Now the fun really begins

It's after 5:00 here on the West Coast which means polls in the East are closed or will close soon.

The one race I'll note at this time is the Senate race in Connecticut between Democrat Richard Blumenthal, who exaggerated his military service, and Republican Linda McMahon who, along with her husband, built a wildly successful business. Fox News is projecting Blumenthal to be the winner but the number of votes counted is still a small percentage of the total. I'm going to wait and see on this one.

What the Tea Party believes: Part 4

The latest in Bill Whittle's "Firewall" series defines and explores the difference between political law and natural law. In the course of this presentation he also succinctly describes the real reason why the recession continues. Hint: It's not Bush's fault.

This election is likely the most important one that has occurred within my lifetime. I've already voted by mail. I urge all of you to get out and vote your conscience, though if your conscience tells you to vote for so called "progressive" candidates, increased debt, increased government, higher unemployment, continued economic stagnation, and ultimately less freedom, then I suggest you review these videos and reconsider whether you're as wise as you think you are.

Part 4: Natural Law

What it's really about

Jeffrey Goldberg's post at The Atlantic is short, which means I'll be including most of it here.

More on this later, but the only surprising aspect  -- and obviously this is a pleasantly surprising aspect -- of the attempt to mail-bomb two Chicago-area synagogues is that the bombs were discovered so far from Chicago, one in Dubai and one in England.

Read the whole post for what he finds unsurprising. The last couple of sentences are the kicker, though, and state a clear fact that so many just don't seem to understand:

...there are many people out there who believe that al Qaeda and its fellow travelers are angry over settlements. They are not. They are angry over the continued existence of Jews.

Quotes of the Day

 Via the Patriot Post.

The Foundation

"[I]f the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted." --Noah Webster

Liberty

"Most people whom we elect to Congress are either ignorant of, have contempt for or are just plain stupid about the United States Constitution. ... Here, in part, is the oath of office that each congressman takes: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same....' Here's my question to you: If one takes an oath to uphold and defend, and bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution, at the minimum, shouldn't he know what he's supposed to uphold, defend and be faithful to? If congressmen, judges, the president and other government officials were merely ignorant of our Constitution, there'd be hope -- ignorance is curable through education. These people in Washington see themselves as our betters and rulers. They have contempt for the limits our Constitution places on the federal government envisioned by James Madison, the father of our Constitution, who explained in the Federalist Paper 45: 'The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.'" --economist Walter E. Williams

 

Equal justice for all

Rob McKenna, a Republican, is the Washington State Attorney General. He has been vilified by many, some of whom I know personally, for daring - daring - to join the multi-state lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. He has been accused of doing so solely for partisan reasons. Well, if he's so partisan, how come he's doing this?

Attorney General Rob McKenna sued a Seattle political consultant Friday, alleging the firm deliberately concealed the source of money used in its campaign to oust state Sen. Jean Berkey, D- Everett, in the primary.

The eight-page lawsuit against Lisa MacLean and her firm, Moxie Media, contends she “acted to conceal the true participants” behind the mailers and phone calls opposing Berkey and supporting a conservative Republican opponent.

Consider, if you will, what would likely happen were this to occur in New York State. The Attorney General there is Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat. Do you think he would take the same action? I can't say with certainty that he wouldn't, but I highly doubt he would.

Rob McKenna is suing over so-called ObamaCare because it's the right thing to do. And he's suing over the fraud in this election for the same reason. He will continue to receive my vote for this or any other office as long as he continues to demonstrate this quality.

A skeptic, not a denier

Warren Meyer, writing for Forbes, provides the most cogent explanation I've yet seen for why many of us are skeptical regarding anthropogenic global warming, or AGW. He outlines a very important distinction between being skeptical that any sort of climate change is occurring, and being skeptical that we are heading for some sort of global climate disaster.

It is important to begin by emphasizing that few skeptics doubt or deny that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas or that it and other greenhouse gasses (water vapor being the most important) help to warm the surface of the Earth. Further, few skeptics deny that man is probably contributing to higher CO2 levels through his burning of fossil fuels, though remember we are talking about a maximum total change in atmospheric CO2 concentration due to man of about 0.01% over the last 100 years.

