The Racial Divide

"OBAMA DECRIES RACIAL RHETORIC" ran a recent headline. In the article, Barack Obama decried "the forces of division" over race that he said are intruding into the Democratic presidential nomination contest. "We have to come together," he said.

"The forces of division have begun to raise their ugly head again," Obama said. "It reminds me: We've got a tragic history when it comes to race in this country. A lot of pent-up anger and mistrust and bitterness. This country wants to move beyond these kinds of things."

Yet Barack Obama has for twenty years been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, says things like this:






When the media spotlight shone on Wright's anti-American, racist attitude, Obama "denounced" Wright's remarks as "inflammatory."
.
In 2006, Barack Obama gave $22,500 to the church.
.
Only after getting caught did Obama try to "distance" himself from the remarks of his pastor of seventeen years. Prior to this he had never publicly criticized the remarks as "racist" or "divisive."
.
Does a potential POTUS get away with something like this? Shrugging off the remarks of his spiritual mentor of twenty years as though they were unimportant, and accusing others of the exact same thing for bringing up the subject? How much of a free ride does this guy get?
.
"President" Obama?
.
Not if I can help it.

Happiness is a Warm Light Bulb

A recent column written by H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, highlights something I've been saying for a long time -- much of the research done by "manmade global warming" scientists is sloppy and inaccurate.

The gist of their argument, of course, is that climate-caused catastrophes will occur in the future due to mankind's activities (unless the United States pays exorbitant amounts of money to the United Nations while at the same time turning our society's calendar back 100 years.) This argument is championed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Burnett points out that forecasting researchers have compiled 140 principles that can be applied to a broad range of disciplines, including science, sociology, economics and politics. Even if global warming research scientists had collected accurate data on historical temperatures (which they have not; see my discussion of the discredited "hockey stick" graph) they would still need to use sound methods to predict possible future outcomes.

From Burnett's article: "In a recent NCPA study, Kesten Green and J. Scott Armstrong used these principles to audit the climate forecasts in the Fourth Assessment Report. Messrs. Green and Armstrong found the IPCC clearly violated 60 of the 127 principles relevant in assessing the IPCC predictions. Indeed, it could only be clearly established that the IPCC followed 17 of the more than 127 forecasting principles critical to making sound predictions.

"A good example of a principle clearly violated is "Make sure forecasts are independent of politics." Politics shapes the IPCC from beginning to end. Legislators, policymakers and/or diplomatic appointees select (or approve) the scientists — at least the lead scientists — who make up the IPCC. In addition, the summary and the final draft of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report was written in collaboration with political appointees and subject to their approval."

.

Global warming alarmists want changes on a massive scale made to the US economy and society. Our politicians have taken up the argument, beginning with outlawing incandescent light bulbs. Interference in our daily lives based on a theory supported by flawed science should astound and enrage anyone with a bit of common sense. They have managed to get laws enacted based simply on fear (and a fear of bad publicity for the politicians.)

.

Our side loses if we simply sit idly by and watch it happen.

All Things Warm and Wonderful

A quick catch-up on some of the recent news on global warming.....

In a recent column by Bill Steigerwald, we find a few interesting facts: The Arctic ice cap, represented as melting so much that New York would be under water, and hapless polar bears were drowning, is now at nearly normal levels, and one expert says it's thicker than usual in some spots.

Another researcher, California meteroologist Greg Watts, finds that 70% of NASA's groundweather measuring sites fail to meet the government's own standards because they are not 100 feet from a building, are on blazing rooftops, sit next to air-conditioner exhaust fans, etc. These 1200+ sites are used to measure the "official" average annual temperature of the United States.

This news has been very under-reported in the US Media.


Real Scientific Minds
Global warming scientists who use the scientific method are starting to fight back. More than 19,000 scientists have signed a petition saying global warming is probably natural and not a crisis. (The complete list can be seen at www.oism.org/pproject.)

The International Conference on Climate Change is meeting this week in New York City. Its topic is "Global Warming: Truth or Swindle?" and according to the announcement, "More than 400 scientists, economists and experts will meet ... to challenge the claim that global warming is a 'crisis.'"

Common sense on this issue seems to be gaining traction.


Proof that Cable Started Off Right
John Coleman, who founded the Weather Channel, wants to sue Al Gore on this whole business of global warming being a hoax. In an interview on Fox News, Coleman said, "I see absolutely no evidence that CO2, carbon dioxide, is causing any warm-up in temperatures. I don't think it's happening. I'm asking the question: If Al Gore knows that CO2 forcing is invalid -- isn't really happening -- and he goes ahead and sells these carbon credits for millions of dollars, is he committing financial fraud? That is the question."

And he goes even further. Read more about it here.

Our side is winning.

