Tell me again why you’d vote to reelect Obama?

When he has a record like this?

America Before President Obama Took Office and Now

	Before	Now	Change
Number of Unemployed1	12.0 Million	13.1 Million	+9%
Long-Term Unemployed2	2.7 Million	5.6 Million	+107%
Unemployment Rate3	7.8%	8.5%	+9%
“High Unemployment” States4	22	43	+95%
Misery Index5	7.83	11.46	+46%
Price of Gas6	$1.85	$3.39	+83%
“Typical” Monthly Family Food Cost7	$974	$1,013	+4%
Median Value of Single-Family Home8	$196,600	$169,100	-14%
Rate of Mortgage Delinquencies9	6.62%	10.23%	+55%
U.S. National Debt10	$10.6 Trillion	$15.2 Trillion	+43%

Source: House Ways and Means Committee (1)

The only reasons I can think of for voting to reelect this miserable Socialist failure are:

• One actually likes what Obama is doing and believes these trends are a necessary price to pay to transform the nation and that “more cowbell” is the solution. In other words, a progressive;
• One is addicted;
• One is simply ignorant.

Forget Obama’s disastrous energy policies that will beggar the poor and the middle classes; forget his topsy-turvy foreign policy that slaps friends, hugs enemies, and makes the world a more dangerous place; forget his arrogance and his contempt for the Constitution, adherence to which is at the heart of our common bargain.

And forget that you’re unhappy with the Massachusetts Moderate, the Angry Muffin, or Mr. Sweater Vest, based on what they might do in office.

Forget all that.

Looking at the numbers above, which represent the president’s record, tell me how could any rational voter who cares about the fate of the United States of America and, indeed, the future of the world make a positive case to vote to reelect Barack Obama?

Well?

via Joel Pollak (2)

UPDATE: Argh, the table didn’t format right. Danged inflexible columns. To see the percentages, follow the committee link above.

UPDATE II: And here’s a nice graphic courtesy of Pirate’s Cove that further illustrates the point:

Heckuva job, Barry!

Footnote:
(1) Yeah, a Republican-controlled committee. So what? Statistics can be manipulated. And? Show me how those numbers are wrong.
(2) Who tried to unseat “Red” Jan Schakowsky in 2010 and is considering running again. Go, Joel!

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Entitlement spending as vote-buying heroin

Liberals decry all the corporate money in politics, while conservatives worry that President Obama plans to spend a billion dollars to fund his reelection campaign.

Bill Whittle calls that “chump change.”

In another of his Firewall videos, Bill examines what he calls “The Vote Pump:” the money the federal government can use to make sure you vote the way the statists want. It’s eye-opening, to say the least.

Interesting, isn’t it? We currently take in more than enough revenue to fund the actual government (setting aside for the moment how many of those are legitimate functions), but what’s killing us is the nearly 60% of all federal spending that goes toward entitlements.

And it’s a percentage that, under current conditions, is only going to go up as the population ages.

Bill calls this a vote pump — money in, votes out. I think of it more as a form of economic heroin: give people “free money” and make them dependent, afraid to give it up. And, no matter how much they realize intellectually that the system is unsustainable and bad for the nation, that fear will lead most to vote to keep in power those who promise to keep the smack coming — the statists, whether Democrat or Republican.

It’s as de Tocqueville once wrote:

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money. (1)

So when conservatives mock Gingrich for proposing a lunar base (“Too expensive!!”) or lefties decry all the money for the military (“Think of the children!!”), just take another look at Whittle’s chart and remind yourself of what the real problem is.

And then look at Greece to see where it will lead.

Footnote:
(1) Arguably misattributed.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Dear Mr. President: Paying your fair share begins at home

President Obama spent much of his recent State of the Union address declaring that the rich need to pay their “fair share” of taxes. (1)

Maybe he should have given that speech to his staff, first:

How embarrassing this must be for President Obama, whose major speech theme so far this campaign season has been that every single American, no matter how rich, should pay their “fair share” of taxes.

Because how unfair — indeed, un-American — it is for an office worker like, say, Warren Buffet’s secretary to dutifully pay her taxes, while some well-to-do people with better educations and higher incomes end up paying a much smaller tax rate.

