heading


Covering Platte County, Missouri Weekly Since 1865

Legal Notices
The official Platte County Legal Newspaper! Platte
County Foreclosures

Between the Lines
by Ivan Foley

The Rambling Moron
by Chris Kamler

The Right Stuff
by James Thomas i

Straight from Stigall
by Chris Stigall

Parallax Look
by Brian Kubickis

KC Confidential
by Hearne Christopher

Off the Couch
by Greg Hall

Classifieds

Advertising

Subscriptions


Weekly publication dates are Thursdays

252 Main Street0
P
P.O. Box 410
Platte City, Missouri 64079
816-858-0363

Fax :816-858-2313

TO CONTACT US
by email
Click Here!
or
by phone
816.858.0363


Contact Lawmakers
by Congress
Click here to:
Find Federal Officials &
Find State Officials


 
Kubicki

Parallax logo

by Brian Kubicki
Landmark columnist

'NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE'

Posted 12/28/12

•“Never let a crisis go to waste.”

Remember Rahm Emanuel's coining of that phrase during Obama's first term? Well that statement now stands as the defining motto of Barack Obama's presidency. We have now seen them yet again try to capitalize on a tragedy, this one being the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, as an effort to work public opinion in their favor on gun control.

•Did you know that an assault weapons ban is in effect in Connecticut? What good did it do?

What good did the “No Guns on School Premises” sign do for Sandy Hook Elementary School? I guess the murderer didn't have his glasses on when he passed that sign.

Did you know that a 4-year old child was murdered in a drive-by shooting in Kansas City last week? Nobody even cares that kids are killed in inner-city shootings every day. Is it race that focuses more attention on the Newtown murders than on the inner city shootings? Aren't those just as heinous?

Don't let them take away your Second Amendment rights. Fight back!

•Kudos to the House Conservatives for fighting back against the Rino leadership of the Republican Party last week. Speaker of the House John Boehner tried to shove through a bill that would have increased tax rates on those earning more than $1 million per year in income. But the so called “Plan B” had to be shelved because the conservative Republicans would not support it.

Nice work, folks. Keep up the good fight. We voters are watching.

•Did you see where French movie star Gerard Depardieu caused a controversy in his native land by moving to Belgium to avoid the 75% income tax on the wealthy that was introduced by the socialist President of France, Francois Hollande.

Depardieu's move was condemned by the French political establishment, including the Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault who called the actor's action “pathetic.” Depardieu shot back and, in an open letter writing, “I'm leaving because you think success, creation, talent and anything different should be punished. I am sending you back my passport and social security, which I have never used.” The French actor claims to have “paid 85 percent taxes on his revenues this year and estimated that he had paid $189 million in total since he started work as a printer at the age of 14.”

The rich can afford to move when necessary and there are plenty of countries that welcome wealthy achievers with red carpets. British Prime Minister David Cameron promised to embrace French tax refugees. High tax rates on income discourage wealthy folks from remaining in the labor force, since their ability to avoid taxation is much greater than that of lesser earners.

The French government was warned about the negatives of progressive high taxes, but it chose to ignore them. Now, they pay the hard publicity and financial costs. Couldn't have happened to a better bunch.

•This one is not to be missed…

A federal employee was formally reprimanded this month for excessive workplace flatulence, in a letter delivered to him that included a log of representative dates and times when he was recorded “releasing the awful and unpleasant odor” in his Baltimore office.

In a December 10 letter accusing him of “conduct unbecoming a federal officer,” the Social Security Administration (SSA) employee was informed that his “uncontrollable flatulence” had created an “intolerable” and “hostile” environment for coworkers, several of whom have lodged complaints with supervisors.

The employee is a claims authorizer at the SSA center that handles disability cases for the entire country.

According to the letter, the man was first spoken to about his flatulence during a May 18 discussion with his supervisor. He was informed that fellow employees had complained about his flatulence, and that it was the reason none of them were willing to assist him with his work. The supervisor referred the employee to a SSA unit for assistance with what could have been a medical problem that was affecting everyone in the module.

Two months later, on July 17, a second SSA manager spoke with the man regarding his “releasing of bodily gas in the module during work hours.” The manager asked the employee if he could “make it to the restroom before releasing the awful and unpleasant odor.” She also recounted what appeared to be a prior conversation during which the worker suggested that he would “turn your fan on when it happens.” The manager recalled advising him that, “turning on the fan would cause the smell to spread and worsen the air quality in the module.”

On Aug. 14, a third administrator--a SSA “Deputy Division Director”--spoke with the worker about his “continuous releasing of your bodily gas and the terrible smell that comes with the gas.” The manager noted that the worker had said he was lactose intolerant and planned to purchase Gas-X, an over-the-counter remedy. The manager informed the employee that he “could not pass gas indefinitely and continue to disrupt the work place.”

Despite these repeated warnings, the man apparently continued to struggle with his flatulence. After stating that, “It is my belief that you can control this condition,” the author of the reprimand letter then noted, “The following dates show the time of your flatulence.” What followed was a log listing 17 separate dates (and 60 specific times) on which the employee passed gas. For example, the man's Sept. 19 output included nine instances of flatulence, beginning at 9:45 a.m. and concluding at 4:30 p.m. Who got the fun job of logging all those?

Your government at work!

(Brian Kubicki is always at work giving you a Parallax Look. Reach him at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


EVIL WILL ALWAYS EXIST, IT'S TIME TO HEAL AND MOVE ON

Posted 12/23/12

Quite a week last week was. The tragic and seemingly inhumane assault on the most innocent among us in the form of a class of elementary age children has seemed to have shaken American society to its core.

I suppose those reactions can be understood as in-scale with the degree of atrociousness of the actions involved. Breaking-in to an elementary school to fire at will on a group of defenseless children is about as low as a person can go to exhibit an absence of humanity.

But there are and have been over the years countless examples of horrific actions of people on other people. Mothers kill their own children by smashing their heads with rocks, or drowning them in a lake strapped into their car seats, or burning their babies alive in a microwave.

Mental illness is often used as an excuse for not executing these people when they do horrendous things. So many mothers who have killed their children are sitting in jail or hoping for parole after psychiatric treatment.

Evil exists in humanity, just as good exists. Fortunately, good is in much greater supply than evil. Evidence of that is that overall, mankind still flourishes. But evil exists, and it will always do so, and we cannot forget that.

•The greatest examples of idiocy in reaction to the tragedy in Connecticut I witnessed are described below:

- President Obama scurrying to the scene of the murders to give a speech where he blamed the violence on the lack of gun control. How much lower can one stoop than to intrude on the mourning of a group of parents of 6 year old murdered kids to try and gain a leg-up on gun control legislation? Sick is all I can say.

- Sen. Diane Feinstein declaring that she will be the first to re-introduce the assault weapons ban. The real hypocrisy of this from her specifically is that when she was San Francisco Mayor back in the 80's, she revealed information related to the crimes of the then un-caught “Night Stalker” Richard Ramirez that allowed him to go undetected for a longer time. Basically, the shoes Ramirez wore were leaving tell-tale prints at each crime scene. Feinstein revealed the type of shoe they knew it was, so Ramirez disposed of the shoes and went on to murder several more victims.

- New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg jumped in front of the microphones before those precious little angels were even removed from the scene and started caterwauling about banning guns. New Yorkers deserve that nut bag.

- Some idiot on CNN (I refuse to dignify the person by giving him even the little bit of P.R. I could here.) had the gall to say, “…if the death toll numbers hold up, this will be the largest mass shooting in history…” “..if the numbers hold up..??!!??” Can you seriously let this person keep talking on-air CNN?

•Mark Levin had a great point about this tragedy and how it relates to gun control. He observed that in Pres. Obama's speech to politicize the tragedy in Newtown, he referenced other examples of gun violence during his term and previous. He mentioned Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek, referenced Columbine and Blacksburg.
But he left out Fort Hood. 13 people were killed and 29 were injured in that event. Why did the president omit Ft. Hood but go back to Columbine?

The answer is politics.

Fort Hood doesn't play in to Obama's political strategy. At Fort Hood, the perpetrator was taken down by an armed guard, before he could kill more people, so gun control doesn't merge well with that tragedy. Also, Nidal Hassan, the killer at Fort Hood, was not mentally ill. He did what he did because he was a terrorist who was sympathetic to al Qaida. That doesn't fit with Obama's narrative.

•Do you realize that if one of the teachers in the building had been armed and had taken down the gunman before he could kill any children we would be giving that person a civilian medal of honor? Those situations where armed citizens protect themselves, happen every day, but no one on the right ever politicizes those events.

•Humans have an incredible capacity for coming together and healing after tragedy. It is that ability that sets us above all other forms of life on this planet. Our depravity and cruelty is lower than the natural forces that drive the animal world.

•And don't let anyone tell you that the reason this killer did what he did was he had Asperger's Syndrome. Lots of people have Asperger's – when us “non-young” people were growing-up, we called them “socially awkward” or nerds. Many very brilliant, kind, thoughtful, and caring people have these social personality traits, and they don't commit acts of evil like this.

•It is time to heal and move on.

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


MAKE ENERGY CHEAP; AND FIRE BOEHNER

Posted 12/16/12

I have only two very basic points this week that really need to be driven home, my friends.

First, ENERGY.

The other side, our enemies the Liberals, just don't get it.

On MSNBC last week (This was mentioned in detail on Hotair.com, a site you should be checking daily.) the host of Up With Chris Hayes was hosting a panel discussion on domestic energy issues. The discussion had hit upon natural gas fracking (They hated it.). They also promoted wind and solar heavily (They liked those a LOT – surprise!)

But right before the host, Mr. Hayes was preparing to go to a commercial break, he said, “My sense is that the price of energy is too low at some level right now, and I want to talk about that right after we take this break.”

When the panel returned from the break (they're rather short on MSNBC 'cause hardly anybody watches it.), the topic was discussed in more detail:

Chris Hayes: We're talking about the massive, extractive energy boom happening in America right now and how it's transforming our politics and how that can be made to work with a sane climate policy, which is really the difficult question. Before the break I left the question on the table about the price of energy being too low right now.

Basically we see this massive amount of supply has come onto the grid thanks largely to natural gas. The price has come down, and I think we generally think, “Oh, lower prices are better.” But it seems to me there's a lot of problematic stuff about the price coming down sharply as it is right now in terms of incentives for efficiency and et cetera.

Dan Dicker: You would want the prices to go up a lot because it would drive the next stage towards renewables, and make that at least cost-effective. Algae fuel, we talk a lot about that…

Dan Dicker: Yeah. The cost is about eight and a half to nine dollars a gallon compared to gasoline as it is now. You want the prices to go up to make these a little more cost effective. Drive the technology into them. Unfortunately it's actually going quite the opposite.

Frances Beinecke: Look, the only thing that's going to change that is if we finally put a price on carbon.

Hotair.com has a great explanation of why this sentiment is so very wrong, but I just have to point with mouth agape at the “Let's-Rotate-The-House-To-Unscrew-The-Lightbulb” logic at work here.

It's quite simple. Energy is the fuel that we use to do meaningful things in human life. We have three basic goals with regard to our energy supply – make it cheap, make it abundant and making lots of it shouldn't kill or maim lots of humans. That's pretty much it.

Cheap, abundant, and safe energy. If we have those goals in place, and we do with natural gas, coal, and crude oil, we have what we need to advance as a society, until something cheaper, more abundant, and/or safer is discovered.

The thought pattern of the Liberals is they aren't doing good for mankind unless they have empowered and designed government to FORCE man to use what THEY deem as the preferred form of energy, and if man happens upon something that is cheap, abundant, and safe, the Liberals' charge is to tax that energy so that man won't use it.

Don't you just loathe Liberals?

•Second, we need to fire House Speaker John Boehner.

If conservatives want to keep the House and win the Senate, John Boehner needs to be voted out as speaker of the House. Only 16 House votes are needed to do it.

Boehner and the House GOP Steering Committee purged four conservative House members from their committee recently. Congressmen Justin Amash and Tim Huelskamp were removed from the House Budget Committee, and Congressmen David Schweikert and Walter Jones were cut from the Financial Services Committee.
Amash, Huelskamp, and Schweikert were targeted because they were too fiscally conservative—all three have voted against Boehner's debt ceiling hikes. Amash and Huelskamp were the only two GOP votes against House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's budget.

Amash explained that vote recently, “It's unacceptable to have unbalanced budgets until 2040.”

For anyone outside of DC, this statement seems obvious. Only in Washington is balancing the budget radical.

If Speaker Boehner wants to purge independent, bold conservatives, then he should be removed as Speaker. In addition to the purge, he has failed to effectively win negotiations with President Obama and appointed moderate committee chairs.

While the caucus has already voted in support of John Boehner as speaker of the 113th Congress, the final floor vote doesn't happen until early January.

The Conservative Movement is capable of firing Boehner with just 16 votes. The House rules demand that a Speaker receive a majority, 218 votes, to be elected speaker. If no nominee for speaker receives 218, the House remains speakerless, as it did during parts of the Civil War.

If 16 House Republicans abstained from voting, Boehner would only receive 217 votes. Once deposed, Boehner and his minions will scurry into the darkness once again. These 16 Republicans only need to hold out until the caucus chooses a new leader.

I was intrigued to hear Mark Levin state recently that the Speaker of the House need not be a sitting Representative. I agree with Levin that current Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker would be an excellent choice for Speaker of the House.

But first, please write to your Representatives (I already have written mine via email.) and urge them to abstain from their vote for House Speaker. This is our time, Conservatives!

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


LOCAL TV NEWS IS A WASTE OF TIME, RESOURCES

Posted 12/7/12

O.K. So Jason Whitlock and Bob Costas think that Jevon Belcher would have not been able to murder the mother of his child if guns had been made illegal in America. So what exactly in the law stopped him from bringing a loaded gun onto the NFL property of the Chiefs' practice facility, where guns are strictly forbidden? As a matter of fact, it is fairly well known that many NFL players carry guns. You think they never have them in their bags when they are at work?

Gun control nuts are a consistently ignorant bunch – you have to give them that. It doesn't take more than a day for them to start flapping their guns after some action of gun violence. I guess I should be thankful that a doorknob like Bob Costas would take the stand on the issue.

•I was also taken aback by those in the media that observed that Chiefs' General Manager Scott Pioli and Head Coach Romeo Crennell, who both exhibited considerable responsible humanity in the ordeal this past weekend, may have solidified their credentials for continuing in their failing roles with the Chiefs.

Pioli and Crennell simply showed that they are human, and that they are capable of communicating compassion through that humanity. They still pretty much stink out loud at the roles of NFL general manager and NFL head coach. That hasn't changed.

•Does anybody think that “going over the fiscal cliff” will harm the country economically? The fiscal cliff is an Obama-led tax increase combined with a suicidal gutting of the military. These are both things that Obama wants – high taxes and a weakened military. Republicans – tell the American people what is happening. That is all it really takes.

Why are Republicans so very bad at telling the American people the truth in this manner?

•That Corona Christmas commercial where a Key West palm tree is illuminated in Christmas lights never gets old.

•I am headed back to Phoenix soon to follow my Kansas State Wildcats to another BCS Bowl, and a few of you will remember that I am returning to the scene of the Mexican Transvestite Encounter of 2003. I will file a complete report after the New Year.

•Whatever demons infiltrated the mind of Jevon Belcher to influence him to take the life of another human being, take his own life and leave his child as an orphan, were given wings by the willful actions of Belcher's own mind and hands. He pulled that trigger. This wasn't about drugs, or alcohol, or depression, or a result of concussions. I know lots of people that get influenced by these elements and they never kill anyone. That point deserves to be made.

•This Redskins-Giants Monday Night Football game is pretty darn entertaining.

•By the way, this issue was well-documented by our good friend, Greg Hall in his recent Off The Couch column, but as the Belcher murder-suicide story developed Saturday morning, I was struck how many people seemed to still be looking to the local TV news for updates on the story, but they just continued broadcasting their usual Saturday morning cartoon fare. No news-flash break-ins…no live coverage on the scene. Local TV news is a waste of time, resources, and effort.

Twitter and the internet however, is where news is disseminated today. I was logged into numerous twitter resources and there were updates served-up by the second. The story first broke on 810 WHB's Twitter line. Soon after that, Belcher's name began to emerge as the perpetrator.

•By the way, all those who are ripping those that released Belcher's name before the police did can just bite it. Why is it deemed better for a person to hear that a loved one died from the police than from a media outlet like a radio station or a Twitter link? Are police personnel somehow better at delivering bad news than a news organization? I don't get it. If, God forbid, this were a friend or family member of mine, I would want to know sooner rather than later, regardless of the uniform of the messenger.

•As a matter of fact, police kind of stink at delivering bad news - just a point of note. Most folks who see a policeman headed their way know something bad is likely to happen next.

•Best of Twitter this week: Someone's response to the news that Prince William's wife Kate Middleton is pregnant opined a tweet to the effect of, “In Obama's terms, the Princess was being punished with a baby.”

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax and email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


THE KEY PROBLEM IS THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT

Posted 12/1/12

•The fiscal cliff is less than six weeks away as I type this. Negotiators are said to be locked away burning midnight oil on a grand “compromise” to avoid the tax hikes and spending cuts that will hit on Jan. 1, 2013. The debate has only focused on how to raise taxes on the wealthy; either by increasing tax rates, as Obama demands, or eliminating deductions and loopholes, as some Republicans (the RINO's) are considering. These are both wrong.

Some excellent advice was posited recently in a column by Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.

As we know, you can't hike taxes on the wealthy enough to balance the budget. Obama has called for $1.6 trillion in tax hikes over the next 10 years. While that is large enough to do serious damage to the economy, it would amount to just 16 percent of the combined deficits that we are projected to face over that period. In fact, the president's proposed tax hike doesn't even cover the $2.6 trillion in spending increases that he has called for over the next 10 years. Obamacare alone will add $2.15 trillion in federal spending by 2022.

New IRS statistics show the burden on taxpayers. The top 1% of all income tax return filers paid 37% of all federal income taxes in 2010. That's up from 36% the previous year. These same folks made only 19% of total adjusted gross income (AGI), also higher than the year before. The top 1% of earners make $369,691 and up. They pay 37% of taxes but only make 19% of income!

They're not paying their fair share, Obama and the Democrats say?

The highest 5% paid 59% of total income tax and accounted for 34% of all adjusted gross income. They each make at least $161,579.

The top 10% of filers, those making $116,623 or more, pay 71% of the total tax burden while bringing in slightly more than only 45% of the total income.

This'll fry your bacon…

The bottom 50% of filers paid a paltry 2% of the total federal income tax take.
Did I hear someone say, Flat Tax?

•As we have discussed here many times, government could confiscate every penny belonging to every millionaire and billionaire in America, and still not have anywhere near enough money to pay for all that we owe. With all that money, you would fund government as it is now spending for about 8 days!

Great Britain hiked its top tax rate from 40 to 50 percent in 2010 as part of a deficit-reduction package. The tax hike was supposed to raise an additional $2.4 billion in 2010–11, but actually brought in $5 billion less than was expected.

We don't have a taxing problem in this country with our federal government, we have a spending problem.

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), if we never add another government program, federal spending will reach 46 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by mid-century. If one assumes that the government had no interest expenses beyond those on the $16.2 trillion it currently owes, federal-government spending would still approach 30 percent of GDP by 2050. There is no possible way to raise taxes enough to pay for that amount of spending without wrecking the economy.
Obama claims his plan includes spending cuts, $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. But his vague plan includes $1 trillion in spending cuts that were already agreed to as part of the 2011 debt-ceiling deal. He also includes savings from not fighting wars in Iraq or Afghanistan after 2014; money that was never going to be spent in the first place. He also includes $634 billion in savings from not having to pay interest on the phantom spending he's cut.

Realistic estimates show the president is actually proposing almost $3 in tax hikes for every $1 in spending cuts.

And of course, those spending cuts are not real cuts, but simply reductions in the baseline rate of increase. And while the president's proposed tax hikes would go into effect immediately, the spending cuts are pushed off into the dim and distant future. In fact, according to recent reports, the president actually wants new stimulus spending in the short term, to be followed by spending cuts once the economy has bounced back.
The 2011 deal to increase the debt limit promised $1 trillion in spending cuts. Spending since then has increased by $132 billion.

The key problem is the size of government. Spending more than we take in is bad - anywhere.

As noted earlier, federal spending is going to rise to 46 percent of GDP by 2050. When you add in state and local spending, government at all levels will be consuming more than 60 percent of everything produced in this country. We as Americans cannot remain economically productive or personally free with a government of that size.

It's time to reduce our government footprint.

You can read Mr. Tanner's excellent piece at www.cato.org.

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR WEALTH, AMERICA

Posted 11/23/12

Now that the election is over, and the storm that divides the country along racial and economic lines is hanging around for another four years, it is time to batten-down the hatches. They are coming for your wealth, America. You have been duly warned.

Have you noticed that Obama took almost no time before he was releasing all kinds of details about the Seal Team Six raid that killed Obama bin Laden last year, but in the case of the 9/11 attack on Benghazi that killed the United States Ambassador and three others, it has been over two months and we still don't know what the president did and when he did it.

Major questions abound:

Why weren't all U.S. Embassies, especially those in unstable countries, fortified in advance of the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks? That seems to be the key question and nobody is asking it.

Who in the Obama Administration edited the CIA talking points that were given to UN Ambassador Susan Rice to use on the Sunday talk shows after the murders in Benghazi? Gen. David Petraeus told the Congress that he knew from the beginning that the attack was by al Qaida and the written talking points sent from the CIA said that, but that information was deleted from the memo by the White House and the nonsense about an internet video was inserted in its place. Thus far, nobody is saying who made the edits.

The timing of the resignation of Gen. Petraeus as CIA Director is suspicious. Did Petraeus fall askance of Obama for refusing to maintain their “company line” about the internet video, and thus was asked to resign when Petraeus was about to testify in front of Congress over Benghazi?

Is the media giving ample airtime to the Petraeus affair story because they are trying to deflect people's attention away from Benghazi?

The idea that Attorney General Eric Holder knew about the Petraeus affair six weeks ago and said nothing to President Obama is very hard to believe.

These are all very serious issues that can also be considered “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

•This Fiscal Cliff the media is going absolutely crazy over is nothing more than Republicans falling into a logic trap that the Democrats created years ago. If the “cliff” is reached, in January 2013, income tax rates go back to the rates that existed before Pres. George Bush (Bush 43) lowered rates in the first years of his first term. Those were the rate cuts that spurred the huge economic growth after 9/11/2001. By calling those rates The Bush Tax Cuts, Obama can avoid being blamed for raising taxes in a sluggish economy, which is actually exactly what he wants to do.

•Did you know that the unemployment rate for government workers is down near 4%? That's considered full-employment. The private sector unemployment rate is about 16%. I would like to reverse those statistics. How's that for a campaign slogan?

•The problem we are in economically is that our government spends too much money. Bush 41 started the ball rolling near the end of his second term when he signed TARP

1.. Obama made it even worse with TARP 2 and hasn't stopped growing government since. We are now $17 trillion in debt long term and the government is trying to gradually take over the health care system in the country.

The problem once again is not too little taxes. The problem is too much government.

•Reduce Your Government Footprint. I have the above statement on a bumper sticker on my car and a gentleman pulled up next to me the other day and asked me where I got it. It is a statement that nobody can argue against.

