We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, June 30. 2009
I saw this morning how our wise and attentive-to-detail Administration wants to control our lightbulbs and lamps. I guess this is what substitutes for a serious energy policy. (I want nuclear. Why waste it all on bombs?)
I have a better idea: Make air conditioning illegal. Can you imagine how much reduction of coal- and natural gas-burning that would accomplish? Lights are just a teeny bit of energy use: a/c is huge. Plus the gummint could really stick it to all those Southerners and those evil businessmen in tall buildings who do not vote correctly. (Come to think of it, why not make elevators illegal too?)
Get rid of a/c, and everybody can go around cool and mostly nekked, like this Theo gal:
Related: The Admin's "Energy Czar" never read the cap & trade bill. What does an "energy czar" do, then? Fly around and give speeches and tell people to overinflate their tires?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Barrister my friend ... First we need to make those damn compact fluorescent bulbs illegal. They're expensive and don't last as long as they are reputed to. They give an ugly, glary light. And when they break, you have to call in a haz-mat team to dispose of them because they release significant amounts of mercury into your nice clean house.
This abomination was inflicted on us by Pelosi and her fellow Democrats after the lobbyists for the compact fluorescent bulb manufacturers got to her with hugely generous contributions to her Nancy-needs-money fund.
The bulbs are dreadful, and an increasing number of consumers know it. I've done my own marketing survey over the past year, every time I shopped for groceries. There is only one small section of shelf space devoted to the compact fluorescents amid several shelves full of incandescent bulbs of all sizes and types. And that narrow little line of compact fluorescents never seems to diminish.
This is the Democrats trying to interfere with the free market again. Consumers tried these bulbs and found them wanting. Now, if the domineering Democrats try to enforce their rulings, we'll find ourselves with a thriving black market in incandescent bulbs.
And I"ll be first in line.
I agree, those CFL bulbs produce an unpleasant and harsh hue.
If it's all about energy, how about stop nibbling around the edges and get serious ...go after the oil that's available here, take advantage of the coal reserves.
It appears the lady on the beach is enjoying a cool/cold breeze from somewhere.
The curly bulbs make ugly light. Incandescents make warm lovely light, curlies --even the newer ones which went balls-out to look incandescent, make u*g*l*y light.
in the wintertime where i live, one can heat the house merely by leaving plenty of lights on. No heaters needed, most of the winter. Plus you got the light.
I beg to differ on CFL bulbs. I have no problem with them. In places where I turn lights on and off for a short duration, such as closets and bathrooms, I use incandescent bulbs. It is not cost-effective to use CFLs in such situations, as they burn out quicker if you turn them off before 15 minutes of use. Moreover, the amount of energy saved for a minute of use is trivial.
Regarding calling a Haz-Mat team if you break a CFL bulb: use some common sense. The amount of mercury in the bulb is trivial. Throw it in the garbage. Only brain-dead liberals would call in a Haz-Mat team in that situation.
Banning air conditioning: while it will never occur, I consider it not a bad idea. I use AC for two hours a year in TX. Haven't used it yet. Throw out polyester and long pants. Substitute in cotton, linen, and shorts. Copious amounts of cold water also help.
Legislators and energy czars approving legislation they haven't read: that is a nightmare. We should make it a felony for legislators to vote for bills they haven't read. Or as others have suggested, limit the size of bills to make it more feasible for legislators to read what they vote on.
Crank up the nukes. As Obama has decided to shut down Yucca Mountain in Nevada, an alternative disposal site would be Senator Reid's backyard.
Gringo ... Just where in Texas do you live? Here in Houston we just finished two weeks of 98 to 104 degrees every damn day. And it's not over yet. And if you can endure that without air conditioning, you're an alien living in an alternate universe. Tell you what ... you leave my air conditioning alone and I won't criticize your choice in illumination and your vision flaws.
Hotter than Houston. AC is for wimps. Them as need AC should move back to Yankeeland. My TX ancestors survived sans AC; I can do the same. It is better to live "al clima"- adjust your body to the temperature. I thus go with wool and minimal heating in the winter, also.
I was born and raised in NE. Those who complained about winter stayed inside. I was outside a lot. Cold house in winter. My childhood bedroom was in the 50s on winter nights. Adjust yourself to the temperature. Much healthier.