Or, worse, skipping their taxes altogether.

A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama’s executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven’t paid any share, let alone their fair share.

Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama’s White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That’s up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration’s last year.

Nearly one-third of Obama’s aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,200, each.

(Emphasis added)

On a scale of 1-10 on the Public Secrets Hypocrisy Meter(tm), this hits an “11.” But, coming as it does from the administration of the most cynical, fork-tongued president since Richard Nixon, it also isn’t surprising.

May I suggest that Congressman Issa’s Oversight Committee, in the moments when it isn’t digging into Operation Fast and Furious, summon these federal employees to explain to Congress why they are not obeying federal law and paying their fair share?

Meanwhile, have a look at the rest of Andrew Malcolm’s article; it seems tax evasion is a favorite sport for federal employees.

LINKS: More from Moe Lane and Hot Air.

Footnote:
(1) As determined by Obama and his allies, of course.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Anti-democratic Democrat governor cuts and runs

"Cancel elections? Wonderful idea!"

Remember Governor Bev Perdue, the Democratic Governor of North Carolina who suggested canceling the 2012 congressional elections so Congress could focus on solving the nation’s problems? (And preserving their Senate majority, coincidentally.)

Maybe she should have cancelled her state’s elections, instead. Facing bad polling numbers and strong opposition, Governor Perdue is calling it quits:

North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue, facing a hard fight for a second term, will not seek re-election, a Democratic official said today.

The first woman elected governor in North Carolina history, Perdue faced a potential rematch against former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, a Republican whom she narrowly defeated in 2008 in the state’s closest gubernatorial contest since 1972.

Perdue’s win was partly attributed to Barack Obama’s surprise win in North Carolina.

Perdue was expected to make a formal announcement later today, according to a Democratic official, who requested anonymity in order to discuss the governor’s decision.

Her likely opponent in the next campaign was to be Pat McCrory, former Charlotte mayor and a Catawba College graduate.

Hat tip to my blog-buddy, ST, who’s a go-to source for Tar Heel State politics and whose site should be one of your regular stops as the (Social) Democratic National Convention rolls into her hometown of Charlotte this summer.

Meanwhile, Ed Morrissey analyzes the egg-on-face moment this gives the Democratic Party and the Obama campaign (but I repeat myself):

Instead of making a triumphant entry into Charlotte and lifting Perdue to re-election, Democrats from around the country will have their convention opened by a one-term governor who couldn’t win re-election even with a Democratic presidential incumbent on the top of the ticket and her party spending a ton of money in her state.  That’s not exactly a winning message for Democrats this summer.

I think this means she gets moved to a 3AM speaking spot.

As for Governor Perdue, herself, I shed no tears at her decision. Not because I’m a partisan Righty who thinks the Democrats don’t deserve to win another election ever, because of the their incompetence and the damage they’ve done to the nation.

Though that’s true.

No, it’s because of that stupid statement about cancelling elections, which she lamely tried to pass off as a joke, that I think she should go away and never be heard from again. It’s not that I think she’s some sort of Fascist, though the proposal itself was. It’s that she has to be either incredibly stupid or incredibly ignorant of American History and political tradition (and of Fascism, itself) to even suggest such a thing and not know how appalling an idea it is.

And we don’t need those kind of ignoramuses in our politics.

Bye-bye, Bev!

Obama plagiarizes himself?

If you’re like me, you were too busy with urgent, pressing matters to watch the President’s State of the Union address last night. You know, things like alphabetizing your DVD collection, or playing Angry Birds. In fact, on Twitter last night I said that I wish presidents would go back to the old tradition of sending a written report to Congress; they’ve become such a pompous  event anymore that they feel like a speech from the throne. Instead, just mail it in.

It seems Obama agrees with me; as this video from the Republican National Committee shows, the President just took his old speeches , rearranged the order, and mailed it in:

Should’ve gone all the way and put a stamp on it, sir, and spared people the disruption of their TV night.

PS: I wonder if “Professor” Obama would ever have let his law-school classes get away with such cheap work?

PPS: On a more serious note, here’s the official Republican response, delivered by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

When geek dreams become real life

Come on, this is Dungeons and Dragons brought to life, thanks to the mad scientists of DARPA: a Wand of Fire Suppression!

