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
Thursday, December 22. 2011
Stuck in Ohio with the Memphis blues? Maybe not.
Ohio is great. Just too far from salt water for me, though
One more reason to pray for globalistical warmening: It would reduce malaria
Derbyshire: Dumping on the Quants
Hinderaker: A legend in his own mind
The term is narcissism
This is brilliant, really: A Diseased Economy Awaits the Correct Diagnosis
Brilliant, because he points out that the disease metaphor does not fit reality, leads people astray
So where do I put my money? Worse Than 2008
Me? I am long cash. At last check, $16.37 in my pocket.
How The House Republicans Completely Mishandled The Payroll Tax Cut Debate
Faith-based groups face hard lessons about federal strings
The 5 worst economic ideas of 2011 (and 12 great ones for 2012)
Mayor Calls For Budget Cuts To Offset Millions In Occupy LA Costs
Ankara's "Economic Miracle" Collapses - Changes in Turkey
Navy Loses Shirt on Solar Project at Camp Pendleton
Obama is achieving his goal of higher energy costs
The EPA's Unconscionable War on Fracking
Tracked: Dec 22, 07:20
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Re: Faith-based groups and federal strings - Wasn't the first "faith-based" government grant issued to a guy named Judas Iscariot for thirty pieces of silver?
Can see you guys are just full of "happy" thoughts this morning. Before I get further depressed reading think I'll just go to work. Merry Christmas.
as an aside currently reading Jesus, a biography by Paul Johnson, very good stuff. It's been sitting my reading pile for 2 months and worked its way to the top.
I am long cash. At last check, $16.37 in my pocket.
Let me see - I left the house with$22 and change this morning off to the driving range hit a bucket of balls - $17 and change. Picked up wife, out to breakfast, $12 on debit card, $3 for tip, $14.53 left. Going back to driving range in a few minutes so I'll have $9.53 after. Stop at the convenience store to pickup a six pack of Yuengling lager because one of our friends only drinks Yuengling and we're having a little get together tonight, so that's $9.53 minus $6.45 which leaves me with a grand total of $3.08.
I WIN!! :>)
Just too far from salt water for me, though
Well, I agree with you, but then again, I live on a lake that is the size of Narragansett Bay, has a wider and bigger eco system and is very bio diverse. It's a trade off, but I'm happy with it.
A legend in his own mind
Back when President Obama started his run for President, somebody I really respect back in CT, a Democrat no less, told me that BHO was quite possibly the most self-aggrandizing, narcissistic personality to ever run for the office and that included President Clinton. Guess he was right.
lion’s den, steals lions’ teeth and claws.
SAVE US OBI WAN CHRISTIE - YOU'RE OUR ONLY HOPE!!!
I'm telling you - the more I watch the current crop of GOP candidates, the more I think this is going to be a brokered convention. The base doesn't want Romney and can't settle on who is the best replacement among the rest. Ron Paul isn't viable, Newt is imploding with his big government ideas, poor Michelle hasn't regained any traction, Perry is getting some traction, but he's way too late to be a game changer, the establishment clearly wants Romney, but the base is revolting, Huntsman can't seem to get out of his own way and Santorum is...well a non-entity.
Who will be the nominee? Just throwing something against the wall to see if it sticks, I'd say Ryan/Christie, Christie/Huntsman, Ryan/Romney - I don't think the top slot is going to any one of the current candidates.
And I'm off to hit some golf balls.
I would like to read your take on the MF Global debacle as described by Ann Barnhardt at her website. Scroll down to this entry:
I'm Calling for a General Financial Market Strike
Posted by Ann Barnhardt - December 20, AD 2011 9:10 PM MST
Would that set precedent for any bank to take any deposit?
Bird Dog: One more reason to pray for globalistical warmening: It would reduce malaria.
