Sunday Open Thread

Certainly not a shortage of issues to discuss or make fun of:

1. Is climate change the global threat of our time?

2. Is Hillary the most qualified Democrat for POTUS?

3. Do IRS employees deserve $50 million in bonuses?

4. Will Bernanke stop the presses and will the last mirage of a good economy stop with it?

5. Why does Jay Z win awards for saying the N word and Paula Dean gets fired?

6. Will there be any intelligent analysis of the Farm Bill?

7. Do Democrats still care about ethics and honesty?

Feel free to add your own and have a great Sunday

Advertisements

91 thoughts on “Sunday Open Thread

  1. Retired Spook June 23, 2013 / 9:08 am

    1. No
    2. No
    3. No, but apparently they do deserve $70 million YGBKM!!!
    4. Maybe, Maybe not. They say Bernanke is an extremely intelligent guy, and maybe the dozens of things he’s said publicly that were either wrong or not true are not a reflection of his intelligence, but of his integrity. Hopefully he realizes or is approaching the realization that the longer he artificially stimulates the economy, the worse the next crash is going to be.
    5. Two words: DOUBLE STANDARD
    6. Not on capital hill.
    7. What do you mean, “still”?

  2. Amazona June 23, 2013 / 9:28 am

    Whole other direction here, but I am curious about a couple of language quirks and wonder what you think of them.

    Lately I have heard several people, in describing a sick or bad feeling, say “I felt a pit in my stomach” or something to that effect.

    I always heard that one felt something IN the pit of his stomach,so the first time I heard this it really struck me as odd, and I have heard it several times since. “It was like a pit in my stomach” or “I had a pit in my stomach”.

    The other is one I encountered a few years ago and again just this week. I always heard the phrase “out of pocket” to mean that something had a cost—-“I was out of pocket a hundred dollars for that car repair”. But years ago, in Texas, I heard it used to mean ‘gone’—–“I will be out of pocket all week but will be back next Monday”. I asked around at the time, and found that most people understood it the first way—-“out of pocket” to mean that money had been spent—-but a few had learned it to mean being away.

    I guess I am curious about whether these are regional quirks, or reflect the changes we see so often in language. In an old book, you would see a man described as “gay” and know he was cheerful.

    The general idea of language shifting, of the actual meaning of words changing, was brought to the surface again when I was talking about the difficulties in taking every word in the Bible at what is now face value, given the meaning of words today and the knowledge that this changes so often, and then my commentary on how the term “natural born citizen” was understood to mean something so obvious there was no need to define it in the late 18th Century and now we have no clue.

    • seniorwoman June 23, 2013 / 10:22 am

      Amazona:

      Here in the northern plains the feeling of a “pit in your stomach” is for example…hearing of a death of a friend or a loved one which comes as a total surprise and you get that “rather strange empty slightly shocking” feeling. Or when you hear on the news the rape and murder of a 6yo girl. It has been said around here for at least a 100 hundred years b/c I remember both my mother and grandmother using the “pit” analogy. Same with “out of pocket”. Around here it is a cost you assume that wasn’t part of a deal. I got a couple bids on what it would cost to replace a glass panel in an antique hutch. I chose a bid of $250 and when I got the bill it was for $350. I paid $100 out of pocket b/c my insurance only covered the $250. Or if you want to own bragging rights…….”I bought my new BMW $75k out of pocket” (believe you me, these are examples)

      Course, this is the same area of the country that says “you betcha” and we have “pop” not soda. As far as “gay”…we always thought it meant happy and “gaiety” was part of that. Words get co-opted after a few generations. Meanings change as do signs made with fingers. There is a sign now made with the forefinger and little finger. When I was a kid, that sign meant you were a “ba**ard”. That got ya in big trouble and would cause a fight.

      Some of the regional dialects are just down right funny. Especially when some overpaid elitist English professor in New England says, “rednecks will nevAH be smaht”. This from some guy who can’t roll his “Rs”.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 1:37 pm

        SW, your reference to the use of “out of pocket” shows the same use I am used to—-an expense paid by the person speaking, not a comment on being away from home or work.

        There is a lot in common between the two uses of “pit of the stomach”. The one I am used to is that there is a FEELING in the pit of the stomach, a feeling such as the one you mentioned. But it referred to that feeling being felt in the pit of the stomach, not having a pit in the stomach. It still sounds odd to me when I hear it, because it sounds like a hole has appeared in the person’s stomach, instead of a feeling felt deep in the stomach.

  3. Amazona June 23, 2013 / 9:49 am

    Victor Davis Hanson has a typically pithy and thought-provoking article in NRO, with the theme that truth is the lifeblood of democracy. He goes through a litany of lies from this government that we all know about, but which are seldom addressed in one article, and the weight of one after another after another is really quite staggering.

    There is one I had not heard of:
    “Former EPA director Lisa Jackson created a fake e-mail identity — “Richard Windsor” — to conduct official business off the record. But Jackson did not stop with that ruse. She turned Richard Windsor into an entire mythical persona, who supposedly took online tests and was given awards by the EPA — a veritable Jackson doppelgänger who was certified as “a scholar of ethical behavior” by no less than the agency that the unethical Jackson oversaw.

    What I got from this is that the culture of deception is now so deeply ingrained in Washington, promoted and illustrated by this administration, that something so blatant is probably seen as just a game,an exercise in creative deception, and no big deal—-particularly given the assurance that getting caught will not only not have a penalty but could result in a promotion, a la Susan Rice.

    Now it is acceptable for the Director of National Intelligence to lie, and then toss off his lie as merely the “least untruthful” answer he could give.

    “Deception is now institutionalized in the Obama administration. It infects almost every corner of the executive branch, eroding the trust necessary for the IRS, the Department of Justice, our security agencies, and the president’s official spokesman — sabotaging the public trust required for democracy itself.”

    And then Hanson comments on the corruption of the media and their descent into merely being obedient lapdogs of the Left and of this administration.

    “For one thing, there is no longer a traditional adversarial media in Washington. Spouses and siblings of executives at the major television networks are embedded within the administration. Unlike with Watergate, the media now hold back, believing that any hard-hitting reporting of ongoing scandals would only weaken Obama, whose vision of America the vast majority of reporters share. But that understood exemption only encourages greater lack of candor.”

    It’s a good article.

    • Retired Spook June 23, 2013 / 10:13 am

      VDH — excellent as usual. Who would have thought, as they were shouting “change we can believe in”, and “yes we can” in the fall of 2008 that 4/12 years later their hero would be compared to Richard Nixon — and not in a good way.

      Barack Obama swept up an entire nation in 2008 with his hope-and-change promises of a new honesty and transparency. That dream is now in shambles, destroyed by the most untruthful cast since Richard Nixon, H. R. Haldeman, Ron Ziegler, and John Dean left Washington in disgrace almost 40 years ago — after likewise subverting the very government they had pledged to serve.

    • Cluster June 23, 2013 / 10:14 am

      Amazona,

      Untruthfulness, deception, and lack of integrity is ingrained in our federal government and anymore in our overall society, and that is why I have so very little hope anymore for America. I just don’t see how things will turn out well for this country in say 20 to 50 years if the general populace will not take the time to engage and educate themselves and instead continue to vote for people who mislead, deceive and distort the issues and play on their emotions and lack of truthful information. This country is quickly devolving into a banana republic and the leaders and general population are unfortunately playing their respective roles very well.