Financial Illiteracy

Listening to radio host Dave Ramsey discuss a recent story in USA Today about how Americans are depending more and more on their credit cards to get by....

Ramsey said that his organization's experience as financial counselors suggests that many people pay their credit card payments and car payments before they pay their mortgage. Could it be that we don't have a "mortgage crisis" but instead have a "credit card crisis?"

I won't go into the math involved, or the collection techniques used by credit card or auto loan companies. Instead, right now I'm thinking about how people get into that kind of mental state in the first place.

Lord knows I've made more than my share of financial mistakes, and will probably make more in the future, so I'm no expert. But shouldn't some of the efforts of the teachers' unions and educational groups go toward teaching our children the basics of personal finance?

I'm not sure what the curriculum would include. Budgeting basics, to be sure. Balancing a checkbook. An explanation of compound interest -- should it take thirty-five years to pay off a credit card? How to comparison shop.

But those are mechanical things, subjects that can be taught like any other in school. I think there needs to be a teaching of a new philosophy, at least new to the current generation -- the principle of delayed gratification. We have been taught since the advent of television that we must have the next thing, the newest trinket, the shiniest object that catches our attention, and we must have it now.

Our grandparents knew about this. The generation that lived through the Great Depression understood what it meant to do without -- our current "poverty level" is the equivalent of what was once considered well-to-do. You saved up to pay cash for a car. You couldn't afford a house until you had a substantial down payment, usually well into middle age. You ate meals at home, and a burger and coke was considered a very special treat.

That mindset created the Greatest Generation. America prospered throughout the 50's and 60's, because of the understanding of adults that nothing is free, you have to work hard for what you get, and sometimes you have to just do without.



We don't have a financial crisis in America. We have an appetite crisis, one in which we want everything we see, and we believe that it's our right to have it all.

Education should start early, fifth or sixth grade at the latest. By the time our children graduate high school, responsible personal finance should be as programmed in their minds as reading and arithmetic.

Of course, if an entire generation of Americans became financially responsible, the Democrat party would wither and die.

Delwin Jones, and Deceiving District 83

Republican Delwin Jones, incumbent District 83 State Representative, has campaigned hard against his challenger Joe Hnatek. Radio ads presenting Hnatek getting his funding from "down state" and as chosen "by the I-35 crowd" are effective. I've written about the District 83 race and Delwin Jones's non-conservative record before.

Now, from radio host Robert Pratt, I get an e-mail with this information:

* 77% of Delwin Jones contributions come from Austin ($35,056 of $45,381), or other "down state" addresses (I've been very generous and included all the way to San Angelo as West Texas.) http://txprod.ethics.state.tx.us/public/366264.pdf

* 78% of money spent by Delwin Jones came from "down state" ($45,020.28)
Hnatek had only 42% of his funding and spending from Austin, or "down state". Of that 42% of funds used that came from "down state", 100% of it was for in-kind campaign work - none was cash. Other spending was from Hnatek's own pocket. http://txprod.ethics.state.tx.us/public/366238.pdf

* 84% of Empower Texans PAC funding is from West Texas - NOT "down state" or from the I-35 crowd. This is the group, which includes donors from the district, helping Hnatek. http://txprod.ethics.state.tx.us/public/366028.pdf

"So we now see the truth: Delwin Jones is being funding primarily from Austin and Joe Hnatek from right here in West Texas.

By the way, Jack Bush, who is also the mayor of Idalou, and advertising man, and who appears in Jones' latest radio advertisement running down Hnatek and claiming he's pushed by the I-35 crowd, was paid $2250.00 in this filing by Delwin's campaign for "media production" - no kidding!"

My thanks to Robert Pratt for sharing this information. I cast my own vote for Joe Hnatek this afternoon in early voting.

The Agony and The Ecstasy

I probably care less about the NFL draft than any other guy in America. Nonetheless, I read an article from Yahoo's main page on NFL hopefuls who have either hurt or helped themselves during the NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis. During the course of my reading, one article led to another, and I finally discovered the "Lowsman Trophy." It's awarded to "Mr. Irrelevant," the last college football player chosen in the NFL draft.

It's a statuette of a player fumbling the ball.

Barack Obama Attacked by Zombie Horde

It turns out that the "fainting" spells were actually people dying and then rising from the dead.

I'll bet you won't hear about this in the mainstream media.

Thought-Struck

Should there even be such a thing as "a career in politics?"

Computer Models Fail to Predict Climate

This article is about -- aw, you know what it's about.

The Real Obama Scandal

Forget all those stupid e-mails you get about Barack Obama being a Muslim, refusing to swear on the Bible, and all that. They're not true.

Here's something that is true, and that you can e-mail to all your friends. Obama wants Americans to pay a global tax to the United Nations.