What skeptics deny is the catastrophe, the notion that man’s incremental contributions to CO2 levels will create catastrophic warming and wildly adverse climate changes. To understand the skeptic’s position requires understanding something about the alarmists’ case that is seldom discussed in the press: the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming is actually comprised of two separate, linked theories, of which only the first is frequently discussed in the media.

The first theory is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels (approximately what we might see under the more extreme emission assumptions for the next century) will lead to about a degree Celsius of warming. Though some quibble over the number – it might be a half degree, it might be a degree and a half – most skeptics, alarmists and even the UN’s IPCC are roughly in agreement on this fact.

But one degree due to the all the CO2 emissions we might see over the next century is hardly a catastrophe. The catastrophe, then, comes from the second theory, that the climate is dominated by positive feedbacks (basically acceleration factors) that multiply the warming from CO2 many fold. Thus one degree of warming from the greenhouse gas effect of CO2 might be multiplied to five or eight or even more degrees.

Back in my college days, I took a class on systems of linear differential equations. I've long since forgotten the details but one of the practical applications was to model systems. The solution of a system of linear differential equations was an equation whose graph depended on starting conditions. For modeling systems, the horizontal coordinate was usually time and the vertical coordinate was some value such as population. Generally, these fell into two types. The first was a convergent solution. Different starting conditions would produce graphs that, as the value for time increased, would converge to a specific value.

The second was a divergent solution. If the starting conditions were altered, then the graphs would diverge away from the value. For example, if the starting condition was low enough, the graph could plunge toward zero. If it was high enough, it could skyrocket toward infinity. Let's say that the system modeled the population of a particular species. If the starting value was too low, the population wouldn't be self-sustaining and would die out. Too high, and overpopulation would occur.

The essence of the final paragraph of the excerpt above is that the second theory predicts a divergent solution; in this case the vertical coordinate is temperature. Adding CO2 artificially alters the starting condition of the graph which skyrockets to a high temperature value. Skeptics, based on historical analysis of temperatures and other factors, think it much more likely that the solution is convergent, or at least not fully divergent.

My thoughts on the Juan Williams affair

When even Whoopi Goldberg says NPR was wrong to fire Juan Williams, you know a line has been crossed.

I believe a private company or other employer should be able to choose who it wants to work for it. If an employee is acting against the best interests of the employer, then the employer should be able to terminate that employee.

However, NPR, and by extension its parent the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, is not a private company. A small but non-zero percentage of its operating costs are paid for by the federal government; in other words, the taxpayers. Us. The argument can legitimately be made that it should be held to a different standard.

In my opinion, the answer is simple. The federal government should do what many have called on it to do and stop funding the CPB in any way. Let it compete on its own merits as a corporation completely separate from government. Let it, with its clear liberal bias, try to do better than Air America did without me having to support it. Then, it can decide who should work for it or not as it sees fit.

What the Tea Party really believes

It really is very simple. I know many of you are afraid of the "racist," and "extreme Right Wing" Tea Party but that just means you've been watching too much Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. Bill Whittle, who excels at explaining simple concepts so that even the elite intelligentsia can understand them, is producing a series of videos which lay out just what the Tea Party is all about. At this time, he has three available. I've embedded them below. As I become aware of any more, I'll post links to them here. You can also find them at Bill's YouTube Channel.

Part 1: Small Government and Free Enterprise


Part 2: The Problem with Elitism


Part 3: Wealth Creation

Review of the 2011 Chevrolet Volt

Gary Gastelu reviews the new Chevrolet Volt for Fox News.  Short form: It's a good car that performs well.  If you drive it correctly, you will save considerably on operation costs vs. the Toyota Prius, although it does cost quite a bit more to purchase.

Something to note is that the way the drivetrain works is not actually what I originally heard.  My original understanding was that the internal combustion engine was not mechanically coupled to the wheels in any way.  It only served to run a generator which fed electricity into the electric drive system when the batteries drained to a certain point.  However, according to the review, the IC engine actually does have a mechanical coupling to the wheels which engages under certain circumstances.

