Monthly Archives: December 2009

So Obama Wanted to

(SCORN QUOTES) “calibrate” the national response to the threat posed by the chariots-of-fire-in-your-shorts bomber.

Right.

This reminds me of a bit by Gallagher. You know: the guy who sledgehammers watermelons as a part of his show.

The bit is part of a rant about baseball and how boring it is. I’m not saying one way or the other, myself, but it’s apposite. Gallagher goes on at some length about how the pitcher and the catcher can be so slow at delivering a pitch. The catcher will pass a sign to the pitcher. The pitcher shakes it off. Another. Not that one, either. Gallagher says, “These guys have got all freakin’ day to get their acts together. They’re together on the plane, on the bus, in the hotel room, the locker room. They have to wait until they get on the freakin’ field before they decide what they’re gonna throw?”

If the President has to take time after an incident to “calibrate” his response, it tells me he hasn’t been paying the requisite attention to his primary, fiduciary duty — that of commander-in-chief of America’s armed forces.

Of course, Obama doesn’t believe America should have armed forces, so that’s alright by him.

But to me, it just reinforces the notion that the man is in over his head.

Quote of the Day

In case you haven’t noticed yet, the government is an idiot.

–Dr. Joy Bliss
at Maggies Farm

Mass Stranding of Whales

IN NEW ZEALAND. People express mystification at whale strandings. How can large groups of intelligent animals go so manifestly nuts as to beach themselves to their deaths?

But, hey! People have been voting Democrat for decades.

Right?

I Can’t See Where

IN ANY WAY that this can be a lawful order.

Seems to me we need some lists of identifying characteristics of InterPol agents. For target acquisition, don’t you know. As agents of hostile foreign powers.

A Worthwhile Lesson

IN THE “SIMPLE PHYSICS” (so-called) of the warmists’ case, here.

Because climate is a flow system far from equilibrium, it is ruled by the Constructal Law. As a result, there is no physics-based reason to assume that increasing CO2 will make any difference to the global temperature, and the Constructal Law gives us reason to think that it may make no difference at all. In any case, regardless of Arrhenius, the “simple physics” relationship between CO2 and global temperature is something that we cannot simply assume to be true.

RTWT.

What?

ABUDLLAH whatsis is STILL alive?

Sheeezus!

I swear it all went South when the moaners reared up on their hind legs and learned to make a curse word of Draco’s name.

Comments de-Verfuckled

THANKS TO OG who grasped the nettle and emailed me directly, I have now fixed the problem with CAPTCHA images not displaying and they work again. You may now comment.

Gee, and here I thought it was ’cause nobody loved me.

That might have been the case, too, Alger.

Aren’t you a regular sweetheart.

Sweetheart: c’est moi. Sweetheart of the rodeo, sweetheart of the troops, sweetheart of America…

.

Christmas with the Grands

DID CHRISTMAS with the grandkids. Number one grandson is now taller than both parents. The granddaughters are a couple of pips. Totally different, completely united in generating soft mayhem. Their mother is approaching sainthood for her patience in dealing with them. We had a lot of fun — and discharged our grandparently duty — winding them up before we left and came home.

I See the Root of

THE WHOLE PROBLEM as being metonymized in stories like this one. The thing runs off the rails when they start talking about Federal criminal charges. Eh? WTF? The man committed an act of war in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As such, he is subject to summary execution. Shot on the tarmac, on his knees under a hood, if the imagery would help the propaganda effort. If the police are too squeamish, then wait for the proper military authorities. But no lawyers. Ever.

Green Eyeshades

I AM SICKENED by the amount of human capital wasted arguing over specific and particular provisions of the so-called “health care” bills.

Get this; fuck that.

Congress has no authority to be legislating on the matter AT ALL.

If you want to reform health care on the Federal level, the only legal reform is to back government out of the matter altogether.

You start by stripping away all Federal legislation — including the tax code — which bears on the matter, and, absent fraud or coercion, treat the whole matter as a purely private matter.

The next step would be to bar the states from regulating the matter. Insurance is almost by definition interstate commerce, and the states do not have the authority to speak on it.

If you’re concerned about the poor and indigent, how about legislating tax credits for insurance companies who cover low-income folk, the disabled, and elderly?

Credits, not write-offs.

If you ever wonder about the reality of the matter, wonder to yourself how insurance companies got privileged in the first place. It wasn’t a matter of market corruption or failure, I can assure you.

So the “Health Care”

BILL IS utterly unconstitutional. So? So was McCain-Feingold. The Congress said so when they passed it. The President said so when he signed it. The Supreme Court said so when they let it stand, pretty much, as passed.

Do you see what’s wrong with this picture?

None of those people are in jail?

Besides that, I mean.

