Climate Skeptics See Smoking Gun in Researchers Leaked E-Mails

>> November 21, 2009

Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails - Biology | Astronomy | Chemistry | Physics -

I think ACE had the first
The skull... "It's got flames on it!"

The File: At MegaUpload, thanks to Peaches. (got this from ACE also.)

Warmist conspiracy exposed?
from Andrew Bolt


To Keep My Sanity...

a little diversion now and again is useful. Jeffrey Ellis has a "Thought Experiment on Evolution vs. Creationism" that I found to be most interesting.
Are we "little software people"?


Insiders' Takes

Tevi Troy Former Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services :

Harry Reid will get his 60 votes, but he won't be getting closer to solving the $2.5 trillion cost problem facing American health care."

Also at the Arena (Politico): Lanny Davis Attorney and Democratic strategist say's;
"In the history of politically brain-dead, utterly stupid, completely insensitive comments by an authorized U.S. Government entity -- "task force" I think is what they call themselves -- I would categorize recommendation of this task force that women in their forties not get mammograms because of the "cost benefit" equation of "only" 1/1000 (or is it 1/10,000 or is it who cares? ) of deaths vs. "false positives and unnecessary anxieties" as the worst of the worst of the worst....

'Makes me want to rethink my liberal philosophy of leaning to trust government solutions. Might even lead me to be a conservative."


Maybe there is hope these people will come to their senses.
I'm not holding my breath.

Fox News has these quotes in an article today:
"This is a vote about whether or not you want to fundamentally change the way health care is delivered in this country in a way which massively expands the size of government, the role of government and significantly increases the tax burden, especially for small businesses and cuts Medicare by a dramatic amount of money," Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., told Fox News before Saturday's session began.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called the bill "monstrous"...

I concur.

BackyardConservative has more: Huge New Costs, Major FAIL on Care


The Green-Stained Fingers Of Mary Landrieu ~ From No Sheeples Here...

>> November 20, 2009

"The state of Louisiana will receive an extra $100 million in federal Medicaid funding beyond what every other state will receive. Why, because Harry Reid cannot pass the bill without the support of Landrieu."

"Deep down in their black hearts, the Corruptocrats know that they are bankrupting America and giving a legacy of bankruptcy to our children and grandchildren. They are defrauding this country to get elected over and over again. What these accomplices are doing to this country is unforgiveable."

Couldn't have said it any better.

Read the whole thing at No Sheeples Here: The Green-Stained Fingers Of Mary Landrieu:

C'mon my Louisiana kinfolk. Don't let this happen!


Melt the Phones!

Say Hello to my Little Fed ~ Ruby Slippers
"Ed Morrissey reports the vote to proceed is on for Saturday. Rush reports 97% of bills that succeed in this vote become law. Call your Senator; tell them to start over. "
I say, tell them to quit altogether.


What We Have Here Is, A Failure To Excommunicate

Cassie Fiano has a good point. "For liberals, most of what’s in the Constitution is a problem. They have to dig and distort and pervert in order to get their liberal fantasies passed. Or, they can do what Sen. Jeff Merkley did, and boil the entire Constitution down to just two words, and ignore everything else: general welfare..."
Read the rest here. 
2010 can't come soon enough for me.


Senate Health Scare Bill Update

Heritage Foundation points out that the new Reid HC bill in the Senate is "A Health Bill Nobody Believes In"
It "Kills Jobs, Hurts Small Businesses, Hurts Families, Hurts Poor, Hurts States, Funds Abortion [and] Hides True Costs".

One question...
How do we get these morans out of office sooner?

More at The Heritage Foundation's Fix Health Care Policy website


Foo Fighters - Everlong (static image)


Beatles - Blackbird


3am: Insomnia and health care go together...

like milk and vodka. I'm awake. I don't want to be, but I can't sleep for worrying about what Reid and his ilk have dreamed up. Found this...
Ruby Slippers: Taxes, Taxes, Taxes: Oh the Joys of Government Health Care
Also at HotAir
The whole monstrosity is here.
Now I really can't sleep. I'm going to find some arsenic to put in my milk. Maybe that will mix better.
Still playing with the backlink thingy. Hope it works.
~What's this milk obsession lately?