In brief, the Volt’s powertrain has three main components: a main electric motor, a smaller electric motor/generator, and the engine. All of which are connected by a series of clutches and a planetary gearbox that takes the place of a traditional transmission. But, unlike grief, there are four stages that the Volt goes through while you’re driving it.

Start off with a full charge and the motor moves the Volt, getting an assist from the otherwise idle motor/generator from time to time under certain conditions. Deplete your battery, and the gasoline engine kicks in, coupling to the motor/generator to create electricity and, under similar certain conditions, send some mechanical torque through the gearbox to help propel the car.

Fear and Loathing in the White House

Because the thought that Americans are about to make a rational decision in a couple weeks is simply unfathomable, it must be because of fear:

In his remarks at a Democratic fundraiser in Massachusetts Saturday evening, President Barack Obama said that Americans’ fear and frustration” are to blame for an intensely competitive midterm election season favoring Republican candidates.
 
“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we‘re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country’s scared.”

Obama told the several dozen donors that he was offering them his “view from the Oval Office.” According to Politico, Obama blamed the economic downturn for Americans’ inability to “think clearly” and said the burden is on Democrats “to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling.

On the contrary, Mr. President, it is precisely because many Americans have regained the ability to "think clearly" that Republicans are predicted to make large gains.  Once again we see the arrogance and elitism break through the mask (which was never very thick to begin with).  Anyone who opposes the policies of higher taxes, increased useless spending, and greater dependence on Government is obviously not thinking straight.

My recommendations for the 2010 Washington State Initiatives

Here is how I intend to vote on the slate of initiatives that will appear on the Washington State 2010 general election ballot and a brief explanation why.

Initiative 1053: Yes
In 2007, the voters of Washington passed I-960 which made it more difficult for the legislature to raise taxes. To do so required either a two-thirds majority in the State House and Senate, or a simple majority in both houses followed by a simple majority of the people. In Washington, an Initiative can be overridden after two years by a simple majority of both houses. This happened earlier this year which came as no surprise given Democrats hold majorities in both houses.

I-1053 will undo that override and restore those requirements. In today's economy, everyone has to tighten their belts, I know I sure have. The state government is no exception.

Initiative 1082: Leaning Yes
Supporters note that what 1082 allows is already in place in 46 other states. Also, I believe that increasing the role of the market in just about anything is a good idea. I'm going to research this one some more just to make sure but at this time I'm probably going to vote yes on 1082.

Initiative 1098: No, Hell No
Washington already has a high state sales tax. This would be an additional tax on top of it. I understand that income taxes have advantages and disadvantages when compared to a sales tax. If an income tax were to be implemented, it should be accompanied by an elimination of the state sales tax. But that's a discussion for another day.

Some of you may respond, "Yeah, but this income tax only affects rich individuals making over $200,000 per year and couples making over $400,000 per year." At first, yes, this will be the case. However, once the income tax is on the books, eventually the legislature (assuming continued Democrat control, and perhaps even if not) will decide that revenue isn't sufficient and will lower that minimum. Eventually, it will be extended to everyone (though I expect there will still be a minimum based on the poverty level). If you don't think this will happen, you are, quite frankly, a fool.

Initiative 1100: Yes
Initiative 1105: Probably No
Quite simply, the state should not be in the retail business. Period. Both of these initiatives get the state out of the liquor selling business. Based on my understanding, how 1100 does it is a bit simpler. It also appears to favor the retailers whereas 1105 favors liquor distributors. Either of them is preferable to the current system but at this time I'm going with 1100.

Initiative 1107: Yes
It will repeal sales tax changes that the legislature made earlier this year. Even though the items the new taxes applied to, namely candy, soda, and bottled water, are items that are not necessary it's still a new tax and it will have a deleterious effect on the economy. The taxes on soda and bottled water are supposedly temporary but you know they probably won't be. Again, the state must learn to live within its means just like the rest of us.

