Saturday, April 25, 2009

2012 Apocalypse

The Mayan Calendar stops at 2012 and the apocalypse folks are mentioning it over and over again as a big deal.

I, of course, was unconcerned. Until I read this. Apparently, scientists are saying we could have some pretty major solar storms in 2012 that could totally collapse our electric grid.

Looks like we will be buying that home generator and survival kits after all. YIKES!

(Hat Tip: Glenn Reynolds)

John Murtha is Stealing Your Money

Watch and learn how.

Can you believe what a monumental waste this is? Aren't you glad that your taxes are being burned up for this awful man's ego? How many jobs can an empty airport provide to make this even remotely worthwhile.

Apparently Talk is Cheap

Lawrence Summers, the economic guy in charge of the current spend-a-thon, didn't always believe in central control and Keynesian economics.

As this PBS interview here shows (scroll down).

A few choice bits, emphasis mine...
LAWRENCE SUMMERS: ... The political debates take place within a universe that is shaped by the development of new ideas. Of those new ideas, none is more important than the rediscovery of Adam Smith and the idea that a decentralized system relying on price signals collects information and provides much more insurance than any kind of centrally planned or directed type of system.

INTERVIEWER: Talk about your own intellectual involvement as a young graduate student. What did you think of [Hayek] and Friedman?

LAWRENCE SUMMERS: ... That's a respect that is born of the power of his arguments as one considers them more and more deeply. But it's a respect that's also born of the lessons of the experience of the success of decentralization in a place like Silicon Valley and of the failures of centralization in places like Central Europe and Russia. ... If you think about it, it cannot be an accident that it is the same 15-year period when communism fell, when command-and-control corporations like General Motors and IBM had to be drastically restructured, when planning ministries throughout the developing world were closed down, and when the Japanese model of industrial policy proved to be a complete failure. There is something about this epoch in history that really puts a premium on incentives, on decentralization, on allowing small economic energy to bubble up rather than a more top-down, more directed approach, that may have been a more fruitful approach in earlier years.
INTERVIEWER: Let me just back up on Friedman before we carry on with that. Why was he such a devil figure in your youth?

LAWRENCE SUMMERS: Because he seemed, with his emphasis on individualism, freedom, and markets, to be so unconcerned with fairness and with the needs of the collective. I think what people came to appreciate is that there is a kind of ethic of "finders keepers" which says the people are entitled to what they produce, which also enters into concepts of fairness. Many of the ideas that were put forward in the name of redistribution and fairness seemed to do far more to hurt those who were well-off than to help those who were poorly off. And it was those losses, those attempts to be fair and redistribute, that led to some greater skepticism about the scope for government to direct and plan economic activity.

INTERVIEWER: So have those concerns gone away? And if you admire some of what Friedman's done, what's happened to those concerns? How do you reconcile those concerns about Friedman's lack of concern?

LAWRENCE SUMMERS: I think we've come to find that market-oriented mechanisms can do things to increase equity. The availability of private insurance provides tremendous insulation for millions of individuals. But I think we've also come to see that an excessive emphasis on equity can result in a leveling down rather than a leveling up, and what's important is to find ways of leveling up our income distribution. That's probably led to much more emphasis on the importance of education relative to the importance of income transfers than would have been the case a decade ago, and I think that's welcome.
At the same time we came to an increasing awareness of the dangers of stifling private initiative, because you can't know what form it will take and therefore if you stifle it there's the risk that you're going to have very large losses from stifling something very promising.

"Enhanced Interrogation" Works

Marc Thiessen debunks the claim that "enhanced interrogation" techniques don't produce results.

Those techniques do work. Did work. And hopefully, will continue to work.

I lived in NYC when the World Trade Center was bombed the first time. I lost people on 9/11. I live in the DC area and when the plane hit the Pentagon, the blast wave shook my home.

After Sept. 11th. After the anthrax attacks. After the DC sniper. I am a bit jumpy.