•I have stopped more than a few people in their tracks in discussing the Obama Administration's use of free contraception as a way to attract women voters to his nefarious cause. I believe that they think women are too stupid to understand that $17 trillion in debt is no way to responsibly run a government. To elucidate, I asked in return how they thought men would respond if a campaign commercial asked for their vote if doing so would ensure that they could have free access to condoms. Most men would rightfully respond, “Why do I need that from you? Just reduce the debt, thank you!”

The most shameful part of this analysis is that in the 2012 elections, Obama won women overall and Romney won overwhelmingly among men. It's sad, really.

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


HERE'S WHAT IS NEEDED FOR GOP TO WIN PRESIDENCY

Posted 11/16/12

Well, that was NOT how I thought the election would go.

As of the time of this writing, all the absentee and provisional ballots haven't been counted, 7.3 million fewer people voted for Obama this time over 2008. 1.1 million fewer people voted for Romney. The battleground states, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado all went narrowly for Obama. The collective difference in those states is something around 400,000 votes. Obama got fewer votes than Bush 43 in his re-election in 2004, so turnout on their side wasn't any great shakes. Obama-Biden received only about 600,000 more votes that Kerry-Edwards.

So what happened?

The populous was definitely less motivated to vote for Obama than they were for Romney. But fewer Republicans voted for Romney than voted for the Republican in each of the last 12 years.

•The David Petraeus scandal is very fishy. The timing of the announcement, right after the election and right before the former CIA Director was to testify on the Benghazi crisis before Congress is VERY fishy. Watch this one!

•I think the answer is simply, don't run the guy who lost to the last guy that lost the last presidential election. If you want to turn-out the base of the party, speak to the issues that motivate your base. For example, I don't think people believed that Romney was really opposed to ObamaCare since he constantly defended RomneyCare in Massachusetts. Now sure, he used the argument that states have the right to implement government-run health care because it is a states rights issue, but that doesn't directly attack ObamaCare and concept of government run health care, which the base needs to hear.

•Folks watch your wallet's and purses (Do they say pocketbooks any more?). The Obama Administration is coming after them in the form of a renewed carbon tax effort. You know what a carbon tax is? It is a tax on amounts of carbon that we all use. You want to know how much carbon we all us? More than we can count. Carbon is used in one form or another in everything we use, make, take, bake, grill, drive, burn, excrete, belch, fart, find, pinch, and pump.

Be VERY aware. We are going to have to stand on the Republicans in the House of Representatives folks. This one is that big!

•If a Republican is going to win a presidential election, they are going to have to be able to defend conservatism, and not just defend it, but extol the virtues and freedoms and liberty inherent in conservatism. Romney couldn't do that. He would always toss in a defense of global warming, or would issue a slight equivocation about what should be done with ObamaCare (repeal and replace – replace? With what?).

•Now of course, we're being flooded with the Rino's (and sadly some conservatives too!) in the Republican Party calling for changing our party's core principles. Many are calling for conservatives to embrace illegal immigration. Why? What have Democrats done to support illegal immigration? The folks at Univision scolded Pres. Obama for doing nothing on immigration reform.

No tacit form of amnesty for illegal immigrants will ever be embraced by Hispanics. Why should they? Illegals come over here through our uncontrolled border now, work readily, and either stay or go back? What motivation is there for those folks to stop what they have been doing for generations?
Just secure the border.

•Rush Limbaugh asked a great question today on his show. When Democrats lost in 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004, who in the media or in the Democrat Party demanded that their party abandon their support of abortion, or gun bans, or school choice? Nobody did because it never happened.

This is where the media steps in. They will find a Rino and shine the lights on him faster than Al Gore runs for watermelon flavored massage oil.

We're going to have to hold the firewall in Congress firmly folks. This is going to get nasty.

•By the way, did you notice that recreational use of marijuana was legalized by a vote of the people in the states of Colorado and Washington? So, if the nation is divided on a divisive issue like the legalization of recreational marijuana use, and states either acting to make it legal or illegal are uniquely American examples of the supremacy of states rights vs. the federal government, which is a topic I do not disagree with, why is it so wrong to do the same thing with abortion laws?

•Kudos to my Kansas State Wildcats for achieving the number one ranking in the only poll that matters (at least for now anyway) – the BCS (Bowl Championship Series) college football poll. With former number one, Alabama, falling last weekend to Texas A&M, the then number two Wildcats simply had to win Saturday night against TCU, and win is just what they did. They still have two games to go, one against Baylor in Waco, TX and one at home in Manhattan against Texas. They're not there yet, but they are getting real close.

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


A LOOK BACK AT 2008

Posted 11/9/12

[Trying to come up with a proper topic on the eve of the most important presidential election in my lifetime was a struggle. So I punted and am re-posting a melding of the columns I wrote on the eve of, and the week after, the 2008 election.]

[BEFORE]
Well, as I write this, I have no idea who is going to win the Presidential election. Hopefully, we won't have a recreation of 2000 when it took weeks to find out who actually won.

Obama won this election because of the sheer power of the cult of personality. Bill Clinton did the same thing in 1992 and 1996. If you gloss the message in fanciful rhetoric and clever euphemisms, you can fool millions who normally don't pay attention to these things.

Now that Obama is in control of the military, look for a gradual decline in spending in Iraq. Look for the military to be given new rules of engagement. In place of weapons, the troops will be issued non-confrontational neutral language talking-down points. Flowers will be placed in all gun barrels. Iran will change its strategy with regard to Iraq. Hide the women and children folks – that one's going to be very nasty.

Under a Barack Obama Administration, hide your assets and pray you don't die in the next 4 years. Tax rates are going up. The Bush Tax Cuts are set to expire, and EVERYBODY that pays taxes got a tax cut when those were passed, so EVERYONE is going to see a tax increase. We're also going to see big money investment start to dry-up in the U.S. as top marginal tax rates and capital gains taxes increase under the Obama Administration.

President Obama reassigns the Border Patrol to picking up trash in the Nation's parks. The number of illegal aliens in the U.S. triples and unemployment rates in the U.S. approach double digit figures. President Obama has no reason to fight for U.S. border security because the Congress is behind him in dropping all resistance. Brian issues his first, “I told you so.” Roofing companies' profits skyrocket.

President Obama's victory showed that pollsters can actually control the outcome of an election. Enough people on the McCain side were discouraged enough by the constant drumbeat of “Obama's going to win” shouted continuously for months by the media that they just stayed home on Election Day, ensuring the victory for Obama. Polls become a major part of President Obama's daily strategy.

President Obama is committing a cash strapped nation into a strategy that triples electricity rates. He then initiates a huge government commitment toward windmills and solar collectors. Migratory birds are killed in unheard of numbers. Roof leaks from the new solar collectors are rampant, spurring the record profits in the roofing industry.
But regardless…life will go on.

[AFTER]
Boy, am I glad the elections are over. Even though my side of the political ledger got beaten like a rubber piñata in a rubber tree forest, after all is said and done, we're done with the political ads - for awhile anyway.

President-elect Barack Obama is primed to take the Oath of Office to, in part, “…preserve and protect…” the Constitution of the United States of America. How exactly his liberal agenda fits into those words he will utter on Jan. 20 will be the defining move of his Presidency.

Are any of you getting a tickle out of the media people that are out there asking themselves what exactly Obama stands for? Really? They are asking that NOW? This is going to be a fun four years for those of us not too proud to say, “I told you so.”

•Why isn't anyone hard on Herm Edwards for going for the two-point conversion at the end of regulation time against the San Diego Chargers last Sunday? The team is 1-7.

They aren't going anywhere in the post season. And overtime is almost literally a flip-of-a-coin (the team that wins the coin flip almost always wins the game in the sudden-death format). I'm as hard on Edwards as anybody, but he deserves a break in this case. Going for two was the right thing to do.

•Things also exploded in Manhattan, Kansas last week when Kansas State pulled the plug on 3rd year head coach Ron Prince after only 2½ seasons. The reasons given for the firing have ranged from, “not enough wins…ran out of time…” to “…the fans aren't patient enough…” That may be what they are telling the media, but the truth appears to be that the university is at a crossroads administratively and financially, and such a condition is no place for a program with a hemorrhaging revenue generator. There was simply too much player turnover and too much coaching turnover. You cannot come into the Big 12 with no recruiting ties and expect to survive without a plan. They liked to talk about plans, but it did not appear that there was really one in place.

Talk is centering around either a return to the sidelines by Legendary Former Head Coach Bill Snyder, who is reportedly itching to give it one more try, or a calling home of former KStater and current TCU head coach Gary Patterson. Put your money on Snyder, if he truly wants it. Gary Patterson wants no piece of the job if Bill Snyder wants it….bank on that.

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


 

IF OBAMA IS REELECTED, HE'LL BE IMPEACHED OVER BENGHAZI

Posted 11/2/12

Alright folks. We're there. My Top 10 Most Compelling Reasons for Voting Barack Hussein Obama Out of Office and Mitt Romney In As America's Next President. We have counted them down from 100 and have arrived at the Top 10.

10. Paul Ryan vs. Joe Biden. Seriously. Shouldn't we be able to be proud of the Vice President of the United States of America? Joe Biden is a national disgrace. We can do better. Obama has no dirt on Ryan. That should be plenty of positive reinforcement beyond what we already know about the guy.
9. Obama's Apology Tour Through the Middle East. He bowed to Saudi leaders. He apologized for America on foreign soil and NO American President should be rewarded for that disgrace.
8. The Children Singing an Anti-Conservative Song Ad. This one came up only in the last week. It's pathetic to use children in this manner for political gain.
7. The First Time Ad. This travesty aired last week. In it, a young woman equated voting for Obama in her first election with having sexual intercourse the first time. Someone should have asked Obama if he would have approved the ad had it featured his daughters in the speaking role.
6. Obama's Energy Ineptitude. More than 80% of our energy needs are met with fossil fuels, and Obama is only pushing wind and solar? Wind and solar energy costs 5-8 times more than fossil fuel generated power. That idiocy alone should be an impeachable offense.
5. Obama Has Saddled Our Children and Grandchildren with Tens of Trillions of Dollars of Government Debt. Who can justify this? I don't recall hearing anything from Obama in defense of passing on this massive debt obligation.
4. Obama's Desire to Pit People Against Each Other. This is one of the core principles of Marxism. Obama says that the “rich should pay their fair share” of taxes when half of Americans pay no income tax at all. He fanned the flames of the violence of the Occupy Movement in the big cities of this country (You know, the “Let's Poop On the Police Cars” Movement.)
3. Obama's Ignorance of the Free Market, which has been largely manifested in his ObamaCare Leviathan which must be destroyed. Obama does not understand how the free market works with private property, liberty and freedom in protecting America from Tyranny. If he hasn't learned it by now, he never will. Time to move on.
2. The Benghazi Cover-up. This has been despicable. The Obama Administration manufactured a false excuse for an al Qaida led attack on an American Embassy in Libya on the anniversary of 9/11 to cover for an embarrassing policy error, At the core of this cover-up lie the deaths of 4 Americans which Obama and his Cabinet have tried to tie to some obscure internet video that nobody had heard of or seen. Reports appear that those under fire asked for assistance and those requests were denied. If Obama wins re-election, which can't happen if you read all 100 of these, he will be impeached over Benghazi.

And the Number 1 Most Compelling Reason:

1. Because Mitt Romney is the BEST candidate to steer this country out of the economic doldrums that Obama has grounded us in to. I don't know that any of the other candidates that threw their names into the ring back in the primaries were as qualified as Mitt Romney is. He saved the Olympics in 2000. He founded a successful corporation. He is a decent person. That part has been proven without a doubt because the dirtiest and sleaziest campaigner in American political history, Barack Obama, could dig up nothing on Romney. Vote for Mitt Romney. America's future and our Liberty depends on it.

•Question: What Percentage of Smokers Get Lung Cancer?

Answer:

We know that smoking causes lung cancer, but it's also clear that some people smoke their whole lives and never develop lung cancer. What percentage of smokers get lung cancer?

Most statistics look at the overall risk of lung cancer, combining both people who smoke and those who have never smoked. Based on United States statistics, the lifetime risk that an individual will develop lung cancer is 6.9%, or 1 in 13 people. So overall, 12 out of every 13 people will NEVER contract lung cancer.

Studies in other countries have broken down the risk further to differentiate between never smokers, former smokers, and current smokers.

In a 2006 study, the risk of developing lung cancer was:

· 0.2% for men who never smoked (0.4% for women)
· 5.5% for male former smokers (2.6% in women)
· 15.9% for current male smokers (9.5% for women)
· 24.4% for male “heavy smokers” defined as smoking more than 5 cigarettes per day (18.5% for women)
So, to summarize, if you choose to smoke, out of 100 of you that decide to quit, 94 of you will not contract lung cancer.
If you smoke currently, 85 out of 100 of you will not contract lung cancer.
If you smoke a lot, 76 out of every 100 of you will never contract lung cancer.
Just wanted to provide some balance.

•Stay well…
…and Vote Mitt Romney!

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


OBAMA FLUNKS WHEN IT COMES TO SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY

Posted 10/26/12

As we continue to count down the Top 100 Reasons to Vote Obama Out of the White House, we approach the Science and Technology 25.

From just about every science and technology perspective, the Obama Administration has been the most damaging to America and its place in the world. I actually had trouble limiting this list to 25.

50. Cash for Clunkers. An idiotic idea to take perfectly capable cars and bury them.
49. The incandescent lightbulb ban. Edison is still spinning in his grave.
48. Raising the government-mandated fuel economy standards for automobiles. 50 mph means less steel in cars and more dead people on the roads.
47. Supporting wind and solar energy with tax credits.
46. Supporting ethanol fuels.
45. Failing to support nuclear energy.
44. Supporting the notion that mankind is a threat to the existence of the planet.
43. Dumping money into ill-conceived companies like Solyndra.
42. Forwarding the ill-conceived notion that capitalism is a threat to human survival.
41. Working to bankrupt the coal industry, by design.
40. Making NASA into a Muslim outreach organization. I still don't get that one.
39. Ignoring America's traditional position as the technological force among mankind.
38. Lack of support for new technologies.
37. Abandoning America's natural energy sources.
36. Making inconsequential pest life forms more important than the progress of man.
35. Supporting the commoditization of the human race through stem cell capitalization.
34. Ignoring outer space.
33. Ignoring the technological benefit in use of the American military for invention.
32. Use of Death Panels in ObamaCare de-emphasizes research toward improving human health and longevity.
31. Forwarding the idiotic notion that local heat waves or mild winters are signs of human-caused climate change.
30. Abandoning the notion that man is a force of creation and innovation on the planet instead of a pestilence.
29. Allowing the EPA to go unchecked in its constant attacks on industry and productivity.
28. Appointment of John Holdren as Science Czar who has stated that forced sterilizations are necessary to save the planet.
27. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu – just a disaster.
26. Failing to acknowledge that 80% of our energy is supplied by coal-generated power and the alternatives he pushed cost eight times more
25. No new energy research.
24. Failing to recognize that necessity is the mother of invention.
23. Vetoing the Keystone Pipeline Project.
22. Placing so much government entitlement spending on the backs of the American people and their descendants that our future for researching new technologies is hamstrung.
21. Keeping the DDT ban alive and people around the world dying from Malaria.
20. No new oil refineries built in this country in the last 40 years.
19. He endorsed billions of dollars in subsidies in electric car technology that is a fiery death trap waiting to happen.
18. Windmills dotting the American landscape are death traps to birds.
17. The completely idiotic idea of spending tax dollars on impoverished areas to weatherproof crack houses.
16. Shrimp on treadmills.
15. Placing the federal government in charge of what must go on the lunch tray for a student in America.
14. NASA spends about $1 million annually “researching and building the Mars menu.” This year, NASA also awarded $947,000 to researchers at Cornell University and the University of Hawaii to study the best food for astronauts to eat on Mars.
13. A general lack of innovation occurs throughout the Obama Administration
12. Obama has no science or technology natural curiosity
11. Lack of support of weapons technology keeps American security at risk
Next week, the Top Ten Most Compelling Reasons to Kick Obama Out of the White House.

•The final Presidential Debate tonight was a strategic victory for Mitt Romney.

Supposedly to be focused on foreign policy, Romney redirected the discussion near the beginning, in the middle and at the end on the most important issue in this election – the economy. Obama's failed promises were kept front-and-center, and Pres. Obama had no answer. I and most in the base behind Romney, wanted to take to Obama on Libya with a mace, but I recognized as the debate went on that in this final debate, on these issues of foreign policy, Romney needed to distinguish himself as capable, strong, and above-all Presidential. He actually made Obama look petty and desperate with his finger-wagging attacks.

Chris Wallace on Fox News had an interesting observation. He said that had he been on a desert island for the last 4 years and just came back to watch this debate, he would have guessed that Romney was the president and Obama was the challenger based on their respective demeanors during the debate.

(Email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow him at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


MORE OF THE TOP REASONS TO VOTE AGAINST OBAMA

Posted 10/19/12

This week's contribution to the Top 100 Reasons to Vote Against Obama in November are the historical justifications:

70. The United States of America must never again be led by a President that sees the country as a detriment to the world rather than its brightest lone beacon of liberty and freedom.

69. Barack Obama had a significant number of people vote for him simply due to the color of his skin, and that is racist. You cannot cure racism with more racism.

68. The Democrat Party does nothing for women, yet demonizes the Republicans as engaging in a war on women. Women are kept slaves to their reproductive powers under the Democrats while men are freed from any thread of reproductive responsibility.

67. The Democrats do nothing for blacks. Black unemployment is higher than for the rest of the population, and has grown at a higher rate under Obama than any other President. In return for this “service” blacks voted for Obama to the tune of 95% in 2008.

66. George Washington once said, “I cannot tell a lie.” Obama told his Pastor, Jeremiah Wright, “…the difference between you and me is you have to tell the truth…”

65. Obama should be thrown out of office simply because he compares himself favorably to Abraham Lincoln.

64. Obama saying to the Russian President that he will be able to be more flexible in disarmament talks after the election should be all any American needs to hear to send him packing. What U.S. President gives that information away to another country?

63. Obama believes that mankind can change the temperature of the planet. Given that the Earth has been spinning on its axis for 4 billion years and man has been industrial on it for only 100 is all you need to know.

62. Wealth redistribution is contrary to the constitutionally stipulated powers of the federal government.

61. Gas prices are higher under Obama than they have been under any President.

60. Pres. Obama has put the country under more debt load than all other Presidents combined.

59. Electric cars, which were explored at the corporate level more than 100 years ago, and were dismissed then are being brought back by Obama, and he has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars.

58. Nuclear power, which is the future of human energy and was doing well in the 1980's, has been ignored by Obama.

57. Obama is about as distant in philosophy from our greatest Conservative President, Calvin Coolidge, as any other President.

56. Obama has taken all the bad traits of his predecessor, Pres. Bush, big government spending and hamstringing our military with strict Rules of Engagement and ramped them up to Avogadro's Number.

55. To quote Margaret Thatcher, “Socialism never works. You always run out of other people's money.”

54. Those that do not learn from history are bound to repeat it.

53. According to Author Dinesh D'Souza, Obama is enacting his absentee father's anti-colonialism against America. How exactly is leading massive relief efforts in Haiti after their massive earthquake and in Indonesia after the Tsunami and countless other relief efforts anti-colonialist?

52. America has never been as depressed economically as it has been under Obama.

51. America has never been as depressed in terms of patriotism and American pride as it has been under Obama.

•Did you see where Todd Akin was leading McCaskill in some recent polls?

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich criticized two major Republican campaign organizations for not continuing to back Republican candidate Todd Akin in the Missouri Senate race.

In an interview with The Daily Caller's Ginni Thomas (Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife I believe) Gingrich called out GOP “establishment types” Crossroads GPS super PAC and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, for pulling funding from Akin.

“If you applied the Todd Akin rule to Joe Biden, he'd be resigning the vice presidency once a week,” Gingrich said in Akin's defense and in his best line. “You have this bizarre double standard where Biden can say the weirdest things, and people just laugh and say, well, that's just old Crazy Joe, you know; after all, he's only vice president.”

But here's the clincher:

“In Akin's case, the establishment types saw a chance to get rid of a trouble-maker, replace him with somebody who'd be malleable, do it in the name of winning the election — and some of the things they said were quite extraordinary.”

I mean, Karl Rove's not-very-funny statement 'If Akin gets murdered, don't look for me,' you know, I told Karl: in the age of Gabby Giffords, this isn't funny, this isn't a joke, you shouldn't be able to say this in polite company.”

The former presidential candidate cited how the NRSC supported Charlie Crist instead of Marco Rubio in the Republican Florida Senate primary. “So let's be clear, the Senate committee doesn't always have good judgment,” he said.

“I got so angry, because I am a genuine grassroots populist, and I have a permanent suspicion of the establishment. And I got so angry at the way they were treating Todd that I agreed to go in.”

Amen!

Look for the complete interview at The Daily Caller.

(Email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow him at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


OBAMA MIGHT BE WORST DEBATER IN MODERN POLITICAL HISTORY

Posted 10/13/12

Romney cleaned Obama's clock in the debate. There is no excuse for Obama. This is what happens when you avoid being challenged on the issues for more than four years.
The Comparative 20 Reasons to Boot Obama from office on November 6. By comparative, we are using relative analysis to show how almost anyone would be a better President that Barack Hussein Obama.

90. Obama is worse than Jimmy Carter. Carter took a similar recession to what Obama inherited, made it worse like Obama has, and like Obama seems to not know how to get out of it. Carter got only one term. So should Obama.

89. Obama wants to raise taxes. Reagan lowered taxes and the economy boomed. Carter raised taxes and the economy stunk. Do you need to know more?

88. Obama throws an embarrassing baseball. Like it or not, Presidents have to be able to throw out first pitches at MLB games. He throws like a girl, with apologies to most girls.

87. Obama may be the worst debater in modern American political history, and I'm not kidding one bit. Obama beating McCain at debate in 2008 was akin to Roseanne Barr dusting Lady Gaga in a chili eating contest.

86. Obama may be the most arrogant President ever to occupy the White House.

85. The Chicago Political Machine is worse than the mafia. At least the media will critically investigate the mafia.

84. Gas prices are higher under Obama – and he has admitted that he doesn't mind high gas prices – than they have ever been in this country.

83. Obama got to power like another pawn of a political machine, Harry Truman (The Pendergast Machine). Truman got only one term.

82. Capitalism is comparatively better than Socialism.

81. Capitalism cannot be enacted on a personal scale under a Socialistic government. Socialism can be enacted on a personal scale under a Capitalistic government.

80 Obama has sunk this nation into more debt than all of his predecessors combined.

79. Our children face more dire futures now than in any previous generation, principally due to the massive debt.

78. Obama plays golf while he has sent troops to fight and die in foreign lands under this country's flag. President Bush refused to do so.

77. Necessity being the mother of invention is not central to Obama's core belief system.

76. Envy is not to be used as a political force to divide people with the end goal to win votes.

75. Obama is not “the First Black President” and to judge him so is racist in and of itself because in doing to one must make a judgment based solely on the color of his skin.

74. I don't believe I have ever heard Obama utter the words, “The Federalist Papers.”

As a Constitutional Law professor, I would think he would know what they are.

73. The Gates Incident which led to the dumbest move by a President in history – The Beer Summit.

72. He seems like the only President that I have ever heard speak that doesn't “get” America.

71. Vice Presidents shouldn't be an embarrassment. They're a heartbeat away from the most powerful post in the world.

Next week, we count down the historical reasons for making sure Obama is not re-elected in November.

•Did you miss the Facebook message from www.BarackObama.com that was urging women last week to “vote their body parts.” The ad was pulled, because I suppose Democrats think that's all women care about-What's good for their "Lady Parts"
And nice job there, Obama Machine, reducing women to the function of their reproductive body parts. Actually, he would have had a more logical argument using men in that scenario because Obama's love of abortion keeps men out of the reproduction decision-making process.