Well it's that time again

The November election is weeks away so I'm going to dust off this blog and try to post more-or-less regularly as we approach zero-hour and then beyond. Maybe I'll even succeed.

Test post

Ignore this.

The hypocrisy of the Left, part the zillionth

Quote provided by The Patriot Post:

"Barack Obama has made few policy pronouncements since his November election. But he and his wife have made a personal decision that is rich with policy ramifications: the choice of a school for their daughters. During the campaign, Obama said he supports charter schools, which are public schools that are free of some bureaucratic constraints, but that he opposes private school choice, because it doesn't work. Turns out it does work for the Obamas, who determined that no public or charter school in the nation's capital would be the 'best fit' for their daughters. Instead they chose Sidwell Friends, an exclusive private school that counts Chelsea Clinton among its alumni. No one should begrudge the Obamas for choosing the best possible school for their children. But we should begrudge Barack Obama for vowing to deny such choices to low-income parents. As Polly Williams, the state representative who gave birth to Milwaukee's school choice program put it, 'The president shouldn't be the only person who lives in public housing who gets to send his kids to private schools.'" --Hoover Institution research fellow Clint Bolick

Your new god

Seen in an email signature:

"Rosa Parks sat so that Martin Luther King could walk.
Martin Luther King walked so Barack Obama could run.
Barack Obama ran so our children could fly.”
-- Unknown participant in the 2008 Presidential Election

And yet we're told race wasn't an issue. It shouldn't have been, but it clearly was for some people.

Oh the quote is very inspirational on the surface. And I do think there's truth in it. But there is also something else. Look at the last line. The best word I can think of to describe it is worshipful.
The implication is that Obama, through the power of the One True Government™, will enable and help our children to succeed.

Whether they want it to or not.

Love Affair

Ah, how sweet.

It started with the fist bump seen ’round the world. Soon there were stories of rousing family Scrabble battles and date nights, in spite of election mayhem. Then President-elect Barack Obama referred to his wife Michelle as “the love of my life” during his election night victory speech, embracing her tightly and kissing her afterwards, while millions of people worldwide watched.

“They took a moment to face each other, to kiss and hold one another, regardless of the magnitude and spectacle of the night,” said Camille Washington, a Bay Area blogger on Soulbounce.com, a music and culture site. “That says a lot.”

The Obamas represent a welcome change as an openly affectionate and romantic couple for many Americans. Some experts say that the soon-to-be first couple embody the ideal healthy relationship, and that they can stir up love around the country. The New York Daily News even predicted a baby boom attributed to election night friskiness inspired by the Obamas.

John and Cindy McCain love each other as well. But if McCain had won the election, do you think for a minute that anything like this would have been published about them? Of course not. More likely, it would have been some article that purported to discuss what it's like for them to be married but would be a subtle, or not so subtle, criticism of the fact that Cindy brought a lot of wealth to the marriage. It would have glossed over her extensive charity work, assuming it was even mentioned at all.

It continues

I just received this press release from the Second Amendment Foundation.

HOLDER NOMINATION SIGNALS OBAMA’S TRUE ANTI-GUN RIGHTS AGENDA

BELLEVUE, WA – The nomination of Eric Holder for the post of attorney general of the United States sends an “alarming signal” to gun owners about how the Barack Obama administration will view individual gun rights, as affirmed this year by the Supreme Court, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

“Eric Holder signed an amicus brief in the Heller case that supported the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, and also argued that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right,” noted SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “He has supported national handgun licensing and mandatory trigger locks. As deputy attorney general under Janet Reno, he lobbied Congress to pass legislation that would have curtailed legitimate gun shows.

“This is not the record of a man who will come to office as the nation’s top law enforcement officer with the rights and concerns of gun owners in mind,” he observed.

Holder’s nomination, like the appointment of anti-gun Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff, tells American gun owners that Obama’s campaign claims supporting the Second Amendment were “empty rhetoric,” Gottlieb stated.

“America’s 85 million gun owners have ample reason to be pessimistic about how their civil rights will fare under the Obama administration,” Gottlieb said. “Mr. Obama will have a Congress with an anti-gun Democrat majority leadership to push his gun control agenda. Gun owners have not forgotten Mr. Obama’s acknowledged opposition to concealed carry rights, nor his support for a ban on handgun ownership when he was running for the Illinois state senate.