And knowing there are CIA operatives working to glean as much information as possible from some really evil people in order to keep my kids safe is a good thing to me.

To paraphrase a comedian, if hooking a man's testicles up to a car battery to save human lives works, then I have only one thing to say.

Red is positive. Black is negative.

Sounds harsh? I am a mother of two children. I can not think or imagine a single act I would not do to defend my kids and keep them from harm if necessary.

Not. One. Single. Thing.

What do Jefferson and Sen. Nunn Have In Common?

A great idea for the TEA Party Protests - a federal amendment removing from the federal government to ability to borrow money.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to John Taylor dated November 26, 1798,
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of our Constitution. I mean an additional article, taking from the federal government the power of borrowing."
Senator Nunn felt the same way and attempted three times to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment which he called the "Jefferson Amendment". It required that Congress balance expenses with revenues.

In 1994, 1995, and 1996 - the three times Sen. Nunn attempted to pass the bill - the amendment polled at 75% approval ratings. It was the Clinton Administration that rejected the Jefferson Amendment.

I think it is time for us to re-examine this idea and if feasible, making Sen. Nunn's Balanced Budget Amendment a goal of the TEA Party Protests.

Afterall, if state constitutions include balanced budget amendments, why shouldn't the federal Constitution?

Friday, April 24, 2009

Glenn Beck, Reasonable Man?

Well, here I think he is...

CNN Gets Antartic Ice Wrong Again

No bias for global warming over at CNN - HA! (Fun comments section)

Once again, nature does what she does and dumps some glacial ice into the ocean and the warming alarmists do their chicken little dance.

It's sad really.

Drive Small and Die

According to this article here,
The super-high efficiency minicar has become the Holy Grail for many environmentalists. But on Tuesday, a new study on minicar safety tossed some cold water on the dream. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) reported that in a series of test crashes between minicars and midsize models, minis such as the Smart car provided significantly less protection for their passengers.

Jamaican Army Deployed

Great, we're going to Jamaica this summer (FDR Pebbles all-inclusive resort includes a vacation nanny, I LOVE this place) but they've deployed their army in fear of tax revolts.

On one hand, I love Jamaica and want my friends living there to be safe. On the other hand, I could easily see the US army being deployed against TEA Party Protests if Obama and Congress keep acting like idiots.

Could Jamaica be a glimpse of our future?

A Rare Open-Minded Liberal

I've become more conservative because I wanted more freedom. Rising disgust at the Liberal Mental Lockstep moved me to the right. I found the folks who claimed to be the most open were the most closed-minded.

So it was with pleasure that I read this article about an Ivy League student who transferred to Liberty College to infiltrate the student body in order to write a book and ended up being a little infiltrated himself.

He starts with
"As a responsible American citizen, I couldn't just ignore the fact that there are a lot of Christian college students out there," said Roose, 21, now a Brown senior. "If I wanted my education to be well-rounded, I had to branch out and include these people that I just really had no exposure to."
And ends with
Roose said his Liberty experience transformed him in surprising ways.

When he first returned to Brown, he'd be shocked by the sight of a gay couple holding hands — then be shocked at his own reaction. He remains stridently opposed to Falwell's worldview, but he also came to understand Falwell's appeal.

Once ambivalent about faith, Roose now prays to God regularly — for his own well-being and on behalf of others. He said he owns several translations of the Bible and has recently been rereading meditations from the letters of John on using love and compassion to solve cultural conflicts.

He's even considering joining a church.
Imagine what would happen if he stayed longer than a semester.


Like I said, He's On Fire Today....

Also copied and posted in full from NRO - The Corner because it is just so freakin' fabulous. Just read this...