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known to its friends as DARPA, has announced their latest innovation: Instant fire suppression. The goal of the research project, which was part of a joint venture with Harvard University, was to find a better way to put out fires. Instead of conventional tactics, DARPA wanted a high-tech tool that would attack the very physical make up of fire using acoustics and electromagnetism.

You might be asking, “But DARPA, we already have perfectly good means of extinguishing fires, don’t we?” Sure, but each method has some pretty major drawbacks. Chemical suppressants, which interrupts the combustion process, are only effective against some types of fires, often result in collateral damage through their use, and are usually toxic. Water and CO2 suppression work well enough by smothering fires, but they still require a physical delivery system — the logistics of which can be hampered by the tight spaces one might encounter onboard a ship, for instance.

Through their research, DARPA wanted to use the physics of fire against itself. In their own words, they sought, “a novel flame-suppression system based on destabilization of flame plasma with electromagnetic fields and acoustics techniques.” Their research paid off in the form of a handheld “wand” device which snuffs out flames.

Click through for video. The big problem is scalability (perhaps power requirements or the size of the fire), but I imagine that can be fixed with enough research. Regardless, this is beyond way-cool. It’s science fiction brought to life, technology as magic.

Now, if they’d only start working on creating a hot Elf chick in a chainmail bikini…

Keystone pipeline rejection a product of crony capitalism?

As they say, Hmmm…

Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

Buffett, aside from being a master investor (1), is also a big supporter of Barack Obama and famously demanded to be taxed at a higher rate, even though a) he can voluntarily pay as much as he wants, and b) his company owed a billion in back taxes as late as last year. (2)

Now, I’m more inclined to think Obama killed Keystone to pander to the enviro-whacko Left, but he’s also shown no restraint about using the power of the federal government to help his buddies. (Solyndra? LightSquared? The UAW?)

As Artie Johnson would say, “Verrryyy Interesting!”

Footnotes:
(1) Seriously. If you invest for yourself, his letters to shareholders are must-reading.
(2) Economist Daniel J. Mitchell has called Buffett “innumerate” for his opinions on taxes.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Now this is a debate I would watch!

Sponsored by Hot Air, moderated by Ed Morrissey, intelligent questions on issues that matter, and with a format that doesn’t resemble a version of “What’s My Line??

Sign me up!

PS: Hey, Ed! If you need a Center-Right blogger for the panel, I know someone who might be available…

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

It’s about time: Arizona to launch investigation of Operation Fast and Furious

It’s bad enough when states have to act to enforce federal law that Washington itself refuses to enforce, as did Arizona and other states when they passed tough anti-illegal immigration laws. But what is a state or local government supposed to do when the federal government is not just refusing to enforce the law, but may itself be one of the lawbreakers?

Answer: Start your own investigation.

Arizona’s state legislature will open its own investigation into the Obama administration’s disgraced gun-running program, known as “Fast and Furious,” the speaker of the state House said Friday.

Speaker Andy Tobin created the committee, and charged it with looking at whether the program broke any state laws — raising the possibility of state penalties against those responsible for the operation.

(…)

Mr. Tobin will announce the committee’s jurisdiction at a press conference in Phoenix on Monday. The committee is charged with looking into the facts about the program, what impact it had on Arizona and whether any of the state’s laws were broken.

A report is due back by March 30.

To recap, Operation Fast and Furious (aka “Gunwalker”) was a program that fed thousands of heavy-duty firearms to Mexican drug cartels, without the knowledge of the Mexican government. Guns were purchased by “straw buyers” who were allowed to walk the firearms over the border into Mexico. The originator of this scheme was the United States Department of Justice, which, through its subordinate law-enforcement agencies, pressured legitimate gun dealers in Arizona to sell these weapons knowing that these sales were likely violations of federal statutes and regulations.

The ostensible purpose was to trace these weapons back to their cartel users, though how that was supposed to work given that the weapons were untraceable until they showed up at Mexican and US crime scenes is unknown.