“Barack Obama vigorously portrayed himself on the campaign trail as a man who supports gun ownership,” Gottlieb concluded, “but now that he has won the election, he is surrounding himself with people who are avowed gun prohibitionists. What better indication of what to expect from Barack Obama as president than the people he is selecting to lead his administration? This isn’t a roster of devoted public servants. It’s a rogue’s gallery of extremists who have labored to erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights.”

Hiatus

Since the election, I've been pretty quiet. I probably will be through the holidays, though I imagine I'll post something every now and then.

Of course, come January, all hell will be breaking loose and I'll be here watching it happen.

More revisionism?

The page on Obama's transition website that I referred to in my last post, the one where he details his Urban Policy that includes gun control measures, has been removed. The URL, http://www.change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/, now returns a simple message that the page is not available.

Is the page not available because:

1. It's yet another attempt to flush something down the memory hole?
2. The President-elect has changed his mind?
3. The page is being altered and will return once the changes are complete?

You're guess is as good as mine.

And so it begins

Updated: see below.

The following comes as absolutely no surprise.  I suppose I thought he’d wait a short while but that is not to be.  The Democrats are already drunk with power and they’re moving fast.

Item the first: The disarmament of the American people

On the official transition website of Barack Obama, President-Elect, (http://change.gov) he lays out his Urban Policy.  Among other things is this:

Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

The best analysis of this policy that I've read can be found here. It's not the only one, of course.

This will only be the beginning.  The market is already reacting with sales of guns of all types going through the roof and stocks are being quickly depleted. The steps listed above will be just the first salvo in an all-out effort to render the Second Amendment meaningless. The decision in the Heller case will act as a roadblock but expect any Supreme Court justices nominated to be amenable to overturning it if not eager to do so.

Item the second: The new conscription

I now point to the America Serves page at Obama's transition website (http://change.gov/americaserves/) containing the overview for the new plan for "service". Before I continue, though, a funny thing has happened. The page has been changed since it was first brought to my attention.

Of course, this isn't the first time that the Obama website has been changed. See here and here. Welcome to the new revisionism, and remember that it's a favored tactic of Communism. Yes, I went there. I'm sure I will again.

The GeekWithA.45 has the original text which I reproduce here with his emphasis intact:

America Serves

"When you choose to serve -- whether it's your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood -- you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That's why it's called the American dream."

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to

require

50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

He also notes the irony of the situation in the face of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. I expect that, though the text has changed, the plan has not.

The ever-irascible Kim du Toit has something to say about it:

Wow. If I didn’t know better, I’d have called those things by their proper names: Obamajugend, Arbeitsdienst and Volkssturm.

As one of those “over age 55” types, allow me to make this suggestion to Comrade Urkel: you want me to work; you pay me. Otherwise, go fuck yourself.

And that goes for my kids, too. If they want to work in soup kitchens or for church charities, they’ll do that. If they don’t want to, you’re not going to force them. Or you’ll have to force them over my dead body, and over those of several of your Gruppenfuehrers.

The GeekWithA.45 is much more to the point:

You. Shall. Not. Teach. My. Children. To. Be. Slaves.

Ever.

Mark my words: This is just the beginning.

Update: Item the third: The biggest heist in history

Of course, in the end, it's always about the money:

Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.

This comes via Nicki at The Liberty Zone who has some rather choice comments:

Confiscate. Appropriate by the government. Deprive of property. Steal.

This is no longer a pithy little catchphrase about helping everyone. This is theft, pure and simple. This is YOUR government, whom YOU elected, telling YOU that they will take what YOU earned away from you, take away your freedom of choice as to what to do with your property, give it to an inept government bureaucracy to mishandle and hand out to those who haven't earned it. This isn't funny, and it isn't noble. It's criminal.

Good job guys. I dare you to justify all of these, and all the other infringements on our liberty that are sure to follow. Go on, I'm listening.