Touchy, Touchy, Touchy [Jay Nordlinger]
Mention Southeast Asia, and liberals get very jumpy — as well they should. Here is a note from Worcester, Mass., re my column yesterday:

What America should be ashamed of is their cowardly bombing of South Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and North Vietnam for 12 years. Nixon and Johnson were terrorists who murdered millions of people in Indo-China. Three million Vietnamese are still suffering from the Agent Orange and have not received one cent in compensation from the US or Dow Chemical. Conservatives should be ashamed for their revisionist lies about the holocaust in Vietnam.
Yep. Very touchy. Keep talking about Dow Chemical. Keep talking. One of the most amazing things George W. Bush did during his eight years as president was cite one of the most infamous headlines of the 20th century. Do you know it by heart? It appeared in the New York Times on April 13, 1975: “Indochina without Americans: For Most, a Better Life.” This was just as the Khmer Rouge was coming to power.
They murdered between one-quarter and one-third of the Cambodian population.

“For most a better life”? You mean the afterlife?

Let me give you some of Bush’s speech from August 2007 — it was delivered to the VFW:
. . . many argued that if we pulled out [of Vietnam] there would be no consequences for the Vietnamese people.

In 1972, one anti-war senator put it this way: “What earthly difference does it make to nomadic tribes or uneducated subsistence farmers in Vietnam or Cambodia or Laos whether they have a military dictator, a royal prince, or a socialist commissar in some distant capital that they’ve never seen and may never have heard of?” A columnist for the New York Times wrote in a similar vein in 1975, just as Cambodia and Vietnam were falling to the Communists. “It’s difficult to imagine,” he said, “how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone.” A headline on that story, datelined Phnom Penh, summed up the argument: “Indochina without Americans: For Most, a Better Life.”

The world would learn just how costly these misimpressions would be.
And here Bush lays it out:
In Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge began a murderous rule in which hundreds of thousands of Cambodians died by starvation and torture and execution. In Vietnam, former allies of the United States and government workers and intellectuals and businessmen were sent off to prison camps, where tens of thousands perished. Hundreds of thousands more fled the country on rickety boats, many of them going to their graves in the South China Sea.

Three decades later, there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam War and how we left. There’s no debate in my mind that the veterans from Vietnam deserve the high praise of the United States of America. Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like “boat people,” “re-education camps,” and “killing fields.”
And Bush is not just picking at old sores. He mentions all this for a present-day purpose:
There was another price to our withdrawal from Vietnam, and we can hear it in the words of the enemy we face in today’s struggle — those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens on September the 11th, 2001. In an interview with a Pakistani newspaper after the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden declared that “the American people rose against their government’s war in Vietnam. And they must do the same today.”

His number-two man, Zawahiri, has also invoked Vietnam. In a letter to al-Qaeda’s chief of operations in Iraq, Zawahiri pointed to “the aftermath of the collapse of the American power in Vietnam and how they ran and left their agents.”

Zawahiri later returned to this theme, declaring that the Americans “know better than others that there is no hope in victory. The Vietnam specter is closing every outlet.” Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price to American credibility — but the terrorists see it differently.
Holy-moly, what a speech. Did an American president really talk that way — less than two years ago? Seems impossible.

Education for Me but Not for Thee

Obama's hypocrisy on School Vouchers and Public School in general is breathtaking. His own children have never gone to public school yet his rejection of the successful school voucher program is forcing two students from private school Sidwell Friends back into a violent and bankrupt DC public school.

Hooray for Hope and Change. Obama should be ashamed.

Jay Nordlinger (who was on fire with the postings today at NRO - The Corner) posted this today and I thought it strong enough to copy in full.

Sidwell’s Not for Just Anyone, You Know [Jay Nordlinger]
A reader points me to an extraordinary Washington Post editorial, published on March 2. You know the D.C. school-choice program the Democrats are killing? Two of the children who will have to go back to the public schools — with their violence and no learning — presently go to school with the Obamas’ children: at the famous Sidwell Friends. Their mother is Deborah Parker, who told the Post, “The mere thought of [the kids’] returning to public school frightens me.” “Tell her,” says the Post, “that vouchers don’t work, and she’ll list her children’s improved test scores, feeling of safety and improved motivation.” More from the editorial:

But the debate unfolding on Capitol Hill isn’t about facts. It’s about politics and the stranglehold the teachers unions have on the Democratic Party. Why else has so much time and effort gone into trying to kill off what, in the grand scheme of government spending, is a tiny program? Why wouldn’t Congress want to get the results of a carefully calibrated scientific study before pulling the plug on a program that has proved to be enormously popular? Could the real fear be that school vouchers might actually be shown to be effective in leveling the academic playing field?