It Came Upon a Midnight Clear

Now it came to pass in those days, there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment made when Quirnius was governor of Syria. And all went to enroll themselves, every one to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, to enroll himself with Mary, who was betrothed to him, being great with child. And it came to pass while they were there, the days were fulfilled that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son; and she wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

And there were shepherds in the same country, abiding in the field and keeping watch by night over their flocks. And an angel of the Lord stood by them and the glory of the Lord shone round about them and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, “Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good tidings of joy which shall be to all the people; for there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior who is Christ the Lord. And this is the sign unto you; you shall find a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, “Glory to God in the highest. And on earth, peace among men in whom he is well pleased.

The Gospel According to Luke
Chapter 2, Verses 1-14

Merry Christmas to all.

A Continuing Christmas Tradition

ALBEIT A BIT altered this year: A Dolly X-Mas,” the story of the first Christmas experienced by one Gabrielle Francesca East — a.k.a. Dolly.

The perspicacious among BTB readers will notice that, not only is “A Dolly X-Mas” posted at the above URL, but with a little messing around, you can get to a few more stories. It’s not the entirety of this cycle of juvenalia, but it is a substantial fraction of the Apocrypha, and it’s a small gift in these parlous times that I’m able to offer it for the first time in a couple of years. With luck, I may be able to return the whole Dolly Apocrypha to our right sidebar sometime this season.

And many thanks to Connie du Toit — a.k.a. Tech Support — for making it possible for me to even get this far. We can’t really say much about why, but, trust me, this is a small thing compare to what the Mrs. is doing behind the scenes. Big kisses and hugs to both Connie and Kim as they celebrate the season with their family.

To the Moral Idiots

CLAIMING THAT — scorn quotes — “health care” is an American right, I offer this Quote of the Day.

There can be no moral right in connection with one man’s making a slave of another.

Abraham Lincoln

You can dress it up any way you want, put a Saturday night madam’s-worth of lipstick on that pig, when you assert that one citizen has a “right” to the labor of another, you are in effect enslaving the second citizen.

Considering the Democrat party’s stance during the debate over slavery, it is, I suppose, refreshing that they’re being so consistent.

Next to the Definition of Irony in the Dictionary

IN THE MIDDLE OF a comment thread at Lucianne on the coming health-care backlash (consider the scorn quotes added to “health care”), what to my wondering eyes should appear but this banner ad:

Considering that the mere prospect of the Feds’ meddling in matters medical has the usual suspect trying to diminish the importance of breast cancer screenings, maybe next year it might be 80,000?

That’s sick, Alger!

Blood dancing? Or a clear-eyed assessment of the possible outcomes of government going where it has no business?

Posted in Comments

TO THIS post at Chicago Boyz. A bit rough, but I think it gets the flavor of my ideas. There are a lot of other, good ones in the comment thread.

Crowdsourcing the Contract With America 2.0. Looks like people have been thinking about this for a long time.

Taxes: that wherever voters get their hands on a tax levy, they defeat it more often than not ought to be a clue: taxes are too high. Some major commitment on taxes must be a high priority. Perhaps the Fair Tax is an idea whose time has come.

Legislation: some arrangment to forbid the passage of omnibus bills. No bill passed out of committee, debated on in either house, or brought to the floor for a vote may, on technical markup, deal with matters touching on more than one chapter of the United States code.

No bill may be brought to the floor for debate or a vote until those constitutionally-mandated items have been dealt with.

It shall be considered fraud and malfeasance for any legislator to propose, support, debate in favor of, or vote for any bill of which he or she cannot demonstrate a clear understanding. Punishable by 1) immediate removal from office, 2) imprisonment, 3) fine, 4) forfeiture of pensions and other benefits accruing from service in the legislature. Review to be done by citizen review panels independent of the legislature.

It shall be considered fraud and malfeasance for any legistlator to propose, support, debate in favor of, or vote for any bill which does not affirmatively demonstrate its chain of authority from one of the specifically enumerated powers of Congress. Punishable by 1) immediate removal from office, 2) imprisonment, 3) fine, 4) forfeiture of pensions and other benefits accruing from service in the legislature. Review to be done by citizen review panels independent of the legislature.

Any citizen shall have standing to challenge the constitutionality of any law, without regard to the effect of said law on that citizen. If such challenge is successful, the law shall immediately be repealed, declared null and void, and all those imprisoned or fined under it shall be released and their fines reimbursed. Officers of the court and members of the legislature are hereinafter held criminally liable for the passage or enforcement of laws which cannot pass constitutional muster under citizen challenge. If a citizen challenge is unsuccessful, that citizen may be fined no more than the costs of the hearing.

All unconstitutional laws are to be considered repealed, null, and void, with or without a specific citizen challenge. For the purposes of this proposal, an unconstitutional law shall be one which does not have as its ultimate source of authority one of the specific, enumerated powers of Congress.