Obama sponsored a bill in the Senate (S.2433) called the "Global Poverty Act." The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

Obama's Senate office sent out a release on the bill: "In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day.”

The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends on foreign aid.

Obama's bill would make it US policy to end "global poverty" by committing Americans to an extra tax to be paid to the United Nations, to be distributed (or stolen) at their pleasure.

While many rumors about Barack Obama are untrue, this one is documented. The House version of this bill (H.R.1302) has already passed the House, and at this time is close to being passed in the Senate.

Does the United States need to commit itself to pay a tax to the United Nations? Should Americans be forced to pay yet more in taxes? Should more American money -- nearly a trillion dollars more over the next 13 years -- go to countries that oppose and hate America, simply because they're poor?

Barack Obama thinks so.

They're Coming to Take Me Away

The Mississippi legislature recently introduced a bill that would make it illegal for restaurants to serve food to obese people. The bill reads in part:

"An Act to prohibit certain food establishments from serving food to any person who is obese, based on criteria prescribed by the State Department of Health; to direct the Department to prepare written materials that describe and explain the criteria for determining whether a person is obese and to provide those materials to the food establishments; to direct the Department to monitor the food establishments for compliance with the provisions of this act."

The bill proposes to revoke licenses of food establishments that violate the provisions of the act.

There are of course many comparisons to the campaign against tobacco users. The first phase explains that it's unhealthy, then it's immoral, and finally it's illegal. (Except in the case of tobacco taxes, which the government can't live without.) Remember how the campaign for seat belt use started out in the late 60's? It was all about safety. Then the message changed to "Parents shouldn't let their kids ride unbuckled." And now we have seatbelt laws.

We've had fifty years of various foods being labeled unhealthy. (The list changes frequently, with yesterday's "miracle food" today's killer, and vice versa.) Now the campaign has started to label obesity as "immoral." Charges of neglect have been levelled against parents for letting their children become obese. In any public discussion of the subject, watch the comments for the sneer and obvious distaste some people have for obese people. Obesity is now considered a character flaw.

Regrding the Mississippi legislation -- if they make it illegal for fat people to eat in restaurants, then fat people will eat at home. The only ones eating in restaurants will be thin people. (Guess what's just happened to the restaurants' business?) So if a legislator goes into a restaurant and sees only thin people, in his mind the legislation worked.

But did the fat people quit eating?

.

Lawmakers, like teachers, have very nebulous ideas of whether their efforts have been successful or not. Unfortunately, they have the power to control all aspects of our lives if we let them. If the Mississippi legislation had been successful -- it was not passed -- it would have spread to other states. And if it was tried once in Mississippi, it will for sure be tried and passed someplace like San Francisco or Berkeley.

.

How long before the fat police start working on supermarkets, and eventually make it illegal for you to have fatty foods in your refrigerator? "Raiding the icebox" takes on a whole new meaning.

Liberals Want You To Forget This

From Mitt Romney's concession speech at the CPAC conference Thursday, Feb 7:

[Israel's President] Simon Peres, in a visit to Boston, was asked what he thought about the war in Iraq. “First,” he said, “I must put something in context. America is unique in the history of the world. In the history of the world, whenever there has been conflict, the nation that wins takes land from the nation that loses. One nation in history, and this during the last century, laid down hundreds of thousands of lives and took no land. No land from Germany, no land from Japan, no land from Korea. America is unique in the sacrifice it has made for liberty, for itself and for freedom loving people around the world.”

The best ally peace has ever known, and will ever know, is a strong America.

Hell Freezes Over

Regarding a thought from my last post -- "McCain has little support among Conservative Republicans" -- Ann Coulter amplifies it in her trademark way:

The Liberal Endorsement

The New York Times recently endorsed Hillary Clinton and John McCain in their respective primary races.

The New York Times is one of the most -- if not the most -- Liberal newspapers in the country. There is no way they will pick John McCain in the general election in November. So why do they pick him at all?

One possibility is that they believe McCain will be the easiest to defeat in November. Despite his recent wins in primaries (and a possible blowout today, "Super Tuesday,") McCain lacks support from a huge number of Conservative Republicans. [Sidenote: the Conservative vote has been split between Mike Huckabee, who has zero chance of winning, and Mitt Romney, who is running a close second to McCain in most races. It's the "Perot effect," the one that won Bill Clinton the election in 1992.]

With feeble support from Conservatives, if McCain wins the Republican nomination, he will be destroyed in November. The crushing victory for the Democrat will give Liberals the "mandate" chant again.

The New York Times knows all of this. Their stated reason for supporting McCain is that he is the most Liberal of the Republican candidates. With McCain's abridgement of free speech (McCain-Feingold,) his support of amnesty for illegal aliens (McCain-Kennedy,) and his embracement of the "governemnt should handle manmade global warming" concept (McCain-Lieberman,) McCain has shown that he is not only willing to compromise, but eager to appeal to Liberal sentiments.