  4. Norma Stitz June 23, 2013 / 10:25 am

    I must say that, while I do enjoy (I suppose I should say “did enjoy”) Paula Deen’s shows, it is amazingly bad judgment for any public non-black person to admit casual use of the n-word. This is no commentary on the use of the word, but to say so publicly is monumentally dumb, and in this case it cost Paula her show.

    As to there being a double-standard, well, duh, as the kids say. This is exactly why Paula should never have said anything, and once it slipped out should have apologized quickly and effectively. The world is full of double-standards and Paula should have known to avoid this one.

  5. bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 10:47 am

    1. No, massive youth unemployment is the global threat of our time.

    2. Yes, under numerous metrics she is the most qualified. Bill is already campaigning for her. He’s already distancing Hillary from Obama on things from the NSA to the IRS. He’s going after the disenchanted youth who doubt Obama.

    My question is what the GOP is going to do to engage young voters. By this I don’t mean as a special interest group, but as a group with concrete concerns like future career paths which might not be shared by e.g. retirees. One can’t keep abandoning the young like the GOP has done, it creates middle age Dem voters.

    3. No, government employees and bonuses are always incongruous.

    4. No, Bernanke will not let the mirage go. He caters to the likes of George Soros not the general population.

    5. Because JayZ is a talented singer/poet and so is allowed poetic license this applied to Jewish comedian Lenny Bruce as well. JayZ is also African American and so is given some leeway on how he thinks the n-word is received by blacks.

    Paula Deen (not Dean) is a thrice married, white trash queen who pushes fat food to obese Americans and declared herself to be diabetic to make money as a spokeswoman for an insulin manufacturer Novo Nordisk. Her worst alleged use of the n-word has the ring of return-the-South-to-glory caricature more appropriate to the Dukes of Hazard (from Wikipedia)

    “According to the court documents, the plaintiff stated that she was appointed by Deen to handle the catering and staff for Bubba’s wedding (Deen’s restaurant which caters weddings) in 2007, and she asked Deen what the servers should wear; “Well what I would really like is a bunch of little n***ers to wear long-sleeve white shirts, black shorts and black bow ties, you know in the Shirley Temple days, they used to tap dance around.”

    STILL she makes some tasty food.

    6. No, the farm bill is to enlarge the profits of agribusiness and the Dems/GOP politicians both get big handouts from the Nestles of the world. Remember when ethanol was only going to be an alternative at the pump, not de facto mandatory? I can’t fill my car up without contributing to the poor science of corn as energy alternative baloney.

    7. As Spook wrote “still ?”

    • neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 12:56 pm

      7. As Spook wrote “still ?”

      EVER??

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 1:56 pm

      dolf:

      1. “Massive youth unemployment” is the direct and inevitable outcome of government interference in the marketplace and redistribution of income. It is exacerbated by a culture in which “youth” are poorly educated, receive little or no practical training, and have grown up expecting someone or something, such as the government or unions, to step in and make their lives easier.

      We see this dependency attitude in comments like of rico, whose opinion is that the biggest problem in “income inequality”. First, there is the strange concept that income among wildly different age groups, skill sets and levels, education, complexity of work and work ethic should somehow, for some reason, be “equal”. Of course the unspoken corollary to this simple minded concept is that “someone” must have the motive and the power to, somehow, solve this perceived “problem”.

      I ran into this attitude about a year and a half ago. I had two young men helping me move from Wyoming, and because the trip was so long they would stay at my place in Colorado one night and in Wyoming the next. One night we were talking about jobs, and I said that some people are, from an employer’s standpoint, more valuable than others. It was like dropping a stun grenade in the room. They were genuinely befuddled and, I think, possibly offended. The very IDEA that I would hire two people at the same time and then, after seeing the quality of work they did, pay one more than the other because his contribution to my business was worth more than the other’s was simply incomprehensible. Not only that, but completely NEW. They were in their early 20s, had bounced from one low-level job to another, and never grasped the concept that their work was being evaluated and therefore their contributions to their various employers was being evaluated, and that when they fell short of expectations or the contributions of fellow workers they were sent on their way.

      2. Under the very limited metrics of exposure to the position of the presidency and participation in national and international affairs (no pun intended) Hillary might be considered the best qualified candidate for the presidency. That is, if exposure is all that matters. When you get into areas like competency and integrity, the basic experience metric simply does not outweigh her history of dishonesty, incompetence and general lack of qualifications for any high office. The only office which she might be said to have filled well was that of Senator, but once she got into a position of personal authority and responsibility, she fell apart. OK, the “RESET” thing was more embarrassing than anything else, but it was a harbinger of silly, stupid, self-serving and short-sighted decisions. And if the Benghazi debacle was not enough to convince you that she should never, ever, be in a position of power again then you are simply not paying attention.

      • bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 3:04 pm

        Amazona

        I didn’t say anything about the causes of youth unemployment. I simply stated that it was a huge problem. Of course one could wonder why the baby boomers didn’t perpetuate the good education that they themselves received. IMO the boomers are by and large Clinton-esque lazy bums who inherited so much from the previous generation that they were somewhat successful despite themselves.

        Since boomer metrics are by and large what positions were held (not what true talent was shown) I’d argue that Hillary is the ideal boomer candidate. Nothing is as nebulous as what a CEO out of a management school contributes talent-wise to a company. A founder of a company is different entirely, but the boomer notion is that one goes to Harvard gets an MBA and knows the business.

        And the GOP has abandoned any number of groups when it approaches every election as a carving up into little groups and places and just getting enough votes. THIS IS NEWT GINGRICH’s opinion not mine. I think he is correct. I intentionally stayed away from preaching identity politics.

        Also, I mentioned Lenny Bruce in support of my contention that performers are traditionally given more slack. You simply can’t defend Paula because there is no defense. If you think that white americans aren’t allowed to be as indecent as Jay-Z you haven’t heard of honey boo boo, “Pawn Stars” and the thousands of white trash programs that pollute reality TV.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:12 pm

        “Thousands” of them, eh?

        Wow. Who knew.

        Thousands. As cappy would say, something to think about.

        BTW, I do know of one, because a friend loves it—“Duck Dynasty”. I haven’t watched it, but I did buy a book written by the guy who started the duck call company and made millions on it, and while you are sitting in your adobe tower sneering at the “white trash” I am admiring someone who had a dream, made a better product than the competition, and went out and worked his tail off till he got it placed in the marketplace. I’ve only had time to read the beginning, but I am very impressed.

        He went to a local WalMart and talked the head of the sporting goods department into carrying some of his home-made duck calls. When he finally succeeded in doing this, he went down the road and did the same thing with the next WalMart, and then the next one, and then the next one, and so on.

        One day he got a call from the sporting goods buyer for WalMart who asked him why he had all these stores selling his duck calls, because the buyer had not bought them. When he heard the story, and realized that this man had had the initiative and energy to get his product placed when executives ignored him, he gave him the account. And a true Duck Dynasty was born.

        So I have much more respect for what you sneeringly call “white trash” because this man had a dream, had a skill, put them together with a lot of hard work, and made a lot of money doing it, than I do for you. To me, he is much more of an example of the American Dream at work than you are. So you just keep looking down that elitist nose at him, and people like him, if that’s what floats your boat.

        And whatever his family gets paid for their show, I say “more power to them”. Good for them.

      • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 6:29 pm

        Amazona: We see this dependency attitude in comments like of rico, whose opinion is that the biggest problem in “income inequality”. First, there is the strange concept that income among wildly different age groups, skill sets and levels, education, complexity of work and work ethic should somehow, for some reason, be “equal”.