WTF is Obama Smoking

AND WHY WON’T he share? Cuts deficit? If it does, it’s only because it’s a white elephant built on the backs of the American taxpayers. Tired of stealing everything they have to spend, the Feds decide to enslave the populace by telling us how to spend the rest.

And if you think you’ll have any left when this lot get through with you, think again.

And another thing: when will the news report the facts instead of just the he-said/she-said? Just once, it would be nice to hear the bubble-headed bleach-blonde say, “A bill that is, as a matter of fact, in direct violation of the enumerated powers provisions of the Constitution, and probably won’t past constitutional muster in the Supreme Court, once challenged. The trouble is that the law will be in effect for years before the case comes up for review. And there’s no assurance that the Court will grant certiorari. Back to you, Biff.”

Don’t hold your breath.

If You Look in the Wiktionary Under

DISINGENUOUS there should be a picture of James Hansen and a link to this article. Please to remember he is on the government payroll and has used his position to mouth off about global warming, in violation of government regs about such stuff, and then has the freaking gall to complain that he’s being stifled.

Please to remember that he’s the one who got Patrick Kennedy to shout from some stage at some rally that people who “deny” global warming ought to be arrested, tried, convicted, and execution for treason.

Please to remember that he’s the one who encouraged and participated in violent, destructive protests in the UK.

So now that the public is beginning to have the scales fall from their eyes and have some justifiably harsh reactions to this … this … little turd’s perfidy, he whines like a little titty-baby that he needs a police escort to go spew his lies at some commie circle jerk somewhere?

World’s smallest violin, playing “Hearts and Flowers” just for you, Jimmy boy. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. Fuck off.

Drunk Blogging the Second Amendment

UH. OH. Alger’s got into the Jim Beam on a Friday night. Let’s see if he can pull this off without embarrassing hisself. And whether he can tell if he’s gonna. Embarrass hisself, that is.

Caleb had a thing. I lost the link ’cause I opened my own blog link in the window. But you know Caleb. He’s the hope of tomorrow — the member of the younger generation what’s gott his shit together. Knows his stuff. Understands American ideals and morality. And knows his Battlestar Galactica, too, I might add. So you know who I mean, and you can find his blog at Gun Nuts dot whatsis on your own without my help, ’cause I’m too sloppy to fumble-finger a copy-link., Thing.

What Caleb mentioned was that some idiot in Indy has hired some police official from Back East aways. (Well, THERE’s your problem!) And the guy is sayin’ “The thing is, there’s too many guns on the street.” Yeah, right. I see guns all over the place. Riding Razors down the sidewalk in rush hour. Skateboarding across Fountain Square — grinding along the benches on Fifth Street. WAY too many guns on the street.

Farglin’ idiot. Not me, the guy who talked that smack about too many guns.

Anyway.

Meanwhile, back at the oasis, New Jovian Fumblebolt has this article ’bout what’s a reasonable gun law. Same problem linkin’ to him as Caleb. But you guys all know NJT, so don’t give me grief if you can’t find this.

Here’smy thing: there’s no such thing as a reasonable gun law. A “compelling public interest” that limits an individual right is… no that’s not right … OUGHTTA be an anath… anesthet… ::urp:: anathema to a free people. That’s people collective, not people… er… whatever the else is. I mean wha’ tha’ fock! How can there be a compelling public innerest? What is that, annyway? Ya dig? All it is is … is … a frigging excuse for those statist bastards to infringe on your rights! (Man.)

The Second Amendment to the Constipation says, “the right of the people and so-on and so-forth SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” It doesn’t say, “except when the government thinks it’s not reasonable to let this stand unmolested.” I mean: FUCK! That doesn’t sound reasonable to me at ALL! It’s about as UNreasonable as you can get. An’ … since laws can’t contradick the COnsitooshun, there’s not such thing as a reasonable (that’s sarcasm, for those of you who flunked poetics in English class) limit on the law.

An’, yes, Dolly, before you say it, that includes the concept of “prohibited” persons. JESUS aitch Kee-RISTE on a friggin Ritz cracker. THe first think the futterin’ government does is go and infringe a right. And all of you go along with it! “Totally reasonable,” you say.

Why?

A felon is either in-custody, or he is not. If it he’s in, he’s not allowed any rights, and thus the problem of weapons is theereticully moot. But once he’s out, he’s (in theery), paid his debt to society. He is no longer a felon. And, under our prespos… er… pre-supposition… er, presUMPtion of innocents, can’t be one until he’s convicted of another =crime. Saying he MIGHT commit a crime because he already has amounts t’ prior restraint. Or weak sentencing guidlines, one… I mean, if a guy’s sentence doesn’t cure him, you haven’t sentencd him to long enough and maybe next time you should learn your frigging lesson. But that doesn’t mean you get to build this whole edifice directed at ‘fringin’ MY rights to keep him from exercisin’ HIS, when whatever.