A New York Times endorsement sends a pretty clear message.

Hitler the Cowboys Fan

Bad Language Warning!!

Wouldn't It Be Funny If....

Newt: A GOP Dark Horse?

"Who...could conservatives end up backing? Well, who recently has come out with a new book? Who's doing all the shows talking about his new book? Who is advocating common-sense solutions to the most pressing problems America faces?

"Newt Gingrich, that's who."

First Newt, Now Fred

Breaking news is that Fred Thompson has quit the race.

My endorsement is apparently the kiss of death.

Tommy Lee Jones

A recent article in the UK Guardian analyzes the film career of Tommy Lee Jones, making the point that in recent years he has hit his stride as an actor and in the roles he has played on film (as well as a few that he directed.)

The profile also makes sure that the reader understands that Jones is a mean SOB. If you've ever read interviews with him, or seen him make one of his surly, taciturn personal appearances on television, you'd probably already figured it out.

One phrase in the article -- author unknown, but sounds more like an American wrote it rather than a Brit -- was this: "You know what they say about west Texans past 50 -- How they don't change but just start to smell higher."

First, I'm not sure about exactly what that means, but I don't think it's a compliment. Second, have you ever heard that saying before?

Other than that weird statement, the profile is really good. It even mentions a western that not many people saw, a film directed by Jones: "The Good Old Boys."

In addition to that film, Jones starred in two more of my all-time favorite westerns: "The Missing" and of course, "Lonesome Dove."

State Representative Elections - District 83

Delwin Jones is the State Representative for District 83 in the Texas House of Representatives. He won his 2006 election as a Republican with over 73% of the vote. He's been in office for 28 years. As you can tell from the map above, Jones represents Lubbock county and several surrounding counties. The city of Lubbock itself is District 84, represented by Carl Isett.

The Capitol Inside's Conservative Voting Index determined that Delwin Jones was the fourth least Conservative Republican in the Texas House. This score is "based on an average of scores assessed by the Texas Eagle Forum, the Young Conservatives of Texas and Heritage Alliance, which used to be known as FreePac. Scores assessed by the Texas Association of Business were also factored into the final equation this year."

The Texas Eagle Forum takes pro-family Conservative positions on legislation, and grades each Texas Representative on their stances. Delwin Jones opposed the TEF on House Bills involving a marriage fee increase and required pre-marital counseling; expansion of the CHIPs program; a tax increase due to an across-the-board pay increase of $6000 for teachers, librarians and counselors (worth noting is that Jones is endorsed by the Texas State Teachers Association, Texas Federation of Teachers and Texas Classroom Teachers;) a voter ID bill (Jones voted against requiring voters to provide proof of identity;) requiring voters to prove U.S. citizenship. Jones also voted against restricting the power of eminent domain -- remember the Supreme Court's decision to allow municipalities to take property from one private owner and give it to another private owner?

The Young Conservatives of Texas ranked Delwin Jones and State Senator Robert Duncan among the least Conservative Republicans in the most recent legislative session.

The Heritage Alliance likewise compares legislators' votes with the Conservative position the organization takes. Delwin Jones scored 55%, lower than the 58% scored by Democrat Joe Heflin from District 85.

So it's been established by various Conservative organizations that Delwin Jones is not a staunch Conservative, contrary to the quote by Senator Robert Duncan.

Jones is opposed in the Republican primary by Lubbock physician Joe Hnatek. The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal ran a hit piece on Hnatek, who appears to be a weak contender anyway. The A-J article mentions Jones's opposition to school vouchers (or the right of parents to choose a school for their children -- remember the teachers unions' support for Jones) and how a wealthy pro-voucher donor could provide life to Hnatek's campaign.

The King is Dead

Bobby Fischer has died in an Icelandic hospital. He was 64.

I mourn for what could, and should, have been.

Thought-Struck

It strikes me that many so-called Republican "conservative" politicians are simply taking stances less Liberal than the Democrats, and describing that position as "Conservative."

"The Democrats want to spend $200 billion on government welfare? I propose only spending $180 billion.

"See? I'm a Conservative."

One of the principles America was founded on was the concept of self-sufficiency and standing on your own two feet.

" . . . the species of oppression by which democratic nations are menaced is unlike anything that ever before existed in the world. . . . Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary* power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood. . . . "

[Edit: I forgot to cite this quote. It's from "Democracy in America" by Alexis de Tocqueville.]

*tutelary - "having the position of guardian or protector of a person, place, or thing"

A Quick Thought on "Change"

Barack Obama is promising "change." Hillary Clinton talked about her 35 years of "change." Mike Huckabee has talked about "change."