I will repeat: The problem with school choice — the problem with getting it enacted or kept — is that it involves caring about other people’s children. And that is very, very hard for many people to do.

One more thing: The killing of the D.C. program strikes me as mean — just plain mean. According to all we have been taught, isn’t that supposed to be the Republicans’ role?

And Jay also mentioned these interesting presidental education tidbits...
Politicians and School Choice [Jay Nordlinger]
A reader writes,


Never mentioned: George W. Bush’s daughters graduated from a public high school in Austin, Texas.

Never mentioned: Sarah Palin’s school-age children attend public schools.

Never mentioned: Laura Bush was a public-school teacher.

Why are they not granted credibility when they advocate school choice?

Well . . .

Boyle's Makeover

All I have to say is "Good."

Susan Boyle deserves to pretty up a bit and she has sensibly (so far) simply freshened her hair and cleaned-up her eyebrows.

What's the big deal? Some people seem to feel absolutely betrayed by her "makeover" which is ridiculous. A little hair dye doesn't change who she is or worsen her voice.

In short, Susan Boyle is ultimately a woman who never had a chance opossibly a reason to spend time on herself. She can now and good for her.

Stupid Human Tricks

Man pretending to fall, falls off bridge.


Genetically Clumsy Cat

Our cat, James, is clumsy. Fall off the bed backwards clumsy.

James's clumsiness hit a new low this morning when he woke us all up screaming.

Apparently, James had been on my son's dresser looking out the window. As he jumped down, he got his back two legs stuck in one of the dresser drawers that my son hadn't pushed in all the way.

So there was our cat, dangling from his hindlegs, off the dresser, screaming his poor little head off until he woke my five-year-old who gently lifted him up and out.

Falling off the bed. Falling off the stairs. Hitting his head while attempting to jump onto stuff. And now, getting stuck in a drawer.

Clumsiest. Cat. Ever.

Oh, did I mention he also thinks he's a dog and plays fetch?

Argument for Staying Married When You Have Kids

Last night on Bones (The Girl in The Mask, episode 88), a character who was a parent-figure to his murdered sister said to Bones who was questioning whether loving someone else so much was worth it, replied,

"If I was willing to give up my life for Satchi, why would I not be willing to risk my happiness for her?"
As a parent, I will do anything and everything to defend my children. It scares me how fiercely I feel for them. I have no doubt that 99% of all parents feel that way. And yet, and yet, we have a devastating divorce rate.

Time and again, studies have shown that even "friendly" divorces have deeply destructive impacts on the children of the marriage. Divorce scars children deeply and lastingly.

But as parents, if we were willing to die to protect our children from harm, why wouldn't we wait to dissolve our marriage until after our youngest child had matured into adulthood? Why wouldn't we put our own happiness (so long as real abuse is not a factor) on hold to finish our commitment to raising our children.

Children are our most precious contribution to ourselves, our family, our communities, and our countries. Without properly raised children, society collapses.

Have we become so selfish and self-centered (I blame the Baby Boomers) as a society that we scratch and scar our children's psyches for our own immediate happiness?

And does getting a divorce actually make you happier? Single parenthood doesn't look all that great to me.

Finally, it seems to me that Bones, the TV show, is rapidly becoming a debate between intellectual elite Bones and intelligent traditionalist Booth. I look forward to seeing which one the writers lets "win".