What is known, however, is that over 300 Mexican military, federal agents, police officers, and civilians are dead from weapons obtained via Gunwalker. In addition, at least one and maybe two US federal officers also were killed with “walked” guns. And the Department of Justice is stonewalling congressional investigating committees, to the extent that –and it appalls me to have to write this– a high-ranking DOJ official is now “pleading the Fifth.” (1)

So, having had enough, the State of Arizona is launching its own inquiry, with the possibility of criminal action down the road.

I wish our neighbors to the East good hunting.

via Big Government

RELATED: Hot Air has news video on the Arizona investigation. See these earlier Gunwalker posts for background links.

Footnote:
(1) Probably because he wants a deal and refuses to be the fall guy. Rats and sinking ships, and all that.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Newt’s South Carolina victory speech

Former Speaker Gingrich won a smashing victory in South Carolina, yesterday, shattering Mitt Romney’s aura of inevitability and, I think ending any idea that this is anything other than a two-man race between him and the former governor. (1)

So, I think it’s worthwhile to see how Newt acts in victory. The short version: I was impressed. He was gracious toward his opponents, seemed presidential, and was right on the money when attacking the Obama administration’s radical and stupid energy policies. But whether he can carry on a national campaign for the nomination with an organization best described as “bare bones” remains to be seen.

For now, at least, he’s a real contender. But I’ll shut up and let the man speak for himself:

Footnote:
(1) Harsh toward Paul and Santorum, but I think nonetheless true. And I really do feel sorry for former Senator Santorum; if the Iowa Republican Party had been at all competent at counting votes, who knows what difference this might have made for his fundraising and later efforts?

PS: Go, 49ers!

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

In which Newt eviscerates CNN’s John King

There’s no other way to describe it: John King, moderating last night’s debate in Charleston, SC, opened with a question about salacious allegations made by Gingrich’s second ex-wife. The former Speaker then gutted King and the MSM in front of the entire nation, calling them out for their biased coverage. It was a thing of beauty, an instant classic. The only thing missing was King falling to his knees in tears to beg for mercy.

Enjoy, my friends:

Now, I’m not much of a fan in Gingrich, though I admire his intellectual acuity; he has a lot of good ideas (and a lot of bad ones). But, were he to become the nominee, I would so look forward to the debates with Obama. The president would be reduced to a quivering mound of Jello.

And I’d need extra popcorn.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Can we call them “Socialists” yet?

Harking back to some of the worst excesses of the New Deal, six Democratic members of the House lead by Denis Kucinich (D-UFO) and all but one members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, have proposed an additional tax on oil companies to be levied when profits rise above “a reasonable level”:

The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a “windfall profit tax” as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what constitutes a reasonable profit.

The Gas Price Spike Act, H.R. 3784 (PDF), would apply a windfall tax on the sale of oil and gas that ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent on all surplus earnings exceeding “a reasonable profit.” It would set up a Reasonable Profits Board made up of three presidential nominees that will serve three-year terms. Unlike other bills setting up advisory boards, the Reasonable Profits Board would not be made up of any nominees from Congress.

The bill would also seem to exclude industry representatives from the board, as it says members “shall have no financial interests in any of the businesses for which reasonable profits are determined by the Board.”

And, of course, “reasonable” would be in the eye of the beholder: in this case, appointees of Barack Obama, renowned class warrior and Socialist. What could go wrong?

Of course, this isn’t about the economic ignorance of the members sponsoring the bill; they’re leftist Democrats, progressives. It’s practically an unwritten law that you have to give up any understanding of basic economics to join that club. The idea that these profits can be returned to shareholders, including pension funds and individual middle-class Americans, many on retirement, via dividends and capital gains is immaterial. And don’t even think of suggesting that these oh so unreasonable profits could be used to expand the business or explore for more oil –or both!– thus creating jobs.

Like I said, to join the club, you have to forswear any economic common sense.

No, this bill, which will never pass the House or even get out of committee, is nothing more than an election year appeal to the worst of Americans populist instincts: class warfare, punishing those “evil” oil companies, and looking for a scapegoat for high gas prices rather than understanding the Law of Supply and Demand. Oh, and already-high federal, state, and local taxes.

It’s all about pandering to people’s frustrations, so they won’t blame the real cause: the radical and against-all-reason natural resources policies of the Democrats and their environmentalist allies that keep us from developing the vast resources we have.