You had to love this: President Obama invoked the liberal lobbying group the AARP to defend his health care law last week, prompting the group to release a statement telling him not to do that again.

“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,” the group posted in a statement “AARP is a nonpartisan organization and we do not endorse political candidates nor coordinate with any candidate or political party.”

•From Newsbusters.com…

The unemployment rate decreased to 7.8 percent in September, even though the U6 rate, which includes folks that have stopped looking for work remained unchanged at upwards of 14%.

The 0.3% drop is the largest single drop in one month in more than 30 years.

Another element making this seem to be a construct of the Obama Machine is that the drop appears to be statistically due only to an eightfold drop in the number of people who reported to have found jobs in a household survey conducted by telephone. All the other numbers remained unchanged.

But explain the divergence in two surveys done by the Labor Department. The Household Survey showed a gain of 873,000 people employed in September - resulting in the surprise drop in the unemployment rate - while the Establishment Survey only showed a rise of 114,000.

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


HERE ARE SOME REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA

Posted 10/5/12

I'm going to start tonight with part of my listing of the Top 100 Reasons To Not Vote for Obama in 2012, so get your notebooks out.

This is The Hollywood 10:

100. Clint Eastwood said not to. I don't buy in to everything he has done in his life, but he's be en able to vote in some 13 presidential elections. If Dirty Harry says it's time to let a failed President go, I'm in no position to argue with him.
99. Cher supports Obama. No explanation necessary.
98. Chuck Norris does not support Obama.
97 Whoopie Goldberg supports Obama. See 99 for explanation.
96. Rosie O'Donnell supports Obama. See 97 for explanation.
95. Bruce Willis supports Romney. I like Willis.
All the tough guys are behind Romney and all the weak, non-childbearing supporters are in Obama's camp. Interesting. More…
94. Janine Turner supports Romney. She is very easy on the eyes.
93. Madonna will take all her clothes off if Obama is re-elected. That will NOT be easy on the eyes or the stomach.
92. Kid Rock supports Romney. Who hates Kid Rock?
91. Jay-Z believes that government and taxes should be small, but he supports Obama because of his skin color. No explanation necessary.
90 (Coming next week…the Comparative Reasons to avoid Obama for the next 4 years.)

•So I'm perusing Twitter one evening and come across this observation by Peter Gleick, an (as defined on his Wikipedia page) “American scientist working on issues related to the environment, economic development, international security, and scientific ethics and integrity, with a focus on global freshwater challenges. Gleick posted something to the effect that '…the Clean Water Act is 40 years old…YEAH!...”

So, I asked him, “How exactly do we measure whether water is cleaner now than 40 years ago?”

Because, naturally, if you are going to tout an anniversary, you should evaluate your relative positioning in terms of accomplishments achieved over that time span.

So, Gleick responded, “Many ways to do this. When we do, we see some improvements and some degradation. Much more can/should be done to clean “
To which I followed, “But the reality is American potable water has been healthy & safe for much more than the last 40 yrs. Another unnecessary law.”

Gleick's final response was, “love your sense of humor. “

My first thought was, “Get him!”

But then I recalled where I first heard his name. Peter Gleick is the individual who on February 20, 2012, announced he was the person responsible for the unauthorized distribution of documents from The Heartland Institute (an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank based in Chicago, that advocates free market policies). Gleick claimed he had received "an anonymous document in the mail describing what appeared to be details of the Heartland Institute's climate program strategy," and in trying to verify the authenticity of the document, had "solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name". He stated that his judgment in this issue was 'blinded by frustration with the ongoing efforts to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate' (I thought their side claimed the debate over global warming was over.), and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.' On February 24 he wrote to the board of the Pacific Institute requesting a "temporary short-term leave of absence" from the Institute. The Board of Directors stated it was "deeply concerned regarding recent events" involving Gleick and the Heartland documents, and appointed a new Acting Executive Director on February 27. He was reinstated following an investigation.

After recalling who Gleick was, his final response made more sense. Someone from his political perspective faced with a logic challenge will choose “flight” over “fight” every time.

•From The Daily Caller, were you aware of the complete transcript of the October 19, 1998 Loyola College forum on community organizing and policymaking during which a future President Barack Obama said he favored the government redistribution of wealth? The audio demonstrates the context of that remark and reveals other far-left positions that Obama held as a state senator.

The snippet we all heard was, “I actually believe in redistribution,” Obama said in the brief 96-second excerpt. “At least at a certain level, to make sure that everybody's got a shot.”

At one point on the tape he suggests that the “working poor” on welfare are a political voting bloc that can be harnessed.

Obama is also heard lamenting Americans' distrust of “government action,” identifying his political opponents — that is, Republicans — as “the bad guys” declaring his support for labor unions and community organizers; endorsing the public financing of political campaigns; and staking out liberal positions on gun control, government-run health care and welfare reform.

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax or email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


THIS IS THE GENERAL ELECTION, TIME TO GET WITH THE PROGRAM

Posted 9/28/12

•I find it fascinating that so many people in the non-liberal media are so very knowledgeable about what the Romney campaign is doing wrong and how they should change their campaign in order to be more successful in defeating Barack Obama in November.

I think it should serve as a sign that the people with some form of a voice who want Obama defeated are much more numerous than most in the “drive-by media” want to admit, but beyond that.

I'm with Ann Romney (Isn't she GREAT?) in telling the naysayers to zip it. You all had your chance in the primary to get in the race. You didn't do it then. Now is the general election – time to get with the program. The principal mission is to defeat Barack Obama. That is the end-all and be-all of this election for president.

And why in the name of Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell is anyone listening to a word that Peggy Noonan writes or says? Who appointed her the Grand Poobah of everything conservative?

Stop letting the liberal media try to define conservatism.

•From The Daily Caller, in the next three to five years, more than 200 coal-fired electric plants will be shut down over 25 states due, in part, to stricter EPA regulations.
The most affected states include Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina, which will see a combined 103 coal-fired generators shut down.

In a rare positive step on Friday, the House voted 233 to 175 to stop the Obama administration's war on coal, passing a bill that would limit the EPA's regulatory authority over greenhouse gases and limit the Interior Department's ability to issue coal mining rules.

Try replacing that with solar and wind power.

•And for the biggest story of the last week, from The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes…

“…For nine days, the Obama administration claimed the killing of our ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, was a random, spontaneous act of individuals upset about an online video, and had nothing do to with the eleventh anniversary of 9/11.

(These claims were lies, as Hayes points-out clearly…)

“The White House now admits that the murders were the result of planned terrorist attacks with connections to al Qaida and were not the result of spontaneous protests.

“Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on five Sunday talk shows on September 16. On each show, she blathered that a “hateful video” triggered a “spontaneous protest…outside of our consulate in Benghazi” that “spun from there into something much, much more violent.” “We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.”

(Hayes nails it here…)

Intelligence officials understood immediately that the attacks took place on 9/11 for a reason. The ambassador, in a country that faces a growing al Qaeda threat, had virtually no security. The two contractors killed in the attacks were not part of the ambassador's security detail, and there were not, in fact, “many other colleagues” working security with them.

“So we are left with this: Four Americans were killed in a premeditated terrorist attack on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, and for more than a week the Obama administration misled the country about what happened.

“This isn't just a problem.It's a scandal.

“If this were the first time top Obama officials had tried to sell a bogus narrative after an attack, perhaps they would deserve the benefit of the doubt. It's not.

“Remember December 28, 2009, three days after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to detonate explosives in his underwear aboard an airliner over Detroit? President Obama told the country that the incident was the work of “an isolated extremist.”

“It wasn't. Abdulmutallab was trained, directed, and financed by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a fact he shared with investigators early in his interrogation.
“The same thing happened less than six months later, after Faisal Shahzad attempted to blow up his Nissan Pathfinder in Times Square.

”Two days following the botched attack, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano took to the Sunday shows to dismiss reports of a conspiracy and insisted that the attempted bombing was just a “one-off” by a single attacker. It wasn't. A week later, after much of the information had leaked, Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged that the United States had “evidence that shows that the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack.

“In each instance, top administration officials quickly downplayed or dismissed the seriousness of the events, only to acknowledge, after the shock had worn off and the media had turned to other news, that their initial stories were incorrect.

“And to top it all off with a rank smelly cowpie, in his 60 Minutes interview last Sunday, Obama referred indicated the “recent incidents” in Libya were simply a “bump in the road” in the process.

“I wish the CBS interviewer would have pressed Obama on what that process is exactly.”

(Follow Brian Kubicki on Twitter at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


KANSAS CITY RADIO, TV NEWSIES BLEW IT ON THIS ONE

Posted 9/21/12

•In the aftermath of the September 11 attack on the U.S. Embassies in Cairo, Egypt and in Libya, the latter led to the murder of the U.S. Ambassador and members of his staff in what appears to have been a planned attack.

This observation – a very good one – comes from John Nolte at Breitbart.com (A can't miss site to visit daily if you want to stay informed):

“Who lost Egypt? Barack Obama. His administration waited eight whole days when those demonstrations erupted (in Cairo) to demand (Hosni) Mubarak's ouster, and then insisted on immediate elections — even though the only opposition organized well enough at that point in time for elections was the radical Muslim Brotherhood. In both Egypt and even more in Libya — where Obama applied military force to dislodge and topple Moammar Qaddafi — the White House left power vacuums that allowed the most radical elements to seize control. Critics of Obama's policies in both regards warned of this very outcome 18 months ago, to no avail.”

Now that Obama's Middle Eastern policy has resulted in the murder of U.S. diplomats, on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, their response is to spend considerable time and effort spinning the murders as the result of Islamic furor fueled by some obscure anti-Islamic video that nobody has ever seen?

Do they really believe the American people are that stupid?

•This from Michelle Malkin's Twitchy.com website:

During an utterly shameful, disgraceful speech to campaign volunteers, Obama dialed the classless, self-absorbed politicking up to 11 by exploiting the deaths in Libya for a revolting comparison.

From President Obama: “And obviously [our] hearts are broken for the families but I wanted to encourage those folks at the State Dept. that they were making a difference,” Obama told volunteer leaders in Las Vegas, according to the pool report. “The sacrifices that our troops and our diplomats make are obviously very different from the challenges that we face here domestically but like them, you guys are Americans who sense that we can do better than we're doing….I'm just really proud of you.”

The sacrifices made by dead embassy staffers are “obviously very different,” and yet totally deserving of a comparison?

Unbelievable!

•Amid all the truly awful events of the 9/11 Anniversary, did you catch the supposed downtown KCMO “bomb(?)” scare that ended quietly with no bomb?

Amid all the radio and TV news people that were going ape-doo-doo to the degree that I actually thought we were looking at a rush hour snowstorm that afternoon, true credit goes to newspaper reporters Christine Vendel, Dave Helling and Matt Campbell of The Kansas City Star for getting to the core of the nonsense in the midst of all the screaming women on TV and radio.

The situation started when a man walked into the Richard Bolling Federal Building about noon last Friday and asked if he was on a terrorist watch list.

In the end, the incident appeared to be a misunderstanding. From The Star report:

Local police and FBI agents acting with an abundance of caution responded appropriately (not my words) with the initial limited information they had based on witness accounts of what happened,” Bridget Patton, an FBI spokeswoman, said in a press release.

The man owns a cleaning business in Blue Springs, and when reached by phone Friday evening, he told The Star he never threatened anybody.

“All I said is I want to meet with someone because I want to clear something…I said I've been told my name is on a watch list. And what happened after that, God knows.”
He later spoke to reporters outside his home and said he had been pulled over Thursday by a policeman who told him he was flagged because he was on a terrorist watch list. He said that is why he went to the federal building Friday to inquire about his status.

He has been in the United States for 36 years and described himself as a small-business man just trying to make a living. “I am not a bad guy,” he said. “Otherwise I would be arrested, and I'm not.”

The man said the FBI treated him with respect while they were questioning him and investigating the situation.

Apparently in all the hubbub caused by the media, a bomb-sniffing dog gave its handler a positive indication on his car's trunk, and police started investigating the incident as a credible threat. The man told police he had fertilizer in the trunk.

Kansas City police used a robot to open the trunk and search it. The robot emptied the trunk, pulling out a green tarp, a spare tire (That part was breathlessly reported by KMBZ's Dana Wright as though one would need to be alarmed about a spare tire in the trunk of a car!!!) and other items.

No explanation was offered as to why any of the other news services in the city weren't aware of the fairly simple notion of calling the guy's business number for his side of the story, or why radio and TV people are apparently not as bright as newspaper people.

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax and email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


OBAMA DIDN'T GET THAT THE JOKE WAS ON HIM

Posted 9/14/12

•Now that the Democrat Convention is history, I can go back to my normal diet of fried meats and cow because my gag-reflex has returned to normal from a week of hair-trigger status.

Have you ever seen a gathering of “Somebody-Help-Me” freaks that so well defined? P.T. Barnum wept in envy.

•Did you catch this gem from Reuters? General Motors Co sold a “record” number of Chevrolet Volts in August.

However, two years after the introduction of the electric car-gas backup vehicle, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt. Thanks to lease agreements, some Americans are paying just $5,100 to drive a Volt for two years; a vehicle that cost a staggering $89,000 to produce.

GM's quandary is how to justify taxpayers' estimated $1.2-billion investment in the Volt. But the Volt's steep $39,995 base price and its complex technology—the car uses expensive lithium-polymer batteries, sophisticated electronics and an electric motor combined with a gasoline engine — have kept many prospective buyers away from the cars -- and that isn't even factoring-in the risk that the car will burst into flames in a crash that punctures the expensive batteries.

•Now, the following column appeared in the Washington Examiner and I'm quoting key sections to illustrate that even those on our side – the logic and reason side of the global warming debate – are sometimes the most whacky. From a political columnist in the Washington Examiner (I'll not give his name to spare him the embarrassment):

“It was pretty obvious to me what Mitt Romney was doing last week in Tampa when he said, with a smile, 'President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. MY promise…is to help you and your family.'

He was mocking Obama's posture that he had divine powers. After the final Democratic primary in June 2008, Obama said that future generations would look back on his primary victory as 'the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.'

But many on the environmental left were pretty upset at Romney's comment, seeing it as a mockery of climate change, or even of rising sea levels. Alex Pareene of Slate wrote, sarcastically, 'Isn't climate change hilarious?' and called Mitt's joke 'disgusting.' There were plenty of others.

But the joke wasn't rising sea levels. The joke was that Obama could control the sea levels. He can't. Under no circumstance could public policy slow sea level rise in the next 35 years.

Obama didn't get that the joke was on him:

'My plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is heating our planet, because climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. (Cheers, applause.) They are a threat to our children's future.'”

Now, here's where the really nutty part begins:

“What's most interesting about that line is what Obama's not willing to say. He no longer says he'll do anything about it. Since his climate-change bill died in the summer of 2009, Obama has not pushed any legislation to restrict greenhouse-gas emissions. He's decided it's a loser, apparently, and for good reason. Polls show that people are willing to fight global warming, but not really if it means paying more.”

So instead of calling for sacrifice to save the planet (Did a supposed Conservative actually say those three words without a hint of sarcasm?), “Obama in Charlotte decided to hit the sweet spot between ignoring climate change and calling for action: he acknowledged climate change, and suggested his opponents didn't.

Obama's professed faith in the existence of climate change, paired with no promise of action, pleased the liberal base by hammering home the conceit that the left is somehow pro-science.

The irony is that Romney was mocking Obama exactly for the unscientific fantasy he had promised in 2008.

Notice that nobody even bothers to mention that carbon dioxide isn't anywhere close to the greatest contributing global warming gas. Water vapor is.

•Here's a classic example of liberally-biased media spin:

On NBC's Meet the Press Sunday, Mitt Romney told host David Gregory that there were parts of Obamacare he actually liked. In fact, he said, one of the goals of his health care plan "is to make sure that those with preexisting conditions can get coverage." A few hours later, with approximately zero people listening, a spokesman quietly "clarified" what he meant:

In reference to how Romney would deal with those with preexisting conditions and young adults who want to remain on their parents' plans, a Romney aide responded that there had been no change in Romney's position and that “in a competitive environment, the marketplace will make available plans that include coverage for what there is demand for. He was not proposing a federal mandate to require insurance plans to offer those particular features.”

The truth? We already have a competitive market for individual insurance. In addition, we already have demand for coverage of preexisting conditions. And yet, the marketplace doesn't make policies available to people with preexisting conditions.
Why? Because policies that cover preexisting conditions are big money losers unless you charge premiums high enough that no one could afford them. Because of that, nobody bothers to offer them in the first place. That's how the free market works.
But that didn't stop all the big media sources from shouting from the tops of their collective liberal lungs the perceived headline, “Romney Flip-Flops on ObamaCare!”

Hat-tip to The Daily Caller.

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow Twitter.com/ivanfoley)

 


EASTWOOD TOOK CARE OF WHAT THE COMICS HAVE FAILED TO DO

Posted 9/7/12

•For the record, I am not the most unbiased of analysts, especially on the issue of Clint Eastwood, but that being established, I think he absolutely fit-in perfectly at the Republican National Convention last week.

An absolutely tremendous column appeared at www.breitbart.com by John Nolte that is well worth your time. Here are a few of the better parts:

“For four long years we've waited, hoped and prayed that some young comic would break free of the politically correct demands of The State and mock Obama the way all presidents and all people in power should be mocked. But for four long years (with a few exceptions) all we've seen instead are cowardly toadies of The State: Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Chris Rock, the cast of "Saturday Night Live"…”

“Once we learned Eastwood was the night's mystery guest, no one knew what to expect. And anyone who took a guess most certainly didn't guess that the Oscar-winning American icon would use his opportunity to relentlessly and hilariously mock Barack Obama in front of the entire free world.”

“Eastwood hit Obama in every sweet spot we've been waiting for him to get hit on: The incompetence; the lies; the empty, pretentious rhetoric; the inexperience; and that roaring blowhard of a moron Obama chose to be a heartbeat away.”

“Oh, and the empty chair, other than an empty suit, there is no sharper metaphor.”

The empty chair metaphor made its way into a Labor Day movement called Empty Chair Day in which disgruntled citizens were placing empty chairs in front of their houses, photographing it, and sending the photos to websites like, www.twitchy.com and www.michellemalkin.com (Michelle Malkin's sites). The creativity was quite impressive – one wonderful Photoshop placed an empty chair on Mount Rushmore!

Back to Nolte's www.breirbart.com piece…

“Eastwood also made one of the very best points of the night: WE own this country, and when someone doesn't do the job 'we have to let them go.'”
It's as simple as that.

“What Eastwood did tonight was funnier, fresher, edgier, and braver than anything those comedy cowards Chris Rock, Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert have done in 15 years.”

“82 years-old, and Dirty Harry is still pissing all the right people off. My hero.”

I personally think the best aspect of the Eastwood bit was that he avoided a formal speech read from a teleprompter. He improvised, adapted, overcame…(Eastwood fans know the significance of that phrase!) which indicated he was speaking from his heart, and he was succinct and to-the-point. How many people are quoting from Chris Christie's speech today?

•I find it somewhat interesting that the Rev. Sung Myung Moon died last weekend at the age of 92. This particular snippet from an obituary-style article written about Rev. Moon in his newspaper, The Washington Times was particularly interesting.
“'Landslide' predicted”

“Even as he faced investigations and imprisonment, Rev. Moon embarked on a new aspect of his public career. He had declared that 'only the United States can protect the democratic world against the threat of communism,' and he warned that President Jimmy Carter's 'naivete' about that threat soon would lead to 'world communization.'”
Unification Church members actively supported the Reagan campaign in 1980, and at Rev. Moon's direction, (aides) arranged a meeting with Reagan in Toledo, Ohio.

Greeting the candidate as 'President Reagan,' (Rev. Moon) told the Republican challenger: 'God has already decided on you as the next president.'”

After he explained Rev. Moon's prophecy, (the aides) said, Reagan responded with his characteristic humor: “I wish I had as much confidence in myself as Rev. Moon does.”

•On a related note famous (Moon) astronaut Neil Armstrong died recently, but he guarded his privacy intensely and did not like a big deal being made of his life or accomplishments, so in his honor, I will leave it at that.

•If you have ever disputed that the Green Movement wasn't spawned by the Democrat Party, read-on:

In Charlotte, N.C. Democrat Convention officials have reprimanded reporters, delegates and others for failing to properly sort their trash in recycling bins.

Special garbage cans marked "Compost" "Recycle" and "Landfill" are placed around the Time Warner Arena in Charlotte. Each bin comes with signs showing what is to go into them, and most of the garbage “wild pitches” seem to be using the "Recycle" bins only because those bins have no special covers on them restricting what can be easily thrown in.

At many garbage stations there are "environmental consultants" to help people choose the right bin (your tax dollars at work no doubt!!!).

One reporter noted that a consultant scolded her for not paying attention and using the wrong bins. Another said that one of the consultants -- who are not allowed to speak with the media -- pulled his plastic cup out of "Recycle" to place in the "Compost" bin, explaining that the cup was biodegradable. "How am I supposed to know that? It's plastic," he said.

For the record, the GOP convention did not have garbage police.

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)


REPRODUCTION IS A TWO-WAY STREET

Posted 8/31/12

In case you missed it, President Obama made a statement on the Todd Akin issue, which was in part, “…So, what I think these comments do underscore is why we shouldn't have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making health care decisions on behalf of women."

That statement is the most anti-woman statement ever made by a US President. Read it again. Think about it. What is he implying with those words? Substitute “reproductive” in place of “health care” and read it again.

“…So what I think these comments do underscore is why we shouldn't have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making reproductive decisions on behalf of women."

What President Obama is saying is,
“…you women - reproduction is all your responsibility. We men, all we do is have sex, and then we go away and have sex again with somebody else. We're men. That's what we do. We don't share in reproductive responsibility. That's all on you ladies, and we men are more than happy to work within the system to make sure it stays that way!”

How more anti-woman can you be? Reproduction is a two-way street that Nature designed to involve the contributions of two people. Not one, not three, and not four. Two. Men provide part of the equation and women provide the other part. Both parts are essential to the process. As such, both parties have immense responsibilities.

Whenever a man says that he supports a woman's right to determine what happens to her own body, he is saying that reproductive responsibility is totally on the women and that men only get to have sex and move on.

You think that's crazy? How about this Obama statement from the 2008 campaign trail: “I've got two daughters -- 9 years old and 6 years old. I'm going to teach them first of all about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at the age of 16.”

Now, Obama's defenders of his less-than-artful use of the English language (and foretelling of his continued pattern in this regard) will claim that he was referring to sex education and not abortion, but in what scenario – in what whacky world is pregnancy and childbirth equated with Chlamydia? If his daughters didn't listen to his advice and had sex anyway, the error on their part was in having sex before they were prepared to be parents. The “punishment” for such an offense is measured in the loss of their innocence; their forcing themselves into adulthood prematurely.

The creation of a child happens often when people have sex. That's why sex feels good. It doesn't feel good so we can make ourselves feel better after a tough day. Sex feels good because nature wants us to make more people so that humanity survives and prospers.

This president just doesn't get it.

•Remember when then Illinois State Senator Obama fought against and ultimately defeated a state bill that would have imparted basic protections associated with a basic right to life for babies that are born alive despite abortion attempts? The bill would have required attending physicians, the abortionists, call in another doctor for the baby, to tend to its health care needs after it exited the woman's womb alive. Obama, seeing the bill as a threat to abortion rights, spoke against the bill and defeated it, voting it down in his state committee.