[UPDATE - Just so we are clear, I am Catholic and will not get a divorce ever. In fact, my husband and I have married each other in 4 (yes, four) separate marriage ceremonies, long story. And I will never ever leave him, not even if I die. Because I am just that kind of chick.]

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Read 'em and Weep

A list of books every high schooler should read before graduation.

(Or ever person who wants to consider themselves literate in western civilization.)

An Admission of Fallibility?

(Originially posted by my husband on NRO - The Corner)

Reproduced without comment, an exchange from yesterday's energy hearing:

REP. CLIFF STEARNS, R-Fla.: Last September you made a statement that somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe, which at the time exceeded $8 a gallon. As Secretary of Energy, will you speak for or against any measures that would raise the price of gasoline?

SEC. CHU: As Secretary of Energy, I think especially now in today’s economic climate it would be completely unwise to want to increase the price of gasoline. And so we are looking forward to reducing the price of transportation in the American family. And this is done by encouraging fuel-efficient cars; this is done by developing alternative forms of fuel like biofuels that can lead to a separate source, an independent source of transportation fuel.

REP. STEARNS: But you can’t honestly believe that you want the American people to pay for gasoline at the prices, the level in Europe?

SEC. CHU: No, we don’t.

REP. STEARNS: No. But somehow, your statement, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” doesn’t that sound a little bit silly in retrospect for you to say that?

SEC. CHU: Yes.

More gems here.

Who Is Afraid of Venture Capital?

According to Protein Wisdom, Obama is.

They make a good argument.

Public Spanking

New York State's Attorney General Mr. Cuomo has written a letter to Dodd, Frank, et al (pdf. link here) about the investigation of the Bank of America and Merrill Lynch merger that is a pretty public spanking of all things TARP.

A lot of heads should roll for this.

Durban II Walk Out

Click here to watch Jon Voight walking out of the Durban II fiasco during Ahmadinejad's speech.

I like an actor who can be a solid conservative, astonishingly good at his job, and a pretty funny guy (watch Zoolander).

It's Probably Wrong To Admit How Much I Love This

You know, I've been cooking since I was about five or six years old and I just think this idea is brilliant! I'll probably make it for my kids tomorrow.

But somehow, loving this "food concept" feels kinda wrong.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Plain Speaking on Earth Day

(Originally posted on NRO - the Corner by my husband)

I'm celebrating Earth Day for once just as my detractors would expect me to, flying across the country. As a result, I am unable to attend the Congressional hearings on the new cap-and-trade bill that it has now been confirmed will cost each household over $3000 (unless you believe that your taxes paying bureaucrats' salaries provides dollar-for-dollar benefit). Thankfully, my colleague Myron Ebell's testimony is available here. He doesn't mince words, our Myron.

Today is also the anniversary of the publication of my book The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You to Know About — Because They Helped Cause Them, still available on Amazon. Thanks to everyone who has already bought it. Unfortunately, with the small exception of some reverse direction on biofuel mandates, most of those catastrophes are still ongoing a year later.

Planned Parenthood Founder Embraced Eugenics

Eugenics is basically someone else deciding which baby gets to live and which one gets to die.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a huge fan of eugenics.

And so is, apparently, Hilary Clinton who stated today that she was "in awe" of Ms. Sanger.

Disgusting and shameful.

What Obama's Cap & Trade Costs YOU

What Will Cap-n-Trade Cost You? [David Freddoso from NRO]

Republicans have been arguing for some months that it will cost an average of $3,128 per household, based on an MIT study. The professor who did the study later disagreed, however, offering a much smaller figure of $215 (which he now says should really be $800). Republicans have subsequently been called "liars" and "pants on fire" by people with very loud voices for using the $3,128 figure.

But now, John McCormack writes, the MIT profesor admits that he wasn't counting as a "cost" the higher energy taxes that Obama's cap-n-trade will make consumers pay. On average, those higher taxes, based on the MIT study, will come to . . . $3,128 per American household. Whatever the federal government decides to do with the money after that (it could be redistributed or it could be used for more "green energy" projects), it is still taking that amount from the consumer up front.