It’s the political equivalent of “Look! It’s Elvis!”

But, let us not forget, it’s also about control and power. These are, after all, progressives, social democrats. Some are full-blown Socialists. It’s their belief that only government can fairly (in their definition, again) distribute wealth. They may not be Marxist, and are thus willing to allow the shareholders to still own their companies, but government has first call on “your” money, to do with what it will. You can keep whatever they decide is reasonable.

Which is why I put “your” in quotes.

In their world, you are not a free citizen with unalienable rights, but a dependent who must wait to see how much of what you earn government will let you keep.

So, while this bill may be a bit of populist red meat that will never pass, it has a very real and very pernicious-to-liberty philosophy behind it.

And it’s another example why the Democrats should never win another election again.

via Jammie Wearing Fool

RELATED: Pirate’s Cove has suggestions for other “reasonable boards.”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Rick Perry drops out; I pout and move on

As I wrote on Twitter, I never get what I want.

From Legal Insurrection, Governor Rick Perry has ridden off into the sunset. The race is down to Romney and Gingrich (1), now.

While I’m disappointed, I can’t say I’m surprised; after starting with tremendous momentum, Perry blew it all in some terrible initial debate performances. And though he did much better in later debates, one only gets one chance to make a first impression, and he couldn’t overcome his. (In spite of having a tremendous video shop. Really, Newt or Mitt should hire these guys.) But this election is not only practical – fix the economy, stupid! — but ideological, a stark choice between American conservatism/classical liberalism and progressive statism. And Perry just couldn’t articulate the conservative case.

And while I’m not surprised, I can say I’m disappointed. Perry had far and away the best overall record of anyone running as well as the right governing philosophy. I’m still convinced that he’d make a great president, even if he isn’t a champion debater.

While 98% of the blame must rest with Governor Perry in this case, the debate process and the ridiculously outsized influence of two or three small states play are broken. The debates are too crowded, reducing the candidates to seeking soundbites and reciting slogans. (Newt being sometimes an exception.) And why in Heaven’s name they let liberal MSM figures moderate debates for conservative candidates, I’ll never know. The questions are designed to make the candidates look bad and they’re almost never on crucial issues (Really, how many times did Fast & Furious or the European debt crisis come up? *crickets*). The AEI debate was the only good one; coincidentally, that was moderated by conservatives.

And the influence of Iowa and New Hampshire? Gee, people in later states once again get to enjoy a meaningless choice on their primary ballot based on the results in a couple of states with electorates smaller than some congressional districts. The primary system is desperately in need of reform, and I suggest the RNC look carefully at alternatives, such as Jim Geraghty’s suggestion.

Ah well. No use crying over a spilled martini. Reports are that Governor Perry has endorsed Former Speaker Gingrich and will campaign for him, especially on 10th amendment issues:

I’m told reliably that Governor Perry will head up a 10th Amendment project for Speaker Gingrich to rally Governors and state legislators toward a plan of devolving power from Washington. This project will include helping shape the Republican platform for the general election, something small government conservatives have been concerned about.

Hopefully this will draw Newt more strongly to the federalist, limited-government side of the Force.

As it is, I can’t get excited about either Romney or Gingrich, each for different reasons. I’ll of course vote for whichever wins the nomination, because getting rid of Obama is the overriding priority. But, from now through November, I may concentrate my efforts on getting as conservative a congress as possible elected, to drag the new president in the Right direction. Sign me up for Operation Counterweight.

Footnote:
(1) Sorry, sweater-vest fans, I just don’t see Santorum going anywhere.

UPDATE: Here’s Governor Perry’s withdrawal speech. Very nice; he’s clearly a classy guy, in the most genuine sense. I wish more people had seen this part of him early on.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

No, my blog is not “going dark” today

Quite a few sites, including the perennially smug Wikipedia, are “going dark” in protest of the proposed SOPA and PIPA acts (background here).  I won’t, because of my distaste for the sanctimonious political theater the Left is so fond of. (1) (And even if some Right-sites are joining in.)