So who is the monster here, Akin or McCaskill who supports Obama in every way, shape, and form?

What is important folks are what the candidates stand for on the issues. Measure those when deciding for whom to place your support behind.

•Think Obama stands for women and minorities? Consider this:

In New York City, over 40 percent of pregnancies end in abortion, some of the more specific numbers reveal nothing less than an epidemic ravaging entire communities:

- Among blacks there were far more abortions than births, 38,574 to 26,635, or 60%. So for every 1,000 black babies born, 1,448 were aborted.

- Among black teens, the abortion rate was even greater – 5,956 abortions to 2,265 live births, or 72%. For every 1,000 African-American babies born to teens, 2,630 were aborted.

Perusing the map presented by the website reveals just how commonplace and devastating abortion is in low-income neighborhoods, particularly in minority sections of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx.

Yet public funding for Planned Parenthood, the major provider of abortions nationwide, is in no short supply (income from public money totaled $305.3 million in 2005 and shot up to $487.4 million in 2010).

Why do you suppose that nearly 80% of Planned Parenthood's abortion clinics are located in poorer, predominantly minority neighborhoods?

Now THAT's a War on Women!

(Reach Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com or Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


 

Media ignoring military deaths in Afghanistan

Posted 8/24/12

•This ridiculously overblown issue with Todd Akin who is running against the truly awful Claire McCaskill for one of Missouri's U.S. Senate seats serves as a delicious example of the double standard existing between Republicans and Democrats with the media.

The problem isn't so much what Akin said, which was essentially that the human reproductive system has natural defenses to protect itself from attack, rather than his manner in saying it because he apparently forgot that at this late point in any general election, within a couple of months of Election Day, the only people that can be swayed to or away from a candidate are the politically ignorant – those that don't generally care or won't take the time to learn about the issues. And those folks don't think about the issues really hard. They will be affected by technical points that are not completely explained, and this issue was very poorly explained.

It's like if you shout to a roomful of hungry 8 year olds, “CAKE…FREE CAKE…..(then you add in a whisper)…is…going…to…give…you…a…terrible….tummy ache…if…you…eat…it…on…an…empty…stomach. They're ears-deep in the second layer by the time you whisper the first word.

Just once, I would like the rape exception question to be posed in the following manner to a pro-rape exception advocate:

“A rape that results in pregnancy has two distinct victims – the mother and the child – how do you justify killing one of the victims? Not even the rapists get the death penalty. So please, why condemn an innocent victim to death?”

And for the record, Joe Biden's, “…they're gonna put y'all back in chains…” remark was far worse than Akin's foible.

•By the way, have you noticed that President Obama called made public statements on the shooting a few weeks ago at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, he spoke after the Ft. Hood shooting, though he still refuses to call it terrorism, and who can forget that he made the Tuscon shootings into a major campaign event. But President Obama has yet to utter a word about the shootings in DC last week involving a Liberal worker shooting at a Conservative organization.

•President Obama is quite proud of his bailout of GM. If he wins a second term (not likely), he is probably going to have to bail GM out again. The company is once again losing market share, and appears unable to develop competitive products in the U.S. market.

As of today, the federal government owns 500,000,000 shares of GM, or about 26% of the company. It needs to get about $53.00/share for these to break even on the bailout, but the stock closed at only $20.21/share on Tuesday. This leaves the government holding $10.1 billion worth of stock, and sitting on an unrealized loss of $16.4 billion.

GM is unlikely to reach crisis stage before the November election, but, given the current trajectory, the company could easily do so again before the end of a second Obama term. (Not if we have something to say about it!)

Remember, the problem with the automobile companies is a bad business model is being propped-up by a overreaching and overspending federal government. That won't fix a broken and failed business model. This is why we have bankruptcy laws in our (preferably) free-market capitalistic economic system.

•Remember when I told you a long time ago about how the Democrats in the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections were throwing the U.S. military, particularly the troops, under the bus of political power?

Did you know that at least 1,961 U.S. service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan over the course of the 11-year war. Casualties rose steadily each year before reaching a peak in 2010 when 492 personnel were killed. There has been a slight decrease in casualties since then, with 398 killed in 2011, and at least 219 so far this year. Even with the downward trend in deaths, however, one U.S. soldier has been killed every day this year on average. July has been the deadliest month of 2012 for U.S. troops, with 40 killed as a result of war-related violence.

But you never hear the media talk about that. I barely hear any of the media outlets, Fox News included, mention that we even have troops in Afghanistan. That's sad and very wrong.

But you don't hear it because it doesn't serve the media's purpose of getting Democrats elected. It served them in 2006, but not in 2012 when the Democrats have control of the White House.

(Get a Parallax Look right here each week, email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


 

WAITING FOR KATIE COURIC TO ASK RYAN 'WHAT DO YOU READ?'

Posted 8/16/12

•For the record, and as you could probably guess, I am all in favor of Rep. Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's running mate. He is young, knowledgeable, personable, and most importantly, consistently conservative.

And if you want to see what President Obama really thinks about Ryan, watch the Health Care Forum video (specifically Part 5 from about the 8:30 mark, look for it on youtube.com) from a few years ago. Look at the fear and intellectual inadequacy in Obama's eyes as Ryan rips ObamaCare a new South-facing hole. Notice how Ryan seems to truly understand what ObamaCare is and how the dollars add-up to nonsense? Then watch how Obama tries to respond by making himself sound smart, but he sidesteps actually proving anything he says by declaring, “..I don't want to get you all stuck in the dollars and cents figures…” It is a really telling video.

Look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs

The vice presidential debate will be more like watching an old walrus running away from a pack of hungry lions.

•From one of my favorite climate websites, junkscience.com:

The environmental activist army is in an absolute tizzy over Mitt Romney choosing Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate. They condemn Ryan's House Budget Committee's efforts to cut clean energy funding and wish to paint him as a bedfellow of Big Oil. (Wow, that's an original tactic for Democrats!)

Ryan has been an outspoken critic of President Obama's clean energy agenda, offering a fiscal plan that would expand oil and gas drilling, limit the influence of the EPA and kill the Energy Department's clean energy loan program. That's almost as good as just eliminating those departments.

The Ryan energy plan even got Obama to flap his gums in protest. “If some politicians had their way, there won't be any more public investment in solar energy,” President Obama said during a March speech at a solar plant in Colorado. Don't try to make-nice now Mr. President. (By the way, on vacation last week in Northern California, we happened to drive right past another solar plant, the failed and empty Solyndra plant. (What a monumental waste of taxpayer dollars!)

The Romney Campaign believes Ryan's energy record, coupled with his image as a staunch fiscal conservative, will be a huge asset for the campaign as it approaches the final stretch of the election. Romney has been less than faithful to the common sense environment and energy mode of thought. Ryan will help that.

The Obama campaign believes Ryan's positions on energy will harm the Republicans in key states like Colorado and Iowa, where there is a great deal of support for renewable energy. Apparently, Obama thinks folks in those states are either stupid, ignorant or a bit of both. Underestimating the American people is Obama's biggest weakness. I kind of like that about him.

•Can someone explain why sun and wind are considered renewable resources but oil and natural gas are not. Aren't they all constantly being replenished? After we die, eventually we become a fossil fuel.

•The control of England's electricity supply seems to have fallen into dangerous hands.
Great Britain's national energy policy is a mess. Apparently, the Brits believe that they can somehow keep their lights burning by building tens of thousands additional wind turbines within the coming 10 years. Currently, Britain's 3,500 wind turbines were contributing a mere 12 megawatts (MW) to the 38,000MW of electricity in U.K.'s demand.

Lucid energy experts said 10 years ago that it was lunacy to base O.K.'s energy policy on wind. It was pure wishful thinking (Remember, Burgess Meredith from Grumpy Old Men, “…you can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one gets filled first?) then and is even more so now, when the English Government in its latest energy statement talks of providing, on average, 12,300MW of power from “renewables” by 2020. Imagine how many wind turbines (A.K.A. wind turbines) that will require - 30,000 by some estimates!

Any government setting such foolish goals knows that you'd have to build dozens of gas-fired power stations just to provide back-up for all the times when the wind won't blow. Remember all the motionless wind turbines in Western Kansas I told you about last week?

I cannot fathom a world inspired by the innovative genius of Thomas Edison and Henry Ford is currently stuck in reverse on energy and innovation more than 100 years later.
What's the matter with you people?

•By the way, I am holding my breath waiting for the Katie Couric interview of Paul Ryan where she asks him, “…what do you read?”

(Catch Brian Kubicki holding his breath via email bkubicki@kc.rr.com or at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


CHICK-fil-A TURNOUT COULD BE A BAD SIGN FOR OBAMA

Posted 8/10/12

•I voted in advance, by mail, for Tuesday's primary election. Advance voting is the greatest invention since self-checkout at the grocery store.

•The Chick-fil-A protest turned out to be a slaughter on the side of the pro-Chick-fil-A folks by a margin greater than the Team USA vs. Nigeria basketball score (that one was an 80+ point margin). If you haven't been aware, Chick-fil-A's COO, Dan Cathy, stated in a recent interview that he was in support of the traditional definition of marriage as occurring only between one man and one woman. The gay lobby, and their allies attacked ferociously, claiming that the Chick-fil-A company is homophobic (How does stating a belief translate to a fear of a lifestyle choice?).

Up stepped former presidential candidate and governor of Arkansas and current Fox News show host Mike Huckabee to defend Cathy's right to express his beliefs and suggested that Aug. 1 be Chick-fil-A Day urging everyone who supports free speech and the beliefs expressed by Cathy patronize the so-called inventor of the chicken sandwich. In opposition, gay rights groups urged their supporters to stage “kiss-ins”on the following Friday.

If you watched cable news Wednesday, you saw reports of massive lines at Chick-fil-A restaurants across the nation on Wednesday. The restaurant chain enjoyed a record revenue day. On Friday, hardly anybody showed for the “kiss-in” protest.
If this kind of response is any measure of what we are going to see on Election Day in November, President Obama should be very worried.

•I drove across Western and Central Kansas on Thursday and Friday last week and saw literally hundreds of massive wind turbines sitting motionless in the windless summer heat. It's bad enough that wind energy already costs about 5 to 8 times more than coal and natural gas to generate, but it costs even more when the wind isn't blowing. Imagine how many coal or natural gas fired power plants could have been built for all the money spent on these wind turbines.

It is staggering that so many people can do such stupid things motivated solely by a change in government toward Democrats.

•I'm not a zealot for the Olympics, but you can't help but pay attention to the over-the-top antics of the media when they get in their overdrive mode.
NBC had to apologize when they ran an ad directly after a segment on the meaning of the gymnastics win by black gold-medalist Gabrielle Douglas featuring a Capuchin monkey doing gymnastics on rings.

Really?!

As Obama likes to say, “…that's like the Special Olympics…” level of dumb.

•I had a dream last night that I was being forced to run the 400 meter hurdles in an Olympic race and I couldn't get over even one hurdle. That's Olympic pain for you right there.

•I got a phone call tonight that Sen. Harry Reid was seen performing in an adults only donkey show in Guadalahara. I'm told it is a can't miss show.

•The Democrat loss coming in November is going to be EPIC!

•By the way, if I ever ran a 100 meter race against Usain Bolt, I would be the first runner to get lapped in the 100 meter.

•I have run at least 2-miles distance in every triple digit temperature day thus far. I'm REALLY tan.

•If this is what global warming is like, give me more of it!!!

•It was interesting to see Sarah Palin endorsing Sarah Steelman for the Republican nomination to run against Claire McCaskill.

It was even more interesting that all three major candidates for the Republican nomination are polling higher than Claire “Just Sell The Damn Plane Or I'm Going To Use My Grandmother Voice, Cause She Has One” McCaskill. What a disaster of a Senator she has been!

•I just can't seem to get as fired-up about football season this year as I usually am. I think the cause of this gridiron malaise is the relative intensity and importance of this political season. The election in November is pretty darn important to this country's future.
Nevertheless, I WILL be crushing the competition in the NFL Picks Contest for the Landmark this year. Mark it down! That kind of competition I can get motivated for.

(Get motivated at Twitter.com/bkparallax or by email to bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 

 


THE NONSENSE OF CURBSIDE RECYCLING
Posted 8/3/12

•Perhaps the single finest piece on the nonsense of curbside recycling appeared in www.newamerican.com in a piece written by Brian Farmer. (Hat-tip to Gordon!)
A few of the best points follow:

First, how did we get here?

“When the first Earth Day observance was staged on April 22, 1970, 20 million Americans gathered at various venues across the country, in order to demonstrate for a healthy, sustainable environment. One of the ideas promoted as an agenda action item was that of recycling, particularly as it related to things made from metal, glass, paper, and plastic. This idea was considered to be a no-brainer, to be accepted virtually without question. After all, had not generations of Americans been raised on the admonition, 'Waste not, want not!'?

And so municipalities from coast to coast started setting up recycling programs in order to encourage people to become responsible stewards of the environment. With the passage of time, as often happens when the heavy hand of government gets involved, what started out as voluntary eventually became compulsory, to the point where curbside recycling is now almost as prevalent as curbside garbage collection.”
Remember when I told you that you get skewed statistics on the energy benefits of recycling? Check this out:

“Recycling doesn't save energy as compared to using virgin raw materials. The websites claim recycling aluminum requires 95% less energy than making brand new aluminum. Or that recycling paper saves 64% more energy than brand new paper. Or that recycling plastic saves up to 60% more energy than making brand new plastic.

However, an Ohio State University fact sheet said, 'The average saving … does not include added energy costs of collection and transportation.' When the energy of recycling collection is figured out, recycling actually uses more energy.”

And then we come to the landfills:
“…without mandated curbside recycling programs, we would not be able to handle all of the trash that we produce. Up until World War II, there were hundreds of giant incinerators around the United States that simply burned the bulk of rubbish produced by consumers. The advantage derived from burning trash was the reduction in disposal volume by anywhere from 85 to 95 percent. The disadvantage was that it produced offensive odors, noxious gases, and irritating particulate matter in the smoke. After World War II, concerns about air pollution led to a gradual replacement of incinerators by so-called “sanitary landfills,” in which all forms of trash were dumped in a suitable place and then buried.

During the 1980s, reports started surfacing that the country might be running out of places to dump its garbage, as the number of operating landfills began to fall significantly. Sloppy analysis by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)…focused on the number of landfills, rather than the capacity of the landfills that were in operation.

Due to new EPA regulations, as well as mergers and consolidations within the waste disposal industry, there had been a move to use new, much larger landfills, while smaller and less economical landfills were being shut down.

Various studies have attempted to estimate how much space will be needed to handle America's trash in the foreseeable future. According to Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, if New York City's Fresh Kills landfill operation on Staten Island were used as a yardstick, where trash was piled up to a height of 255 feet, all of the trash produced in the United States over the next 100 years could fit on a square patch of land measuring approximately 10 miles on each side.”

I would think Ted Turner would be more than happy to donate a 10x10 square mile patch of his 50,000 acre Montana cattle ranch for the good of his country, don't you?
The entire piece can be found at:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/12159-kick-curbside-recycling-to-the-curb

•Back on message, did you see where President Obama and Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts Senate opponent to incumbent Scott Brown, delivered essentially the same message — that small business owners only succeed through the contributions of others to infrastructure, which ignores the fact that infrastructure exists in large part because of the wealth created by those who take risks to expand markets and create new ones.

Once again, what came first…Henry Ford's Model T or the roads on which it drove?

•Football is here. But I am still immersed in politics. Football will have to wait.

(Immerse yourself in a Parallax Look with Brian on Twitter @bkparallax or email him at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


WE SEE THE REAL OBAMA WHEN HE STARTS TO AD-LIB
Posted 7/27/12

While I was immersed in the shock and grief that we all felt over the movie theater shootings in Aurora, CO last Thursday, I was also, albeit slightly later, shaken to the reality that the media goes absolutely nuts when these kinds of situations happen.

Brian Ross with ABC, and a willing accomplice in George Stephanopoulos the morning after the shooting speculated that the shooter was a member of the Colorado Tea Party. They had no other evidence than similar names between the shooter and the Tea Party Member. Did they also check the roster for Occupy Denver? Why was the Tea Party the first site checked? Occupy Denver would certainly seem to fit the profile of one who is apt to enact violence. That singular act by ABC was despicable.

Pjmedia.com had an excellent column on the issue entitled, “Why Is Brian Ross Still Working for ABC News?”

Here's there actual on-air discussion:

Stephanopoulos: I'm going to go to Brian Ross. You've been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.

[ONE MIGHT ALSO LEGITIMATELY ASK IF IT MIGHT BE SIGNIFICANT THAT STEPHANOPOULOS WAS A FORMER ADVISOR TO THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.]

Ross: There's a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.

Stephanopoulos: Okay, we'll keep looking at that. Brian Ross thanks very much.

ABC News has since issued a correction and Ross has included an apology.

“An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect,” ABC News said in a statement. “ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.”

George Stephanopoulos thanked Brian Ross for smearing the Tea Party by reporting a lie. Ross should be suspended or lose his job for this heinous smear attempt against a legitimate grass roots political organization that has done nothing more than loudly protest the unchecked growth of government. ABC News will not grace my video displays again (not that it did previously).

Incidentally, Noel Sheppard with NewsBusters.org interviewed the Tea Party member linked with the Aurora shooter and he had a question for Ross and Stephanopoulos, "What kind of idiot makes that kind of statement?”

“Really, seriously, how do we take a journalist seriously when it's pretty clear they really haven't done any sort of check on their facts?” he told the Daily Caller's Alex Pappas:

Holmes informed Pappas that ABC News didn't contact him before Ross went on air.

In fact, he still hasn't heard from anyone there or received a direct apology.

“They could've contacted me through the Tea Party Patriots website.” he said.

That certainly wouldn't have been difficult; the site lists a phone number at the Contact Us page. I guess that would have been too much work for an "investigative reporter" like Ross.

“I do understand what making a mistake means, but is it really worth the person's reputation, the potential ruining of the person's reputation?”

Good advice. I couldn't have stated the sentiment better.

•By the way, remember when Pres. Obama insulted small business owners and American entrepreneurs by declaring that if you own a successful business, “you didn't build that!” Well, not that the nation is in uproar over his remarks, he is trying to backtrack by saying that the “that” he was referring to was roads and bridges and not the businesses themselves. [BY THE WAY, AS AN INVENTOR OF MANY A PATHETIC DEFENSE, THAT ONE IS A DOOZY!]

Taking Obama at his word, he would have been stating that the success of business entrepreneurs should be partially attributable towards government for building the roads and bridges and other infrastructure items that assist us all in conducting business. He says that “government built those things.”

But again, the President is incorrect. Government may have signed the paychecks for that work, but government did not do the actual work. Small businesses, in the forms of civil engineers, structural engineers, concrete contractors, landscapers, large equipment companies like John Deere and Caterpillar sold the equipment that was used by the contractors to build the roads and bridges. The common thread that links all of those companies that did the work of building that infrastructure is they were all fueled by the pursuit of profit; the lifeblood of capitalism, and apparently Pres. Obama's Kryptonite.

Keep up the pressure people. It's beginning to work.

Incidentally, for all my friends that want to vote for this president again, please keep following him to his public events and keep cheering him on so loud that he goes off teleprompter and ad libs. That's when we start to see the REAL Barack Obama start to leak out, and the Karl Marx beard starts showing through.

(Check him out at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)



OBAMA IS CLUELESS WHEN IT COMES TO ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Posted 7/21/12

•In an unbelievable act of open-mouth-insert-foot, President Obama addressed supporters in Roanoke, Virginia on Saturday afternoon and took a completely unveiled shot at the business community.

He began:

“There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me--because they want to give something back. They know they didn't--look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.”
Step One in establishing a Marxist government – divide the people and pit them against each other according to economic classes. Crush hopes and dreams that anyone can truly succeed on their own in a capitalistic economic system without assistance from government.

•For the record, Prometheus stands as my favorite summer movie so far of the Summer 2012 Movie Season.

•Obama continued:

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”

Step Two – invent whatever facts you need to make your case. Government research did not “invent the internet.” (Why are Liberals always claiming government invents things? Private corporations invent things. Government may use taxpayer money to fund projects, but it's always a private corporation somewhere along the way doing the inventing.) By the way, if you are really interested in learning who had a major hand in the beginnings of what we now know as the internet, do an internet search for either or all of the following: “Leo Beranek,” “BBN,” or just go to this internet address: http://www.sandv.com/downloads/0701bera1.pdf

•Has anyone else noticed the complete idiocy that is displayed by Entercom and KMBZ radio at 2pm in the afternoon every weekday? They take what has to be the largest lead-in audience in the city – Rush Limbaugh's audience and after his show ends at 2:00 every afternoon, they feed them with a “water cooler” talk show hosted by a liberal woman and a RINO. That kind of dumb takes awhile to develop. Anyway, 710 KCMO just down the dial, and simulcast on 103.7 FM, has the answer for conservatives and Republicans who want to know about conservatism. There you can hear Greg Knapp in the mornings, Shawn Hannity at 2, with Mark Levin at 5-8 p.m. Knapp is a solid conservative and could successfully anchor a drive-time broadcast. Levin is not to be missed!

•Then President Obama said:

“The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.”

Actually, we kind of do, each of us, have our own personal fire service. Look under your kitchen sink, in your basement or garage workroom, or in your boat or camper. You see a fire extinguisher don't you? Look up at the ceilings in your home. See those little round white things attached to the ceiling? Smoke alarms. We can get along pretty well with much less government.

Has there ever been a U.S. President so clueless about how entrepreneurship works? Sure, businesses become successful after teachers taught the students. But those teachers were paid for that service. Yes, manufacturing businesses needed electricity to run the machines that made their successful product. But the business owner paid a utility for their use of that electricity.

•One other thing…I noted that the Lee's Summit woman who accidentally left her child in its car-seat in her car while she went to work, killing the child, is not going to have to face any kind of criminal charges. I kind of understand that. Lord knows she is putting herself in at least as much hell as any criminal justice system would. But what about the fathers that are jailed for having guns in the home and the kids come upon them and shoot themselves? What about the babysitters that have erroneously placed hair dryers near the babies they are caring for during cold weather, killing those babies due to hyperthermia? Last time I looked, that baby sitter is in jail. What gives?

•I like how Rush Limbaugh put it today on his 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. CDT radio show. He asked the question, what came first, the automobile or the road designed to accommodate the automobile? We all know, of course, that the automobile came first. We can extend that question much further. Did the incandescent light bulb come first or did the electrical distribution system – A.K.A. The Grid come before? (That one is obvious.)

Private business creates the need. Government funds the infrastructure to support business (Well, at least that's the way it was conceived when this country was founded). We need to get back to that limited role for the federal government.

(Check him out at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


IS OBAMA TRYING TO INTENTIONALLY DESTROY THE ECONOMY?
Posted 7/16/12

There so much to cover this week, I'll just provide the link or the website name so you can read the whole story yourselves. Lawd I love the internet!

•From The DailyCaller.com:

On Rush Limbaugh's Thursday program, George Mason University professor Walter E. Williams proposed the notion that states can nullify Obamacare. He used Thomas Jefferson's 1789 Kentucky Resolution, which was a claim that the U. S. Constitution is a compact among the several states, and any power not delegated to the U.S. government is thereby void.

In his words, “I think the American citizens ought to press their state governors and legislatures just to nullify the law — just to plain nullify it and say, 'The citizens of such-and-such-a state don't have to obey Obamacare because it's unconstitutional, regardless of what the Supreme Court says.'”