As I don't pay your AC bill, that is your concern, not mine. Downstairs it stays lower 80s nearly all the time without AC.
Haha... a man who considers the wide view of the B.'s suggestion. Good point and same here, John.
Gringo, nothing really wrong with your suggestions and reasons in and of themselves. I grew up in coastline Florida without A/C and have also spent a few winters in the Northeast. But I'll tell you what, you'll take my A/C from my cold (or hot) dead hands. I wonder how old you are, not that I'm asking, because extremes at either end are much easier to take when one is young.
But the thing is is that we shouldn't even have to consider the B.'s solution, even if it does have its attractive aspects. Go nuclear and we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
I'd bet gringo lives up on the Llano Estacado --where humidity ain't even in the dictionary.
or in the Davis Mountains. That's it, Amarillo or Alpine (or near environs). Folks in both areas can and do still make do with the old so-called "swamp coolers" in the winders, 'cuz thar ain't no humidity.
Where I live, it's much more humid than the Permian Basin/Llano Estacado/Big Bend, lemme tell ya.
Las estatcas son usado (pongen en la tierra) para hacer una ruta a traves en la 'grasses' demasiado alto para ver, ciento cincuenta anos pasado atras. Por los colonos que viajan hacia "El Oeste Loco".
Que buena información. Me preguntaba siempre sobre el origen del nombre. Gracias.
De nada. Si, estoy de acuerdo - los origenes son siempre cosas muy interesantes de la historia.
Okay ...you boys go right ahead..
and when you're all finished,
you're gonna have to clean it up.
This will clean it up --one of the boundaries of the Llano Estacado, it's an almost secret Grand Canyon (smaller of course than the Big One) hardly anyone knows about. Site of the Comanche's Last Big Stand. Palo Duro Canyon about an hour from Amarillo. Take a look at it:
good picher of Lighthouse Rock, which (putting 2 and 2 together)had to've been named by some old salt from 'back east' --
My goodness, it is beautiful, I've heard of the Palo Duro Canyon, but never visited. The Grand Canyon stole my heart.
Now,the Palo Duro is a must see.
For finding out about the Llano Estacado, remember that Wikipedia is your friend, as long as you don’t use it for politically controversial topics. The lefty moonbats tend to control much of the Wikipedia discourse on politically controversial topics. As far as I know, the Staked Plains are not politically controversial. At least not until Odessa Permian plays some East TX team for the state high school football championship.
Technology we should see more of:
Of all weather related deaths, the heat of summer takes a toll greater than all.
When day time temps are near 100f, the humidity near 100%, night temps stay above 80f ...
a heart with a few miles on it will make the low pressure light flicker at first and finally stay on steady & bright.
Factor in a High Ozone level (03), not good.
The best advise is to stay inside with the A/C
and fans on, with a jug of cold lemon-aid.
Powder River Basin coal plus nuclear plus Alaska, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Gulf of Mexico natural gas = US energy independence.
Perhaps for several centuries.
I'd watch what you suggest, even in jest! Remember that we are in the hands of professional community organizers (like, you know, the "shirts of color" that we eastern European Jews had gotten to know so intimately), and that their only purpose in life to make a target population's life unbearable until the target population surrenders and accepts what the community organizers want to impose on them!
A competent community organizer, working on the assumption that sex and skin color spontaneously give him/her/it superior ideas and therefore the right to direct your life, might tell you that a/c is a want, not a need...
If you really want to save money and energy, make A/C and heating illegal in Washington, DC, specifically in the Capitol building, the legislative office buildings. Then Congress would only be in session for three, maybe four months of the year. The rest of the time it would either be too hot and humid or too cold for the Congresscritters to stay in DC, meaning they'd have less time to spend our money on stupid things or raise our taxes to pay for all the stupid things they want spend it on. We'd save BILLIONS!
Gringo ... You just did a real slick job of tap-dancing your way far from the original subject of this discussion, changing it from a discussion of a denial of free trade by the present Democrat-run government, to whether we ought to use our air conditioning or not, and how often. Pretty slick, Gringo.