Thursday's Potpourri - Sure Smells Around Here

>> November 19, 2009

NPR Shocker: Attorney General Holder Stumped By Lindsey Graham

Work site arrests of illegals fall dramatically
"The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE)."

Advisory Health Panels Good, Obama’s Super MedPac Bad

Summary of New Taxes in Health Care Bill


Go Call Your Senator and Tell Them To OPPOSE The Monstrosity That Is Government Health Care!

Have a nice day.


Wednesday Linkfest

>> November 18, 2009

Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist
Human Error Blamed for Crediting New Stimulus Jobs to Nonexistent Places
Lie like a rug.

RS McCain has a conservative for the list:
Allen West: 'Governed by your inferiors'
In a letter to his supporters, retired Army Lt. Col. Allen West quotes Plato -- "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors" -- and talks about the problem of "impostors" in politics
Where is my "like" button?

Obama Warns of Double Dip Recession
America?s big spender in chief warns of over spending.
Which side of the mouth would that come from?


Gateway Pundit Is On the Case...

Posted by GP at 11:29 pm.

I have to ask: does GP ever sleep?
I hope not.


To Read or Not to Read... That Ain't the Question.

>> November 17, 2009

The subterfuge fairy hath visited again.
I just read a piece by Alex Knapp at Outside The Beltway that, quoting another article, says:
"The 1,990-page length of the health reform bill is once again bringing forth demands that members of Congress be required to read the legislation before voting on it. While a seemingly reasonable demand, it is, in fact, a waste of time.
The reason becomes obvious the moment one actually reads legislative language.
For these reasons, reading an actual bill is a completely useless exercise for the vast majority of members of Congress and staff...."

Then, speaking of the article he's quoting, we are directed to "Read the whole thing, which is quite illuminating. The bottom line is that the language of a bill is generally technical and may have impacts on various pieces of existing law. If you’re a member of Congress who is not on the appropriate committee or not involved in drafting the legislation, it’s not necessary to read it. The legal language is there to ensure that particular policies get enacted. The important thing is that the members understand the policy, not the technical legal language." ~ emphasis mine

Read the whole thing?! What? Do as I say, not as your congress do?

If I take this idea  further, I could extrapolate that we might be too stupid to understand the article to which we are being referred. Therefore, we should  just take Alex's word for it that said article tells us what we need to know and sends us to bed with a warm glass of milk, assured once more that our blessed government is doing all it can for our safety and security. Thus, our lawmaker, equally assured, can say "Why would I need to read it? I'll just move on and vote a hearty AYE!" Pass the bill and sign it. No need to understand anything. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

What a load of dung.

Lawmakers should be able to understand what they are voting on. This is not too much to ask. If the language is too tough, let's simplify the language or elect new lawmakers! The halls of Congress have for too long been haunted by language abusing lawyers wedding glorious matrimonies of insidious carnage and passing it off as beneficial legislation. The honeymoon is over.

Thomas Jefferson had a few choice words on the language of lawyers ~ "which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves."

United States Judge and judicial philosopher Learned Hand wrote: "The language of law must not be foreign to the ears of those who are to obey it."

That being said, here is a link to the actual article. I refer you to this to get you to the comments section, where the real beat-down is happening. Scroll down for some actual acumen.


Tuesday's Recommended Reading

Times Online UK reports the Brit's are losing more of their privacy: "Health and safety inspectors are to be given unprecedented access to family homes to ensure that parents are protecting their children from household accidents...." Who would have guessed? There's not a nanny state thing going on over across the pond is there?
Thanks Quint

While we're pond hopping,
Michelle Malkin observes that "Female Conservative Derangement Syndrome has spread across the pond." in response to Sarah Palin? No. Michele Bachmann, even more at Wizbang.
I also like the comment "We are called stiletto conservatives." ~ Schweet! I like stilettos.