However, this issue is one of those rare ones that brings both Right and Left together: both bills are badly drawn and grant far too much authority to the federal government to block web sites suspected of piracy. While I have little to no sympathy for copyright pirates, one does not fight it by giving the government power to shut anyone down at any time on just a complaint, with no due process. There is a real threat to free speech in these bills, and they must be defeated.

So, while I won’t be draping this site in black, today, I do urge you to contact your senator to urge the withdrawal or defeat of PIPA. (SOPA is, for now, dead.) Senator Marco Rubio, who had distressingly co-sponsored PIPA, has realized his mistake and withdrawn his support.

Here’s a list of remaining cosponsors. If your senator is on the list, contact him or her to make your opposition known. (2) And if Republicans vote for these bills, regardless of who they are, primary them.

Footnotes:
(1) They like to do strange things such as protesting threats to free speech by doing passive-aggressive stuff such as… suppressing their own free speech. As a friend notes, “Seems a bit like giving up your guns to protest a gun ban.” Must be a quirky “moral authority” thing.
(2) Yeah, I know. I’ve got Boxer and Feinstein. A forlorn hope, but letters sent, nonetheless.

UPDATE: From Moe Lane, a list of Republican senators who’ve changed their minds about protecting free speech.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

British scientists find Darwin fossil slides ‘lost’ for 150 years

Got nothing political today (not even a good bit of Biden mockery!) but here’s a neat find for fans of science and history: hundreds of glass slides containing original fossil samples collected by Darwin during his famous voyages.

What Falcon-Lang found, while looking through the old drawers with a flash light, was a collection of 314 slides of specimens by Charles Darwin and his close professional colleagues, including the famous botanist Joseph Hooker and Rev. John Henslow.

Falcon-Lang said he was very surprised and excited to find “quite important and overlooked specimens.” AP reports Falcon-Lang described the moment of seeing Darwin’s signature on the first slide he examined as “a heart in your mouth situation.” The first glass slide was a specimen Darwin acquired during his voyage on the HMS Beagle. Falcon-Lang commented: “To find a treasure trove of lost Darwin specimens from the Beagle voyage is just extraordinary…We can see there’s more to learn. There are a lot of very, very significant fossils in there that we didn’t know existed.”

According to the Paleontologist, some of the significant finds come from the slides Hooker collected in 1846 while working at the British Geological Survey. One was a specimen of prototaxites, a 400 million-year-old tree-sized fungi that grew at a “time the Earth was so hot that not even the Poles had ice.” (1) Other finds, according to Daily Mail, include 40 million-year-old plants from a remote Island off the coast of Chile. Falcon-Lang said,”There are 100 million-year-old fossil trees from the latter age of the dinosaurs. It’s real Jules Verne stuff, and scientists are only now starting to study it and understand its scientific importance.”

I think this kind of stuff is cool: lost treasures, sitting in a closet or cabinet  in a nearly forgotten room until someone stumbles across them. Thank goodness they weren’t chucked out by some overzealous janitor or administrator desperate for space.

RELATED: The Daily Mail has some pictures.

Footnote:
(1) I couldn’t resist highlighting this bit for the global-warming cultists in the crowd. So, the earth was much hotter, the Poles were clear of ice, yet life somehow survived this sweltering greenhouse. Indeed, it prospered. Now there’s “an inconvenient truth” for you.

via neo-neocon

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

At least Newsweek is honest

This really is what the intelligentsia in the MSM, academia, and the leadership of the Democratic Party think of most of the nation:

I don’t know about you, but I prefer this honest contempt to the patronizing variety we usually get.

For those not familiar with Andrew Sullivan, he had been blogger for The Atlantic, until he went off the deep end with wild conspiracy theories about THE TRUTH behind the birth of Trig Palin. Now he writes, supposedly as a conservative, for (what’s left of) Newsweek and The Daily Beast.

But we’re the dumb ones.

via Newsbusters

UPDATE: Joel Pollak asks, “Why is Andrew Sullivan so dumb?”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

The real legacy of Margaret Thatcher

With the release of “The Iron Lady,” there’s been a renewed interest in the person and political career of Margaret Thatcher, in my opinion the second-greatest (1) British Prime Minister of the 20th century. The film has received mixed reviews (also) generally crediting Meryl Streep for a great performance that lifted a problematic script. I haven’t seen the film, myself, so can’t comment on how accurate it is.

