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.
How the O has lost voters like me: Althouse. She quotes Chris Rock: "'He speaks so well' is some sh*t you say about ret**ded people that can talk." I think Ann A. was duped by her own wishes. Quite related: Was Chris Matthews born yesterday?
Speaking of challenges to conventional wisdom, the Pajamas Media article on governmental gridlock is an interesting one. Generally, we are expected to praise an active federal or state government, for "getting things done." Trouble is, many times what gets done by this active government is not beneficial to the citizenry. Like the passage of the bloated and ill-designed Obamacare bill that Congress keeps trying to 'Rahm' down our throats.
Some pundits have recently pointed out gently that "sometimes it is better to do nothing." We in Texas have already reached this conclusion. It's one of the reasons that we only allow our state legislature to meet and consider legislation every other year. Keeps the usual political chicanery down to a more controllable level.
Hey ... it works pretty well for us. Maybe the American people should consider instituting it on a national level.
I freely admit I know NOTHING about the John Birch Society but this article seems to imply they are evil because of something they did 45 years ago.
Does this seem a reasonable approach at a time when we need all Conservatives pulling together?
Dont flame me, this is an honest question.
Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels. Another "Woops, we goofed".
But, well, the article does not say if they guessed too high - or too low.
Related: The UK Telegraph has quite a scare story, blaming warming-related Arctic ice loss (again?) for an increase in methane levels and notes (again!) that methane is a much better "greenhouse gas" than CO@ (just like water vapor!).
Unfortunately for the storyline, the article made the mistake of quoting the scientists. A two-year increase does not mean a trend. We have no idea why this is happening. IFit comtinues as a trend it MAY become worrisome.
Personally, I wonder if the increase is from the decaying of all those pigs killed in Egypt because of the "swine flu" and the rotting of all the garbage those pigs are no longer around to eat.
One thing I noticed on the correction to sea level rise is that no where does it say that sea level is not going to. Whether we're talking about 1 centimeter, or 700 centimeter sea level will rise, should conditions continue as they have.
However, any rise is not going to become obvious for a while. When you hear of streets in beach front communities becoming permanently flooded by the sea is when you'll know that the seas have risen. You only have to be patient.
BTW, admitting they were wrong is what scientists do. It isn't always done gracefully, but it is done.
As far as the Barnett Shale Field is concerned, it's very large, and there is another still larger field in the area of New York and Pennsylvania. If one would like to be pi$$ed at Congress for turning its back on our own energy assets in order to keep us in bondage to other countries' energy supplies, and governments, this would be a good place to get angry. If we were allowed to develop these fields, we could save our petroleum to make gasoline and other petroleum products, and we wouldn't be in bondage to anybody. Not even our Congress.