        No, what I’m saying is that NATIONS (not “age groups, skill sets and levels, education, complexity of work and work ethic” within them) which have the largest inequalities (i.e., those who score high on the GINI index) also have the most unstable governments, regardless of type, whereas stable democratic governments almost always have the smallest inequalities. The problem is that the US is in serious outlier status in that regard, and is thus more imperiled as to the status of its democracy. Romney may have been misquoted, but there is no denying the power of his “I’m not interested in the lower 49%” argument. (I apologize if that’s not a verbatim quote: please emphasize the meaning of the content instead).

        Amazona again: Of course the unspoken corollary to this simple minded concept is that “someone” must have the motive and the power to, somehow, solve this perceived “problem”.

        Oh hon, that’s not it at all. Your major problem is that you’re equating microeconomics with macroeconomics. But don’t blame yourself: that, I would say, is the fundamental problem with your “constitutionalist conservative” outlook — or someone else’s “mutt libertarian” outlook, or someone else’s Tea Party movement, or someone else’s “Occupy Wall Street or Something Big Having To Do With Big Money” movement. IMO, ALL of them have something in common. And IMO, that commonality is the consequences accruing to the changes in what can realistically be expected in the 21st century economy. The better the GOP defines those expectations the better off the party will be. And that, to me, is the bottom line.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 11:50 pm

        Well, rico, I guess we can be grateful that you admit you are not quoting Romney accurately. Now if only you could admit that you are not even in the ballpark with your goofball claim of “…. the meaning of the content …” you might be nearing the gravitional pull of sanity.
        Hell, you’re not even on the same PLANET as the “meaning of the content”, if you are claiming it was a statement that he didn’t care about these people.

        Surely even you understand that Mitt Romney, speaking to political donors about where and how their money would be best spent, was saying that it would not be wise to spend that money trying to attract people who do not pay taxes and therefore not only have no dog in the hunt regarding the need to cut taxes, they do have a dog in the hunt regarding continuing of government programs that benefit them at the cost of the other 53%.

        Sure, translating this into something negative and spoon-feeding it to the ignorant was a successful tactic. Thanks for reminding us of the target audience of that particular act of demagoguery.

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 2:06 pm

      Since you’re into correcting of spelling,it was Dukes of Hazzard, as in Hazzard County Kentucky.

      Your tendency to veer off into utter silliness pops up again with this gem: ” One can’t keep abandoning the young like the GOP has done, it creates middle age Dem voters. ”

      ???????????????????????????

      ABANDONING THE YOUNG ??????????????????

      You mean like not appealing to them on the shallow, superficial, American Idol level the Left uses, in its constant demeaning of “the young” as simply too stupid and poorly educated to know they are being manipulated? You mean that kind of “abandonment”?

      If you are suggesting that Republicans follow along the Dem path and treat “the young” like mindless rodents that need to be lured into the voting booth with promises of goodies, then you might be right. But this is an indictment of the educational system, the culture, and the ethics of the Left, not of a party which does not pander to whims.

      Or at least should not pander to whims.

      Perhaps in one way the GOP HAS “abandoned the young” by not doing a good job of pointing out how important votes are, what those votes really mean regarding their future, and the silliness and vapidity of voting according to what is mouthed by some celebrity whose only life skill is the ability to pretend to be someone else.

      If this is the case, clarify your point. But please do not bleat some platitude about “abandoning THE YOUNG”. Next you’ll be complaining about the “War On Women”.

      • bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 3:10 pm

        Why did I know you wouldn’t be a Dukes of Hazzard fan? The Dukes of Hazzard is based in fictional Hazzard County Georgia. Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane would be disappointed.

        Any comment on Deen wanting the waitstaff at her restaurant to parade around like ‘n**gers’ from the Shirley Temple days?

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 4:59 pm

        Of course I was not a Dukes of Hazzard fan, but I did know how to spell it.

        Because I really don’t care, I just flipped through that and latched onto Harlan County, not Hazzard County. It was a “whatever” moment, spurred by your spelling correction for someone else. Too funny to see someone misspell a word while correcting someone else.

        And I am the loudest voice in favor of not getting sucked into the “issues” trap that the Left sets so well. The GOP did not divide the nation into disparate and mutually distrustful groups, but they certainly have been quite inept in dissolving the divisions so artfully created by the Divide and Conquer Left.

        It’s just that I would not say the GOP has abandoned those groups nearly as much as they have been outplayed, because they have been up against the guys who invented the game in the first place.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 5:06 pm

        Why should I comment on what Deen said? And why would you even hint that I have been or ever would defend her? What a sneaky and dishonest thing to say. What is it with the “teachers” who come to this blog, who evidently cannot process the written word or at least be confined by it when trying to come up with snarky “responses”.

        It was a hateful horrible thing to say. It’s just that I am one who can recognize that without being hateful and horrible myself. (“….thrice married, white trash queen…”) Also don’t make other claims that I have said, done or defended something when I clearly have not.

        I always wonder about you when you pull out some Lefty trick like trying to pretend that one thing is relevant to another, or to divert from one thing to another. Stick to what I really say and this will go a lot more smoothly.

        Oh, and you might drop that “white trash” thing, too. So so tacky, and of course racist. Trash is trash, along the lines of “trashy is as trashy does” and it has nothing to do with color.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:03 pm

        As for your conviction that mentioning Lenny Bruce is supposed to give you some cred or something, well, that’s just silly.

        Lenny Bruce is one of those “emperor-has-no-clothes” ARTISTES the pseudo-cool admire because it is ever so avant-garde to ooh and ahh over someone who is vulgar and crude. Shows you are hip and cool and all, doncha know?

        Bruce was before my time, but I have made a point of reading about him and listening to some of his stuff and he struck me as an earlier version of the current unfunny “comedians” who have to resort to the F-bomb to get a titter out of people who are afraid to stand up and admit they don’t really think he is very funny.

        Not cool, you know.

        So I don’t give a flip about what Lenny Bruce said or why or who gave him a pass on it or why.

      • bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 6:23 pm

        “It is the double standard that says that if you are black, you just can’t be expected to meet any standard of decency.” – Amazona

        My point is that there is no standard of decency for any color nowadays. There is only a standard of who can make companies the most money. JayZ is a performer and his base expects him to be DEFY the system, to be ‘controversial’ hence his expression of ‘freedom’ is his use of the n-word. Paula Deen has the role of being a model Southern dame. Her schtick is exactly to DEFY the system, to say to all those in power that she is going to cook unhealthy food because she is a free woman. Her audience sees her use of the n-word as a racist expression not a controversial freedom of expression.

        In both cases if either JayZ or Paula do something that changes the bottom line of their handlers then they are gone.

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 2:13 pm

      As for your #5—BS. It has nothing at all to do with this alleged “talent” and everything to do with skin color. Awwww, you call this “poetic LICENSE!!!!” Bull. It is racism. It is the double standard that says that if you are black, you just can’t be expected to meet any standard of decency. It is part and parcel of the Left’s demeaning attitude toward black people, ranging from the overt racism exemplified by Affirmative Action to the claims that black people should not be expected to speak or write clearly because, you know they are black to the clamor that even noticing the skin color of another is RACIST !!!!! to the assumption that black people need the government to feed and house them to the myriad other examples of expectations lowered for all sorts of reasons which all boil down to the same thing—-that it is racist to expect people of one color to behave decently BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR.