And speaking of Michelle Bachmann, she has drawn the ire of a "CREW" of her own. Who plan to file suit over some over hyped something or other. I'm sure that there's no pot/kettle thing going on here. I'm sure that our illustrious apologist in chief has never, ever thought about doing anything of the sort. I'm sure ACORN or SEIU wouldn't have either.

Judge Andrew Napolitano gets it right at "Kiss Your Freedoms Goodbye If Health Care Passes   Why we cannot afford to sit out this fight".

Conservative Buddha links to Discover The Networks expose' of "THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY" ~ This site is going into the links column. Lots of good stuff over there.


Subversive Socialism

From The August Review: "The Socialization of America":
"Socialists are united in their desire to see capitalism destroyed, either forcefully or gradually, and most would rejoice if Christianity were destroyed along with it. Socialists and liberals generally see in Christians "an infallible marker of mental retardation"” (Claremont Review of Books, Winter 2008/09, p. 6)

The Christian worldview endorses sound or hard money, fiscal responsibility, saving for a rainy day, deferred gratification, paying off monthly credit card bills, living within one’s means, etc. Keynesian economics, by contrast, argues for consumption, extravagance, and not providing for the future, arguing that “the great vice is saving, thrift, and financial prudence.” (Keynes At Harvard, p. 63) Keynesians love huge national spending, debt, and high inflation—anathema to Christians and conservatives.

Socialists see capitalism as an evil economic system founded on the concepts of profit, individualism, private property, private business, freedom to buy and sell products and services, etc. Indeed, a working definition of capitalism is “the peaceful and free exchange of goods and services without theft, fraud, and breech of contract.” Capitalism is tailored to individual initiative rather than groupthink or community initiative. Nearly all inventions that have furthered the capitalistic enterprise and blessed humanity in the process have been the result of individual initiative rather than committee, group, or government activity....

...It was Keynes himself who admitted that by "a continuous process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method, they not only confiscate, but confiscate arbitrarily: and while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some [e.g., Al Gore]. The process engages all of the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner that not one man in a million can diagnose"”

Thus it is astounding that Larry Summers, head of President Obama’s National Economic Council and former president of Harvard University, when asked by Charlie Rose “what idea, what person has most influenced your thinking on how to deal with this [financial] mess?” without hesitation answered "Keynes"”

...Following the economic advice of Keynes (huge government spending, debt, and inflation) is kissing the American capitalist system goodnight! His advice is what every socialist would give, even though clear-thinking, common sense Americans know that excessive debt and excessive spending are the main ingredients that created this current financial mess (with the help of Congressional Progressives like Barney Frank hatching socialist schemes in the House of Representatives)."

Read the whole thing.
Kickin' a$$ and naming names.

HT Conservative Buddha


"The Naked Insurance Saleswoman" or "Federal vs State Governance"

>> November 15, 2009

A libertarian friend and I were having a debate on the necessity of car insurance, a conversation which was brought about by Pelosi's asinine health care bill mandating all of U.S. to buy health insurance "Under penalty of death!" ok, that last is a bit of a stretch - under penalty of jail time. Although I could see a situation where the brown shirts come to an uninsured person's door saying "You haven't bought  your health insurance, you're going to jail." (Insurance Ensurers?) To which the uninsured might say: "Over my dead body." One can see where that would end up, with a dead, albeit uninsured ex-taxpayer, problem solved.

But I digress, back to the argument er- discussion. In arguing against mandatory health insurance it was brought up that people are required to buy liability car insurance if they want the "privilege" of driving a car. Fair enough, I say. I should be able to assure to my fellow citizens that, if something goes wrong, whether by negligence or pure dumb luck, that I can pay restitution where needed. I have no problem with this.

"No" said friend, "it's not". He is of the opinion that we should not be required to purchase even liability car insurance. In his opinion, if I understand it correctly, all insurance should be a voluntary thing, letting karma do the work of... doing whatever karma does. I submit that, if that were the case, then at best only the most noble, moral and ethical among us would be insured and at worst none of us would have insurance at all. This is unacceptable in the eyes of our state legislators. They have seen a benefit to individuals having liability insurance for their cars and acted accordingly. I still have no problem with this. He does. While I'm certainly no expert on the constitution, I will try to explain my point a little better.

