANIMAL Horsepistol so Toni could have Tiny Doctor Tim look at it. While I was there, I ran into my step-nephew-in-law (IOW, no real relation, except…) whom I haven’t seen since he was in grammar school. He’s 24 now. I remember when his mom was pregnant with him. Wow does that make you feel old allofasudden.

First thing I noticed was he has the family voice. It’s a timbre and a way of forming vowels that is more noticeable among the men, but the women of the bloodline have it, too.

Dateline Oslo

THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE committee, not satisfied with having turned the notion of “peace” on its head by awarding corrupt terrorist and genocidal maniac Yassir Arafat and corrupt kleptocraft Kofi Annan, now has issued what this writer believes may be the first vaporware Peace Prize to the Junior Senator from Illinois, still a probationary President of the United States at the time of his ascension.

Apparently on the basis that Probie Prez hopes to bring about change the world can get behind.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

You sound as though you think any Nobel outside the hard sciences ever meant anything.

Do I? Sorry. Didn’t mean to.

Tee-Hee of the Week

A CALLER ON HANNITY Friday afternoon identified the Obama presidency as “…the Milli Vanilli presidency.”

Heh.

Indeed.

Quick! Somebody Check On

WHAT GEORGE SOROS is up to.

(Hat tip: Insty)

Then again, consider the source: Robert Fisk? Tsk tsk. ARe you so credulous as to buy ANYthing he says?

Quote of the day

If you’d like a taste of what it feels like to be a libertarian, try telling people that the incoming Obama Administration is advocating precisely those aspects of FDR’s New Deal that prolonged the great depression for a decade; that propping up failed and failing ventures with government money in order to save jobs in the present merely shifts resources from relatively more to relatively less productive uses, impedes the corrective process, undermines the economic growth necessary for recovery, and increases unemployment in the long term; and that any “economic” stimulus package will inexorably be made to serve political rather than economic ends, and see what kind of reaction you get. And trust me, it won’t feel any better five or ten years from now when everything you have just said has been proven true and Obama, like FDR, is nonetheless revered as the savior of the country.

– John Hasnas via Matt Welch and Coyote

People Might Remember 2001

THAT THE CLINTON/BUSH transition was hampered by Al Gore’s temper tantrum at having been beaten at the polls and in the Electoral College (remember Sore /Loserman?). The transition from campaign to governance was leg-ironed with the massive, petulant ball-and-chain of Gore v Bush (Should have been U.S. v Gore on charges of electoral fraud, but that’s a whole ‘nother post.) Then, in the true spirit of bipartisanship (that means that the partisan feuding swings both ways, I suppose), the Democrats did everything up to and including suborning near-treason to scotch the approval of incoming presidential appointees.

The result of which, the Bush administration was barely getting up to speed when 9/11 happened.

And yet, as the news reminded us tirelessly on Wednesday, in less than a month, they managed to get an invasion together of Afghanistan.

Fast forward eight years, and we have The Won and his kack-handed, politically tone-deaf, would-be kleptocrats and tin-pot dictators, unable to get together on the simple proposition that the general you appointed should be — you know — supported in his generalship.

“The latest spin-filled explanation for the stalemate on our Afghanistan war strategy comes from the Washington Post. You see, the civilian leadership didn’t really understand that a full counterinsurgency strategy meant, well, a full counterinsurgency strategy… If so, this is a fundamental breakdown in policy formulation and communication that makes the Guantanamo debacle look like small potatoes.”

Commentary

One is reminded of a similar amateur-hour administration, back in ’93. And another one in ’77. And yet another in ’61. And one feels moved to wonder: is there a pattern here?

Well, Gee, Rush

INNIT OBVIOUS? Reading an item Thursday about stimulus money being used to benefit the homeless in Houston, Rush asks (rhetorically), “Anybody ever hear of JOBS?”

But, of course, since the government cannot really create jobs (except government makework), that’s the nub of the problem. The state can only rob from Peter to give to Paul. It cannot offer Paul a gainful, productive job. It certainly cannot offer gainful, productive jobs to tens of thousands of applicants. It can only make charitable dependents of them.

Which, I submit, is the point of the exercise.

Quote of the Day

I get a chuckle every time I hear someone toss out the line “The science is settled!” It just proves the speaker to be unclear on their terminology, because Buddy, if it’s “settled”, then it ain’t “science”, okay? Science doesn’t “settle” things; it just provides workable hypotheses that we use until we get better data.

Tamara K

True dat.

You May Rest Assured

ANY ORGANIZATION whose name begins with “Center for…” is a front — usually Marxist in intent, and in effect regardless.

Calling Bullshit on Eric Holder

WHEN HE ASSERTS THAT “youth violence isn’t a Black problem.”

Every study of crime stats I’ve ever heard of says just the opposite: when you control for young, Black men — generally involved in drugs or gangs or both — assaulting, robbing, and killing each other, the crime rates in America are shockingly low.