      And in Upside-Down-Inside-Out America, treating people as people is considered the racist act, while assuming they can never measure up is not.

  6. tiredoflibbs June 23, 2013 / 11:37 am

    1) yes, if they get to impose the leftist radical “solutions” that will cripple economies.
    2) define “qualified”. Whether or not they believe in the Constitution as written and its intended implementation.
    3) no. The IRS needs to be put out of business.
    4)yes. Yes. We have already seen that a hint of the slowing of federal cash input, the stock market take a dive.
    5) double standard and political correctness and chicken-sh!t executives.
    6) not by the praetorian guard for 0bAMATEUR in the MSM.
    7) only when they don’t have control. They are “morally selective”.

  7. Retired Spook June 23, 2013 / 11:39 am

    My question is what the GOP is going to do to engage young voters. By this I don’t mean as a special interest group, but as a group with concrete concerns like future career paths which might not be shared by e.g. retirees. One can’t keep abandoning the young like the GOP has done, it creates middle age Dem voters.

    Dolf, there’s been no better time in recent memory to engage the 18-30 demographic that has become disenchanted with Obama by the droves in the last few months. Unfortunately, I don’t believe the GOP on a national level has any idea how to engage young voters without making it seem like pandering. Since the biggest problem facing young voters is jobs, they will be attracted to areas of the country that are creating the most jobs, and the vast majority, if not all of those areas are currently being run by Republicans. Sort of a back-door way of connecting with this demographic, but probably the only one that will work at this point.

    • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 1:12 pm

      Spook: Since the biggest problem facing young voters is jobs, they will be attracted to areas of the country that are creating the most jobs, and the vast majority, if not all of those areas are currently being run by Republicans. Sort of a back-door way of connecting with this demographic, but probably the only one that will work at this point.

      That’s a terrible strategy! For one thing, it’s predicated on the assumption that people attracted to areas “run by Republicans” will change their attitudes rather than the politics of the area. In fact, the evidence suggests it’s more often the other way around. E.g., ask Mark about Nevada.

      For another, the states projected to add the most jobs (on a percentage basis) in 2013 are not at all run by Republicans. It’s more of a mixed bag. The same is true for the states projected to add the most net jobs in 2013. So even that aspect of your premise is in serious question.

      Face it, Republicans have to change their message. The obvious target in the short term is immigration reform. But more fundamentally I think we have to address the issue of income inequality. That’s the biggie, IMO.

      • neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:29 pm

        reek-O
        I think we have to address the issue of income inequality. That’s the biggie, IMO.

        WHY??
        WHERE in the constitution is that relegated to the government??
        Oh wait……silly me that was Marx.

        PS just donate YOUR entire income to some welfare loafers…show us / lead by example!

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 2:23 pm

        “….the assumption that people attracted to areas “run by Republicans” will change their attitudes rather than the politics of the area. In fact, the evidence suggests it’s more often the other way around. E.g., ask Mark about Nevada.”

        Yes, please DO ask Mark about Nevada. I’m sure he can tell you in detail how the influx of Lefties driven out of California and Washington State and Oregon into Nevada, and their subsequent impact on Nevada government as they imposed their Leftist nonsense on a previously sane state, quickly dragged that state into the unenviable position of having the highest foreclosure and unemployment rate in the nation.

        I wouldn’t stop with asking Mark. I’d ask any long-time Nevada resident about the corrosive impact of Leftism on the state, as people rushed in because of its conservative government and to escape the miseries of the Leftist governments they left behind and then turned Nevada into Caliwashingon Lite and recreated the same messes that drove them to Nevada in the first place.

        I’d ask lots. After all, as a “PRAGMATIST” you really want to know the truth, right?

        Do get back to us on that, ‘kay?

      • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 3:53 pm

        Amazona: Yes, please DO ask Mark about Nevada. I’m sure he can tell you in detail how the influx of Lefties driven out of California and Washington State and Oregon into Nevada, and their subsequent impact on Nevada government as they imposed their Leftist nonsense on a previously sane state, quickly dragged that state into the unenviable position of having the highest foreclosure and unemployment rate in the nation.

        Well, you added a bunch of things, but you reinforced my point — that you can’t count on politics to remain the same when people from other states “invade”. It very much depends on where they come from, why they’ve migrated, and how old they are. But here’s the over-arching reality: where do you expect the invasion to come from? My guess is that it’s from a more urban area to a somewhat less urban one — one which (if things go well) is soon to become more urban. And it seems to me that that’s the basic, long-term reality of it all: it’s not fundamentally about race or ethnicity. Over the long run, if the Republican party abandons urban-dwellers the party is doomed. Ethnicity and race is secondary to that equation. But economics is essential. Evidence accumulating from many cities indicate the truth of that. And it’s all about putting pragmatics before ideology. Houston, TX might be the best of the most recent examples.

      • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 4:44 pm

        Amazona just put the lie to Spook’s contention that the only hope for the future of the Republican party is to hope that people from “blue” areas migrate to “red” areas, as if by some miracle that would change their attitude from “blue” to “red”.

        She said, … I’d ask any long-time Nevada resident about the corrosive impact of Leftism on the state, as people rushed in because of its conservative government and to escape the miseries of the Leftist governments they left behind and then turned Nevada into Caliwashingon Lite and recreated the same messes that drove them to Nevada in the first place.

        In other words Amazona confirmed that people who are attracted to areas “run by Republicans” will change the politics in the area much more than they will their own attitudes. And that doesn’t help the GOP.

        Additionally, the country in general is becoming more urban, and there are no realistic alternative. Consequently, if the GOP wants to remain viable, the party has to become increasingly more relevant in urban environments, regardless of the ethnic/racial mix within them.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 4:55 pm

        Sorry, rico, but I “put the lie” to nothing.

        Or did I miss the part where Spook said that there would be an instantaneous epiphany on the part of migrating Lefties? No, it might take a while for it to sink in that they have ruined their refuges by making them into images of what they had fled. Let’s face it, if you are a Lefty you are already identified as being somewhat dense and not good at connecting the dots, such as seeing the relationship between the Leftist model and miserable living conditions. They will have to bring that model with them to change what they fled TO into what they fled FROM to begin to see the connection.

        Really, rico, you need to stop being such a nitpicker.

        But then you wouldn’t be rico, would you?

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) June 23, 2013 / 6:10 pm

        Face it, Republicans have to change their message. The obvious target in the short term is immigration reform.

        Yeah, because that worked out so well for them in 1986.

        But more fundamentally I think we have to address the issue of income inequality. That’s the biggie, IMO.

        What???????????? You’re kidding, right?

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:17 pm

        What is this new ABANDONING theme you guys are spouting? Some Lefty talking heads on Sunday morning TV blathering on and on about those Wascawwy Wepubwicans ABANDONING people?

        You guys are too funny.

        I was going to say “You boys are too funny” but then CO would get his knickers in a twist and be howling at the moon about my “racism”.

  8. seniorwoman June 23, 2013 / 12:16 pm

    1. No, a troubled world full of moronic males who run countries are the global threat.

    2. If you want a liar and a cheat she certainly is. Well, until another unqualified black man comes along and challenges her as happened in 2008. Then watch her LOYAL followers and the DNC throw her under the bus again.

    3. No, the IRS needs to be gone. No agency should have as much power to ruin families and business as the totally irresponsible IRS.