Janet LaRue made a pithy comment in her most recent column:

"Most of us won’t allow a hairstylist to “change” our do without an in-depth explanation. But a lot of us are buying into undefined promises of “change” from presidential contenders."

The Answer to Life's Biggest Question

You have trouble with your debit or credit card at the store. It won't register properly when you swipe it through the machine. The cashier takes your card, wraps a plastic shopping bag tightly around it, and it works.

Why?

The Mental Floss website gives us the answer:

"There are tiny particles embedded in that magnetic strip on the back of your card. When the card is “swiped” through the reader, those particles are translated into binary code and transmits your card number (and other pertinent information) to the computer at the bank or wherever the merchant transmits the data for verification.

"As a card gets older and more worn, slight surface defects might occur in the magnetic strip that could corrupt the data stream. (The machine might read a zero where there isn’t one, and kick back your card as being invalid.)

"Increasing the distance of the card surface from the reader even a few thousandths of an inch often improves the signal-to-noise ratio, causing the electric eye to skip over the “ticks” in the magnetic strip. "

Now I can go back to sleep.

My Presidential Pick

Over the last year I put forth several times my reason to select Newt Gingrich as my choice for President. Because it would have been illegal under current campaign laws for him to remain the head of American Solutions and run for President, Newt withdrew his name from consideration.

I had to find another candidate to support.

Human Events recently endorsed Fred Thompson as their choice for President, based on his Conservative record. In the endorsement statement they quoted Ronald Reagan: “A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers."

Several weeks ago I decided that Thompson best fit my concept of what conservatism is, based in part on his interview with Charlie Rose:

Thompson states that his stance on particular issues derive from guiding principles, embodied in the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Beginning in late spring of last year, I read, studied and considered The Conservative Mind, by Russell Kirk. It's an immense, dense work, and it took me a long time to read it. A basic definition Kirk uses of conservatism is the same concept as Thompson uses -- that our institutions (such as the church) are based on hundreds years of established practices and beliefs, and that they should not be discarded based on a popular idea or the latest fad.

None of the other candidates have struck me as having the same principled basis; instead they seem to have arrived at particular positions based on political expediency. They claim the "Conservative" label, but not with the same credibility that Thompson possesses.

Fred Thompson for President in '08.

Global Warming Irony

Recently, Jeff Jacoby wrote a column entitled "Brrr - Where Did Global Warming Go?" He cited recent cold weather phenonema: record snowfall in New Hampshire, snow for the first time in 89 years in Buenos Aires, Australia had its coldest ever June -- as evidence that the global warming alarminsts (featuring Al Gore) are wrong.

Jacoby quotes scientists who repeat the notion that solar activity is the key element in global warming, and that the earth's recent warming trend may have peaked.

"Given the number of worldwide cold events, it is no surprise that 2007 didn't turn out to be the warmest ever. In fact, 2007's global temperature was essentially the same as that in 2006 - and 2005, and 2004, and every year back to 2001. The record set in 1998 has not been surpassed. For nearly a decade now, there has been no global warming. Even though atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to accumulate - it's up about 4 percent since 1998 - the global mean temperature has remained flat. That raises some obvious questions about the theory that CO2 is the cause of climate change."

A Few Questions Wouldn't Hurt

Pat Sajak -- yes, that Pat Sajak, of "Wheel of Fortune" fame -- has written a column in which he asks ten questions. These are questions that he says make him skeptical of the "manmade global warming" arguments. Some of the questions:

What is the perfect temperature [of the Earth]?

Why is there such a strong effort to stifle discussion and dissent?

Are there potential benefits to global warming?

How has this movement gained such momentum?

All good questions, the last one especially. Read Sajak's column to find out about the "religious fervor" that global warming alarmists suffer from. And use these questions to poleax the next Liberal who starts in about this.

The Congressmen Who Hate Christmas

LifeSiteNews.com reports on a group of nineteen U.S. Congressmen who voted on a resolution recognizing Islam and the holiday of Ramadan -- then either voted "against" or "present" (meaning they refused to support) a resolution similarly recognizing Christianity and Christmas.


The language of the resolutions is nearly identical. The Congressmen who refused to support Christmas while supporting Ramadan are all Democrats. (Full list on the site.)


Whenever you start to think that maybe Conservatives are getting too "vicious" or too "partisan," remember that there are people like these elected representatives, who hold power over all our lives, who support the beliefs of our enemies more than they support American beliefs and traditions.


Although I disagree with those who are anti-religion, I at least respect their right to believe the way they do. Don't get me wrong, I go to great lengths to defeat such people in arguments -- I don't think a single contemporary person's arguments trump 2000 years of believers in Christianity, for example -- but this is America, etc. etc.


Those who I want to remove from public life completely are those who choose to officially sanction other cultures' beliefs over our own.