By which, given the prevailing social attitudes over the past four generations or so, leads me to believe that the fault — if there is ONE single fault — lies with what Paul Stookey (PBUH) once called “A teenage mother-my-dog instinct,” by which he may have meant but didn’t want to say, liberal nanny-state approaches to juvenile crime.

Calling Bullshit Also

ON ALL THOSE WHO cavil that we in the Right need to stop being “the party of NO” and offer solutions to problems.

First, the Republicans are in the minority. (And, so, despite being a majority of the People, are those in the broader Axis of Liberty.) We therefor perforce must be reactionaries — reacting to the despicable initiatives of the Left. That must be done. The Left must be resisted and, where possible, fought to a standstill — BEFORE it is even possible to take positive action.

Second, there are those in the Right who are offering “solutions.” They are simply being ignored by the dominant government-media cultural elite, and therefore struggle to garner mindspace.

Nevertheless, these solutions are being heard. They include:

- Lower taxes, freeing up capital to be invested and providing incentives once again to investment.

- Eliminate the perverse incentives in the IRC which mandate the purchase of “health insurance” as an added burden to the family budget for medical care.

- Eliminate those unlawful departments and agencies of the Federal goverment for which there is no constitutional mandate.

- Provide greater individual liberty: eliminate burdensome (and
unconstitutional) regulatory regimes which destroy wealth and enslave the People to the government — a situation which is despicable to a free nation.

- Stop the futile, wasteful, and unconstitutional War on (some) Drugs.
Failing that, at least end the unconstitutional policies of no-knock entry and asset forfeiture.

- Bring the income tax into line with the Constitution or (preferably) eliminate it altogether. Provide for revenue to the government via the Fair Tax.

These all have one feature in common: they withdraw power from Washington and return it to the People, which is why they are to vehemently resisted by the Inside the Beltway crowd.

Last, but not least, the word “solution” implies that there is a problem. Leftist nostrums always posit solutions to problems which either do not exist or to which the nostrums offer no solution. In the cases of both catastrophic anthropogenic global climate change and the high cost of health care, the problems are chimerical at best. To the extent that the latter can have an inordinate price tag attached to it, that fault lies with government, and no solution involving government action will provide resolution. In the case of the former, those proposing the so-called solutions admit that said solutions will have no ameliorative effect.

Come back and see us when you have a real problem. Maybe then we can talk.

OMG!

I HAD TOTALLY FORGOTTEN that it was Jimmy “Numbnuts” Carter who gave away the Panama Canal.

Funny thing: nobody I knew back then thought he was a traitor — just stupid.

I have since been persuaded different.

Quote of the Day

…a kind of Republican Party method: they conceded all his basic premises and fought him on inconsequential details.

–Ayn Rand (on Kant)

(spotted at The Smallest Minority)

Heh.

The Dust Bowl

BROUGHT TO YOU BY… wind power.

Tee-hee. I get it! The winds blew up all those dust clouds and…

Not it, Dolly. In the twenties, the plains got lots of rain. Unusually lots, as it turned out. But the farmers had limited power available to them to draw water from their wells.Only enough, as it turned out, to fill up a bath tub or a cattle tank. Not enough to irrigate the fields and keep the soil from blowing away. Y’see, all they had was windmills.

Later, when they had electric power available — coal-fired electric power — they could pump water up from the Oglala Aquifer and irrigate the fields.

And the watermelon Left wants us to go back to that… wind… power.

Right.

The Left Has Its Panties

IN A DOUBLE CARRICK BEND because there are some of us in the Right who, while enjoying the actual Games themselves, understand that the International Olympic Movement is an anti-American, One-World type of collectivist front whose descent on a host city exactly resembles the parasitical actions of the British Court when it would descend on an unruly noble’s household, bag and baggage, and proceed to eat the poor lord out of house and home.

There’s a term for that.

Escapes me at the moment, but someone will remind us of it in three… two…

And we in the Right have been a bit in a celebratory way, not only with schadenfreude over the Obamas’ getting a nice pair of his-and-hers shiners out of the exercise…

..self-inflicted, if ya axs me…

… indeed, not only that, but also that the good people of Chicago are not to be saddled with the burden The Won was chasing them around the corral with.

It’s not so much cheering for America’s defeat in the matter as it is a vast sigh of relief at having dodged THAT bullet.

Let them suck the life out of Rio this time.

I’m Almost Tempted

TO ENDORSE SOMETHING without disclosing compensation received, just so I can take the First Amendment and shove it up the FTC’s collective ass.

I Want You To Take Note

OF THE WAY THAT the pig flu vaccine is being rolled out — with parade-ground-voiced announcers barking out who is going to be getting theirs first.

And I want to remind you that this is being run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the CDC, formerly a part of the Army Medical Corps), a government organization.

And then I want you to consider: how can the government’s running anything … how can it not lead to rationing of goods and services?

And then I want to ask you: How is this a good thing?