The Heritage Foundation, however, was concerned that the film would underplay the great things Thatcher accomplished in Britain by resolutely applying conservative principles. So, they produced this short video reminding us of the Iron Lady’s legacy:

Footnote:
(1) Winston Churchill will always be the greatest. Always.

PS: Sorry about the non-posting this weekend, folks. The NFL playoffs took priority. How ’bout them 49ers?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

“We find your lack of sincerity disturbing, comrade”

Well, now we know why North Koreans were crying so hysterically at the death of psychotic brandy-swilling midget Dear Leader Kim Jong-Il last month. As I wrote at the time:

Some of it may be genuine fear for the future, and I’m sure some of it is also fear of what happens if they don’t perform on cue.

Turns out I was right:

Following the mourning period for former leader Kim Jong Il, North Korean authorities have begun to punish citizens who did not display enough sadness at his death, The Daily NK reported Wednesday.

The Daily NK, an online newspaper based in South Korea and run by opponents of the North Korean government, said it had learned from a source in North Hamkyung Province that, “The authorities are handing down at least six months in a labor-training camp to anybody who didn’t participate in the organized gatherings during the mourning period, or who did participate but didn’t cry and didn’t seem genuine.”

You also get imprisonment or internal exile for daring to question the dynastic succession that gave the throne of the world’s largest prison camp masquerading as a real nation to Dear Leader’s son, Kim Jong-Un.

And people wonder why so many of us are suspicious of government having too much power.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Not that I can afford a Mercedes-Benz…

But, after this, slap me if I ever do try to buy one:

“Some colleagues still think that car-sharing borders on communism,” Mercedes-Benz Chairman of the Board of Management Dieter Zetsche said onstage at CES today, speaking about Mercedes’ new CarTogether initiative. “But if that’s the case, viva la revolucion!”

To be sure, a luxury-car maker like Mercedes is not actually promoting communism. But during his CES talk, Zetsche pushed hard on a vision that the company has for a greener future that allows drivers to reduce emissions by using connected and social technology to easily find compatible passengers to share rides with.

Still, it’s odd–and no doubt intended to stir up conversation–to hear a company so inexorably tied to money and lavish lifestyles invoking philosophies like communism. Especially with a picture of Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara towering over Zetsche as he talked. Of course, Che’s signature beret sported a Mercedes logo.

What’s next? VW embracing its past as the “People’s Car” and using Hitler in its ad campaigns?

I could go on a rant about stupid people treating murderous tyrants such as Che Guevara as trendy fads (the ubiquitous t-shirts come to mind), but two writers have already done a fine job of showing why this is not only mind-numbingly stupid, but a nauseating insult to Che’s victims. First, Michael Gonzalez at The Huffington Post, quoting Guevara’s own words:

Hatred is the central element of our struggle! Hatred that is intransigent…hatred so violent that it propels a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him violent and cold- blooded killing machine…We reject any peaceful approach. Violence is inevitable. To establish Socialism rivers of blood must flow! The imperialist enemy must feel like a hunted animal wherever he moves. Thus we’ll destroy him! These hyenas are fit only for extermination. We must keep our hatred alive and fan it to paroxysm! The victory of Socialism is well worth millions of atomic victims!

Then Humberto Fontova at Big Peace, who’s often written of Che’s murderous sociopathy:

“When you saw the beaming look on Che’s face as the victims were tied to the stake and blasted apart by the firing squad,” said a former Cuban political prisoner Roberto Martin-Perez, to your humble servant here, “you saw there was something seriously, seriously wrong with Che Guevara.” As commander of the La Cabana execution yard, Che often shattered the skull of the condemned man (or boy) by firing the coup de grace himself. When other duties tore him away from his beloved execution yard, he consoled himself by viewing the slaughter. Che’s second-story office in Havana’s La Cabana prison had a section of wall torn out so he could watch his darling firing-squads at work.

Even as a youth, Ernesto Guevara’s writings revealed a serious mental illness. “My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any vencido that falls in my hands!” This passage is from Ernesto Guevara’s famous Motorcycle Diaries, though Robert Redford somehow overlooked it while directing his heart-warming movie.