Now, if rights are totally unreasonable, what about when they come into conflict with one another. Like: my right to keep and bear arms conflicts with your… Wait! YOur what?

How about the right to free speech versus the right of free association?

No conflict. You don’t associate with me, you don’t have to listen to my speech.

So what’s reasonable about infringing on people’s rights? It isn’t, I say. Who’s with me?

::faceplant on bar:: ::snore::

Dolly update: As y’c’n see, Alger did manage to embarrass himself. So, while he sleeps that off, let me try to clean up after him just a bit. Caleb’s item about the new whosis of whatsis in Indy is here. New Jovian Thunderbolt’s article (as Tam says) dissecting — scorn quotes — “reasonable” gun laws is here. I apologize on Alger’s behalf for his calling NJT Newe Jovian Fumblebolt. In his inebriation, I’m sure he thought it was a clever pun, and meant no disrespect. If that’s not it, by the time Alger appears in public, I will ensure he says it is. I’d like to disclaim that the views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the staff, management, or owners of BTB, but you-all know that’s a crock. Thing is, I pretty much agree with what Alger was trying to write, even if he did it so poorly. I hope this is a lesson to him.

Luvya! L8R

–Da Doll

Quote of the Day

“We can spend the rest of our lives fighting these one hundred different fronts. Or we can realize that no matter what your issue is, be it 2nd Amendment, Land Rights, Health Care, Cap and Trade, Children’s Protective Issues, Taxes, the Federal Reserve, or whatever. Each of these issues had the same root cause. That cause is a Federal Government who has ignored the limits placed on them by the Constitution. The Government we suffer under is a usurper Government. An illegitimate body operating outside all legal boundaries established at this government’s founding.

“We can continue to stand apart in sullen indifference to those fellow patriots who are focused on a different usurpation than we, or we can UNITE behind that Constitution. All patriots recognize that document as the essential foundation of what it means to be American.”

–Bob Wright

(Spotted at Sipsey Street Irregulars.)

Not what are you against. That turns into a “What do you got?” situation. No. Say what you are for. The Constitution is it in this country, this time, this fight.

Just don’t let them tangle you up in the whole: “You want to dial it back to the original Constitution? Is that the pre-Bill-of-Rights Constitution, or the pre-blacks-are-3/5-of-a-person Constitution, or the slavery is OK Constitution?”

Remember — as we learned (or relearned) after Harry “Dingey Harry” Ried’s outburst of last week or so: it was the Democrats who fought the elimination of slavery from the original country. It was the Democrats who pushed for the expansion of slavery and forced the Missouri Compromise. It was the Democrats who supported the South in the Civil War, fighting for the preservation of slavery. It was the Democrats who formed the Ku Klux Klan, lynched Blacks, and fought Reconstruction. It was the Democrats who fought integration all through the 19th and 20th Centuries. It was Democrats who filibustered against the Civil RIghts Acts of 1957 and 1964-65. It’s the Left which wants — has wanted — to enslave humanity to their vision of Utopia. It’s the Left which fights against the observation of constitutional limits on the Federal government. It was a leftist, a Democrat, a national leader of the party and the Progressive movement — Nancy Pelosi — who, when asked about the constitutionality of a bill, asked, “Are you serious?”

Yes, she may be stupid. But she booted the most serious question that can be asked of a legislator. Her witlessness doesn’t change the fact that she made that odious rejoinder, and it metonymizes the outlook of the radical far-left fringe which now has a death’s grip on the Democrat party, and (more’s the pity) the country.

Whow! That turned into quite the rant.

(Cross-posted to Eternity Road.)

I really Don’t Think

THE TICKING TIME BOMB scenario is a good defense against false accusations of torture. It’s begging the question, and is argumentatively weak.

Work the question from another angle. Like, maybe, what you’re doing isn’t definitionally torture and it’s disingenuous to call it that.

What, I Ask You, Evolutionary

ADVANTAGE IS CONFERRED upon a cat that permits the species to develop the ability to drop a weapons-grade stink bomb in the litter box, seemingly at will?

Do you mean Sky this evening? He just wanted to let you know it was time to scoop the litter.

What gives you that idea? Not saying you’re wrong, mind, just asking.

How about the fact that he didn’t bury it, but left it atop the highest pile of litter in the box. You don’t think that might have been a hint?

A clue, you think?

Duh!

Hmmm.

Oo! Shiny

FLEA OBSERVES some sensible questions on the CAGW issues that aren’t being asked much — and certainly not enough.

Flea has also discovered… Lego Digital Designer. A free download. Ladies and Gentlemen! Start your graphics engines!

Snortle of the Day

I briefly contemplated checking my email and noticed that my United States Constitution app (an essential download for every geeky tea party extremist) needed updating.