That works for me.

•One of my most favorite conservative columnists, Victor Davis Hanson penned a column last week entitled, “Atlas Still Shrugging” that is not to be missed, especially if you doubt the notion that what has happened to this country at Obama's hands has not been intentional destruction of an economy

The main idea of the column, that if one wanted to ensure permanent 8 percent to 9 percent unemployment, one might try exactly what Obama has done, namely:

Add $5 trillion to the national debt in three and a half years

Impose a 2,400-page, trillion-dollar new federal takeover of health care.

Scare employers with constant us/them class warfare rhetoric.

Appoint a bipartisan committee to study the fiscal crisis and then neglect all its recommendations.

Subsidize failed green companies.

Do not address changing the above policies, but rather blame others for such self-induced stagnation.

Go to NationalReview.com for the entire piece. It is stupendous AND chilling.

•From ClimateDepot.com. This one is just plain nuts.

A Melbourne, Australia family claim they were charged a $55 "carbon tax charge" when burying a relative,

Erica Maliki and her family were burying her father-in-law at Springvale Cemetery when she was told the price per burial plot had increased because of the carbon tax.

Her father-in-law died on June 30, the day before the carbon tax was introduced, and was buried early last week.

"I thought to myself, 'What carbon could possibly be used by putting a man in a grave?'" Ms Maliki said.

"All they did was put the dirt back in. How can they charge us a carbon tax for burying someone?"

Ms Maliki's son Zaid said the cemetery's receptionist told his sister-in-law "even the dead don't escape the carbon tax.”

Actually, planting a carbon-based organism would appear to meet the definition of carbon sequestration. They ought to be getting a rebate.

•Did you know that volcanoes spew WAY more ozone-depleting chemicals than anything mankind does?

Magma, molten rock, contains dissolved gases that are released into the atmosphere during eruptions. Gases are also released from magma that either remains below ground or rises toward the surface. In such cases, gases may escape continuously into the atmosphere from the soil, volcanic vents, fumaroles, and hydrothermal systems.

Volcanic gases rise dozens of kilometers into Earth's atmosphere during large explosive eruptions. Once airborne, prevailing winds may blow the eruption cloud hundreds to thousands of kilometers away from a volcano.

Volcanic gases undergo a tremendous increase in volume when magma rises to the Earth's surface and erupts. The most abundant gas typically released into the atmosphere from volcanic systems is water vapor, followed by carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. Volcanoes also release smaller amounts of others gases, including hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and helium.

The volcanic gases that pose the greatest potential hazard to people, animals, agriculture, and property are sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen fluoride.

Locally, sulfur dioxide gas can lead to acid rain and air pollution downwind from a volcano. Globally, large explosive eruptions that inject a tremendous volume of sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere can lead to lower surface temperatures and promote depletion of the Earth's ozone layer.

Emission rates of sulfur dioxide from an active volcano range from 20 tons/day to 10 million tons/day according to the style of volcanic activity and type and volume of magma involved. For example, the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June 1991 expelled 3-5 km3 of dacite magma and injected about 20 million metric tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. The sulfur aerosols resulted in a 0.5-0.6°C cooling of the Earth's surface in the Northern Hemisphere.

At Kilauea Volcano, the recent effusive eruption of about 0.0005 km3/day (500,000 m3) of basalt magma releases about 2,000 tonnes of SO2 into the lower troposphere. Downwind from the vent, acid rain and air pollution is a persistent health problem when the volcano is erupting.

Meanwhile, man uses chlorofluorocarbons in refrigerants that course through closed-loop (that means the gas spends most of its useful life in a series of pipes - heat exchangers actually - that never see the light of day) systems. And THAT is supposed to be comparable to one of 1800 massive volcanoes scattered over the globe!

(Follow @bkparallax on Twitter and email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


OBAMACARE BRINGS A TAX HIKE TO POOR AND MIDDLE CLASS
Posted 7/7/12

What an absolute week of nonsense by the Supreme Court!

Also, what an incredible opportunity we have as citizens of this country in November!
The court essentially declared on Monday that states have the right to implement certain parts of Federal law regarding the detainment of suspected illegal immigrants. The Obama Administration quickly afterward issued an order that their Immigration officers will not take the calls that come in from the states pertaining to suspected illegal immigrants.

That behavior sounds downright childish doesn't it? It seems our young president has not outgrown temper tantrums.

In the really big case last week, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Obama's health care overhaul. The decision means that the federal government overhaul of the healthcare system can continue to go into effect over the next several years, which can affect the way Americans receive and pay for personal medical care.

Notice that I said “can” instead of “will.” That's key because another part of the Supreme Court decision declared that states are not required to participate in Obamacare and if they do not, the federal government may not withhold federal funds from the states in retaliation for their non-participation. Those trying to find a silver lining in the court decision are claiming that states volunteering to not participate will starve the beast of Obamacare to death. Time will tell on that one.

This part of the whole scenario is the most hypocritical – Chief Justice John Roberts concocted the cockamamie idea that the individual mandate was a tax and not a penalty as the Obama Administration had claimed. That helped save the law because Roberts had declared that using the Commerce Clause of the Constitution as justification for the imposition of the individual mandate was unconstitutional. President Obama himself re-iterated after the decision that the mandate punishment was a penalty and not a tax. The court says the mandate is a tax.

Obama cannot recognize that the mandate is a tax, as the Supreme Court says it is, and maintain his original campaign promise that he would not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. Obamacare has with it the largest tax increase on the poor and middle class in U.S. history. That's just a fact.

The key will be in how well Republicans fare in hanging that albatross around Obama's neck.

All of Roberts' legal “creativity” aside, I would have preferred that he simply have declared the law unconstitutional and we would be past all this nonsense.

Oh well – I cannot wait for November.

•From World Net Daily: President Obama's top aide, Valerie Jarrett, boasted to the black community recently that the administration sharply reduced the sentencing disparity for possession of crack cocaine instead of powder. Jarrett made the remarks at a meeting of black journalists and columnists last weekend, clearly aimed at Obama's re-election efforts. Mainstream media outlets covering the event did not report on her comments regarding crack cocaine.

On Saturday, Jarrett engaged in a wide-ranging interview session with a group of journalists at the National Association of Black Journalists convention in New Orleans. The Root, a website owned by the Washington Post aimed at the black community, reprinted a blog report by the Maynard Institute's Richard Prince on Jarrett's appearance at the convention.

Prince reported that at the meeting Jarrett outlined “what she considered the Obama administration's successes.” Continued Prince: “Among them funding for historically black colleges and universities; health care reform, which she said will disproportionately help African-Americans; and reducing disparities between penalties for possession of crack and for powdered cocaine.”

He wrote Jarrett touted the sentence reduction for crack-cocaine disparity as a way to build a broad Obama re-election coalition, including African-Americans. “To do this, Obama supporters need to unabashedly trumpet what the president has done for blacks – such as increased funding for education, universal health care and a sharp reduction in the sentencing disparity for possession of crack cocaine instead of powder, all things that Jarrett said have disproportionately benefited them.”

For those that may say, in defense of the Obama Administration, “…consider the source…” check out, the White House website yourself. www.whitehouse.com, which is the official website of the Obama Administration, says, “President Obama recognizes that our civil rights laws and principles are at the core of our nation. He has spent much of his career fighting to strengthen civil rights – as a community organizer, civil rights lawyer, Illinois State Senator, U.S. Senator, and now as President. He knows that our country grows stronger when all Americans have access to opportunity and are able to participate fully in our economy.”

“Progress” (There are a number of claimed accomplishments, among those was the following:)

The President signed the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduces the disparity in the amounts of powder cocaine and crack cocaine required for the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences and eliminates the mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine.”

That's an accomplishment?

•Happy birthday, America!

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow @bkparallax on Twitter)


TWEAK THE LIGHTNING ROD AND YOU ARE CALLING THE THUNDER
Posted 6/29/12

•So a compromise was struck on immigration law before the Supreme Court?

Why?

From Monday's Washington Times…

The Obama administration very quietly said Monday that it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona state government over the enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Arizona may not impose its own penalties for immigration violations, but it said state and local police could check the legal status of those they have reasonable suspicion to believe are in the country illegally.

That means police statewide can immediately begin calling to check immigration status — but federal officials are likely to reject most of those calls.

Federal officials said they'll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said the court's decision frees police up to perform immigration checks. In anticipation of the ruling, she issued an executive order calling for guidance to be issued to every police department on how to fairly carry out the law.
“We will move forward, instructing law enforcement to begin practicing what the United States Supreme Court has upheld,” she said.

Justice Antonin Scalia's written dissent to the 5-3 decision pointed out that it is unfathomable that the court could tell people in Arizona that they may not enforce federal immigration law at the state level, even in the face of the fact that the Obama Administration refuses to enforce federal law.

It is annoying to the point of distraction for the Supreme Court to appear to be taking the position of the Supreme Compromisers toward all disputes presented. Uphold the Constitution. It is not a difficult task. Read the document and interpret it. You don't need a law degree to do that.

I have long maintained that a teaching degree is wasted on an elementary school teacher. I would like to add an addendum: A law degree is wasted on a Constitution defender or interpreter. These buffoons spend more time trying to be memorable or unique than their position warrants.

Shall we, the American people begin deporting illegals ourselves?

•It was reported that the Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of ObamaCare will come on Thursday.

I predict right now, on Monday, that ObamaCare will be struck down in its entirety, on Thursday.

If I am wrong, and the ACA is upheld, Obama's defeat in November will be worse than if the law was struck down. The Affordable Care Act, A.K.A. ObamaCare, is a lightning rod for the Tea Party. Tweak that lightning rod and you are calling down the thunder. Beware.

Then again, don't worry about it, Libs. Don't pay any attention.

•If I hear another radio commercial for Amberin, the drug that helps menopausal women shed that “stubborn belly fat,” I am going to perform a vasectomy on myself with a rusty spoon! Seriously, that damn commercial seems to play every 15 minutes on daytime radio.

I so hate that commercial that I am convinced the woman talking on it asking for “Claire” is actually referring to Claire McCaskill and McCaskill actually has lots of stubborn belly fat.

But that's just me.

•The new Muslim Brotherhood leader of Egypt has been endorsed by our President, and he (the new Egyptian leader), has stated that reconsideration of the Camp David Egypt-Israeli Peace Accord will be reconsidered. Here we go again.

By the way, Sharia Law, the umbilical cord of the Muslim Brotherhood, believes that a woman has to have 4 witnesses in order to bring a charge of rape…just for the record.
Look it up…it's there.

•Football practice starts next month!

(Football practice might not start until next month but a Parallax Look never stops. Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow on Twitter @bkparallax)

 


MANY PROGRAMS ACTUALLY HARM THE POOR FIRST
Posted 6/22/12

•I'm not even sure this one is worth my time, but I figured I'd led you decide.
From DougPowers.com, hopefully forward-thinking parents who sent their children to a progressive 'no books, no tests' school are shocked that their kids are not learning to read.

The $32,000 per-year progressive school founded by the Blue Man Group (Yes, THAT Blue Man Group.) has come under scrutiny by parents, who claim their kids are barely learning to read, as reported in the New York Post.

The Blue School, a private school located in New York City's Financial District, has no books, no tests, and is facing an exodus of students and teachers. One mother complained that the school is “unstructured.” She is pulling her son at the end of the school year, as are the parents of four of her son's first-grade classmates. Parents also claim that their children are not prepared to take tests and are bored with nothing to do in school.

School officials say students decide their own curriculum, and have no set arrival time. Grades run from kindergarten to third grade. A fourth grade is being added next year.
In other words, it sounds as if parents are paying $32,000 a year for liberal daycare.
The school's web site says “our mission is to cultivate creative, joyful and compassionate enquirers who use creative and innovative thinking to build a harmonious and sustainable world.”

•One of my wisest readers made a very salient point on my recent Cash for Clunkers remembrance:

“I was catching up on your articles tonight and came across your mentioning of the cash for clunkers program. One interesting thing about this program that is rarely if ever mentioned is that destroying all of these vehicles vastly reduced the supply of low cost vehicles that low income individuals can afford to purchase and thereby increased the price of those vehicles. So in essence, the program transferred billions of dollars from those poor people who had to pay a higher price to purchase a used vehicle to higher income people who could afford to purchase a new vehicle while doing virtually nothing to help the economy as a whole…..and here I thought the anointed one was the champion of the poor! It really just shows you just how utterly economically illiterate this administration is. It's sickening.”

Makes me recall the same thing I've been saying for years about erroneously conceived environmental restrictions against certain air conditioning refrigerants. These things always harm the poor first.

•From Forbes Magazine's Avik Roy:

“If you've been following my writing on the Obamacare legal challenges, you know that a pet peeve of mine is the 1942 Supreme Court case Wickard v. Filburn, in which the Court decided that Roscoe Filburn couldn't grow wheat on his own land to feed his own animals, because this somehow constituted interstate commerce. Wickard remains the core justification for 70 years of federal intrusion into the activities of individuals and localities.

Surprisingly, Antonin Scalia writes in a new book, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, that he agrees. Wickard, he writes, “expanded the Commerce Clause beyond all reason” by opining that “a farmer's cultivation of wheat for his own consumption affected interstate commerce and thus could be regulated under the Commerce Clause.”

It's surprising because Scalia's concurrence in Gonzales v. Raich, the most recent major Commerce Clause case, is justly seen as an endorsement of Wickard. “Congress may regulate even noneconomic local activity if that regulation is a necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce,” he wrote in that 2005 case.
And thus you have a little bit of reference for all the liberal nonsense we are having to fight today, and an understanding of how hard we must keep up the fight.

•My most favorite exchange of the past week came out of Wisconsin after Gov. Scott Walker defeated the recall challenge he faced. A TV news reporter had this exchange with the President over whether he regretted not assisting in the effort to recall Gov. Walker.

KTIV's Matt Breen: “One of those businesses that I mentioned said very specifically when they said they needed to close up shop and move their jobs back to Wisconsin was that it was a direct result of the health care reform that you initiated, that Congress passed. How do you react to that?”

President Barack Obama: “Yeah, that would be kind of hard to explain, because the only folks that have been impacted in terms of the health care bill are insurance companies who are required to make sure that they're providing preventive care, or they're not dropping your coverage when you get sick. And so, this particular company probably wouldn't have been impacted by that. I know that there's a perception sometimes that there's all kinds of regulations coming out of Washington, the truth is actually we've seen fewer regulations coming out of my administration than the previous administration. But obviously, you know it's tough running a small business no matter what. And we're going to make sure that we continue to provide whatever financing help that we can provide.”

He really just doesn't get it.

(See if Brian gets it at bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow him at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


MORE ON OBAMA'S 'PRIVATE SECTOR DOING FINE' COMMENT
Posted 6/15/12

•O.K., I'm back into real-time.

From FoxNews.com, David Axelrod, President Obama's top campaign strategist, said Sunday that the country needs to "accelerate" job creation in the private sector -- by hiring more teachers, police and firefighters.

Axelrod made the comment as he continued to perform damage control for the president, who on Friday claimed that the private sector "is doing fine." But Axelrod drew rapid-fire ridicule from conservatives, after he called for more public-sector hiring to address private-sector economic issues.

"The private sector, we need to accelerate job creation in the private sector," Axelrod told CNN's "State of the Union," before adding: "One of the ways that we can do that is putting teachers and firefighters and police back to work because those are good middle-class jobs."

If this kind of both-feet-in-the-mouth activity is an inkling of what the Obama campaign is going to be about, the next few months are going to be VERY fun to witness!

•By the way, if you haven't yet seen the movie, Prometheus, and you are a fan of the classic Alien and sci-fi in general, do not miss this!

•I'm sure you caught the controversy over President Obama's statement in a White House Medal of Freedom awards ceremony a couple of weeks ago week that there were “Polish Death Camps” in Poland during World War II. Most of the mainstream media largely ignored the story.

I think a few facts about the story that didn't get much coverage are warranted. This was gleaned from several sources, namely hotair.com.

First-off, Obama made the verbal slip-up while posthumously awarding the Medal of Freedom to Jan Karski, a resistance fighter who struggled to tell the outside world about the murder of Jews in his country. Karski, who was Catholic, smuggled himself into the Warsaw Ghetto and a death camp, witnessing the atrocities committed against the Jews firsthand. He then took that information to President Roosevelt and other Allied leaders, imploring the world to act.

Karski later became a professor at Georgetown University and died in 2000.
Warsaw has been fighting for decades against phrases such as "Polish death camps" or "Polish concentration camps" to refer to Auschwitz, Treblinka and other German killing sites. The language deeply offends Polish sensitivities because Poles not only had no role in running the camps, but were considered racially inferior by the Germans and were themselves murdered in them in huge numbers. For days, Obama's words have dominated the news in Poland. Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the entire Polish nation felt affected.

"We always react in the same way when ignorance, lack of knowledge, bad intentions lead to such a distortion of history, so painful for us here in Poland, in a country which suffered like no other in Europe during World War II," Tusk said Wednesday.
Komorowski's reaction was more muted. He said Wednesday that he knew Obama's words did not reflect any bad intentions but that the words were nonetheless "unjust and painful." He wrote that day to Obama, and Obama's letter came in reply to that.
In his response Obama noted that "the Polish people suffered terribly under the brutal Nazi occupation during World War II."

"In pursuit of their goals of destroying the Polish nation and Polish culture and exterminating European Jewry, the Nazis killed some six million Polish citizens, including three million Polish Jews during the Holocaust," Obama wrote. "The bravery of Poles in the underground resistance is one of history's great stories of heroism and courage."
National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor tried to explain via BuzzFeed.com: “The President was referring to Nazi death camps operated in Poland . The President has demonstrated in word and deed his rock-solid commitment to our close alliance with Poland .”

In a second comment, Vietor said: “The President misspoke – he was referring to Nazi death camps in Poland . We regret this misstatement, which should not detract from the clear intention to honor Mr. Karski and those brave citizens who stood on the side of human dignity in the face of tyranny.”

The fact that Vietor felt obliged to issue a second, more apologetic statement shows how badly the White House was caught off-guard by the fury of the backlash.

So Obama wrote the Polish President a letter:

"In referring to 'a Polish death camp' rather than 'a Nazi death camp in German-occupied Poland,' I inadvertently used a phrase that has caused many Poles anguish over the years and that Poland has rightly campaigned to eliminate from public discourse around the world," Obama wrote. "I regret the error and agree that this moment is an opportunity to ensure that this and future generations know the truth."

(Remember, “Never let a good crisis go to waste?” It just seems to never go away with this administration.)

(Brian Kubicki can be reached at bkubicki@kc.rr.com or followed at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


INTO THE ARCHIVES FOR ONE FROM 2005
Posted 6/8/12

A 4-hour long city council meeting has erased my ability to be creative today, so I am dipping into the archives…July 2005 to be exact for this week's foray into Parallax vision. Enjoy…\

·The scurrilous and bloodthirsty cowards of the globe, in the form of Al Qaeda bomb squads, have apparently struck again from beneath the shadows of their victim's freedom, this time in London. Remains of the unfortunate dead are still being recovered from the wreckage of the train station where as many as 4-5 bombs were detonated at the start of a busy workday. If anyone still lacks resolve that this War on Terror must be won, and must be fought by everyone standing for freedom and liberty, they are probably better off leaving the blanket of freedom and pitching a tent in a desert land.
A single ray of hope from this terrible tragedy is that it appears the Britons are standing firm in their commitment to defeating terrorism and not crumbling like Michael Jackson in a Chino community shower which Spain did after the Madrid bombings.
Staying the course in the face of the enemy is the only option!

·Hurricane Dennis did it's best imitation of a Clinton headed for a roomful of media last weekend, storming through the Gulf of Mexico like Hillary after catching Bill with another intern, and then hitting the shore at the Florida Panhandle like she no doubt does when Bill looks at her with those “cheating–but-oh-so-lovely-eyes” saying, “Who loves ya bayba!”
Not that I'm praying for weather-related death and destruction in this era of arrogance we seem to be residing in (well…maybe just the destruction part), but I haven't seen such a deflation of apparent vigor since the fateful hotdog scene in The Crying Game. What a letdown!

·The elder wing of the Supreme Court seems to be desperately hanging-on to the ultimate judicial power to the point that the only apparent reason for a suspension of retirement of at least two more justices is each wants to be the first zombie to hold a Supreme Court position.
Sheesh! Life is supposed to be about living. Don't you people have families to see? Go home already. The Supreme Court Chambers have no accommodations for drool buckets and catheter ports.

·Hockey is rumored to be nearing a settlement between the owners and players' union that will end the sport's longest work stoppage. Oh be still my beating heart.

·Is it only my erroneous perception, or is there an inordinate number of dogs gone missing from suburban homes? It seems that every telephone pole in suburban KC is adorned with a new missing Labrador, Golden Retriever, or Sharpei (the apparent three most favorite suburban breeds) every week. What gives? Are we on to an Underground Railroad for dogs? Is there a canine Pied Piper? Could there be a new Asian restaurant in town? This is really strange.

·The new movie Fantastic Four made a highly successful debut last weekend, with no holiday props, no whacky star jumping on a daytime couch as he hits his first mid-life crisis, no preachy premise, no shoving of an alternative religion down the public's unwilling gullet, no examination of our greater significance in the world. Just old fashioned entertainment.

The movie out gained Speilberg's War of the Worlds at the box-office, which was only in its second week, and the F-4 had no props from a holiday weekend. Pretty cool.
I caught Fantastic Four last weekend with the family and I loved it. I never read the comic book or watched a Saturday cartoon interpretation of the Fantastic Four. I saw heroism, self-sacrifice, elevation of intellectualism, healthy and normal levels of titillation, and old fashioned good vs. evil interplay. It was a fine way to spend two hours on a Saturday evening.

If there a message here?

Hollywood will continue its much-publicized downward spiral until it remembers what made movies special in the first place. The cinema is supposed to be a place where we go to escape the world of reality, but keep true to the basic tenets of our human existence. Stop trying to blur the lines between good and evil. Keep material in movies age-appropriate. Stop trying to mature my kids faster than I want them matured. Personally, I'd like another John Wayne on the scene, but perhaps I'm unrealistic.

·I deeply love my wife, but sheesh-a-mighty she does like to live in precarious surroundings. Her dresser and dressing table are surrounded by lightweight glass bottles that are all much longer than they are wide. The shower is surrounded by moisturizers, chemical removers, shampoos, and conditioners for every day of the week all set upon apparent ledges along the shower walls that aren't really there. Cabinets harbor stacks-upon-stacks of paper boxes and bags of cotton that fall-out when disturbed by nothing more than the draft created by the opening of the cabinet door!

I'm a rhinoceros tip-toeing through a freaking house of cards! if you catch my drift.

·Football….take me away…

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax)


THE LIBERALS ARE COMING AFTER NASCAR
Posted 6/1/12

•Happy summer! Welcome to the bosom of global warming. It's nice in here. Be proud if you indeed caused the summer warmth you are feeling.

•From the Drudge Report. This has to be the most illustrative example of Pot-Calls-The-Kettle-Black in human history. NASCAR is going green.

President Obama's eco-friendly EPA inked a green partnership deal with NASCAR last week to promote recycling and environmentally-friendly products to the sport's millions of fans.

Yes, NASCAR has gone GREEN.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, NASCAR will encourage fans to buy “sustainable concessions” at races, expand the use of “safer chemical products,” conserve water, reduce waste, promote recycling, push products approved by the EPA that have a small environmental footprint and encourage suppliers to get an “E3 tune-up” aimed at promoting sustainable manufacturing.