Guevara was also a rabid racist (see the Gonzalez link) and set in motion plans for a mass terror-bombing of Manhattan in November, 1962, a plot foiled by the FBI.

And this is the figurehead for the new Mercedes-Benz campaign.

Now, I could write something about how this shouldn’t be surprising, because MB is a German company that collaborated with the Nazis, and Naziism was form of Fascism, and Fascism is a product of the Left, as is Communism, so by extension it’s only natural that a Mercedes-Benz executive would feel drawn to Che Guevara, but that would be leaping to conclusions. (1)

It’s much more likely that Herr Zetsche is simply crass, ignorant, and stupid.

But I still wouldn’t buy his cars.

via Dan Mitchell

Footnote:
(1) Perhaps. Maybe.

UPDATE: Fontova on Mercedes-Benz and Che.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

More Green dreams shattered

Two posts at Watts Up With That bring news that that ought to turn the Gaea-cultists’ sweet dreams into nightmares. First, a study from Civitas in the UK demolishes any idea that wind-power is a practical, economic alternate energy source:

The focus on wind-power, driven by the renewables targets, is preventing Britain from effectively reducing CO2 emissions, while crippling energy users with additional costs, according to a new Civitas report. The report finds that wind-power is unreliable and requires back-up power stations to be available in order to maintain a consistent electricity supply to households and businesses. This means that energy users pay twice: once for the window-dressing of renewables, and again for the fossil fuels that the energy sector continues to rely on. Contrary to the implied message of the Government’s approach, the analysis shows that wind-power is not a low-cost way of reducing emissions.

(Full report here (PDF))

They have to pay lip-service to the idea of reducing CO2 emissions, even though there’s no credible evidence of a man-caused greenhouse effect from CO2, because of the success the Green Statists in and outside of government have had in demonizing a gas that’s essentially plant food. The key takeaways, though, are these: because of the unreliability of wind, conventional power stations have to be kept running on standby to handle those times when the turbines aren’t running, either because there’s no wind, or the wind is blowing too fast. That means costs to the consumer skyrocket, as UK residents are finding out. (And we will, too, if Obama and the Eco-lobby in the US have their way.)

But wait, there’s more! It turns out that wind-turbines actually increase the use of CO2 -spewing fossil fuels:

In a comprehensive quantitative analysis of CO2 emissions and wind-power, Dutch physicist C. le Pair has recently shown that deploying wind turbines on “normal windy days” in the Netherlands actually increased fuel (gas) consumption, rather than saving it, when compared to electricity generation with modern high-efficiency gas turbines. Ironically and paradoxically the use of wind farms therefore actually increased CO2 emissions, compared with using efficient gas-fired combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) at full power. [p. 30]

Ooops…

Second, you know all those fears of “ocean acidification,” the Green Left’s latest environmental bogeyman? Turns out it’s another …say it after me… natural process:

It turns out that far from being a stable pH, spots all over the world are constantly changing. One spot in the ocean varied by an astonishing 1.4 pH units regularly. All our human emissions are projected by models to change the world’s oceans by about 0.3 pH units over the next 90 years, and that’s referred to as “catastrophic”, yet we now know that fish and some calcifying critters adapt naturally to changes far larger than that every year, sometimes in just a month, and in extreme cases, in just a day.

Data was collected by 15 individual SeaFET sensors in seven types of marine habitats.  Four sites were fairly stable (1, which includes the open ocean, and also sites 2,3,4) but most of the rest were highly variable (esp site 15 near Italy and 14 near Mexico) . On a monthly scale the pH varies by 0.024 to 1.430 pH units.

The authors draw two conclusions: (1) most non-open ocean sites vary a lot, and (2) and some spots vary so much they reach the “extreme” pH’s forecast for the doomsday future scenarios on a daily (a daily!) basis.

pH varies widely and often, yet life adapts and prospers, in a process that’s gone on for hundreds of millions, if not billions of years. No need to invoke the Demon Man and his evil capitalism to frighten people into obedience and submission to a bunch of liberty and economy-killing  transnational bureaucracies.

Though I’m sure they’ll try, anyway.

Keep dreaming, cultists.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)