I don’t know if it’s an unfortunate sign of the times, or if I was still half asleep, or what but I swear my very first thought was, “Oh no…what did Obama do now?”

– Teh Breda, who is… well, you know.
Observed here.

Quote of the Day

It is telling that these governments fear the aspirations of their OWN people more than the power of any other nation.

– Barack Obama, December 10, 2009
on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize

Utterly no sense of irony whatsoever.

If You Want to Know

WHY THE MUSIC BUSINESS is having such trouble selling product these days, take a look at the outlook of the marketers, as metonymized in the Opinion column of the Devember 12, 2009 issue of Billboard (Sorry, can’t find the thing online, but it’s in the front of the magazine on newsstands – Mary J. Blige is on the cover.) It is, to quote Jeff Goldblum as Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park, a really BIG pile of shit.

There was a reason that music overtook the consciousness of so many people in the ’60s and it didn’t have anything to do with hippie ways or political movements. It had to do with who was running the record companies and their outlook toward their “product.” In fact, I would peg the start of the decline in the industry that we see the other end of today to the period in time when use of the term “product” to describe music became current and acceptable.

While I Don’t

NECESSARILY DISAGREE with this notion from Eric Voegelin (Found On the Right at American Digest)…

“If a government is nothing but representative in the constitutional sense, a representative ruler in the existential sense will sooner or later make an end of it; and quite possibly the new existential ruler will not be too representative in the constitutional sense.”

— Eric Voegelin

…I have long believed that a flaw — possibly a fatal flaw — in our system of government is that it leaves a power vacuum at the top. Not that the power is not there — I’m not sure you can entirely eliminate the potential of a vast governmental entity — but that (in theory, at least) nobody is allowed to use it.

But, if you know anything about human beings, that’s never stopped us before, I’m not sure it ever will.

Now, it appears that the corruption this vacuum works on the government is progressive (pun intended). That is, it doesn’t start out with a value of CORRUPT(.GOV)=11, but rather at a level of 1 or 2. But, as time goes on, the corruption sort of acts like glycosilation, or the accretion of calcium on a stalactite. You may get rid of one corrupt individual, who abused his office to get his hands on the forbidden power and to exercise it, but the thin film of tarnish he put there remains, to be increased by the next one, and so-forth.

So, while, no, the men in Federal office haven’t gotten more or less corrupt over the decades than they were at the Founding, the system has been progressively corrupted over time.

Until today, when the disconnect between the government and the governed observed by Voegelin seems almost complete.

And the citizens are faced with the prospect of ever-increasing encroachments on liberty, ever-more outrageous, coming faster and more furiously than ever before. And we throw up our hands and ask, “What can we do?”

I might suggest that, when we are electing new Representatives and Senators next fall, we make sure to let them know in no uncertain terms that we not only want this juggernaut stopped dead in its tracks, we want its predecessors rolled back. Not just “No more!”, but “REPEAL!”

When Hillary Clinton shrilled that the Right wants to “roll back a century of progress,” my response was, “Damned right we do! Only: you’ve mis-identified the culprit. It’s not just the Right, it’s the whole American people!”

REPEAL!

This realization makes me dubious when I hear the “Do you really want to die on this hill?” advice from the Pick Your Fights crowds (as ably voiced here by Og). I’m not sufficiently confident to deny outright the concept of a strategic withdrawal, but there is something in me that wants to — at the very least — give the enemy so big a bloody nose as to A) make him reluctant to try that again anytime soon, and 2) make it easier (one hopes) to roll back whatever gains he may have made at a later date to be announced …
er… later.

When the enemy lives and dies by incrementalism, giving him incremental victories gives him, well, victories.

Toward a New Disestablishmentarianism

SPEAKING OF MAKING the Enemy die on this hill… I hear that the administration — through its creature, the EPA — is attempting to strong-arm Congress by threatening, in the event of a failure of Congress to act on Cap’n Tax, to impose a command-control regime under the aegis of the Clean Air Act.

The only suitable response must be: “Fine. We’ll just disestablish the EPA. Put that in your pipe and suck the second-hand fumes, why don’t you?

Og responds to me with apropos wisdom that a lone gunman is bound to die on his chosen grassy knoll, were he to try facing down a horde.

Unless, of course, he runs a successful bluff.

Think back over the century just past and think how many bluffs the Left has run. Don’t limit yourself to the American Left, either. For example, consider the Soviet military, which we now understand to have been, to a greater extent in the post-war years, rather than a steely machine, more like a rusty bucket. Reagan called their bluff — with the world’s intelligentsia crying out, “OHNOHE’SGOINGTOGETUSALLKILLED!!!!” — et le poof! the Soviet Union, she is no more.