“Promote recycling?” I thought trash recycling was apolitical? That's what a lot of you on the political Left and Middle were telling me. Why, if NASCAR is being forced to act in opposition to their Conservative roots, is recycling at the core of this statement but we can enjoy race cars that get 5 mpg?

I'd like someone to explain that to me.

Of course, there was no talk of greening races or concern about race cars that consume about two million gallons of gas a year and average five miles per gallon. Yes, you read right…5 mpg!

“Yes, the focus is on suppliers and programs, not green cars,” said an EPA spokesman.
Instead, it's a first step to get fans and suppliers to think green while favorites like Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Tony Stewart lay down some rubber.

“Because NASCAR is followed by millions of passionate fans and many businesses, it can be a powerful platform to raise environmental awareness, drive the adoption of safer products by more Americans, and support the growing green economy,” said Jim Jones, EPA's acting assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.

The agreement “is a great example of NASCAR's commitment to green innovation and our role as a leader in sustainability,” said Steve Phelps, chief marketing officer of NASCAR.

Probably the furthest sport from the green movement, NASCAR for the past four years has nonetheless pushed an environmentally-friendly agenda in unusual ways. They even have a manager of “green innovation,” Michael Lynch.

In a white paper issued last month, NASCAR reports that they will plant 10 trees every time the green flag is raised, which they claim will capture “100 percent of the emissions produced” in races. They also have the largest recycling program in sports and last year starting using E15 fuel.

“This partnership will provide new resources that will allow our industry to create innovative environmental education and awareness platforms while continuing to build on our strong momentum in reducing the environmental impact of our sport,” said NASCAR's Lynch.

Are we, referring to “us” as a collective humanity, so devoid of basic logic that we can be swayed by such nonsense that 5 mpg in our cars would need to be replaced on some ethereal abacus of environmental responsibility with a comparable use of recyclable bags?

Give me a break! If they will attack NASCAR, the liberals will come after anything.

•And then we have this:

•On Thursday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams announced: "Los Angeles is about to become the third big city in California to ban plastic grocery bags." He then framed the government overreach (not Williams' term, mind you!) as a green crusade: "Environmental activists, as you know, have been pushing for this, to keep those bags out of the ocean and out of the natural world.”

In May of 2007, Williams absurdly claimed that grocery shoppers were forced to answer a “paralyzing question” which “can make otherwise competent adults quake with fear" when faced with the dreaded choice between "paper or plastic." He added that customers "are made to feel like the fate of the planet hinges on our decision.”

On Thursday, Williams explained that the fear-inducing bags would "be phased out over the next 16 months" in L.A. and noted: "Shoppers will have the option to buy paper bags for 10 cents each.”

There is good reason for you to be glad you are not living in California. I will store my groceries in a receptacle of my own choosing. I do not need the government to step-in and dictate how I transport food to my domicile.

(Brian Kubicki keeps an eye on things through a Parallax Look. Follow him at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS AGAIN RAISES ITS UGLY HEAD
Posted 5/27/12

The Poop-In-The-Park-Protest-Movement has now resumed its terroristic activities in Chicago at the NATO summit. Riot police were summoned and our TV's were filled with video of bandanna-wearing thugs throwing things at the police.

Where's the media to decry all this violence? Where is Pres. Obama in condemning it? He seems to be laughingly dismissing it as “American protest at work.”

Remember the Tea Party protests around the then-Democrat led House of Representatives passing ObamaCare in the face of 75% disapproval ratings? The media was out front then making every protester shouting “Kill the Bill!” into a race spitting Klansman. They even got Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver to fake the act of being spit on (Remember the Magic Loogie?).

Another example of Liberal Media Bias raises its telltale head.

.Remember all the hubbub about Obama being born in Kenya? Kansas City's own Jack Cashill wrote a column about the resurrected issue in American Thinker entitled, “Why Kenyan Birth Claim Was No 'Fact Checking Error.”

The issue centers around a 1991 brochure from a publisher representing Obama that clearly indicated that then aspiring author Barack Obama was born in Kenya. The responsible literary agent quickly stated, "This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me - an agency assistant at the time," Miriam Goderich, who today is a partner in the literary agency, Dystel & Goderich, wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News. . "There was never any information given to us by Obama in any of his correspondence or other communications suggesting in any way that he was born in Kenya and not Hawaii. I hope you can communicate to your readers that this was a simple mistake and nothing more."

But Cashill makes an excellent point in his column. “This confession rings false to the point of preposterous for any number of reasons. Let us start with the obvious. At the time, 1991, the Acton & Dystel agency listed 90 clients, Obama among its least significant. How likely is it that Goderich would have remembered enough about a 1991 'error' to know it was hers, especially since it went uncorrected through several revisions until changed in 2007? To make this claim credible, there would have to be an existing paper trail leading to an Obama submission in which he lists an Hawaiian birth. I am confident that there is no such submission.”

That's the practical reasoning.

Now here's the philosophical one. Cashill continues:

“In Dreams from My Father, Obama inflated his stint at Business International even more and transformed it into a faux moment of racial awareness, one of at least a half-dozen concocted racial melodramas in the book. As Obama tells the story, a 'consulting house to multinational corporations' hired him and promptly promoted him to the position of 'financial writer.'

Here, he felt like 'a spy behind enemy lines,' and a guilty one at that. 'As far as I could tell,' he adds, 'I was the only black man in the company.' He does not boast of his racial uniqueness. Rather, in full grievance mode, he considers it 'a source of shame.' Indeed, the whole experience troubled him:…”

But the truth was something completely different. Cashill continues:

“As early as July 2005, however, former co-worker and Obama fan Dan Armstrong revealed Obama's whole account to be a 'serious exaggeration.' Obama worked at not a multinational corporation, but a 'small company that published newsletters.' He was not the only black person who worked there. He did not, as claimed, have his own office, wear a jacket and tie, interview international businessmen, or write articles. He mostly just copy-edited business items and slipped them into a three-ring binder for the company's customers.

Are we supposed to believe that Goderich not only changed Obama's birthplace from Hawaii to Kenya, but also transformed him from a grunt filling three-ring binders into a "financial journalist and editor?"

Read more at http://www.americanthinker.com/. It will be worth your time.

•From Michellemalkin.com, Seven women participated in the National Organization for Women's day of protest against Rush Limbaugh in front of Limbaugh's D.C. affiliate WMAL, Friday.

The NOW protest had been in the works since April 19, when the women's advocacy group launched their “Enough Rush” campaign.

Pairing with media watchdog Media Matters for America, NOW is targeting local affiliates and local advertisers, Friday's demonstration was touted as the group's big demonstration of opposition to Limbaugh with affiliates across the country participating in protests.

The Daily Caller put the number of protesters at seven, but a less biased spokesperson for NOW estimated the crowd size at around 50,000.

I'm not unbiased, but I watched a lot of video this weekend, and I didn't see 50,000 protesters. I'm not sure I saw 7.

•Here are your Top 5 Facts to Know About the Environment:
5. Carbon dioxide is an essential element of life, not a poison.
4. Man couldn't harm the planet earth if he tried with all his might.
3. There is plenty of room for trash on the planet. Do NOT recycle.
2. Fossil fuels are renewable resources.
1. Global warming is not caused by mankind.

 


EXPOSING ANOTHER LIBERAL ITEM OF NONSENSE
Posted 5/18/12

•Time for another installment of, “I Told You So,” the accountability portion of my column where I show you that some Liberal nonsense item I warned you about has come to pass. This one is a Hall of Fame entry. From Fox News via The Drudgereport:
Oregon investigators have traced an outbreak of norovirus to a reusable grocery bag that members of a Beaverton girls' soccer team passed around when they shared cookies.

The soccer team of 13- and 14-year-olds traveled to Seattle for a weekend tournament in October 2010.

At the tournament, one girl got sick on Saturday and spent six hours in a chaperone's bathroom. Symptoms of the bug, often called "stomach flu," include vomiting, diarrhea and stomach cramps. The chaperone took the girl back to Oregon.

On Sunday, team members had lunch in a hotel room, passing around the bag and eating cookies it held. On Monday, six girls got sick.

Oregon scientists determined they had picked up the norovirus from the grocery bag.
Tests turned up the virus on the sides of the bag below the polypropylene handle.
Norovirus causes about 21 million illnesses, 70,000 hospitalizations and 800 deaths a year in the United States.

Usually, it's transmitted by direct human contact, but can contaminate surfaces. Leafy greens, fresh fruits and shellfish are commonly involved in foodborne outbreaks.
"What this report does is it helps raise awareness of the complex and indirect way that norovirus can spread," said Aron Hall, an epidemiologist with the Division of Viral Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

His agency says the best way to fend off the virus is thorough hand-washing and cleaning contaminated surfaces with a bleach-based solution.

You could also use plastic grocery bags and throw them away when you are done with them!

•In the “Ways in Which Pres. Obama Has Failed” file:

Remember Cash for Clunkers? This was one of the first Obama-led boondoggles. Essentially, in an effort to spur the purchase of new cars, while lowering fuel consumption, the Obama Administration allocated billions of dollars toward paying folks through rebates for turning in perfectly good, low mpg cars in return for higher mpg new cars.

To ensure that vehicles traded-in would not be resold by dealers, the program outlines a procedure for destructively disabling the engine: The motor oil is drained and replaced with a sodium silicate solution, then the engine is started and run until the solution, becoming glass-like when heated, causes engine internals to abrade and ultimately seize.
They did this to perfectly good cars.

By completely disabling the engine, the program avoids recycling schemes such as the one discovered in Germany, where authorities found that an estimated 50,000 scrapped vehicles have been exported to Africa and Eastern Europe, where newer, safer cars of the type being destroyed in the West are prohibitively expensive.

What kind of economic nincompoop-philosophy is this that you destroy a perfectly good working engine in an ill-advised effort to boost car sales?

• This caught my eye late today when author Ed Klein, author of the new book about Barack Obama, The Amateur showed up on Hannity's radio show.

Klein interviewed Obama's spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright, who told him Obama's team tried to buy his silence in 2008.

An interview of the account went like this:

'Man, the media ate me alive,” Wright told Klein when they met in his office at Chicago's Kwame Nkrumah Academy. “After the media went ballistic on me, I received an e-mail offering me money not to preach at all until the November presidential election.”

“Who sent the e-mail?” asked Klein.

“It was from one of Barack's closest friends.”

“He offered you money?”

“Not directly,” Wright said. “He sent the offer to one of the members of the church, who sent it to me.”

“How much money did he offer you?”

“One hundred and fifty thousand dollars,” Wright said.

“Did Obama himself ever make an effort to see you?”

“Yes,” Wright said. “Barack said he wanted to meet me in secret, in a secure place. And I said, 'You're used to coming to my home, you've been here countless times, so what's wrong with coming to my home?' So we met in the living room of the parsonage of Trinity United Church of Christ, at South Pleasant Avenue right off 95th Street, just Barack and me. I don't know if he had a wire on him. His security was outside somewhere.”

“And one of the first things Barack said was, 'I really wish you wouldn't do any more public speaking until after the November election.' He knew I had some speaking engagements lined up, and he said, 'I wish you wouldn't speak. It's gonna hurt the campaign if you do that.'

Now here's the key part –

“Barack said, 'I'm sorry you don't see it the way I do. Do you know what your problem is?' And I said, 'No, what's my problem?' And he said, 'You have to tell the truth.' I said, 'That's a good problem to have. That's a good problem for all preachers to have. That's why I could never be a politician.'

“You have to tell the truth.”

Both ways that phrase could be taken are each bad. Either Obama is admitting that he lies a lot or he is admitting that Rev. Wright's Black Liberation Theology is “the truth.”

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


THE DINOSAUR FLATULENCE THEORY IS RIDICULOUS
Posted 5/11/12

Of all the stories I have come across on the internet this past week, the following one seems like the most referenced. It is also the one with the least amount of reason applied to its formulation.

They say that dinosaurs may be partly to blame for a change in climate because they created so much flatulence, at least according to scientists.

Professor Graeme Ruxton of St Andrews University, Scotland, said the giant animals spent 150 years emitting the potent global warming gas, methane. Large plant-eating sauropods would have been the main culprits because of the huge amounts of greenery they consumed. Greenery has lots of fiber, and dietary fiber produces flatulence.

A sauropod which weighed up to 80 tons and reaching 100 feet in length - would have been one of the many culprits emitting methane gas. The team calculated the animals would have collectively produced more than 520m tons of methane a year - more than all today's modern sources put together.

It is thought these huge amounts could easily have been enough to warm the planet.
It is even possible that the climate change was so catastrophic that it caused the dinosaurs' eventual demise.

After breaking down in the animal's stomach it would have produced thousands of liters of the greenhouse gas compared with a modern cow which only produces 200 liters of methane daily. Methane is allegedly up to 20 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (CO2).

Scientists claim humans have pushed levels of the gas up 2.5 times higher than they should be and estimate this is responsible for 20 percent of modern global warming.
{Should? Who quantifies should?)

The world's livestock collectively emit only 100m tons of methane a year.
Can you believe that serious people forwarded this ridiculous hypothesis?

•And then there's this…
The EPA's 17th annual US greenhouse gas inventory shows overall emissions in 2010 increased 3.2% from 2009. The EPA says the trend is attributable to an increase in energy consumption across all economic sectors, due to increasing energy demand associated with an expanding economy, and increased demand for electricity for air conditioning due to warmer summer weather during 2010.

We are using more energy year-to-year, once again. As we have since the day we first walked the earth.

•Honeywell has begun destroying inventories of certain ozone-depleting refrigerants and selling the resulting emission reduction credits for use in California's greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program. The company says it has already destroyed more that 27,000 lbs. of CFC-11, a chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant with one of the highest ozone-depleting potentials. It plans to destroy its remaining inventory of ozone-depleting CFC-11, CFC-12 and R-500 refrigerants this year. "Honeywell chose to destroy this inventory, rather than sell the refrigerants for use by others, as part of its commitment to environmental leadership," said Jeffrey Ballew of Honeywell.

So Honeywell has determined that it is more beneficial to destroy an effective refrigerant liquid than sell it or donate it to an under-served country that depends on old technology?

•By the way, I rip on inconsistent conservatives like George Will often but I also give them their due when it is earned. On ABC's “This Week” Sunday morning TV show, Will said the following regarding President Obama:

“Look, self-absorption is part of the occupational hazard of politics, and it's also part of the job description of being president,” Will said. “All that said, try to imagine Dwight Eisenhower talking about D-Day saying, 'I did this. I decided this. I did this and then I did that.' It's inconceivable.”

Kudos to Mr. Will!

That comparison between Obama and Eisenhower illustrated the problem for the president, Will said.

“If you struck from Barack Obama's vocabulary the first-person singular pronoun, he would fall silent, which would be a mercy to us and a service to him, actually,” Will continued. “Because he has been so incontinent for the last three years that you wind up with, as you said, [an] Ohio State University with empty seats.”

Double wow!

•More facts:
The United States has just the seventh largest annual loss of primary forests in the world In the 2000-2005 period, the United States lost an average of 831 square miles (215,200 hectares, 2,152 square kilometers or 531,771 acres) of such lands which are sometimes termed "old-growth forests."

These forests are created from a variety of natural and human-influenced sources which include landfills, natural gas, petroleum sources and agricultural activities.

So, we are actually replenishing the forests to positive levels.

Those are the facts.

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN LIKES TO NAME AND SHAME PRIVATE FOLKS
Posted 5/6/12

•The CBS 60 Minutes piece this past Sunday on the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques employed by the CIA in gaining information vital to the capture of al Qaida leaders like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and the killing of Osama bin Laden was very illustrative of the real enemy that liberty and freedom are facing in this country.
The interviewer, Leslie Stahl, clearly presented the argument that rough treatment of mass murderers was outside the bounds of normalcy “CBS-Stahl-defined.”

The well-established truth, of course, is that if you are going to make an omelet, you will need to break a few eggs. Jose Rodriguez, the head of the CIA interrogation unit, was rightly unapologetic and should be carried through the streets of America as a hero.
And I did like the way that Mr. Rodriguez placed Liberalism in national security within its proper perspective in the national debate. Those were words that needed to be heard in America.

I have no problem whatsoever with my government getting rough with men who admit to wanting to see the 3000 innocent people killed on September 11, 2001.

Waterboarding them is not excessive. Sleep deprivation is not excessive treatment. Losing 50 pounds through being fed Ensure as a food supplement is not torture. Are you kidding? Ensure is torture? I suppose if your life goal is to die for the cause of Islam, it COULD be termed as torture if you were kept alive and healthy completely against your will.

Do you?

•Am I alone in believing that the recent release, “Bully” the movie that documents the true cost of uncontrolled bullying among our youth, should be played in 1000 times the number of schools that played Al Gore's “An Inconvenient Truth?”…

•This from the Wall Street Journal -- President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, is branding Romney donors as people who are “betting against America," and accuses them of having a "less-than-reputable" record.

The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

Remember Richard Nixon's "enemies list?" That information appalled the media for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers—to jail, to fine, to bankrupt—are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

Well, except for President Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled "Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney's donors." In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having "less-than-reputable records," the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that "quite a few" have also been "on the wrong side of the law" and profiting at "the expense of so many Americans."

These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.

This is despicable. If you are an Obama supporter, I DARE you to come forth and defend these actions.

•Five quick thoughts to carry you through the weekend.:

•Why do we get SO worked up over the NFL draft?

•Who had to shave Khalid Sheikh Mohammad's back and chest?

* Why can't pulling finger and toe nails from murderers be acceptable coercive treatment?

•If global warming is established science, why are we still debating it?

•If the Geico pig can endear himself to me to the degree that I can actually smile at one of their commercials, is world peace really unattainable?

(Follow Twitter.com/bkparallax and email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)


OBAMA DOG RECIPES
DELIVERED
ON TWITTER

Posted 4/28/12

•So the Twitter buzz last week centered on people eating dogs – well, to be accurate, Barack Obama eating dog.

If you missed it all, the cyber-fracas started when Obama campaign czar (and Mr. Whipple stand-in) David Axelrod sent a message out saying that Barack Obama knows how to hold a dog in a car, accompanied by a picture of the President holding his dog Bo lovingly in the White House limo. Axelrod was referring, snidely; to the decades old story that Mitt Romney on a family car vacation put the family dog in a kennel on the roof of the station wagon because the dog had gotten sick with the Hershey Squirts.

So, Republicans returned fire, wisely digging into Obama's own book where he admitted that his step-father Lolo Soetoro had gotten Barack to eat dog when they lived in Indonesia. The GOP even supplied clips from the audio version of Obama's book, delivered in his own voice, admitting that he ate dog.

What soon followed was a virtual avalanche of Obama Dog Recipes delivered on Twitter. Notables included: Labradoodle Noodle Soup, and Collie-flower. I think my favorites were German Shepherd Pie and Pekinese Duck. I'm getting hungry.

Here's the actual quote from Obama's book:

“With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy). Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”

Of course, PETA reacted angrily. But they only spoke in favor of the dogs. Why has nobody stood-up for the snakes and the grasshoppers?

I kind of like this Twitter thing.

•This Secret Service controversy has me scratching my head.

If you are not aware of the details, the U.S. Secret Service detail assigned to the President's recent trip to Columbia involved a number of agents that solicited prostitutes, one of whom took issue with not being paid the agreed-upon amount for services rendered. Remember, prostitution is legal in Columbia, so the agent could be prosecuted for theft theoretically.

The issue is not going away soon with rumors now emerging that the scandal may also involve White House personnel. No word yet on how far up the ladder this will go, but it is fascinating hearing the national media – A.K.A. The Drive-Byes, mentioning that the procurement of prostitutes around a President in this manner presents a security risk in the form of possible blackmail of personnel around the Administration.

So why weren't any of these people in the media concerned about these risks when Bill Clinton was chasing interns around the Oval Office? I remember mentioning blackmail concerns, but nowhere else in the media did I ever hear that mentioned.

Strange.

Here's another inconsistency – this time from Reuters. The number of earthquakes in the central United States rose apparently "spectacularly" near where oil and gas drillers disposed of wastewater underground, a process that may have caused geologic faults to slip, U.S. government geologists report.

The average number of earthquakes of magnitude 3 or greater in the U.S. midcontinent - an area that includes Arkansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas - increased to six times the 20th century average last year, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey said in an abstract of their research.

The abstract does not explicitly link rising earthquake activity to fracking - known formally as hydraulic fracturing - that involves pumping water and chemicals into underground rock formations to extract natural gas and oil.

But the wastewater generated by fracking and other extraction processes may play a role in causing geologic faults to slip, causing earthquakes, the report suggests.

"A remarkable increase in the rate of (magnitude 3) and greater earthquakes is currently in progress," the authors wrote in a brief work summary to be discussed Wednesday at a San Diego meeting of the Seismological Society of America.

So then why are these people not concerned with carbon sequestration underground, where pressurized carbon dioxide gas is shot down into underground formations? Seems kind of politically one-sided to me. Gas is gas.

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)


FORMER NASA SCIENTISTS CHIME IN ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Posted 4/21/12

•So regarding this Secret Service prostitution scandal, White House press secretary Jay Carney says it would not be appropriate for President Obama to comment on the concern that is overshadowing his visit to Colombia.

"This is a matter that is being looked at in an appropriate manner by the Secret Service itself. It would not be appropriate for the president to characterize something being looking into the Secret Service at this time." Carney said on Saturday afternoon.
Then why was it “appropriate” for Obama to weigh-in last month on the ongoing investigation regarding the shooting of Trayvon Martin? The president said then if he had a son he would look like Trayvon.
What's different?

•I loved this little snippet from the news of the past week. Nearly 50 former NASA scientists, astronauts and technologists have chastised NASA for its position on man-made climate change.

In a March 28 letter addressed to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, the group of 49 former employees asked NASA to refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites because it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

“As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA's advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate,” the letter reads. .

The group said that statements to the effect that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.

“The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA's history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements,” the letter reads.

NASA spokesman Steve Cole told The Daily Caller (Hat-tip – great website!) that they have not received the letter yet. “We are now aware of the correspondence but have not yet had an opportunity to review the contents,” he said. Kinda sounds like Jay Carney.
The group includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston. The letter surfaced Tuesday on the blog Watts Up With That?

“Our concerns are about the reputation for NASA,” former Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham told The Daily Caller in an interview. Cunningham noted that he has been friends with NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, who he calls “Charlie.” “I've known him a long time,” he said. “He is a very fine guy.”

But then he added, “Not many of us are really all that pleased with what's been happening to NASA.”
Unlike the environment of their space visits, the astronauts are not alone on this one.
As for the frequent lockstep claims by the Liberals that any naysayers are funded by Big Oil, they say the group is just a loose coalition of former NASA employees who agree on the topic and said they aren't being funded by anybody. “They don't have a penny.”

•One last point about the Hillary Rosen controversy, Chief Obama strategist David Axelrod told CNN that Rosen worked for CNN, not the White House. Recall that Rosen stated that Ann Romney had not worked a day in her life. “She actually is your employee, not ours,” Axelrod told CNN. “She works for CNN. I think CNN would not allow her to be an operative for our campaign.”

CNN asked Axelrod why Rosen's comments were such a big deal that Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and multiple other campaign operatives had to condemn them.