When you're debating a Liberal, remember these nineteen Democrats who refused to recognize the worth of Christianity and Christmas, but supported the religion of our enemies. It will put a fire in your belly.

As Bill is Bought, So is Hillary

Is it clear to everyone else that when money is given to Bill, Hillary also benefits?

Bill's Clinton Foundation, for example.
Or Bill's employment by the crown prince of Dubai.
Or Bill's offshore investments in the Cayman Islands. (Isn't that done to avoid paying taxes? Isn't Hillary constantly talking about how rich people like Bill and her should pay more taxes?)

Tsk, tsk.

Should the POTUS be involved in so many questionable deals?

Other People Say Smart Stuff, Too Part X - Hillary

"Experience counts."

Sound familiar? Remind you of Hillary Clinton's slogan when comparing herself to Barack Obama?

"Experience counts" is what Richard Nixon used in his campaign against John F. Kennedy in 1960.

In his most recent column, "Retro Campaigning," George Will examines the two primary instances of Hillary Clinton's "experience":

The first instance was the selection of her husband's Attorney General. Hillary's criteria was based on chromosomes -- the AG had to be a woman. The first choice was Zoey Baird, who was eliminated when she was found to have hired illegal immigrants as servants and had not paid Social Security taxes on them. The second choice was Kimba Wood, who had also hired an illegal immigrant. The final choice was Janet Reno, whose career as AG is remembered for 1) the botched assault on the Davidian compound in Waco, resulting in 86 deaths, 17 of which were the children the assault was supposed to save; and 2) the extraction at gunpoint of six-year-old Elian Gonzales so he could be sent back to Castro's Cuba.

To quote Will: "The second of Hillary Clinton's important experiences was the drafting, in secret, of a national health care plan. It was so dauntingly baroque and ominously statist that a Congress controlled by her party would not bring it to a vote. "

Her experiences that should matter most to primary voters reveal consistently bad judgment. Her campaign's behavior radiates bad character."

The Gratitude Campaign

Oh man.

Below is the short version. For the full movie, go to The Gratitude Campaign website.

Al Gore's Snowjob - A Video Response

Since so many people were convinced by Al Gore's propaganda movie "An Inconvenient Truth," maybe the best way to refute his claims is visually. The Heartland Institute thinks so.

You Might Call It Cognitive Dissonance

Yahoo published an article which tells how miserable Americans think things are. 88% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans say they think "things in this country are headed off on the wrong track."

However, a top paragraph in the article says: "most in the U.S. say they are personally happy and feel in control of their lives and finances, according to an extensive Associated Press-Yahoo! News survey on the mood of voters."

66% say they are personally happy and feel in control of their lives and finances, but that things are on the wrong track. In other words, "I'm doing okay, but I hear things are bad everywhere else."

The power of the media, folks.


To give you an idea of the overall tone of the poll, two of the questions were:

1) "Do you favor or oppose having the federal government intervene to reduce the income differences between the richest and poorest Americans?" (42% favor! How do you think the "federal government" would go about implementing this idea?)

Consider this: Economist Thomas Sowel wrote an article in which he analyzes income data from the Internal Revenue Service. People in the bottom fifth of income-tax filers in 1996 had their incomes increase by 91 percent by 2005. The top one percent -- "the rich" who are supposed to be monopolizing the money, according to the left -- saw their incomes decline by a whopping 26 percent. Meanwhile, the average taxpayers' real income increased by 24 percent between 1996 and 2005.

2) "Do you favor or oppose canceling the tax cuts passed since 2001 for people who are wealthy?" (41% favor.)

This, despite the fact that the tax rate cuts implemented by the Bush administration have increased the amount of taxes the wealthy pay. (The top 25% of wage earners pay 84.6% of all federal income taxes.)

Dante's Eighth Circle of Hell is reserved for politicians who engage in and exploit the politics of envy and covetousness.

How UN "Scientists" Work

Much is made by global warming alarmists about the UN's Intergovernmental Panal on Climate Change (IPCC) and its findings, namely that catastrophic global warming (due to mankind's activities) can only be averted through government action.

An article in the Washington Post discusses a similar "crisis" that the UN has addressed for the last several years: the AIDS epidemic. The Post article is entitled "U.N. to Cut Estimate Of AIDS Epidemic" with the subhead "Population With Virus Overstated by Millions."

Some quotes from the article:

"JOHANNESBURG, Nov. 19 -- The United Nations' top AIDS scientists plan to acknowledge this week that they have long overestimated both the size and the course of the epidemic, which they now believe has been slowing for nearly a decade, according to U.N. documents prepared for the announcement.

"Some researchers, however, contend that persistent overestimates in the widely quoted U.N. reports have long skewed funding decisions and obscured potential lessons about how to slow the spread of HIV. Critics have also said that U.N. officials overstated the extent of the epidemic to help gather political and financial support for combating AIDS.