A perspicatious observer can see (if he looks) that we In The Right are far more numerous and doughty than the enemy on the Left. The pretzeline contortions Harry Reid is having to perform to shepherd the health care debacle through the Senate (a Senate in which the majority has been elected by the best voters stolen money can buy — and (I submit) the majority was only elected in an “Anybody but…” reaction to RINO turpitude.) should clue you.

We outnumber them. And, as Rush has observed, undiluted, full-strength conservatism wins elections. (What he calls conservatism is, as we keep telling ourselves, in truth classical liberalism — or the Enlightenment concepts which informed the Founding of the country.) If we press our case, we won’t “die on this hill” and have a real chance of forcing the enemy to expire there instead. Fortune favors the bold, friends! Take not the counsel of your fears. Make the enemy pay for every inch of ground.

And never forget, our aim is to roll back a century of misbegotten Progressivism.

Dreaming of A

WHITE CHRISTMAS: Not saying it’s the Gore effect per se but… In a different context, somebody (sorry: I forget who) said it ain’t really Christmas if it’s tropical. Which made me think, well… 60 or 70 degrees Eff isn’t exactly tropical, but it’s not Arctic, either. But that’s a more-normal temp around here come Christmas week than what we’re looking forward to. We don’t usually get a storm that threatens business closures until late January at the earliest, and usually mid-February. But here comes one — treetop high and nationwide.

Maybe an annual average increase of one degree Eff isn’t so bad after all?

It Was SondraK’s

BURFDAY YESTIDDY. Go over an wish her lotsa lotsa.

Ooo-ee! Spankin’s?

Yes, Dolly, but not for you.

::pout::

::(Taking pity):: Unless you get too frisky…

::brightens:: Ya think? ‘Cause I can be very frisky!

I’m sure you can, Dolly. I’m sure you can.

Did It Snow

EVERYWHERE ON MONDAY?

I know, I know: weather is not climate. Still, one can’t help a frosty shiver of schadenfreude at how thoroughly the wheels are coming off the People’s Red Wagon, a.k.a. the Great Climate Change Swindle.

Just So We Don’t Look Like

WE’VE GONE ALL DEAD-air on you…

The clementines from California appear to be luscious this season. It’s coming on the time of year when fresh citrus starts showing up in the produce sections of your grocery. And the clementine mandarin oranges packaged under the brand name California Cuties are particularly juicy and tart.

Of course, if the eco-nazi terrorists of the Left coast have their way with Lady Liberty, you won’t be able to have fresh citrus in the winter unless you live within 50 miles of the groves. You see, they think that produce which travels farther than that to market is evilll. And you shouldn’t be allowed to buy it. Doesn’t matter if it’s cheaper. Doesn’t matter if it’s better use of land. (Not saying it is, just saying the watermelons don’t appear to care.) Doesn’t matter if the mode of transport — rail — is a lefty favorite and the most cost effective and fuel-efficient on a gallons-per-ton-per-mile basis. It takes so-called “fossil” fuels to drive the transport, and THOSE exhaust carbon dioxide, so they have to go.

Doesn’t matter their all-important article of faith is the scientific fraud of the age. You’re not to have your citrus.

So, enjoy that scurvy.

Leftist Shibboleths

FISH, BARREL BANG!.

From Knowledge is Power.

Really! The reason we spend so much on medical care in this country is not that it costs too much, it’s that we spend it. That might sound like a tautology, but — trust me — it’s not. Prices might go up faster, and with less apparent justification, than in some other areas but that’s because of a marked absence of the natural signals that prices provide in a free market. There’s no incentive to keep prices low, and every incentive to keep them high. But that’s not because the market is free and open; it’s not. That’s because government has emplaced such perverse incentives through regulation and the tax codes.

“Affordable” means you can afford it. If you have the money and can pay for something, it’s affordable. The concept is meaningless when it’s applied to rights.

–First of all, NOTHING has gotten cheaper over the years. With the exception of perhaps some electronics, who get cheaper when a new model comes about, everything else has gotten more expensive. I’m sure that you have noticed that just by going to the corner grocery store.

Typical economic illiteracy. Of course, any idiot who confuses price increases with monetary inflation — as reversing cause and effect — wouldn’t know a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy if it sunk its big donkey teeth into his ass and chomped down good and hard.

If businessmen had their way, prices would stay the same, because businessmen know (as government pukes seem incapable of apprehending) when you raise prices, it makes it harder to sell your stuff. The only reason businessmen raise prices (absent collusion, which — in a well-regulated (i.e., working as it should) market — means absent government collusion) is because costs have increased. Why do costs increase? Most usually, the root cause is inflation. Which is caused by … anyone? Beuller? Right. The government, expanding the money supply beyond what the market can absorb. I.E., printing money — usually to pay off debt.