But let's get back to what we were really talking about, shall we? The Democrat Congress intends to deny us Americans the right to purchase incandescent bulbs, a benign invention with no downside. The bulbs have been on the market since Thomas Edison invented them more than 100 years ago. We Americans love them, and they are made in a wide variety of wattages, from 15 to more than 500 watts. We use them for all sorts of applications. Occasionally they break. Frequently they burn out, and then we throw them away in the trash. Again, no downside.
But because lobbyists for the compact fluorescent bulb manufacturers are unhappy with the free market's reception of their inferior product, they whined to Congress that they weren't getting a fair share of the market. Money and favors may have changed hands. Certainly good sense and freedom of choice in a free market took another hit, and greedy Congressional folks decided to mandate the death of incandescent bulbs as of 2011. The hell with the free market, they said.
I get the idea, Gringo, that you feel a need to decide what my behavior, and the behavior of others, should be, whether it's what light bulbs we buy or where we set our air conditioning or what else we do with our private lives. This makes me think that you belong to the Busybody Brigade on the liberal side of the political spectrum, rather than the grown-up, conservative, live-and-let-live side.
I sure hope I'm wrong.
Target found, locked on, and poofed.
I see poofed is not a word. It is now, least in my world. Similar to blowing seeds off a dandelion in that Southern heat.
Poofed. Why not! Language needs that little bit of malleability. See Maggie's Farm: http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/11831-Dictionaries.html
Here's a little word play...let's see if you get it: Obama poofed many of his constituents with his position on DOMA.
I think we could go on like this for hours! But the topic is A/C and heat. Here's my thinking...the picture of the young beauty enjoying the A/C is going to disappear and reappear many times on Maggie's. Nevertheless, goddammit, keep the government away from her A/C!
that made me think of Henry Waxman at the same time i was looking at her --i blinked, sneezed, farted and hiccupped all at the same time and ended up crosseyed and left handed
Gringo ... You just did a real slick job of tap-dancing your way far from the original subject of this discussion, changing it from a discussion of a denial of free trade by the present Democrat-run government, to whether we ought to use our air conditioning or not, and how often. Pretty slick, Gringo.]
Yes, pretty slick to talk about AC when this was the title of the thread: A simple solution: Make a/c illegal. Pretty slick indeed. When Mr. Swift talked about eating Irishmen (Modest Proposal), I doubt he thought people strayed from the topic when people discussed eating said Irishmen.
I also note there was very little detail at all in the thread about light bulbs, just about the following: our wise and attentive-to-detail Administration wants to control our light bulbs and lamps.
Much more space in the thread devoted to making AC illegal. That is what I responded to. Apparently you didn’t like my response. So be it. I have been a contrarian all my life, without overtly seeking out contrary positions. Rather, that is where my thinking leads. I am rather accustomed to people disagreeing with me.
I expressed opposition to the Cap and Trade Bill. That does not exactly support your surmise “I get the idea…” I also expressed support of nuclear energy. I also stated that I used incandescent bulbs when I considered them appropriate. Do YOU get the idea?
Re CFL/incandescent, I will only say the following: it is rather foolish to have lights imported from 5,000 miles away instead of being made locally. In that sense, I see some problems coming up. The Han wish us no good. In that sense, free trade has its shortcomings, security-wise.
My parents taught me frugality and simplicity. Frugal: conserve. Sounds conservative to me. IMHO, it is pretty damned stupid to be cold in the TX summer because some BLOOMING IDIOTS have the temperature down to the lower 70s. Cold fingers I can accept in the winter. I see no need to accept them in the summer. That has been my point of view for decades, and I am not changing over to support stupidity just to show that I am doing “correct thinking.” One reason I left the liberal side was that I got tired of being informed that I should line up on A, B, C, D, E…all of them, when I only agreed with A, B, E.
If disagreeing with you means that I am a member of the dreaded BusyBody Brigade, so be it. I am reminded of a conversation back in my liberal grad school days, when I pointed out that inflation put one into a higher tax bracket without any corresponding change in real income. My even more liberal roommate replied, "That's very right-wing thinking." So be it.
it wasn't personal i don't think, gringo --it's just "there it is again" --the mendacious over-reach by the left has pizened yet another well, has politicized 'conservation' --which ort to be, right after foreign policy, the most ecumenical of issues. Just look at a Polar Bear now --doesn't the image kind of irk you? We used to call the phenom "co-option" --as in "Polar Bears have been co-opted by Henry Waxman".
buddy larsen, I think you're right.