"The United Nations' AIDS agency, known as UNAIDS....has drawn criticism in recent years [for] being politicized and not scientifically rigorous."

In essence the article says that UN "scientists" have claimed a larger catastrophe than actually existed in order to increase funding and political clout.

Sound familiar?

The Debate Ain't Over Yet, Al

John Stossel started his column "Don't Look to Government to Cool Down the Planet" with a reference to his other job:

Recently on "20/20," I said "give me a break" to Al Gore for
claiming that the global-warming debate is over and suggesting that all dissenters were in it for the money. I interviewed independent scientists who say Gore is wrong.

In this standout column, Stossel also adds a link to the Science and Public Policy Institute, which prominently displays on its website an article titled ""35 Inconvenient Truths: The Errors in Al Gore's Movie."

Stossel cites experts who criticize the UN's attempt to promote global warming alarmism. "Consensus is the stuff of politics, not science," says Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute. The scientific process ought to be left to play itself out with as little political bias as possible. Politically influenced research is poison to science.

Part of the problem is the IPCC itself. Reiter points out, "It's the inter-governmental panel on climate change. It's governments who nominate people. It's inherently political. Many of the scientists are on the IPCC because they view global warming as a problem that needs to be fixed. They have a vested interest."

Stossel also cites a member of the UN's "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change" (IPCC) who disputes the so-called "consensus" view and reiterates the argument that trying to control CO2 emissions (for the purpose of slowing global warming) is ineffective and a waste of time.

This should be must-reading for everyone, but especially for those who want to clobber those blockheads who insist that the "global warming debate is over" -- blockheads like Al Gore.

Need It Spelled Out For You?

Karl Rove recently wrote a column for the Wall Street Journal opinion page. He succinctly and clearly spells out the failings of the Democrats since they won control of Congress last year:

On the budget. "In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better... The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill."

Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a 'relatively small' difference."

On the war in Iraq. "Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq.... After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members."

On "bipartisanship." "They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points."

***

At it's best, Congress is like an orangutan trying to solve a Rubik's cube. At it's worst, it's two orangutans fighting over the Rubik's cube. The Democrats have proved that they are more interested in partisan politics than in trying to do the job for which they were elected.

Term limits. I'm a believer.

A Quick Thought On: Al Gore

Al Gore makes much about the so-called "consensus" of scientific opinion that he claims supports his theory on global warming. He has recently begun the campaign to stop the media from presenting both sides of the story. Or, as he says in his propaganda piece An Inconvenient Truth, "The debate is over." In other words, the scientists voted, his side won, and we should stop checking.

The reason he wants to stop the scientific "vote" now is that he's lost every other recount he was involved in.

Never Forget

Remembering Abbey Road

To people of a certain age, the Beatles' 1969 album "Abbey Road" meant a lot of things, from such great songs as "Come Together" and "Here Comes the Sun" to the infamous "Paul is dead" clues.

Abbey Road is an actual road in London, where (logically) Abbey Road Studios was located. The Beatles recorded most of their records in Studio 2 of Abbey Road Studios. In 2006, Paul McCartney recorded a show for PBS called "Chaos and Creations at Abbey Road," in Studio 2. Using instruments from the period, he played the very first recorded Beatles song, and traveled through his songwriting career with hits like "Blackbird" and a variation on "Eleanor Rigby." (Plus a quick riff on "Strawberry Fields" on the Mellotron.)

YouTube has the rest of the hour-long special in seven parts. If you're a Beatles/McCartney fan, you'll enjoy spending time watching one of the greatest songwritiers of our time create an intimate experience onstage. Check out all seven parts of "Chaos and Creations at Abbey Road" on YouTube.

Here's part #5:

$2,100,100

Earlier I wrote about a letter that 41 Democrat Senators, led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and including presidential hopefuls, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Chris Dodd, sent to Mark Mays, head of ClearChannel Communications, demanding that Rush Limbaugh be punished for what they mischaracterized as calling troops who opposed the war "phony soldiers."

The transcript of Rush's comments, as well as a recording of the conversation (which was with a caller) is readily available. Only an intentional misreading could produce the idea that Rush meant anything close to that of which the Democrats accused him.

The Democrats used Senate floor time to chastise Rush, at the same time making the accusations part of the Congressional record. They used government resources -- time, staff, etc. -- to produce the letter. Forty-one Democrats thought it politically expedient to sign on.

In Your Face

Now Rush has turned the tables on the Democrats. Mark Mays turned the letter over to Rush, who put the letter up for auction on e-Bay. The proceeds from the sale of the letter will be matched by Rush, and the total amount donated to the Marine Corps/Law Enforcement Foundation (MCLEF). Rush challenged the Democrats to also match funds for the charity, but received no response.