When I was a kid, I could buy a candy bar for a nickel. Prices had been pretty stable for a long time. Then Nixon uncoupled the dollar from any precious metal standard and gave it over exclusively to the Federal Reserve’s fiat currency. (Anybody remember Silver Certificates?) And we had Weimar-style inflation in the ’70s. Jimmy Carter caught the brunt of the blame for it, but Nixon and Ford really deserve more — to the extent that Presidents really have any control over that stuff. In the ’80s, candy bars started going for 50 cents. Same candy. Same package. Same value, as in the amount of time somebody had to work for it, but it looked like the candy bar cost more. But what really happened was that government stole 90% of the value of your money. Any money you earned before the inflation was worth that much less afterwards.

People who don’t pay attention might see the change in the price tag and not realize what actually happened. That’s not an excuse, just an indicator of their stupidity.

–deregulation of the free market is what got us into this mess, to advocate more deregulation is ludicrous.

BZZZZT! Oh, I’m so sorry! You’re WRONG. What got us into this mess is gratuitous government intermeddling in the market, and the only way to escape the morass is to tell the government to butt the hell out. The kind of abuses we see in today’s so-called “market failures” (a real term of art in idiocy, that) can only occur with the connivance of government. Without it, no single corporate entity has the throw weight to force people into compliance with unfavorable situations. And that’s what’s happened with — for example — the Community Reinvestment Act, which mandated, through an escalating series of bad laws passed over thirty years, that those in the business of lending money on real estate (a bad risk if there ever was one) no longer pay as much attention to the would-be borrower’s ability to pay as before — particularly if the borrower is a member of a connected — er, protected, I mean — group.

– advocating that it’s ok to exclude people from health care on the basis of pre-existing conditions? So we’re saying that it’s ok to exclude people on a whim depending on how much money this real or perceived pre-existing condition could cost…

Your house is on fire, so you should be able to go to State Farm or Allstate and buy a policy that will make you whole? And the policy should cost one penny less than the replacement cost of your house? And you pretend to understand the nature of insurance? I laugh up my sleeve at your ignorance. I fart in the general direction of your foolishness.

And, by the way, you’re not blocked. You just have to pay a higher premium to get coverage. Unless, that is, the government forbids the charging of premiums on an actuarial basis, in which case, yes, coverage might not be available. Quelle surprise. They’re not saying, “No soup for YOU!” They’re saying, “We’re not allowed to sell it to you at any rate but a loss. Sorry, not as stupid as you seem to be.”

–This whole dribble is a push by the insurance companies who are obviously peeing their pants because if we go to a third party system they won’t be able to make the gazillion of dollars they are presently making off people’s backs.

You know, nobody — yet — is required to have health insurance coverage. That would be dictatorial, tyrannical and draconian. Un-American, evennn. It is possible and even legal for you to go out and simply pay for your medical care out of your own pocket — cutting out the middle man. The only reason this system has any traction at all is due to the Internal Revenue Code provisions that make it tax deductible for employers to pay for their employees’ coverage, but not for individuals. (And even that’s not really true. You can deduct medical expenses if you file long-form and itemize. And you can even buy individual first-dollar HMO coverage, if you don’t mind paying for your medicine twice.) In other words, the government has jiggered the rules so people think the only way they can get medical care is to pay somebody else to pay for it. And if you think the insurance companies pay out more to medical providers than you pay them in premiums, well… I know of a bridge to Kentucky you might be interested in buying.

What? You think the insurance companies should work for free? What are you, in favor of slavery or something? Of course they expect to get paid. It’s how they make a living. And, if they didn’t take in more from you than they paid out in your medical expenses, well… they wouldn’t be in business very long, now, would they?

A sensible person would pay out-of-pocket for quotidian expenses and only insure against catastrophic illness, requiring sudden, large bills — as from a stay in a cardiac intensive care unit or bypass surgery or something, thus saving the “insurance” premiums for the first-dollar coverage. But that’s not feasible for a lot of folks, because they have to participate in their employers’ plans, which frequently don’t offer a lot of options as to how things are structured.

But then, they’d be more aware of the costs of everything they’re consuming, medically speaking. And they might start price shopping. In reaction to which, the medical field might start sharpening its pencils, as we put it in the real business world of buying and selling, and actually — gasp! — compete on the basis of price. And prices might react like they do in the market — the free, unregulated market that is, you know, the natural way people arrange their affairs when left to their own devices and not be-bothered by meddling government bureaucrats and greedy, power-hungry politicians.

Shocka!

The Thing With Proxies

FOR TEMPERATURES — using analogs of data rather than the real thing, such as tree rings for temperature — is they are worthless if they’re not calibrated.

You have to know to a reasonable degree of certainty that {THIS} is at least ROUGHLY equivalent to {THAT} or the whole process is just so much masturbatory exercise. A good workout, but to little real effect.

So you take a bunch of observations of things you think might be decent proxies in times and places where you can correllate them to actual measurements.