    4. Nope.

    5. There is NO good racism and no one should get a pass. I don’t care who they are or their color.

    6. When over 80% is for food stamps and rich Hollyweirdos there is NO farm bill. So much could have been cut from this travesty. I do agree with flood insurance.

    7. Ditto on the “still” ?

    • neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:42 pm

      No, a troubled world full of moronic males

      Whoa, go easy on US moronic males…LOL we cant help it 🙂

  9. J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) June 23, 2013 / 12:21 pm

    Is climate change the global threat of our time?

    The Strata-Sphere blog had an interesting analysis a couple days ago that would seem to indicate that it’s not.

    Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven’t. In a SPIEGEL interview, meteorologist Hans von Storch discusses how this “puzzle” might force scientists to alter what could be “fundamentally wrong” models.

    “Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn’t happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) — a value very close to zero. This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.”

    I take issue with the claim the models are “fundamentally wrong“. They actually appear to be correct – for the case where there is no CO2 forcing.

    It seems strange to me thatboth the alarmists and the skeptics forget that the climate models were run to show two diverging scenarios. And the one scenario that has been born out in the measurements is the one where there is no CO2 forcing.

    Seems we have validated the models – just not the way the IPCC and alarmists wanted.

    • neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:09 pm

      that the climate models were run to show

      EXACTLY!!
      GI GO a man made HOAX!!

    • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 2:57 pm

      JR: Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions.

      Actually, that’s not what they predicted, and not even what “the models” predict. To assume that one would have to assume that collective GHG emissions is/are the only forcer(s) involved, and that’s ludicrous. For the last decade or so many of China’s cities have been increasingly choking in smog. Does CO2 cause smog? No. Sulfates, nitrates, and particulates do. And those compounds are largely negative forcers which counteract the effects of positive forcers such as GHGs.

      A very similar situation occurred in Western countries following WWII until the late 70s when it became apparent that smog-producing compounds were not only strangling the cities in which they were produced, but also causing acid rain — and consequently crop reductions and other caustic effects — in wide areas leeward to them. So a major effort was launched to reduce those emissions in North America and Western Europe. Soon thereafter global temperatures increased considerably more rapidly. Coincidence? I think not. I’m not implying that’s the only variable involved (volcanic activity is also on the rise, and the oceans are retaining heat as well), but you don’t need a model to tell you it was important.

      Now China has started to pour large amounts of capital into cleaning up their own dirty air. And they’re doing it smart — a lot of that capital is being invested in alternative energy. It’s not because it’s cheaper at the moment, but because they realize that’s where the future of energy lies. And energy is a HUGE market — globally, well into the area trillions of dollars per year. IMO, it is PROFOUNDLY stupid to pump FAR more federal money into perpetuating fossil fuel industries rather than promoting future energy industries.

      But you’re right, JR, CO2 concentrations are accelerating pretty much linearly. So why aren’t global temperatures? It seems to me that you have to subscribe to one of the following general categories:

      (1) CO2 is not a GHG. That stands in contradiction to everything physics indicates, but is consistent with a comment in the article you cited, “I take issue with the claim the models are “fundamentally wrong“. They actually appear to be correct – for the case where there is no CO2 forcing.” If so, I offer you to provide an alternative model.

      (2) The positive forcings provided by GHGs (especially CO2) are somehow naturally offset by the negative forcings provided by other things (e.g., clouds, Commies, etc.). If so, I offer you to provide evidence.

      (3) No one has any freakin’ clue as to what’s happening. It’s all a complete mystery. If so, you’re an animist, or at least a profound pessimist, and no further discussion is warranted.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) June 23, 2013 / 10:19 pm

        Actually, that’s not what they predicted

        Actually, it is. Take your pick of lots and lots of articles and studies.

    • tiredoflibbs June 23, 2013 / 6:28 pm

      “Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven’t.”

      Algore’s own graphic, in his “documentary” A Convenient Lie, does not show this! In fact, it shows that temperemature changes LEADS greenhouse gas changes by 800 years! Hardly a rise in parallel, and the hardly global threat that the dumbed down talking points say. If greenhouse gases were the cause then it would be the opposite of he measured observation.

  10. neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:07 pm

    we need a smart but tough pit bull like Allen West on the ticket as VP. Then a REAL conservative as #1 (think R. Paul (not rue) T. Cruise, etc) Our dream team. They would mop the floor with the old pant suited hag.

    • bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 4:54 pm

      No chance Paul or Cruise gets the nomination. The GOP will put up another out of touch dipstick in 2016. How about Krispycreme or Rubikscube for a sure fire descent into irrelevancy?

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 5:58 pm

        “Cruise” as in Tom, or “Cruz” as in Ted?

      • neocon01 June 24, 2013 / 9:01 am

        ****“Cruise”**** as in Tom, or “Cruz” as in Ted?

        DUH!!! 😦

      • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 1:10 pm

        Hey, you never know. If 5’8″ baby-faced Tom can play 6’5″ rugged fill-the-doorway Jack Reacher (albeit not very convincingly) then he might be able to play President, no doubt far more convincingly than our current bad actor.

  11. Cluster June 23, 2013 / 1:15 pm

    Recently discovered this quote from Margaret Thatcher which I think says it all!!

    “Do you know that one of the great problems of our age is that we are governed by people who care more about feelings than they do about thoughts and ideas.”

  12. neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:24 pm

    cluster
    another great British quote

    “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty, you have no brain.”

    ― Winston Churchill

    • neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:54 pm

      ROYFLMAO….

      Kenyans Rage Online as Obama Skips Father’s Homeland on Africa Trip

      Rachel Rose Hartman, a White House reporter for Yahoo! News, couldn’t possibly have missed the “birther” story. It was unavoidable, after all, for an unhealthy chunk of the president’s first term.

      Yet: In her story yesterday on Obama’s Africa trip, Hartman managed to say that “he won’t be stopping in the country of his birth.” From the context of the story, it’s clear she was referring to Kenya.

      • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 2:26 pm

        Yeah, but when Barry/Michelle/ et al refer to Kenya as his birthplace, these are just “gaffes”. You know, silly little misstatements that don’t mean a thing, just keep moving, folks, nothing to see here…………………..

      • Cluster June 23, 2013 / 2:31 pm

        Again, a country full of deceptive, misleading, unthinking people.

    • ricorun June 23, 2013 / 3:12 pm

      “People, regardless of their age, sex, race, ethnicity, experiences, preferences, or persuasions, have to learn how to deal with intransigent, self-absorbed assholes.”

      — me

  13. neocon01 June 23, 2013 / 1:59 pm

    New Black Panther Leader With ‘Kill Whitey’ Face Tattoo Busted on Gun Charge

    maybe we should introduce him to GZ…….OH wait, he has already put a hit out on him.

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 2:27 pm

      Yet I’ll bet no one on the Left decries this as “racism”. Much less the dreaded Worse-Than-Anything HATE SPEECH that has the Left so upset.

    • seniorwoman June 23, 2013 / 2:39 pm

      neo:

      No offense was intended since you don’t run the world and I don’t consider you a moronic male.

      Did you happen to catch where his lawyer said this fine upstanding Black Panther did community service for kids at risk of becoming criminals? You can not make this stuff up. There is a video of him on the streets preaching his hatred of whites and how he wants all whites and white babies killed.

  14. bardolf2 June 23, 2013 / 6:30 pm

    “What is this new ABANDONING theme you guys are spouting? Some Lefty talking heads on Sunday morning TV blathering on and on about those Wascawwy Wepubwicans ABANDONING people?” – Amazona

    Well, since I am on vacation in Italy I have been remiss in watching Sunday morning TV. Actually, I rarely watch TV nowadays to balance out all the Dukes of Hazzard I watched in my youth.