The main questions, I think, are these:

1. Where does my responsibility to another person begin and end?
Answer: When I, in the course of living my life and exercising my rights, negatively affect another person or their property. Then I have the responsibility to supply a reasonable amount of restitution.

Ahh, therein lies the rub. Reasonable. Who shall best determine what is reasonable liability? The parties involved will surely bicker about the worth of a fender, or a leg, or a house, or a life, or a wife (2 mules?).
Leading to the next question:

2. What if I cannot, or will not supply reasonable restitution to the injured parties?
Answer: Then the matter is for the courts to decide. This is where the states saw a problem and attempted to fix it by requiring everyone who wants the privilege of driving a car to maintain a reasonable amount of liability insurance in case they harmed a person or their property The point here is, it is an issue for the individual states.
I'll get to that by way of this:

3. Is it the federal government's role to determine reasonable liability in matters of persons or personal property?
Answer: No. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that specifically grants this power to the federal government unless it first goes through the state and comes to the federal government through the courts.

* So check this out. It is, to me, the most important thing in the entire discussion.
The main flaw in the H.C. proposal and frankly most federal laws passed in the last hundred years concerning society and personal responsibility is this: The federal government's thinking has changed from QUESTIONING "Does the Constitution specifically grant me the power to do this?" To STATING "The Constitution doesn't specifically OPPOSE it, therefore, it is ALLOWED." In other words, it's like saying "Well, you didn't tell me I COULDN'T". It's an insolent child's justification and it is wrong.

AS a matter of fact, the Constitution did and it still does "Tell them they couldn't". The clause is called the Tenth Amendment, which has been conveniently ignored or forgotten.

It reads:
"Amendment Ten
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The federal government thinks that when they pass a law it is amending the constitution. They are not. A law in itself is not an amendment.  This is no small, quibbling point.
The Constitution and it's Amendments is the litmus test by which we are to MEASURE laws. It should be used to judge a law's fairness with respect to individuals and their property. We have forgotten this basic rule. Our legislators are acting dogmatically to deconstruct our Constitution by creating laws that subvert it. Their dogma is running over our karma. (Car-ma?)

Wait. Wasn't I speaking about car insurance?  Where did that lizard go?
Next question:

4. So, if the insurance question isn't in the federal government's bailiwick, then who's place is it?
Answer: The state is the only place in our system of government where this kind of law can be made. According the Tenth Amendment, the state can in fact, within the parameters of it's Constitution, do whatever it wishes. The state is even allowed to require a person to have liability car insurance. The individual, if he doesn't like it, can move to another, uninsured state although he would be hard pressed to find one except maybe another country, or he could fight it in the courts or at the ballot box or in the state legislature.
Which, in a round about way leads to this question:

5. Why did the founders put the Tenth Amendment in the Constitution?
Answer: It was meant to keep government's power closer to the people. They saw that laws pertaining to and encroaching on individual rights were best kept at the state level. It is close enough and local enough to the people so that if the power is abused,  it is then easier to affect meaningful change either by the ballot or by changing law. The founders knew that if power were given to the federal government over an individual, then the federal
 government would surely abuse such power and use it to acquire more. Recent events are bearing witness to this fact.

The federal government is, against the will of the American people, passing unconstitutional laws that oppress it's citizens. This is by definition, Tyranny. I think if the American people really understood how far the country has strayed from our Founders' defining principles they would be truly shocked and utterly dismayed.
"Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to god." ~ Benjamin Franklin
Read up people. Educate yourselves before it's too late!

Ok, I've got to find my bible and my "The End Is Near" body signs and get to the busiest street-corner now. Don't mind me. I'm a harmless street urchin. I know nothing. No, really. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Wasn't I talking about car insurance?

Related Posts with Thumbnails




You win the "I scrolled to the bottom of the blog award". Which is an empty paper bag of hot air. But then, if you made it this far, that is exactly what you've received. Glad you stopped by.
Please, while you're here, hit he USO tip jar. Thanks.

  © Blogger templates Inspiration by 2008

Back to TOP