But if your measurements are bogus — which the surface stations initiative has show the historical climatological networks pretty much … are — then the analogous proxies … pretty much are.

But it’s always the cover-up that really gets you.

We shouldn’t let the whole issue of ClimateGate — as fun as it is — blind us to the bigger picture. In order to scotch Cap’n Tax and Obamacare and all the rest of the Left’s collectivist snake oil nostrums, we need to persuade people to our point of view. So we must keep pounding on Roger (the Real King of France)’s lesson — that virtually all elected Democrats are filthy liars — until everyone realizes the truth of the matter.

Point out to everyone you know — but especially your friends who claim to vote independent (the dreaded Swing Voters) — that the whole Global Warming hoax is of a piece with everything else the Left tries to do — lies bent on enslaving you to ineffectual solutions to non-problems. And they shouldn’t fall for it. Any of it.

No proxies. Insist on the real things. Friends don’t let friends vote Democrat.

Missing the Point

WARREN MEYER posts an elegant takedown of a defense of the warmiasts’ conjectures by noting that the defenders of the faith miss the main arguments the skeptics make.

A lot of people — self included — let a more salient point get buried in all the madness, and it is this:

The skeptics do not have to prove that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is not so. The warmists have to prove that it is. It has been argued all along by the skeptics that the warmists have not proven their case. Now, the ClimateGate files reveal that they knew all along their case was weak.

No. The CRU dump does not prove that global warming is a fraud. Global warming was demonstrated to be a fraud a long time ago. The CRU dump shows that the fraudsters knew it.

Did I Hear Right

DID HILLARY CLINTON (the smartest woman in the room) really say she wanted to leave the door open for Taliban who abjure violence and seek to integrate peacefully into Afghan society? Is she really that stupid or ignorant? Does she really not apprehend the nature of the Taliban?

No We Are Not

funny pictures of cats with captions
see more Lolcats and funny pictures

One More Time

PEOPLE WHO GO ALL ECUMENICAL with the warmiast crowd and say, “beyond doubt, the earth is/has been warming” obviously haven’t been paying attention.

It doesn’t frakkin’ matter how many data sets “corroborate” the “warming.” The only ones with decent global coverage are the satellites, and they don’t have enough resolution in either time or space. The rest of them are pitifully inadequate to even track regional climate, let alone global climate. They have too few stations, stations that are poorly sited (and that’s being charitable), stations that are designed for telling you whether to carry your umbrella today not measure global temperature changes across a hundred-year scale, and stations with too short a timeline, or too spotty coverage, to provide even the fuzziest picture of what global temperatures have been like.

As each “dataset” is examined, only those which have been designed for the purpose of tracking global climate and transparent process appear to stand up to scrutiny. The rest have been badly mis-managed, and display all of the earmarks listed above — and then some.

The bottom line is, we don’t know whether the planet is warming because, except for where we’ve looked when we’ve looked, we don’t know what the temperature was in any given time at any given place. And as for the whole planet…

(Don’t make me laugh…)

If the planet is warming, what temperature is it right now? What was it yesterday? The day before?

Since your precious datasets have massive holes in their coverage, and can only be correlated with one another about like Frankenstein’s monster’s body parts relate to each other, it inevitably follows that the very evidence which might falsify your claim has not been recorded. The data points which might refute your claims as to global average temperatures are unknown — though it cannot be denied that they existed at the appropriate points in time. Yes, there was a temperature in Frostbite Falls at Sunset on July 24, 2006. But, since there was no USHCN thermometer there to record it, that temperature was not entered into the “dataset.” This renders the dataset incomplete and irrelevant as regards any resemblence to the reality we are trying to mapy. Given the enormously complex structure of the atmosphere, making claims with insufficient information is tantamount to … well … fraud.

The “fact” of global warming: Has. Not. Been. Established. I submit to you it cannot be established to any degree of reliability. And, since the claim cannot be substantiated, it cannot be falsified, it is not, therefore, science. Kyew, as they say, ee-dee.

Oh, and don’t EVEN come over here with that bullshit about being able to interpolate. If you don’t know enough about chaotic systems to know you CAN’T reasonably interpolate them BECAUSE they’re chaotic, then you’re not qualified to play in this game. If you don’t have hard data, you know fuck-all about the conditions you claim to be mapping.

Now, it’s true that science always has to operate with less-than-ideal data. Quite true. You can’t get all the readings you want, and they won’t all be of the quality you’d like. We all know what that means: you do more runs. You refine your instrumentation. You refine your techniques. You come back next season and do it again. And, when your claims have to do with minuscule changes in temperature (finer-grained than your instruments are capable of detecting) over a hundred-year time scale, “next season” takes a long time.

And you sure as shit don’t turn the world upside down on bum data and a single run.

Stop trying to buttress your scientific ecumenical street cred with bogus claims. That dog won’t hunt.