    I have been reading David Brooks lately and going through some of Newt’s thoughts on enlarging the GOP. The GOP won’t win if they don’t talk to people that didn’t vote for them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/opinion/brooks-a-second-g-o-p.html?_r=0

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:44 pm

      “The GOP won’t win if they don’t talk to people that didn’t vote for them. ”

      No, the GOP won’t win as long as they play the Left’s game. The Right is talking to people, but they are trying to win them over regarding “issues” the Left has created and the Left OWNS.

      What the GOP needs to do is to find a way to get the message across that elections are not about “issues” but about how best to govern the nation. And they won’t/can’t do that as long as they sit around till the Left creates a “gotcha!” and uses it to set up a new “issue” and then play defense on that “issue”.

    • Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:52 pm

      BTW, the David Brooks article is crap. Anyone who is willing to be influenced by pap such as a claim there is an “…… absolute antigovernment story of the current G.O.P. “ is a moron.

      “Absolute antigovernment story”????????? Huh? You buy into this nonsense?

      Brooks is tickled because some “conservatives” continue to be sucked into the “issues” trap, and is opining that the Right needs to sucked in even further. Wow, what great advice!! From someone with sooo much insight into the GOP that he claims its “story” is about being “absolutely antigovernment”.

      It was “issues” that defeated us, because Americans prefer to focus on”issues” rather than on government, and the Left promotes this because they know if Americans ever start to think about actual government, and comparing the records of the Right and the Left, they are doomed.

      Yeah. let’s gather around to figure out how to talk some more about “issues”. And let’s keep taking advice from people like Brooks, who is doing the political equivalent of handing a guy a shovel to dig a hole before pushing him in.

      Brilliant analysis, there, Prof.

    • seniorwoman June 23, 2013 / 7:03 pm

      The GOP shouldn’t hold their breath to get the Latino vote. At least not until everyone who votes has a voter ID card. They won’t get the black vote either. Now I am pretty sure the Democrats will lose the Tsarnaevs’ votes. When the GOP talks about the real issues, the real problems facing the USA and tells everyone that it doesn’t matter color or race or religion then the GOP might have a chance. Until then, social justice and one party rule will reign supreme and the USA will become just another country with a lost identity.

      I think I hear Khrushchev laughing.

  15. Amazona June 23, 2013 / 6:34 pm

    Anybody see Chuckie Schumer’s latest temper tantrum?

    Poor Chuckie–evidently he thought sending Hillary to Russian with a misspelled “RESET” button, in a juvenile and smirky effort to snuggle up to the Russians and slam Bush at the same time, made them suddenly our friends.

    Awwww—–ain’t that sweet? Barry whispers a little pillow talk into Medveded’s ear about how he’ll be Putin’s BFF once he snookers the US public again, and thinks this means he has resolved the century-old animosity between the two nations. Yeah, because who doesn’t just loooooove Barry?

    And who could fail to be won over by the winsome charms of the Hildebeast, as she smirked for the camera?

    Now Chuckie and the Left realize that you can be in the same room as a bear, but you’d better not think this means the bear wants to be your friend, or won’t take a bite out of you if he gets a chance.

    Poor Chuckie is simply stunned—–STUNNED, I tell you!—-to learn that the bear does not see us as huggy-bear buddies. “……..allies are supposed to treat each other in decent ways and Putin always seems almost eager to put a finger in the eye of the United States, whether it is Syria, Iran and now of course with Snowden,” Schumer said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

    “ALMOST eager”??? Chuckie, you need to get out more. Get out of the echo chamber and you might not be so taken aback by something that surprises very very few people.

    “Schumer did not say what kind of consequences Putin and Russia would suffer, but mentioned efforts to reduce nuclear arms, economic, political and diplomatic effects.”

    Ooooh! Now Vladimir has gotta be scared!

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/schumer-russia-snowden-putin

    • Cluster June 23, 2013 / 7:19 pm

      Hard to believe how clueless this regime is from the economy to foreign affairs. But they did “evolve” on gay marriage so that counts for something, right?

  16. Cluster June 23, 2013 / 8:29 pm

    So not only does the majority of Americans have sh*t for brains – so do our elected representatives:

    “So that’s the answer from U.S. Senators,” Crane, an ICE agent and a former marine, told Breitbart News exclusively on Sunday morning. “They know the bill is bad but plan to pass it anyway? With billions of taxpayer dollars to be spent and the safety of the public on the line, Senators plan to pass the buck to the House with hopes they might fix it? Anti-enforcement special interests have succeeded in pressuring the Senate from doing what’s best for America. This is why America has lost faith in its lawmakers.”

    I hope everyone realizes what deep kimchee we are all in. I am so sad that Romney lost. He had the moral fiber and the experience to try and turn this around. As it is, we still have a brainless coward in the White House.

    • neocon01 June 24, 2013 / 4:41 pm

      As it is, we still have a MARXIST-brainless coward in the White House.

  17. dougq June 23, 2013 / 10:47 pm

    1) No, it’s the people who cry climate change that are the real threats of our time.
    2) Sadly, Hillary is the most qualified, sucks to be an American right now.
    3) Some IRS employees deserve bonuses, I would start with any employee willing to whistleblow.
    4) Bernanke won’t stop the presses, monetizing the debt is the new ‘trickle down’.
    5) Same reason why a gay person can call someone a faggot and others can’t, he is one. It works for all protected classes nowadays, same rule applies.
    6) No intelligent analysis on the farm bill, there no longer is independent intelligence, everyone has an axe to grind and it shows up in the analysis they write.
    7) Yes, there are some Dems who care about ethics and integrity, after all there are some Dems who make hundreds of thousands of dollars teaching those courses on ivy league campuses.

    • M. Noonan June 23, 2013 / 11:17 pm

      I would have thought you right about Bernanke, but it seems that the Bank of International Settlements has issued a “bail out of this bogus QE” notice. Could be we’re finally approaching the end of this.

      • dougq June 24, 2013 / 1:34 pm

        No, that’s just cover for Bernanke.

        This administration sees too much value in devaluing the dollar, they’ll play the other banks and try to squeeze out a few extra months while the other banks aren’t printing, just to try to get a lower dollar value. That, in turn, will likely cause the other banks to retaliate……this stuff won’t get sorted out until the end of 2014…expect the free money for the investment class to continue through then. That’s a pretty long taper.

  18. bardolf2 June 24, 2013 / 4:41 pm

    “Sort of a back-door way of connecting with this demographic, but probably the only one that will work at this point.”- Spook

    I want to enlarge this idea, which doesn’t quite work at this juncture from how I interpret the data. Why does the ‘brainwashed’ person who moves from California to say Texas not make the connection that maybe the old ideology was itself the problem? Because there is not a path of continuity, instead there is a short circuit along the transition.

    As Newt (I can’t believe I keep going back to the Newton) has said, the GOP must fight the good fight even in the hopeless places like Detroit. But you say, Detroit is an impossibility. And Newt responds, if a person from Detroit moves to Ft. Wayne AND hasn’t even been confronted with the GOP, not even had a scintilla of doubt placed in his/her brain then when the move occurs, the natural reaction to the Ft. Wayne conservative surroundings will be a circle the wagons mentality and a spread of Dem ideas.