If you live in the real world, your tax bill is an expense, not an asset as the professor has been reckoning it. So yes, cap-n-trade costs at least $3,128 to the average household.

Earth Day is such a Hallmark holiday

One of the biggest lies about Earth Day is that it is some grassroots thing. If you look at the organizers of the first Earth Day according to Wikipedia, it was total astroturf.

It was even stated that the week of April 22nd was chosen to maximize college student participation.

In the Wikipedia entry (no unbiased information source itself), they can't even imagine there were people who cared about the earth before the organizers were born. I'm no fan of Rousseau or Thoreau but they existed before these damn dirty hippies did and they cared about nature too.

We've had nearly 40 years of these leftwing extremists trying to shove lies and deceptions about the state of our planet, our energy use, and our lives down our throats and I am sick of it. Sick of hearing how I am bad because I don't agree with every idiotic and wasteful save-the-earth idea they come up with.

There are no Pros without Cons but these activists don't seem to understand there is a trade off. If we give up cheap abundant energy, then millions of Americans will not be able to afford air conditioning in the summer and will die. Millions more will not be able to afford heating in the winter and will die. But these "environmentalists" care more about dirt, than people.

This day makes me sick because it only functions as a deliberately created platform for leftwing activists to spew falsehoods in an attempt to control how we lead our lives. And dollars to donuts, Hallmark will come out with some Sierra-Club-Sanctioned "Earth Day Cards" within the next five years.

Buy This Book So An Environmentalist Gets It

Today is the First Anniversary of the publishing of my husband's book.

Buy it today to celebrate Human Achievement Day and upset a leftwing environmentalists!

You can purchase "Really Inconvenient Truths" at here and if you want get a free excerpt to read here.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Monday, April 20, 2009

Guidence for TEA Parties

(I orginially posted this as 25 Things I Would Do If I Ran The Country, but now I think it would be a good starting manifesto for Tea Party Protests)

In no particular order

1) Education is a state right. Local property taxes pay for local schools. The Federal government should butt out, therefore I would abolish the department of education.

2) If the president has term limits so should all members of Congress. Our government was built on a system of checks and balances. There is a check on the office of the presidency which needs to be balanced by a check on the legislature. 3 terms in the House, 2 terms in the Senate offers a person a 24 year career in politics. That’s long enough.

3) Congress can no longer vote itself raises. Individual Senators and Representatives should appeal to their constituents for pay raises and have it put to a vote or referendum accordingly.

4) Line by line veto to eliminate pork.

5) Ditto Ear marks.

6) Emergency spending bills are only allowed during natural disasters or within 3 – 6 months of an aggressive attack on American soil or overseas bases. Otherwise, the department in question (I’m looking at you DoD) has to get the monies from its existing budget.

7) ALL laws passed must clearly state its intended effect/goal and a review of its effectiveness evaluated by an independent government office, the GAO, for instance after five years. If a law is found lacking by the specified measure, the law is automatically returned to Congress for review – either to be struck down or re-written to address its failures.

8) All government regulations – starting with ones governing business/energy/agriculture – that are over 20 years old must be examined by independent reviewers to determine if said regulation is a help or a hindrance to the business practice and the government’s ability to enforce the regulation. If it fails the test, the regulation is automatically negated.

9) Tax loopholes for individuals and corporations are closed.

10) Tax code must be streamlined until it can be printed on no more than 25 pages in 12pt Times New Roman font. Figure it out.

11) Any Federal agency that is a duplicate of a state function (excepting interstate issues) is automatically eliminated.

12) English is the official language of the United States of America.

13) Our borders are ours to control. All unauthorized entries into the US will be treated as a criminal offense. American citizenship will no longer be extended to children born in the US to illegal immigrant parents under the age of three. They and their parents will be returned to their country of origin where they may re-apply to enter the US.