“I don't know in the long term whether it will be a big deal,” Axelrod replied. “It was an unfortunate comment, unfortunate for two reasons. In the battle of politics, family are civilians and should be treated as such. They shouldn't be pulled into the debate in that kind of way as targets. So it was unfortunate from that respect. The other thing is that it did feel like denigration of stay-at-home moms. There are moms that are working that would like to be home and to suggest that you are not working if you're staying home, raising a family, often active in the schools and the community and causes, that's not right. My own wife was a stay-at-home mom and worked harder than anybody I know. Often, the moms are the ones who are handling the family finances as well. It was an unfortunate comment. Hillary has acknowledged that. It is true that the Romney campaign jumped on it like a raft in the deep blue sea. They were drowning under the weight of their own problems. Earlier in the day they couldn't come up with an answer of whether Governor Romney supported the pay equity law, the first law the President signed and he endorsed and warmly spoke of Governor Walker who just repealed the pay equity law there. I think that has more durable meaning to the women of this country than this,” Axelrod said.

You recall when James Carville was lying, he talked louder and faster? Well it appears David Axelrod's lying markers are run-on sentences and everything but the kitchen sink!

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)


OBAMA STRUGGLING WITH SOARING GAS PRICES

Posted 4/12/12

•Did you see that the Obama administration is quietly diverting roughly $500 million in taxpayer funds to the IRS to help implement ObamaCare?

The money is only part of the IRS's total spending in implementing the enormously unpopular law, and it is being provided outside the normal appropriations process. The IRS is being made responsible for several key provisions of the new law, including the individual mandate.

Republican lawmakers have tried to cut off funding to implement the healthcare law, at least until after the Supreme Court decides whether to strike it down. That ruling is expected by June, and oral arguments last week indicated the justices might well overturn at least the individual mandate, if not the whole law.
Another example of your government tax dollars at work!

•This one takes the cake though. Illinois U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin reacted last week to the tornadoes in Dallas, Texas earlier in the week. Durbin called for more laws regulating carbon output while he sends a dire warning that we must convert to hybrid cars or lose our life. Durbin says we must spend money now to fix the problem. "It's your money or your life," he said a press conference. "We are either going to dedicate ourselves to a cleaner, more livable planet and accept the initial investment necessary or we're going to pay a heavier price in terms of loss of human life, damage and costs associated with it." If you had any previous doubts that politicians, especially the Democrat ones, are certifiably dumb, Sen. Durbin bobbed that apple down to the bottom of the barrel.

•Does anybody else find the timing a bit suspicious regarding President Obama's recent comments about the Supreme Court's possible actions regarding the constitutionality of ObamaCare? We heard that the Friday before Obama made his highly inflamed comments the court was actually conducting their first vote on the issue, which of course is done in-chambers with the results not released to the public. Results of that vote, which are non-binding, but precipitates the assigning of authors of assent and dissent opinions issued by the court, may actually have been leaked to President Obama by one of the justices, allowing him one more chance to try to sway votes onto his side.

Some have argued that Obama's motives in making the comments were hitting the ground running in arguing that the Supreme Court was acting out of a sense of political bias, which would be an effort for Obama to gain political advantage by characterizing the Supreme Court as political vigilantes, if a Supreme Court could be viewed as a vigilante, one who takes the law into their hands in an unlawful manner.

•How about this one? As of Monday, President Obama has hit another President Carter goal. Both administrations saw gas prices double in their first term of office. Now we have proof that under Obama, even higher gas prices than were seen under Carter have been reached. Under the Carter administration, gas prices increased by 103.77 percent. Gas prices since Obama took office have risen by 103.79 percent as of Monday. No other presidents in recent years have struggled as much with soaring oil prices. Under the Reagan administration, gas prices actually dropped 66 percent. When Bill Clinton was president, gas prices grew by roughly 30 percent, and under both Bush presidencies, gas prices rose by 20 percent.

•My favorite Obama Administration nuttiness of the past week involves what came out of Eric Holder's Justice Department.Video from James O'Keefe's, “The Project Veritas Monday shows a poll worker in Washington, D.C., offering a “voter ID activist” Attorney General Eric Holder's ballot in the recent primaries.

Holder, 61 years old and black, bears no resemblance to the young white man who asked for and was able to obtain his ballot. The young man walked into the D.C. polling place in Holder's precinct, gave a poll worker Holder's name and home address, then received Holder's ballot.

When the poll worker asks the prospective voter to sign a form to get Holder's ballot, he responded: “I actually forgot my ID.”

The poll worker and voter then went back and forth over how a photo ID wasn't necessary to obtain Holder's ballot.

Poll worker: “You don't need it; it's alright.”
Activist: “I left it in the car.”
Poll worker: “As long as you're in here, and you're on our list and that's who you say you are, we're okay.”
Man: “I would feel more comfortable if I go get my ID, is it alright if I go get it?”
Poll worker: “Sure, go ahead.”
Man: “I'll be back faster than you can say furious!”
Poll worker: “We're not going anywhere.”

The voter never accepted Holder's ballot, despite the poll worker offering it to him. Even so, the video shows just how easy it is for one to claim they are somebody else, obtain that person's ballot and effectively disenfranchise them by stealing their vote — all because there are no federal voter ID laws. D.C. falls under federal jurisdiction when it comes to voting laws.

As U.S. Attorney General, Holder has adamantly opposed efforts to combat voter fraud with voter ID laws. The irony in this latest Project Veritas revelation, of course, is that Holder, one of the staunchest opponents of voter ID laws, could have himself been disenfranchised by white men because there is no federal voter ID law to protect voters in D.C. and elsewhere nationwide from fraud.

Hat-tip goes to The Daily Caller. A superb website.

 


LIBERALLY-BASED EXTORTION OF THE TAXPAYER

Posted 4/6/12

Quite a number of people in the media last week were all over April being National Autism Awareness Month. The Star ran a story last week about how “…Autism has become a veritable epidemic in the U.S…”

In fairness, the story in the paper, by Mike Stobbe, did mention that the definition of Autism has been expanded so that now "autism" is also shorthand for a group of milder, related conditions, including something called Asperger's syndrome. For decades prior to that, the Autism diagnosis was given only to kids with severe language, intellectual and social impairments and unusual, repetitious behaviors.

Specifically, the reason for the perceived "explosion" of kids with Autism is the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistic Manual for Psychiatric Disorders), which kind of is the Official Bible of loopitude, expanded their definition of Autism in 1994 to include kids with a wide variety of social-perception and interaction difficulties. That's kind of like declaring an epidemic of broken bones when you extend the medical definition to include broken finger nails.

Uta Frith, a researcher on the subject once observed that Asperger's kids may have a "dash of Autism." Her backhanded phrase handcuffed millions of kids by forever linking them with the previously known true profound disability of Autism. It is a disservice to kids who exhibit Asperger's-like personality traits, and is akin to the environmental activist group, the Sierra Club basing every protest they have against coal fired power plants on the needs of the asthmatic kids that may be living in the vicinity.

Linking Asperger's Syndrome to Autism in this manner is like linking forgetting where you left your keys to advanced-stage Alzheimer's Disease.

It is yet another form of liberally-based extortion of the taxpayer and it has to stop.
Kids with Asperger's are NOT Autistic. There is no medication that will cure them. They are not diseased. They're normal kids.

Aspergers Syndrome is nothing more than a difference in personality of some kids and adults that are not able to process social cues -- AKA body language. Once parents learn a proper strategy for teaching their kids social cues, they can function in the "regular" world like most everybody else. Not being able to read social cues is no more or less a disability than a kid that is so dependent on social approval for their actions that they give of their bodies sexually in order to gain that approval. Another example - it's no different than a kid that can process social cues just fine but cannot focus on written instructions. We don't call those kids disabled...we call them "visual learners."

But when the difference deals with social interaction, everybody wants to label them disabled. That's a disservice to those kids and to kids who really are Autistic.
As you can expect, the expressions of “Autism epidemic” has spurred advocacy groups to seize on the new numbers as evidence that Autism research and services should get more attention (By attention, they mean money.).

Some have linked childhood vaccines as a trigger to Autism. However, many parallel studies have found no such connection, CDC (Centers for Disease Control) has been looking at other possible factors, including illnesses that mothers had while they were pregnant with children who later were diagnosed as Autistic. The researchers also are looking into antidepressants and other medications that the pregnant women took and those given to their children when they were young.

Parents are hungry for more answers. The worst part of all this is parents are blaming themselves, wondering if there was anything they could have done to have prevented “Autism.” The only reason they are racking themselves with such guilt is public education administration sees another opportunity for sticking their greasy mitts into the hip pockets of the taxpayers.

If any of you have a different opinion on this subject, and I am specifically addressing you teachers and especially SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATORS, I would like to hear from you. Bring it!

(Get a Parallax Look right here each week, follow along at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


CAN'T WE MOVE BEYOND SKIN COLOR LINES?

Posted 3/29/12

•There were so many things going on this week, I had to return to the short-bite shotgun format…enjoy.

Why he opened his big mouth on the subject of that 17 yr old that got shot and died in Florida last month I'll probably never understand, (Were you aware that the shooting occurred back in late February? Where was Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the Black Panthers in the two weeks after this happened? Who is asking those questions?) but President Obama said “if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon.”

Looking past the obvious criticism of why a “post-racial” president would deem it beneficial to invoke the race of a shooting victim, but doesn't Obama need to acknowledge that a woman is involved in the creation of a son for him? Now, had he said, “If Michelle and I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon.” you might be O.K. What if the mother was White or Asian, or Nigerian? Perhaps even with Michelle, Obama's White genes might have taken a lead role in forming Trayvon's skin color and resulted in a kid that looks more like Blake Griffin.

Don't you see how silly this all is? Can't we move beyond skin color lines?

•Remember Jalisa Reed? Beautiful, wonderful young woman from KCK shot for no reason at all. Where's Jesse Jackson speaking-up for Jalisa? Where's President Obama talking about her shooting in a White House statement?

Why is the Trayvon Martin shooting so much more important to take to the national stage?

•As the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf are sent to the mothballs, did you know electric cars were once made for the Father of the mass-produced American automobile? Henry Ford bought his wife, Clara, at least two electric cars in the early 1900's. The cars offered a 50 mile driving range.

The Volt has an advertised electric range of 25-50 miles! More than 100 years later and we still can't manage more range? Why did our government even begin to subsidize this nonsense?

On top of all this other idiocy, even with rising gasoline prices -- topping $4 a gallon in parts of the country – electric vehicles are simply uncompetitive. According to the Lundberg Survey, gas prices would have to rise to $8.53/gal. to make the Nissan Leaf competitive and $12.50 for a Chevy Volt to be worth it, based on the cost of gasoline vs. electricity, fuel efficiency, and depreciation.

So President Obama's goal is gas prices more than 3 times what they are right now?

•Get a load of this factoid amid all the hand-wringing over the birth control issue. An 18th-century Russian woman holds the world record for having birthed the most children: 69, which she had over the course of 27 pregnancies that included 16 pairs of twins, 7 sets of triplets, and 4 sets of quadruplets. Believe it or not, she was outdone by the male record-holder for most kids, a Moroccan emperor who, according to the Guinness Book of World Records, sired "at least 342 daughters and 525 sons. By 1721, he was reputed to have 700 male descendants. Ouch!

•Notice how you never seem to hear about the Ozone Hole anymore?

The ozone hole above the Antarctic annually reaches its maximum size every year around fall/winter time, revealing a thinning in the protective atmospheric layer that rivals the size of North America itself.

Spanning about 10 million square miles, the ozone hole over the South Pole reached its maximum annual size on Sept. 14, 2011. The largest Antarctic ozone hole ever recorded occurred in 2006, at a size of 11 million square miles, a size documented by NASA.

The Antarctic ozone hole was first discovered in the late 1970's by the first satellite mission that could measure ozone, a spacecraft run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The hole has apparently continued to grow steadily during the 1980s and 90s, though since early 2000 the growth reportedly leveled off. Even so scientists have seen large variability in its size from year to year.
On the Earth's surface, ozone is a pollutant, but in the stratosphere it forms a protective layer that reflects ultraviolet radiation back out into space, protecting us from UV rays. Years with large ozone holes are now more associated with very cold winters over Antarctica and high polar winds that prevent the mixing of ozone-rich air.

There is a lot of year to year variability. In 2007, the ozone hole shrunk 30% from the record setting 2006 winter. This year, the ozone region over Antarctica dropped 31 million tons, compared to the record-setting 2006 loss of 44 million tons. Apparently natural variations in temperature and atmospheric changes are responsible for the decrease in ozone loss, and are not indicative of a long-term “healing.”

The data shows a lot of variability and no real trends after the Montreal protocol banned ChloroFluoroCarbons (CFC's). The climate models had predicted a partial recovery by now. Later scientists adjusted their models and pronounced the recovery would take decades. It could be yet another failed alarmist prediction.

Remember we first found the ozone hole when satellites that measure ozone were first available and processed (1985). It is very likely to have been there forever, varying year to year and decade to decade as solar cycles and volcanic events affect high latitude atmosphere.

Another climate hoax! I want my Big Macs back in thermally efficient Styrofoam boxes!

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


REDUCE OUR GOVERNMENT'S FOOTPRINT

Posted 3/19/12

•From junkscience.com, the Washington Times recently noted that a new LED light fixture manufactured by the Philips Corp. is the latest public-relations disaster for the Energy Department. The 60-watt bulb won an Energy Department $10 million prize for an “environmentally sensitive” bulb that is “affordable for American families.” The retail price is $50 each.

Affordable?

The new LED is more energy-efficient than standard incandescent bulbs and “may” last up to 10 years. $10 million to a corporation in economic times like these when manufacturers should be developing efficient, reliable, cost-effective products?

Obama-mentor (Hat-tip to Breitbart.com) Prof. Derrick Bell, also one of the founders of Critical Race Theory, once wrote the following:

“The Constitution has survived for two centuries and, despite earnest efforts by committed people, the contradiction remains, shielded and nurtured through the years by myth. This contradiction is the root reason for the inability of black people to gain legitimacy -- that is, why they are unable to be taken seriously when they are serious and why they retain a subordinate status as a group that even impressive proofs of individual competence cannot overcome. Contradiction, shrouded by myth, remains a significant factor in blacks' failure to obtain meaningful relief against historic racial injustice.

“The myths that today and throughout history have nurtured the original constitutional contradiction and thus guided racial policy are manifold, operating like dreams below the level of language and conscious thought. Much of what is called the law of civil rights -- an inexact euphemism for racial law -- has a mythological or fairy-tale quality that is based, like the early fairy tales, less on visions of gaiety and light than on an ever-present threat of disaster.”

Wow! That sounds like ObamaNonsense, doesn't it?

•From real-science.com:

Did you know that the Chevy Volt has a great-great grandfather?
Meet the Roberts electric car. Built in 1896, it gets a solid 40 miles to the charge (same as the Volt), the highly touted and subsidized $31,645 electric car General Motors CEO Dan Akerson called “not a step forward, but a leap forward.”

Don't let the car's advanced age let you think it isn't tough: Its present-day owner told The Daily Caller it still runs like a charm, and has even completed the roughly 60-mile London to Brighton Vintage Car Race.

So Obama's “leap forward” in automotive science is no more efficient (and much more dangerous judging by recent revelations of Volts bursting into flames when their batteries are punctured in crashes) than was possible more than 100 years ago!

From the Way-Back Machine:
From the Jun 24, 1974, Time magazine, entitled: "Another Ice Age?"

“As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades.

The trend shows no indication of reversing.

Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data. When scientists analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since.

As the winds swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. Climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.

The earth's current climate is something of an anomaly. In the past 700,000 years, there have been at least seven major episodes of glaciers spreading over much of the planet. Temperatures have been as high as they are now only about 5% of the time.

But there is a peril more immediate than the prospect of another ice age. Even if temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply reduced.”

My how times change!

•By the way, I have largely avoided the Sandra Fluke issue because I know you all are way too smart to fall for smarmy Liberal manipulation like that, and Fluke is an idiot.
But it will be worth your time to visit TheDailyCaller.com and read a column entitled, “Thank you Sandra Fluke, because I've gotta have it” authored by Keith Koffler.

(Read a Parallax Look each week and follow along at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


REDUCE OUR GOVERNMENT'S FOOTPRINT

Posted 3/11/12

•If you follow media firestorms, you no doubt are aware of Conservative talker Rush Limbaugh's past week. In the interests of time and space limitations, I won't recount it all here, but suffice it to say the left wing mainstream media were having their way with Limbaugh.

But a column written by Liberal columnist Kirsten Powers that appeared in The Daily Beast last weekend identifies a vicious double-standard between Liberals and Conservatives. You really should check it out. The read will be well worth your time.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html

•We need to repeal The Clean Air Act.

As I am sure most of you know, The Clean Air Act is a U.S. federal law enacted by Congress, and signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970 to control air pollution on a national level. It requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which Nixon also started, to develop and enforce regulations to protect the general public from exposure to airborne contaminants that are “known” (my parentheses, for obvious reasons) to be hazardous to human health.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 proposed emissions trading, added provisions for addressing acid rain, ozone depletion and “toxic” (there I go again!) air pollution. The amendments also established new auto gasoline reformulation requirements, set gas vapor standards to control evaporative emissions from gasoline, and mandated that the new gasoline formulations be sold from May to September in many states, at huge costs to the industry.

This automobile control part of the bill was extremely contentious at the time it was passed. The automobile industry argued that they could not meet the new standards and Senators expressed concern about the impact of this part of the legislation on the economy. Specific new emissions standards for moving sources passed years later.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed regulations of a list of categorized sources that emitted any number of the 188 “hazardous” (me again) air pollutants, as directed by the Clean Air Act. There are currently 174 categories with plans for the creation of emission standards.

Another title was added as part of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. It addresses the issue of acid rain which is said to be caused by nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions resulting from electric power plants powered by fossil fuels (or by your backyard barbeque grill). Originally the method for regulating industrial emissions was very controlled, meaning there was a way to decrease the pollution by a certain amount with a particular type of technology. The 1990, amendments gave industries more options including switching to low-sulfur coal and/or adding devices that controlled the harmful emissions. In some cases plants had to be closed down to prevent the “dangerous” (Oops, I did it again!) chemicals from entering the atmosphere. Have you noticed that Pres. Obama's EPA has been closing coal plants all across the country?

The EPA through The Clean Air Act has been responsible for the following:

•Banning the use of DDT, which has led to the deaths of tens of millions of people, mostly children because banning the pesticide allowed malaria to return.

Banning the use of Styrofoam and aerosol spray cans in the name of saving the unthreatened ozone layer. Remember when McDonald's Big Macs came in Styrofoam containers? Remember how hot these efficient containers kept their burgers?

•Banned use of refrigerants that were much more expensive than their replacements, all in the name of “saving” the ozone layer. This is why you have to buy a much more expensive compressor whenever the old one dies.

•Banned use of the pesticide Chlordane which was extremely effective against termites.

•Banned use of the thermal insulator asbestos which spawned litigation that nearly destroyed the fiberglass and mineral fiber insulation industry and may have caused the World Trade Center towers to collapse because the impact of the planes wouldn't have knocked the much tougher asbestos off of the building steel, which precipitated the towers' collapse.

You know they will be caterwawhling over how could we possibly allow the air and water to get dirty if we repeal The Clean Air Act. Was air and water terribly dirty before 1972? I drank lots of water back then. It tasted fine.

We need to reduce our government footprint and we need to repeal The Clean Air Act.

(Increase your Parallax Look intake each week. Go to Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


AN INTERESTING CONTRAST COMES INTO PLAY

Posted 3/4/12

Remember Newt Gingrich's claim in the last debate that then-Illinois Sen. Obama supported infanticide? I'm fairly sure we covered this here back then, but there is an interesting contrast in-play that I'm not sure anyone has specifically noted.
For the facts, I went to www.FactCheck.org. Here they are:

Sen. Obama opposed Illinois legislation in 2001, 2002 and 2003 that would have defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a "born alive infant" entitled to legal protection, even if doctors believe it could not survive.

Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 "born alive" because he claimed they were intended as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been "fully in support" of a similar federal bill that President Bush signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.

The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) claims Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus.

Obama loyalists and abortion supporters note that Illinois law had already provided that physicians must protect the life of a fetus when there is "a reasonable likelihood of sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb, with or without artificial support."
(I find it fascinatingly ironic that doctors will enact every measure in their power trying to save a patient that has gone into cardiac arrest or a victim of an accident or a drowning victim. But if the mother didn't want the baby, the God-given right to life somehow doesn't exist?)

As originally proposed, the 2003 state bill, SB 1082, sought to define the term "born-alive infant" as any infant, even one born as the result of an unsuccessful abortion, that shows vital signs separate from its mother. The bill would have established that infants thus defined were humans with legal rights. It never made it to the floor; it was voted down by the Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired.
So somebody is lying. You can be the judge of who that might be.

But in his best light on the issue, Obama looks like this – a second or third trimester baby shows the intestinal fortitude to survive an abortion attempt, and is breathing, albeit with difficulty, but is breathing and alive. In the past, before Born Alive laws, doctors could make the judgment that the child should be left on a table to die. Obama's past actions dictate that he believes the baby should have been left to die. Even if the law was intended as a wedge against other abortions, isn't one life like this worth fighting for? What human being can make that judgment?

On the other side of the issue in this campaign, we have Rick Santorum, a former U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania and current presidential candidate who is a father of seven children. One of their children, a boy they named Gabriel, died only a few hours after birth. The Santorum's knew that Gabriel was facing these odds before he was born. They remained steadfast refusing suggestions to abort him, and after he was born the parents held him for all the time they had which turned out to be only about 2 hours. In Rick Santorum's words, “For two hours he lived a life that knew only love.”

After Gabriel died, the parents brought the body home for a funeral and burial, and made sure that their other children knew that they had a brother. That act has been fodder for liberals scratching at Santorum, with some making claims that they took the body home “so their other kids could play with it.” Outrage from the mainstream media regarding these claims were few and far between.

In 2008, Santorum and his wife Karen welcomed a daughter Isabella into the world. Soon after Bella's birth, they learned she had a rare genetic disorder that would result in her not likely living past a year or so. The parents have loved and supported her throughout and the child is now 3 years of age.

Kind of a telling contrast; on one side, you have a candidate that would prefer a living but struggling baby be left to die rather than move to support its God-given right to life for fear that his side might lose leverage politically. On the other side, you have a candidate that actually walks-the-walk, extending into numerous examples in his own life. For the record, Sen. Santorum was one of the sponsors of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act signed by Pres. Bush into law in 2002.

Isn't the presidency at some degree about character?

(Follow Brian at Twitter.com/bkparallax or email him at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


IS THIS HOW A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE PAYS HOMAGE?

Posted 2/24/12

•Did you catch the video a few weeks ago where Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg told Egyptian television that “…I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012…”.

According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

The Constitution gives her the power she has, and this is how she does homage to that great document? This is the kind of stuff that makes people truly hate liberals.

•The following letter was shared with me from a thoughtful reader regarding my column last week about President Obama requiring insurance companies to pay for contraception, including abortions, for employees of church-owned institutions.

The reader asks:
“Where does the President get the power to compel a citizen to give a product away to another citizen? Surely not from the US Constitution. This is a dangerous man who is setting dangerous precedents. This is certainly not the kind of “Hope and Change” the founders would have endorsed.

I have not heard anyone in this present debate ask the following question…..How much time until Obama determines when, which and how often “women employed by such institutions” or any other women for that matter are REQUIRED to use birth control?.... In other words, he is currently trashing the individual liberty of those who provide health insurance, i.e. the employers and the insurers. What then precludes Obama to eliminate the liberty of the individual women to determine if, when and how to use contraception? Someday their “choice” will be eliminated because it doesn't fit the needs of the state i.e. we can't afford the health care costs for single parent pregnancies for example. Or the population is too large. Or we need to increase the population so we will restrict birth control. Or a million other reasons. It can happen here. It has happened in China.