    If instead, the Detroit voter has been confronted with GOP ideas, when he is forced to move to Ft. Wayne and sees his neighbors now include Republicans then he may consider the possibility that the problem with Detroit was the old ideology.

    AND in response to Amazona. Abraham Lincoln was a big friend of BIG RAILROAD which many lefties and righties might hate, but I think was okay. He used that to economically enable more and more people. The current GOP sees any novel expansion of infrastructure by the government with too deep of a suspicion. The handouts to green energy under Obama have been scandal ridden, but that does not call into question the strategy of prudently supporting alternative energy both for energy independence and in case the global markets turn in that direction. I’d take most of the money from the Department of Homeland Security and give it to tinkerers who are making/mining/building.

    • Cluster June 24, 2013 / 6:29 pm

      The current GOP sees any novel expansion of infrastructure by the government with too deep of a suspicion

      Stool,

      Are you implying that the railroad was built by government? The railroad was largely constructed by Vanderbilt and private business, with a great deal of that attributed to Rockefeller. There wasn’t even an income tax in the 1850’s when much of the rail was constructed in the east.

      And what you and all liberals ignore, and what a lot of conservatives overlook is that the majority of Americans are now too stupid, too selfish, and too dependent to engage in politics on any other level than what government can do for them in terms of freebies. We have past the point of no return, and thanks to those people (who will always vote for big government progressives), America will no longer be great. We are just another mediocre country in an under achieving world filled with despots, tin horn dictators, and over educated idiots.

      • Cluster June 24, 2013 / 7:24 pm

        Stool,

        Far be it of me, a lowly real estate broker, to point out history to an elite, high minded professor, but you link pretty much proves my assertion:

        Early railroad surveys and construction were financed by private investors Before the 1850 land grant to the Illinois Central Railroad, indirect federal subsidies were provided by the federal government in the form of route surveys made by army engineers. In the 1824 General Survey Bill to establish works of internal improvements, railroads were not specifically mentioned. Part of the appropriation under this act for the succeeding year, however, was used for “Examinations and surveys to ascertain the practicability of uniting the head-waters of the Kanawha with the James river and the Roanoke river, by Canals or Rail-Roads.”

        Rail transportation was largely inexpensive, inefficient, and inconsistent until Commodore Vanderbilt came in and connected lines, and streamlined efficiencies.

      • Cluster June 24, 2013 / 7:34 pm

        And stool, to imply that the government of the 1850’s is even remotely similar to our current federal government is to clearly demonstrate your bona fides to the educated idiot label

      • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 10:55 pm

        “Sam Cooke”?

        Dolf, your cattiness is expanding, and not to your credit. And now you make no sense at all.

      • dbschmidt June 25, 2013 / 3:03 pm

        Kinda of OT (from an email I received) but since it is an open post.
        Railroad tracks.
        The U.S. Standard railroad gauge (distance between rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That’s an exceedingly odd number.

        Why was that gauge used?
        Because that’s the way they built them in England, and English expatriates designed the U.S. Railroads.

        Why did the English build them like that?
        Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that’s the gauge they used.

        Why did ‘they’ use that gauge then?
        Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they had used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.

        Why did the wagons have that particular Odd wheel spacing?
        Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England because that’s the spacing of the wheel ruts …

        So, who built those old rutted roads?
        Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England ) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.

        And the ruts in the roads?
        Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Therefore, the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot.

        In other words, bureaucracies live forever.
        So the next time you are handed a specification, procedure,or process, and wonder, ‘What horse’s ass came up with this?’, you may be exactly right. Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses …

        Now, the twist to the story:

        When you [used to see] see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, you will notice that there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit larger, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses’ behinds.

        So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world’s most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse’s ass.

    • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 6:46 pm

      “The current GOP sees any novel expansion of infrastructure by the government with too deep of a suspicion.”

      Uh, no. wrong again. The current GOP sees any expansion of anything that is not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution with being, quite simply, forbidden to the federal government.

      10th Amendment and all…………………

      “The handouts to green energy under Obama have been scandal ridden, but that does not call into question the strategy of prudently supporting alternative energy both for energy independence and in case the global markets turn in that direction. I’d take most of the money from the Department of Homeland Security and give it to tinkerers who are making/mining/building.

      Uh, no, wrong yet again. (See a pattern here?) They DO “…..call into question the strategy of supporting alternative energy…..” if that support comes from federal intervention beyond the scope of the 17 enumerated duties assigned to it.

      See how that pesky 10th Amendment keeps popping up and interfering with all these grandiose schemes to expand the size, scope and power of the federal government?

      “GIVE it (taxpayer money) to tinkerers….” etc.? Really? Just take money from some people and GIVE it to others? How too too Leftist of you.

      How about just getting the hell out of the way so those “tinkerers who are making/mining/building” can do what they do best, and allowing them to reap the rewards if they are successful, as they will be paying the price if they are not? You know, the model upon which the era of the greatest expansion of science, technology and medicine was based.

      Who would make the decisions about who to GIVE this OPM to? Bureaucrats. Have you learned nothing?

      • Cluster June 24, 2013 / 7:08 pm

        Who would make the decisions about who to GIVE this OPM to? Bureaucrats. Have you learned nothing?

        Amazona, you’re expecting a leftist to learn? And I see your inner Jack Russell is getting the better of you – LOL

      • bardolf2 June 24, 2013 / 7:23 pm

        Amazona

        By your line of reasoning the homestead act was unconstitutional. BUT there is a general welfare clause in the constitution, SO most of the farmers in Nebraska and the Midwest are not a bunch of people who were simply given government handouts.

        Again, you continue to reinforce the nonsensical point of view that the government has no role in supporting economic stability. But take away all farm subsidies and watch how quickly things go badly. It’s also a little boring to hear that since the military in mentioned in the constitution the US has to blow trillions of dollars on contractors, including the latest whereby the US leaves 7 billion dollars worth of equipment in Hellistan.

        http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/20/great-news-us-scrapping-7-billion-of-military-equipment-in-afghanistan/

      • Cluster June 24, 2013 / 7:56 pm

        Taking away farm subsidies wouldn’t hurt much of anything:

        The annual failure rate for farms is 0.5 percent. The annual business failure rate, at 7 percent, is 14 times greater.
        The average debt-to-asset ratio in farming is currently 10 percent and has not exceeded 15 percent since the late 1990s. This indicates that farmers generally face very little financial risk, and as a result, even less-efficient farming operations are able to survive.

        The farm bill has a lot more to do with redistribution of wealth in the form of food stamps and enriching lobbyists and congress critters than it does with subsidizing crop failure.

      • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 10:49 pm

        Seriously, dolf—you are really arguing the Leftist take on the meaning of the general welfare clause?

        Seriously?

        Every time I think I have grasped the extent to which teachers today are ignorant, I am taken aback by how little I understand the paucity of their/your education.

        Do you truly think the “general welfare clause” means the nation has a Constitutional right, or worse, duty, to provide for the “general welfare” of the PEOPLE?

        Really?

        Oh,dear.

        We have gone over this so often, I find it tiresome to have to be constantly educating you people on the basic rule of law you should have learned, and come to understand, decades ago.

        But here is a smattering of what was said by the Founders when people of their own time tried to claim the same silly thing.

        “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
        -Thomas Jefferson

        James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:
        “With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

        To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the WELFARE OF THE UNION. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.
        Thomas Jefferson

        The clause was inserted to make sure that the welfare OF THE UNION would be taken care of, or provided for—-not of the citizens.