To take the liberty of saying it another way:
These are frustrating and trying times for people that hold to the same values of, MM, BD, Meta, Gringo,Skookumchuk, Jephnol, AVI, jappy, Luther, Leag, Joy Bliss and all the many other upstanding farm hands who come here to share and find comfort in something that is true and meaningful to us all.
Add to the mix, the sometimes difficult chore of clearly communicating through the written word, and it might appear that we are experiencing causalities from friendly fire...hopefully not.
" ...the sometimes difficult chore of clearly communicating through the written word, and it might appear that we are experiencing casualties from friendly fire.."
Nice comment, Ron. I think we have plenty of casualties, but no deaths. I think being low dog on the totem pole has left lots of conservatives frustrated because with no leader in sight, we're tabula rasa to whatever it was that 'was' a conservative. People are making up names and playing with the language in the hope of defining us, and it's looking bleak. I've heard neo-con, of course, but now, Pre-Fab Con, paleo-con, and one hydra-con, all of which means we are a little nuts and ready to fight.
I think it's good, really. It's better than giving up and floating two feet off the ground hoping Charles Krauthammer will put some lead in our shoes by running for president, bringing us all back to the right page and making us Hammer-cons.
yep --nice comment. The one about the a/c, fans, and ice cold lemonade was welcome, too!
Five Suggestions for Ineffective Blog Postings
1) Throw the kitchen sink and everything else into the posting. Ignore the KISS principle.
Do not write brief, concise postings such as the following: “In addition to banning AC, the thread talked initially about the Administration wanting to control our lightbulbs and lamps. What is your opinion on that?”
While that may be the question you want answered, obscure it by writing over 300 words. Bring in the kitchen sink, and much more. In addition to annoying people, it is much more entertaining.
2) Needlessly annoy people by making assumptions about them that you are not prepared to sustain.
Here is an assumption: “I get the idea, Gringo, that you feel a need to decide what my behavior, and the behavior of others, should be, whether it's what light bulbs we buy or where we set our air conditioning or what else we do with our private lives.”
There is no way the poster can sustain such an assumption. For example, I previously made a statement that directly contradicted the above assumption: ”As I don't pay your AC bill, that is your concern, not mine.” The even more broad-based part of the assumption- “..or what else we do..” is even more unsustainable.
3) Needlessly annoy people by making unfounded statements about their online comments that do not stand up to examination of the text.
Consider this comment. ”You just did a real slick job of tap-dancing your way far from the original subject of this discussion. ….Pretty slick, Gringo.”
Upon examination of the facts, this accusation does NOT stand up. For example , consider the TITLE of the piece. A simple solution: Make a/c illegal. Of the 154 words that The Barrister wrote on the thread, 86 referred to AC. I can hardly be accused of “a real slick job of tap-dancing” from the topic of the thread when my discussion referred to the title of the thread, and to what the majority of the thread discussed.
4) Accuse people of doing “bad” things while ignoring that you have been documented doing similar things yourself. Physician, heal thyself.
A poster said the following: “I get the idea, Gringo, that you feel a need to decide what my behavior…should be, whether it's what light bulbs we buy …or what else we do with our private lives. This makes me think that you belong to the Busybody Brigade…" .
The poster previously said “First we need to make those damn compact fluorescent bulbs illegal.” I do agree that it is my opinion that I and others should use CFL bulbs where appropriate . However, the advocate of overreaching state power, a.k.a. the BusyBody Brigade, in this case is not me, but the poster. In no case did I state that incandescent bulbs should be illegal- in fact I stated I used them where appropriate -whereas the poster stated that CFL bulbs should be illegal. Which would infringe on MY choice, thank you very much.
5) Needlessly annoy people by condescending to them.
This makes me think that you belong to the Busybody Brigade on the liberal side of the political spectrum, rather than the grown-up….side.
I find this remark very condescending. Perhaps an eighteen year old would assent to being addressed that way, but I am no longer eighteen. Also note this remark also annoys by making an assumption about somone that the poster cannot sustain. A twofer.
People who are needlessly annoyed, falsely accused and condescended to see no need to respond to a poster’s questions. At least that is my point of view as “an alien living in an alternate universe.”