14) Any business hiring illegal immigrants will face stiff fines and criminal charges.

15) Any persons using false identification will face criminal charges, restitution to the victim, and if illegal, expulsion from the US.

16) Moments of silence are re-instated in schools and government institutions. If you have to put your hand on a bible to swear the truth in court, then God is part of the government.

17) You are the person you chose to be. Victim-statuses in government law will be reviewed as objectively as possible to determine if it helps or hinders various classes of individuals from the handicapped to ethnic minorities to genders to sexual orientation.

18) All treaties between the US and foreign countries will be reviewed. Those deemed unfair to US interests will be renegotiated.

19) Modern developed countries have the ability to defend themselves. We will remove US troops from those countries (I'm looking at you Germany) and relocate to countries with greater need or return the troops home. Many of these overseas bases are now rewards for soldiers rather than actual deployments.

20) Independent reviews will be conducted of every government department starting with the Department of Defense with the intent of eliminating waste and redundancy.

21) Soldiers and government civilians should be making equal pay and receive equal pensions. Saleries either drop or rise but soldiers and civilian workers across all departments of the federal government will be equalized.

22) If you bring a lawsuit to court and you lose, you must pay the defendant’s legal fees.

23) We’re building more nuclear power plants, drilling off shore, and drilling in Alaska. Get over it, we need the energy. The money from taxing the positive economic growth caused by abundant energy can go to research to develop realistic and affordable new energy sources.

24) All government subsidies to corporations and businesses will be reviewed and most likely stopped. The taxpayer should only pay for the goods and services they buy directly. Subsidies are forced gifts from the taxpayer to well-represented-by-lobbies corporations (sugar lobby) via the government. It is theft, wrong and largely unnecessary.

25) Any charity that makes more than $50 million in donations a year, loses its tax-exempt status and is shifted into a slightly progressive taxation rate. (Income from investments, etc. doesn’t count.) Donations to the charity are still tax-exempt, just the charity's total income is taxed. Any charity caught funneling its donations into other charities or shell companies to hide its income will be shut down.

Really Celebrate Earth Day

An Earth without humans wouldn't be celebrated at all so let's really celebrate Earth Day by celebrating all the amazing things humans have done since they appeared on Mother Earth. [It does take a while to load and if it starts too soon, you'll lose some of the sound, so press the pause button and let it load completely before viewing. Sorry about the cropping.]

Gotta Love Teh Resistance

The website "Teh Resistance" has just posted "10 Things You Didn't See at The Tea Parties". Reason number 45678 why conservatives are better than liberals - we aren't silly or gross (for the most part).

Thank you "teh resistance" - Punch and Pie!

Just Have To Be Different

There are a few in every sensation.

Someone who has to be different. If everyone suddenly wears blue, they wear yellow. If everyone suddenly likes Peter, they like Paul.

The latest eater of sour grapes is Maureen Callahan who without a shred of evidence or even reason, trashes Susan Boyle's sudden burst of internet attention in the New York Post.

Her arguements are spurious and her positions are petty. Let the woman have some success, Boyle's voice deserves it.

Ms. Callahan can have her opinion but if her opinion doesn't rest on facts - then it ain't worth much. While Ms. Callahan's NYP op-ed will be birdcage liner soon, Ms. Boyle's voice will hopefully continue to soar and inspire.

Nuke 'em Til They Glow

Here's something fun, nuke (or send an asteroid) to anywhere you want on the planet. Have fun switching between "map" and "google satellite".

What I like is playing around with the various nukes one might have available. You can have some relatively precise targeting with these babies. Like with the right nuke, you could bomb the Mission and Castro districts of San Fransisco, taking out Hippietown Central without hurting the "good" parts.

Sick, sick fun.

Deliberately Confusing Drivers

If I saw the above on the road, I'm not sure what I would do, but the Virginia Department of Transportation thinks it'll slow down drivers. I'm not too sure.