        Sheesh—this is Constitution 101.

        Stick to numbers.

      • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 10:52 pm

        Cluster, no, my “inner Jack Russell” is still snoozing.

        dolf may be squishy enough to steer quite close to Lefty lunacy every now and then, but as his posts are not among those routinely deleted it is OK to respond to them, as far as I can tell.

        I gather that the comments are directed toward people who insist on responding to people they know will have their posts removed, thereby making sure that there are kind of free-floating comments unrelated to anything.

      • Amazona June 24, 2013 / 10:58 pm

        dolf, I have warned you about the foolishness of claiming I have said something I have not said. Though you may have realized that the “Look How Dumb Dolf Sounds” ship has already sailed, so you might as well invent away, with nothing left to lose.

        However, I will continue to point out the goofiness and dishonest of your constant assignment to me of words and thoughts I have never expressed.

        I take this as proof you realize you can’t address what I DO say, so your only option is to invent a straw man and take swings at that.

    • neocon01 June 25, 2013 / 8:09 am

      Dr B
      I’d take most ALL of the money from the Department of Homeland Security and give it to tinkerers who are making/mining/building. fixed 🙂

      • Amazona June 25, 2013 / 8:22 am

        Gee, neo, when did you become an advocate of confiscating the property of some (the taxpayer money now funding DHS) and handing it out to others? (….tinkerers who are making/mining/building…)

        tsk tsk

        Personally, I like the idea of a form of DHS, a way to coordinate our various security agencies and, hopefully, have a coherent approach to national security. I’m not too crazy about the chaotic and bloated and evidently inept bureaucracy it has become.

        How about starting with eliminating the IRS? It has taken on the role of Police State Enforcer, and it has to go. Establish a Fair Tax, and put those people to work on the backlog of immigration investigation, etc. till it is time for them to retire, and then do not replace them.

      • Amazona June 25, 2013 / 8:25 am

        And isn’t it just too too condescending, the dismissal of people who mine, build and make as mere “tinkerers”? From the heights of the self-identified “intellectual” elite comes this dismissive sneer. “Ah, yes, those little people out there “tinkering” away keeping the country running so there is taxpayer money for me…”

      • neocon01 June 25, 2013 / 5:14 pm

        ama

        and handing it out to others?
        Moan…..didnt think that one through, really meant to save it period.

  19. Cluster June 24, 2013 / 8:17 pm

    This is priceless:

    Re: Hong Kong’s release of Snowden
    “We are just not buying that this was a technical decision by a Hong Kong immigration official,” Jay Carney said.

    But yet Carney wants us to believe that the IRS scandal was just a decision by a Cincinatti official. Good times.

  20. bardolf2 June 25, 2013 / 3:23 am

    I’d like to ask the constitutionalists here to remark on the clearly illegal Louisiana purchase by Jefferson and if they live in an area covered by it.

    As far as tinkering and how it is done I don’t have the answers, but again these are ideas put forth by many leading Republicans. Currently the government gives money to most engineering departments in the country NSF. Is that okay because of credentials alone, a PhD and a name brand institution?

    • neocon01 June 25, 2013 / 7:59 am

      Their PLAN!!! scary stuff… read the whole article..

      “I said something offhandedly to Dennis. “I just wish we could get rid of those bastards, once and for all.”

      He stared at me for a long time, chewing on his second BLT sandwich until the Navy steward retreated from range, and then he said, “Actually, Jacinda, there is sort of a plan for that.”

      “What do you mean, ‘a plan for that’?”

      He explained that it was nothing formal, and there was nothing in writing. Nor would there ever be. It was just a concept he had come up with, along with a few other trusted colleagues and advisors. An idea. They had gamed out various scenarios. We could solve our problems with molding public opinion if we removed just a few dozen key right-wing opinion makers. That was the exact word he used, “removed.” That was last spring, and I put it off as a harmless thought experiment. I didn’t hear anything more about it for several months.

      Then one day after another media talking points session in the mess, Dennis said, “Remember the plan we were talking about? You know, we really could do it.”

      “Are you serious?”

      http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/what-i-saw-at-the-coup/

    • Amazona June 25, 2013 / 8:04 am

      “Clearly illegal”

      Too funny. Now dolf, even after having the General Welfare Clause explained to him as a directive to the federal government to do what is necessary for the general welfare OF THE UNION, is trying to go back a couple of centuries to whine about the government doing (gasp!) SOMETHING FOR THE WELFARE OF THE UNION.

      Yes, it was for the benefit of the Union to settle vast areas, to establish citizens in far-flung and unpopulated lands. Yes, it was for the benefit of the Union to purchase land from a foreign nation, to expand our boundaries and remove a foreign power from that end of the continent. Yes, it was for the benefit of the Union and its security to push the southern boundary to an ocean.

      dolf, you are sounding more addled than usual. Too much Barolo?

      • neocon01 June 25, 2013 / 8:12 am

        he is on vacation, maybe too much gonja.

    • Amazona June 25, 2013 / 8:16 am

      “Currently the government gives money to most engineering departments in the country NSF. Is that okay because of credentials alone, a PhD and a name brand institution?”

      Speaking of addled, dolf is now expressing the possibility, in his own mind, that exceeding the restrictions of the Constitution might be OK “… because of credentials alone, a PhD and a name brand institution…” At least this idea came from him, in the guise of pretending to be a question.

      As usual, it is hard to tell what he is blathering on about—-“credentials alone” of a person? an institution? “A PhD” has to be about an individual, unless of course in dolfland they hand out degrees to schools. A “name brand institution”? Huh?

      I can see some situations in which helping fund some kinds of research could be considered, rightly, part of national security (or even another enumerated duty) —the Manhattan Project comes to mind.

      But dolf is cearly jusr tossing off odd little thought fragments as they burble to the surface of his mind, possibly in hopes one of them will support his rather muddled concept of the general welfare clause and/or Constitutional restrictions on federal activity but possibly just because he wants to be able to post something—anything—-and doesn’t care how silly it is.

      Stick to numbers, dolf.

  21. dbschmidt June 25, 2013 / 3:16 pm

    Did not take the Dems very long to show their true colors;

    “A Democratic lawmaker from Minnesota criticized Tuesday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act by calling Justice Clarence Thomas “Uncle Thomas,” then saying he didn’t know “Uncle Tom” was a racist epithet.

    On his Twitter account Tuesday, state Rep. Ryan Winkler called the justices’ 5-4 ruling striking down a part of the law racist, and the work of “four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.” Justice Thomas, who is black, was one of the five justices in the majority.”

    I am really, really sure he had no idea “Uncle Tom” could be construed as racist. Is he going to lose his job and support now like Deen did? Where is the outrage?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/democratic-lawmaker-hits-justice-uncle-thomas/

    • neocon01 June 25, 2013 / 5:20 pm

      Where is the outrage?

      Outrage??? by the left?
      40++ shootings a week in chi town…not a peep.
      ONE drug addled thug shot by a “white hispanic” in a gated community during a felony battery….= marches, outrage, beatings, looting, death threats, a witch hunt and hits put out.

      now THERE is the lefts “outrage” for ya.

  22. tiredoflibbs June 25, 2013 / 7:21 pm

    Once again the Democrats attack Clarence Thomas with racially charged speech, but according to the mindless drones we are the racists.

    There was a reason Martin Luther King was a registered Republican – the party of slavery, Jim Crow and segregation will attack anyone who gets in their way. No race is safe with these individuals.

Comments are closed.