"Predictions of an intensification of malaria in a warmer world, based on extrapolated empirical relationships or biological mechanisms, must be set against a context of a century of warming that has seen marked global declines in the disease and a substantial weakening of the global correlation between malaria endemicity and climate."
Gething, P.W., Smith, D.L., Patil, A.P., Tatem, A.J., Snow, R.W. and S.I. Hay, 2010. Climate Change and the Global Malaria Recession, Nature.
In other words, even though the expected increased global mean temperature may lead to increased reproductive rates and biting in vectors, this can be more than offset by technological countermeasures against the vector and disease organisms.
Lord knows I'm not an Obama supporter. I think his comments about his place among great presidential achievers is misplaced. But I also think the Powerline article engaged the wrong discussion.
Obama himself says "we need to do more work on the economy" (ha! That's an understatement), so while comparing him to Reagan on economic affairs is justified, it doesn't really address what Obama was commenting on - legislative action.
I think the article is informative, but about an issue Obama would prefer not to discuss (though of course he should) because he's a failure at economics. On the other hand, where I do agree he's been successful is in getting legislation passed. From that standpoint, I'd like to see a comparison between him and Reagan, as well as several other presidents (including Bush II). My guess is that his ability to get anything passed in legislation is hardly as great as the others he mentioned. In fact, I'm willing to bet his 'achievements' in legislation are quite tepid.
But I haven't seen a comparison like that. So if anyone is aware of one, please feel free to share it.
I call foul on the picture. Who can retain a sense of righteous indignation when looking at an adorable puppy, who's clearly hoping his obedience means a reward of fun and frolicking.
THANK YOU for the Zimmerman article on being content. I just visited my Ohio hometown on Mon, and caught up w/ friends I hadn't seen in 2 decades. It will probably be the highlight of my holidays.
One friend has lived in LA for many years, working in the highly competitive film industry. Suddenly I ask, "Are you living here now?"
"Sort of; 6 weeks here, 2 weeks in California. I'm comfortable here. I'm happy."
Says a lot.
re The EPA's Unconscionable War on Fracking
Yep. Nothing like having laws passed under the guise of 'regulations" that we can do nothing about. Can't vote them out of office. Law making is done outside the realm of Congress so they can do what they damn well please, and there is apparently no political party with the fortitude to throttle the attack that is impoverishing the American people.
What would the Founders think?
Re EPA's attack on 'fracking', here's
a quote from just one report on the birth of the template:
Footnotes in the Love Canal
By Michael Fumento
The Washington Times, January 3, 1996
(snip, but do read it all)
The media descended upon the town and relayed to the outside world every sneeze, every cough, and every ache and pain experienced by Love Canal residents, making it clear that they could only be caused by toxic waste, which included the dreaded dioxin.
The EPA and the governor of New York swaggered around, condemning the chemical company and promising to make everything better, no matter the cost. Ultimately tens of millions of dollars were spent evacuating the residents.
Only later did the truth begin to seep out. Study after study conducted by the federal government and the State of New York Department of Health found that Love Canal residents had no more illness than would be expected in any other area of similar size. Believe it or not, dogs who don’t live on top of toxic waste dumps also vomit.
A New York Times editorial predicted correctly in 1981 when it said, "it may well turn out that the public suffered less from the chemicals there than from the hysteria generated by flimsy research irresponsibly handled."
Somehow, none of this was mentioned at the aforementioned press conference. Instead, EPA Administrator Carol Browner used the myths of Love Canal to blast congressional Republican efforts to cut back on enforcement of environmental laws. Love Canal led to the creation of the Superfund for the cleanup of environmental hazards.
In seeking to reduce environmental spending by $25 million, she said, "Congress is attempting to roll back the environmental health protections that Superfund brought to Love Canal." Since there was never any health threat at the Love Canal, obviously Superfund brought no protections there.