The auction went on for a week, generating conversation and excitement about Rush Limbaugh and what he was doing. At the end of the auction, the winning bid was an incredible $2.1 million. With Rush's match, the charity will receive over $4.2 million.

More incredible than the selling price of the letter is the chutzpah of Harry Reid. After using the power of his office to try to destroy Rush Limbaugh, he turned around and tried to take credit for the money that was raised for MCLEF (by Rush Limbaugh.) I don't know if all politicians have no shame, but at least one -- Harry Reid -- doesn't even know the meaning of the word.

The Liberal Response

Meanwhile, Liberals are going bonkers over the situation. With the MoveOn.org attack on General Petraeus also backfiring on them, this makes two public humiliations in a row for Liberals. Expect burning buildings and mass protests (since they can't win by debating the issues.)

David Blaine Street Magic 1 & 2 (Parody)

If you're familiar with the work of David Blaine, and you have any sense of humor at all, you'll laugh until milk comes out of your nose.

WARNING!! STRONG language! (Dirty words)

DON'T WATCH THESE VIDEOS WITH CHILDREN

OR EASILY-OFFENDED ADULTS

IN THE ROOM!!

YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!

...and the sequel....

Who Has More Credibility...

MILLI VANILLI

Pop musical group who were forced to return their Grammy awards in disgrace after it was discovered that they had lip-synced their songs, including such hits as "Girl You Know It's True" and "Blame It On The Rain"?

or

AL GORE

Propagandist, failed politician, and global warming profiteer, winner of an Academy Award and Nobel Peace Prize, whose film "An Inconvenient Truth" has been deemed to be incorrect, false, misleading, or distorting by at least 500 scientists and a British court?

Alfred Nobel is Spinning in His Grave

Alfred Albert "Al" Gore Jr. is the co-winner of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Experts give their opinions:

Gjermund Hagesaether, of Norway's Progress Party: "We believe it is strange to give the prize to Al Gore for having made a film on climate that is subjective, one-sided and full of one-sided assertions."

Award-winning French geochemist Claude Allegre: "The amount of nonsense in Al Gore's film! It's all politics, it's designed to intervene in American politics. It's scandalous."

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts: "We're brainwashing our children. They're going to the Gore movie and being fed all this. It's ridiculous. We'll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realise how foolish it was."

Dr. Gray added: "It bothers me that my fellow scientists are not speaking out against something they know is wrong. But they also know that they'd never get any grants if they spoke out."

Czech President Vaclav Klausa: "[I'm] a bit surprised that Al Gore has received a peace prize because the connection between his activities and world peace are vague and not very clear."

What "Living Green" Means to Al Gore

Deborah Corey Barnes wrote an article which recently appeared on HumanEvents.com that shows exactly which "green" Al Gore is trying hard to generate -- and as you'd expect, it's the color of money.

The money is created by the buying and selling of "carbon offsets." The government would establish arbitrary caps on greenhouse gases for each company. If a company exceeds the amount the government set, it could pay a fine or "buy" pollution credits from another company; if it is under the limit, it could sell the remaining pollution credits to someone else.

What this trading does is create an "emissions market" for traders and brokers to deal in pollution credits. One company already engaged in such activites is Generation Investment Management (GIM), whose chairman and founder is Al Gore.

According to Gore, the London-based firm invests money from institutions and wealthy investors in companies that are going green. “Generation Investment Management, purchases -- but isn’t a provider of -- carbon dioxide offsets,” said spokesman Richard Campbell in a March 7 report by CNSNews.

Read the article to get an idea of the complex regulatory hijinks Gore & Co. are pulling, in order to cash in. If you've ever wondered where Al Gore got his zeal for this global warming stuff, this will help you answer that question.

Hack Journalist vs The Republican Survival Instinct

The Republican Presidential Candidates will debate tomorrow evening (October 9,) and the press is emphasizing the point that it's the first time that Fred Thompson will participate in a debate.

More important, however, will be the behavior of the moderator of the debate, Chris Matthews.

Matthews is the host of MSNBC's "Hardball." At the 10th anniversary party for his “Hardball” show Thursday night in Washington, D.C., Matthews remarked that the Bush administration had "finally been caught in their criminality." He was referring to purported calls from Vice President Dick Cheney's office to MSNBC brass complaining about Matthews' biased comments and coverage on his show.

Another Matthews gem: “God help us if we had Cheney during the Cuban missile crisis. We’d all be under a parking lot.”

MSNBC parent company NBC, which covered the event, refused to release video of Matthews' remarks to the press. They should change their initials to "CYA."

Let's hope that journalist Matthews is put and kept in his place by these men who aspire to become the leader of the most powerful nation on earth.