In any case, it’s too bad Browner didn’t go farther to point out that Superfund, according to the Office of Technology Assessment, could soak up an amazing $500 billion over the next few decades. While a few of these toxic waste sites may pose a real hazard to persons living nearby, most have posed no demonstrated threat as large even as making dogs upchuck.
Sometimes people fight back. The citizens of Leadville, Colorado successfully fought the EPA’s needless effort to scrape the lead out of Leadville’s soil. (Anyone for "Ville" Colorado?). Like so much of what the EPA does, it was nothing but makework for a bloated and arrogant agency.
That $500 billion is the sum the spend, unadjusted for inflation. Adjusted, who knows --double? triple?
No, i'm not in favor of filth. But also not in favor of a hundred crony-capitalist Superfund-birthed companies such as Clean Harbors, founded in 1980 upon the congressional creation of the EPA's patronage pipeline.
Why pick on Clean Harbors? Because it is lobbying hard for a federal mandate that all drilling sites must hire Clean Harbors (or whomever else is for appearances sake licensed) to monitor the well.
As it stands, state laws cover the same, and since fracking as a 'tight sand' completion procedure option is 50 years old with tens of thousands of frack jobs done with almost zero cases of contact between ground water and frack fluid (there's the odd equipment failure, which no $5K/day federally-mandated private [wink politically-connected wink] Superfund piglet's labs & engineers living in housetrailers on each and every well site from spud-in to completion, can prevent any more than the designated operations people do now and have always done).
It's the racket again, folks, capitalizing as usual on the citizen's natural technical ignorance of all but his or her own area of expertise, and made possible at the highest levels by pols, bureaucrats and media mavens who are secretly paid and/or ideology-driven agents of foreign petroleum exporting interests --some of whom are this nation's most dangerous deep enemies.
Don't bite the weenie!
PS, yes, it's the same Carol Browner who abruptly resigned her energy czarina west-wing perch (to join a Soros think tank) upon the unanticipated 2010 election handing the new GOP house the congressional subpoena power.
In between her Democratic presidents, she served among other things on the boards of several rank out-and-out socialist revolution organizations. Look it up, see for yo self.
But naw, that itty-bitty political perversion of her'n would not have colored her public policy work, nosirree, she will have always looked out for the country's interests, you betcha!
Thanks, BD --as i always say, you're a prints among men!
Re: Navy Loses Shirt on Solar Project at Camp Pendleton
Boy, first they buy some eco-fuel for $15/gal (yikes!) now this. Well, at least the seas have begun recede.
What can we do about the Administration's war on fracking? This is, by the way, a safe effective way to produce gas and oil from tightly bound shale layers. It has been used safely for about fifty years, with no bad results, as far as I can see from the documents.
We could string Lisa Jackson and Carol Browner up by their thumbs -- always an effective short term solution. What both women are attempting to do is to follow Obama's campaign promise that he would bankrupt the coal companies. He wants to bankrupt the energy companies so he can nationalize natural gas and oil, giving our monster-size government a still larger playground in which to innovate... and destroy.
Meanwhile, the sensible Canadian government is producing from their proven reserves of shale oil and gas at a great rate., and gaining new customers right and left. Like China, for instance.
Mr. Obama is in a pouty frame of mind right now, because "the natives are restless" and they want to take their own chances and make their own profit, like free enterprisers do.
I suppose that the only thing we can try to do to counteract this extreme liberal effort is to hang steady, don't panic, and vote the idiots out of office in November.
Thanks for your frequent and kind comments about Ohio. While we do lack salt water, I have a sizeable pond on my property (as do most all of my neighbors) and live less than an hour away from a Great Lake. Zimmerman's article was spot on. I could move if I wanted to yet I have more than I ever dreamed living in rural Ohio - a Buckeye through and through.
--hearing someone's pride in their locale always lifts a spirit in a certain inimitable way --
Take a look at USN's Elk Hills reservoir and how it was basically stolen and given to Kremlin-connected Occidental Petroleum --The Gore family as middlemen.