*The following is an excerpt from a house subcommittee hearing that discusses horrible stories that took place in China….while they were 'modernizing:

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 1998
House of Representatives, Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, Committee on International Relations, Washington, DC.

'The world has known for well over 15 years now that the Government of China routinely compels women to abort their unauthorized unborn children and that the Chinese men and women are often forcibly sterilized.
Almost 2 months ago, I was approached by human rights activist Harry Wu, who asked for my help in bringing an important defector from the People's Republic of China into the United States. Mrs. Gao Xiao Duan was the senior official at what the Government of China euphemistically calls a ''family planning clinic.'' She had decided that she could no longer live with herself while continuing to do this work and was trying to escape to the United States in order to tell the inside story of the PRC population control program.'”

Read much more here:
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa49740.000/hfa49740_0f.htm
China's one child policy was established by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in 1979 to limit population growth. Although designated a "temporary measure," it continues a quarter-century later. The policy limits couples to one child. Fines, pressures to abort a pregnancy, and even forced sterilization accompanied second or subsequent pregnancies.

It is not an all-encompassing rule because it has always been restricted to ethnic Han Chinese living in urban areas. Citizens living in rural areas and minorities living in China are not subject to the law. However, the rule has been estimated to have reduced population growth in the country of 1.3 billion by as much as 300 million people over its first twenty years. That's the equivalent population of the entire United States!

This rule has caused a disdain for female infants; abortion, neglect, abandonment, and infanticide have occurred to female infants. These measures have resulted in the disparate ratio of 114 males for every 100 females among babies from birth through children four years of age. Normal ratios are 105 males born for every 100 females.

Now that millions of lone children in China are now young adults in or nearing their child-bearing years, a special provision allows millions of couples to have two children legally. If a couple is composed of two people without siblings, then they may have two children of their own, thus preventing too dramatic a population decrease. Minister of the State Commission of Population and Family Planning Zhang Weiqing confirmed in early 2006 that China's one child policy is consistent with the nation's plan for population growth and would continue indefinitely. He denied rumors that the policy become less stringent to permit a second child.

Statistically, China's total fertility rate (the number of births per woman) is 1.7, much higher than slowly-declining Germany at 1.4 but lower than the U.S. at 2.1, which is seen as a stable fertility rate.

Is this where we are heading?

(Email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)

 


ARE WE GOING A BIT OVERBOARD FOR A BIRD?

Posted 2/17/12

•This story is just one of those Big Government stories that leaves you wondering how we ever let it all get this bad.

A story in The Star last week illustrated that a Kansas City federal judge sentenced a Norborne, Mo., father and son to probation Tuesday for illegally destroying two bald eagle nests on THEIR Ray County farm.

Ronald L. Gibson, 70, and Todd A Gibson, 49, admitted in September that they had contracted with a logging company to remove trees from their 235-acre farm near the Missouri River in the spring of 2010.

In March, the Gibsons hired a logger to cut down a cottonwood tree that held a bald eagle nest. The logger returned the following month after Todd Gibson asked why several trees near the Missouri River levee had been left standing. The logger explained that the trees were hollow and had no value. Todd Gibson ordered the tress removed, including one that had another bald eagle nest.

Apparently, there is a federal law that specifically protects bald and golden eagles and their nests. The judge also ordered each man to pay a $5,000 fine and perform 100 hours of community service at the Big Muddy National Wildlife Refuge in Columbia.
They didn't kill the eagles, they only destroyed the nests.

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), enacted in 1940, and amended several times since then, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from "taking" bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal penalties for persons who "take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof." The Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.”

According to the language of the law, a violation of the Act can result in a fine of $100,000 ($200,000 for organizations), imprisonment for one year, or both, for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for additional offenses, and a second violation of this Act is a felony.

Isn't that a little bit overboard for a bird?

•The Clint Eastwood "Halftime in America” car ad during the halftime of the Super Bowl last week was largely seen as an affirmation of the Obama Administration's bail-out of the auto manufacturers, General Motors and Chrysler.

Unfortunately, almost nobody in the media has the stones to acknowledge that last November, Eastwood himself ripped the U.S. government for bailing out the car companies. He did so in an interview to promote his new film at the time, J. Edgar.
After all that nonsense, it is somehow telling that the commercial was paid for by an Italian company, Fiat, which owns Chrysler. The Italians are telling us Americans how we can recover our country. Priceless!

•The Obama White House announced today this week, instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control, it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women, no matter where they work.

The plan was immediately denounced by pro-lifers. “The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else.”.”It remains a serious violation of religious freedom. Only the most naïve or gullible would accept this as a change in policy.”

President Obama stated that “the insurance company, not the hospital, not the charity, will be required to reach out” to women employed by such institutions to offer birth control “without copays, without hassles.”

I believe that the Obama Administration thinks this action places the Catholic Church in the position of decrying the practice of shifted funding when they themselves have employed such tactics in their defense of using Catholic funds to support the criminal legal defenses of accused pedophile priests.

That's the kind of tactics we deal with when we have Obama as a President.

•The Susan B. Komen foundation fiasco resulted in the following realities:

The mainstream media is not impartial, and they are decidedly pro-abortion.
I never knew that part of the funds given the Komen Foundation through their various enterprises went to Planned Parenthood, which does some 400,000 abortions each and every year.

I will never run in the Komen Race for the Cure again.

(Run here for a Parallax Look each week. Email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow him at Twitter.com/bkparallax)


OBAMA'S TWISTY LIGHT BULB LOGIC

Posted 2/11/12

I have a veritable cornucopia of stuff this week.

•Another boondoggle bites the dust. The parent company of an electric car battery maker that received a $118 million grant from the Obama administration filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Ener1 subsidiary EnerDel received a $118 million stimulus grant from the Energy Department in 2009. The New York-based company said it has been affected by competition from China and other countries.

So why didn't anybody do the due-diligence before these loans were made? Everybody (even me) knew that the Chinese were cornering the market on the metals needed to make electric car batteries.

From the Washington Times on Obama's twisty light-bulb logic: President Obama said in his State of the Union address, “I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury pollution.”

Obama was referring to his support for the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule issued late last year by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In a December presidential memorandum, Mr. Obama claimed that “by substantially reducing emissions of pollutants that contribute to neurological damage, cancer, respiratory illnesses and other health risks, the MATS Rule will produce major health benefits for millions of Americans – including children, older Americans and other vulnerable populations.”

What he didn't tell you is MATS is the most expensive EPA rule revision in history, and compliance will cost power plants $10-18 billion a year. Guess where these costs are going to be passed to?

Critics have charged that hyping mercury poisoning in MATS was just a cover for the EPA to ramp up its regulatory assault on the coal industry. Trace amounts of mercury from coal-fired power-plant emissions affect almost nobody.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has been trying to force Americans to accept even greater mercury risks by insisting that traditional incandescent light bulbs be replaced with compact fluorescent lights (CFLs).

Did you know that mercury vapor in CFLs is at a much more dangerous concentration than anything coming out of power plants? The associated risks are magnified because the toxic vapors and dust from a broken bulb would be contained in a room or enclosed area.

The same EPA sounding the alarm about mercury emissions from power plants has written a detailed guide explaining how to respond to a broken CFL. It involves: evacuating the room where the breakage occurs, shutting down central heating and air conditioning, airing out the room, carefully collecting bulb fragments and dust with rolled up duct tape, and placing all cleanup materials in airtight bags in a protected area outdoors pending proper disposal.

Who knew that dropping a light bulb would instantly turn a home into a HAZMAT zone?

Truth is, it won't, and neither will saddling our energy grid with additional unnecessary regulations improve the economy.

•They found in a recent survey that 1 in 10 babies along Minnesota's North Shore are born with “unhealthy” levels of mercury in their bodies, according to a new report on contamination around Lake Superior, the first to look for the pollutant in the blood of U.S. infants.

Researchers at the Minnesota Department of Health said they were surprised to find that some of the 1,465 children they tested had very high concentrations. It's the first evidence that infants in the state are “contaminated” by mercury, a pollutant that can cause neurological damage and is distributed around the world, primarily by coal-fired power plants (and by fish too, naturally, but they leave that part out).

Researchers also found that the Minnesota infants were more likely to have unhealthy mercury levels in their blood than their counterparts in Wisconsin and Michigan. That's probably because their mothers ate more fish, the primary source of mercury in people, health officials said. Babies born in the summer months, when local fish consumption is highest, had more mercury than those born in winter, McCann said.

So if you eat more fish, which are high in mercury, you will have more mercury in your system. Got that?

"People could be eating enough fish to cause exposures that we are concerned about," McCann said. Now, health care providers can use the findings to persuade women of child-bearing age to avoid fish such as walleye that are often high in mercury, she said.

Mercury can affect the brain and nervous system development in fetuses and babies. At high levels, it's been shown to affect memory, attention and language. As a result, the EPA has established a health standard for women of childbearing age and infants of 5.8 millionths of a gram per liter of blood. Anything above that is considered unhealthy, though would not necessarily result in neurological problems.

Did you catch that last part? Even though they have mercury in their systems, there are apparently no neurological problems necessarily caused by mercury consumption.
Did they say anywhere that they have proven that the mercury in the fish came from coal fired power plants?

Did you know that the charcoal you burn in the barbecue grill emits mercury?

(Get a healthy Parallax Look each week. Email Bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow at Twitter.com/bkparallax)

 


NO NEED TO PANIC ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

Posted 2/4/12

You won't often see me feature the work of another columnist for my entire contribution, but this one was worth it. From the Wall Street Journal last week; this piece made my millennium. Hat-tip goes to JunkScience.com. (Edited for required brevity.)

No Need to Panic About Global Warming

Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article:

A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, to do about “global warming.” Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true.

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins:

“I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement:
'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.'

Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 “Climategate” email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth:

“The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't.”

The lack of warming for more than a decade—indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections—suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause. Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2.

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere's life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today.

Many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted—or worse.

They have good reason to worry.

In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years. The international warming establishment quickly mounted a determined campaign to have Dr. de Freitas removed from his editorial job and fired from his university position. Fortunately, Dr. de Freitas was able to keep his university job.

This is not the way science is supposed to work, but we have seen it before—for example, in the frightening period when Trofim Lysenko hijacked biology in the Soviet Union. Soviet biologists who revealed that they believed in genes, which Lysenko maintained were a bourgeois fiction, were fired from their jobs. Many were sent to the gulag and some were condemned to death.

Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them.

There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to “de-carbonize” the world's economy. Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC, aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.

Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.

(Get a weekly Parallax Look, then email bkubicki@kc.rr.com or follow Twitter.com/bkparallax)


WHY THE DRIVE OF SOME REPUBLICANS TO DESTRUCT NEWT?

Posted 1/29/12

•Why are so many Republicans working so hard to dismiss Newt Gingrich in his ascendancy versus Mitt Romney? Is Newt so bad compared to the conservative failings of Romney? I don't quite get that drive to destruct.

•As for those that like to say that certain Republicans will not win versus Obama in 2012, remember this: Obama has already had to run again.

In the mid-term elections, President Obama defended liberalism. He defended his cause célèbre, Marxism and liberalism, with every fiber of his being. He talked about the need to look out for the lesser achievers. He talked about high taxes on the wealthy. He advocated socialism.

You know what happened as a result of that effort? He lost miserably. He lost so badly the Congress was turned Democratic to Republican in greater numbers than ever encountered previously.

So what exactly has he accomplished since then to change that outcome in another election?

Just for edification, $1.83 was the average cost of a gallon of gas the day before President Obama was inaugurated.

Just so you know.

•The National Center for Public Policy Research is urging Apple Corporation shareholders to vote for a shareholder proposal, asking Apple to determine if board member Al Gore violated the company's Business Conduct Policy. At issue is whether Gore played a role in Apple's 2009 decision to end its membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as part of an effort to pressure the trade group to stop opposing greenhouse gas regulations.

Several companies, including Apple, ended their relationship with the Chamber over the trade group's aggressive opposition to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill and EPA regulation of carbon emissions.

At issue are Gore's significant personal investments in renewable energy and related technologies that would have benefited from these greenhouse gas regulations.
Conflict? You be the judge.

•How about this?

A ridiculous amount of money to capture a trivial amount of CO2 with no guarantee that the CO2 will stay where stored. That should be a winner, shouldn't it?

Climatewire.com reports that the Department of Energy announced recently that a Texas-based utility will buy power from one of the largest planned carbon capture plants in the United States, giving the project an important boost.

Under the finalized agreement, San Antonio-based utility CPS Energy said it would purchase approximately 200 megawatts of power from the $2.4 billion Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP), which, if built, would involve capture of 90 percent of its carbon dioxide from an advanced coal-fired power plant.

It is the first planned purchase of power by a utility from a commercial coal-fired power plant equipped with carbon capture, the department said…About a quarter of the plant's cost — or $450 million — came from the Department of Energy, with about half of that from the stimulus package…yes, TARP.

If constructed, TCEP would sit about 15 miles west of Odessa, Texas, and lead to capture of approximately 3 million tons of carbon dioxide per year for use in enhanced oil recovery in the Texas Permian Basin. It would be an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant that turns coal into synthetic gas before combustion.
Imagine having to capture farts and storing them somewhere. This is what that is…essentially.

I've finally arrived at the point that it is embarrassing defending humans on this.

•Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt caused quite a stir when they showed up at the White House last week.

What was the famous couple doing there?

Jolie recently talked about her trip to the Oval Office, explaining what she discussed with President Obama. Accompanied by Zana Marjanovic, the lead actress of “In the Land of Blood and Honey,” Jolie said they talked to Obama about ongoing issues in Sarajevo, where the film is set.

“We spoke with him briefly," she said. "And then we spoke a lot to the people that work, certainly underneath him, kind of in the trenches and tried to figure out how we could do some stuff to continue the healing in Bosnia and make sure it's heading in the right direction.”

Meanwhile, Pitt “went mainly to speak with Biden about building in New Orleans and other parts of America," she said.

Brad Pitt and Joe Biden talking together? That must have been a scintillating re-par-te.
I don't know about you, but I'm certainly comforted that our president is availing himself of the top minds in society…sheez!

(Get your weekly Parallax Look right here. Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow along at Twitter.com/bkparallax)


CONSERVATIVES OUTNUMBER MODERATES AND LIBERALS

Posted 1/22/12

•I've got a JOB tonight 'cause there's a lot going on. I'm starting with 2600 words. Paring it down to around 800 is going to be a chore on the level of making Ron Paul look presidential.

•A peer reviewed study found that global temperatures have shown a strong correlation between solar activity (also known as magnetic solar flux) and global temperatures.
The relationship isn't perfect, but it represents a significant improvement over the unsupported human-CO2 and global warming/climate change relationship claimed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) anti-CO2 Climategate scientists (also termed alarmists).

This study was started in1999. The following comments come from the peer review study. If you don't know, peer review is a technical review of a paper or study by scientists on all (or most and at least several) sides of a given issue.

"The authors examined measurements of near-earth interplanetary magnetic field to determine the total magnetic flux leaving the sun since 1868...authors were able to show that the total magnetic flux leaving the sun has risen by a factor of 1.41 over the period 1964-1996...results of this study lead us to wonder just how much of the reported 0.6°C global temperature rise of the last century might be a result of the more than two-fold increase in the total magnetic solar flux over that period. We may now, at long last, be moving closer than ever in our effort to understand the importance of the sun in driving 20th century climate change."

So it really is all about the sun.

•There's no current news story about this next one, but I just thought it was interesting.
The Centers for Disease Control, also known as the CDC, reports that gay and bisexual men — referred to in CDC studies as men who have sex with men (MSM), among all races continue to be the risk group most severely affected by HIV. The CDC's most recent data show that between 2006 and 2009, the number of new HIV infections that occur each year increased among young MSM — driven by an alarming 48 percent increase among young, black MSM between the ages of 13 and 29.

The facts from the study:

The MSM group account for nearly half of the approximately 1.2 million people living with HIV in the United States (49%, or an estimated 580,000 total persons).
The MSM group account for more than half of all new HIV infections in the United States each year (61%, or an estimated 29,300 infections).

According to the latest estimates, white MSM represent the largest number of new HIV infections (11,400) in the United States, followed closely by black MSM (10,800) and Hispanic MSM (6,000).

These statistics were taken from CDC studies taken from the beginning of the epidemic through 2009.

I'm not particularly surprised by these numbers, but I am sure that the media isn't reporting these numbers. Conventional media opinion seems to be spouting talking points like, “White heterosexuals are the most prevalent group of new HIV infections.”

That doesn't appear to be true at all.

For the record, I am pleased that there are drug therapies helping to significantly prolong the lives of those affected, but let's not be afraid to report the truth.
I'm still intrigued about how HIV first made the jump from simians into humans, called Zoonosis.

•While I'm not a poll wonk, because the media usually misrepresents their importance, I did like this.

Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This marks the third straight year that conservatives have outnumbered moderates, after more than a decade in which moderates mainly tied or outnumbered conservatives.

The 2011 results are based on 20 Gallup and USA Today/Gallup surveys conducted between January and December, encompassing interviews with 20,392 U.S. adults, including 5,912 Republicans, 6,087 Democrats, and 8,064 independents. The trends represent annual averages of multiday Gallup surveys conducted each year.

The most important point to take away from this study is the following: the majority of Republicans say they are either very conservative or conservative, but the total proportion of conservatives grew 10 percentage points between 2002 and 2010, from 62% to 72%. At the same time, the percentage of moderates fell from 31% to 23%. Relatively few Republicans say they are liberal -- just 4% in 2011. Republicans' ideology largely held at the 2010 levels in 2011.

•For the record, stop worrying about how the Chiefs administration may or may not be treating their employees. The Chiefs deserve no more scrutiny in the manner that they treat their workers than any other business does. And comparing the GM change from Carl Peterson to Scott Pioli to other GM changes around the NFL is not accurate, because those changes did not involve owner changes as well. Clark Hunt seems to be distinctly different from his father, Lamar Hunt. That may end up being a good thing or a bad thing, the jury is still out, but no doubt about it, they are different.

(Email bkubicki@kc.rr.com and follow along at Twitter.com/bkparallax)


'GREEN' BUILDINGS ARE NOT USING LESS ENERGY

Posted 1/14/12

•Well, now that the first primary is history, we should be able to focus on a few main points in the Republican race for President.

Rick Santorum seems to be congealing as the main focus of the all-important conservative wing of the Republican Party.

Mitt Romney has enough money to pretty much marginalize any front-runner that threatens his campaign.

Rick Perry is hinging his flailing campaign on a win in South Carolina, which might lead to a win in Florida.

Newt Gingrich must win a state primary or caucus. His recent $5 million donation from a Vegas hotelier will give him some longevity.

And the two most important points that all conservatives, independents, and Republicans MUST NOT forget:

1. Whomever is the Republican nominee, he must get our vote in November; and

2. Sitting out the election or voting for another party's nominee is a vote for Obama.
Defeating Obama is what this election is about.

•Remember this past week when Gov. Rick Perry minced no words in calling Barack Obama a Socialist. A website run by an Austin, Texas newspaper called politifact.org claimed to conduct an objective analysis of this claim. Their conclusion was that Perry's claim is untrue, that Obama is not a socialist. His efforts to extend government influence over the automobile companies, the private health care system, regulation of the use of carbon, etc. all are apparently not sufficient evidence of socialist intent.

What they DID claim was that the progressive taxation system we are subjected to was voted and approved by Republicans and Democrats, therefore, said system which Obama fully supports and is in fact trying to make even more unbalanced, is not evidence of socialism.

Yes, that is indeed what they did. I haven't seen reasoning that lucid since I was 8 and complained to my parents that I could hit my brother because, “He hit me first.”

•Here is more evidence of the lunacy of electric cars.

The Nissan Leaf was recently driven by a reporter, Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, from Knoxville to the Nashville area. His plan was to follow Interstate 40 West, where a series of Cracker Barrel restaurants – equipped with so-called “fast” vehicle chargers (if you want to call 30 minutes or more “fast”) along the route – would provide an electricity re-charge resource as the Leaf's charge diminished.

The only problem was, the car's charge dropped more rapidly than promised. In what has to be a public relations disaster for Nissan, Smith's Leaf was unable to travel no farther than 55 miles on any leg of the trip – and for the most part, much less. The company, and its government backers, proclaimed the Leaf was “built to go 100 miles on a charge,” with a footnoted disclaimer that it travels shorter distances if the air conditioning or the heater is used. Turns out even that was an exaggeration.

It was about 35 degrees when Smith departed Knoxville on Monday. A trip that should take 3 hours ended up taking six hours because of all the stops to recharge. The approximate intervals where they paused for recharging were as follows:

·Knoxville to Harriman: 45 miles
·Harriman to Crossville: 31 miles
·Crossville to Cookeville: 31 miles
·Cookeville to Lebanon: 50 miles
·Lebanon to destination in Antioch, just south of Nashville: 22 miles

Hence Smith required four recharges in order to travel approximately 180 miles.

I can't believe that here we are in the 21st century and they're still trying to make us buy electric cars!

•Now this one shows some promise!!!

The U.S. Congress is calling a halt to certain military spending on so-called “green” building in a newly passed defense authorization bill (H.R. 1540) The bill prohibits use of Department of Defense funds to achieve LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Gold or Platinum ratings, with waivers possible if a cost-benefit analysis for the project can demonstrate payback.

The bill “represents a rollback of the federal government at the forefront of pushing green building and LEED,” according to green building attorney Shari Shapiro, Esq. “Over the last five years, the federal government has been one of the largest customers for LEED,” she says. Shapiro sees indications in other legislation that Congress is trying to “push back at the use of LEED particularly but also green building in general.”

Without dedicating this entire page of The Landmark to this issue, LEED and “green” building design has been under fire because early statistics have shown that buildings constructed to these “green” standards are not using less energy – they're in fact using MORE energy than conventional buildings, and the point in building “green” buildings is supposed to be that they use less energy.

(Statistics show you’ll always learn something using a Parallax Look. Email Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)


MAKE 2012 THE YEAR WE TAKE BACK THE FREE MARKETS

Posted 1/7/12

•Did you catch this nonsense on your way out the door on New Year's Eve this year?
“Just in time for New Year's Eve…the Hump Smarter Hotline - 1-800-***-****.”
Yes, you read that accurately.

The Center for Biological Diversity, which is the group of nincompoops who first sued to stop development in the name of the Spotted Owl, launched the Hump Smarter Hotline, intended to be an irreverent toll-free phone service urging callers to think twice before taking an unprotected roll in the sheets.

The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), based in Tucson, Arizona, is a nonprofit membership organization with approximately 220,000 members and online activists, known for its work protecting endangered species through legal action and scientific petitions. Founded in 1989, the group has the stated objective to protect endangered species and critical habitat.

Their goal with the New Year's Eve movement was to bring attention to what the group perceives as a human overpopulation problem, and a somehow connected reduction in animal habitats.

There are two major problems with this movement. First, are you serious that we should forestall creating more humans, or at least in constructing more places where we can live comfortably, so that animals have more land to live on? Seriously? Who is higher on the food chain here?

Second, did they ever consider that in telling people who are dumb enough to listen to them in the first place, environuts, to not procreate that they will in effect breed their movement out of existence?

•Another fire hazard from electric cars came to light.

Fisker Automotive is recalling all 239 of its 2012 Karma luxury plug-in hybrid cars because of a fire hazard, according to a report filed with the NHTSA.
In a report filed recently on the agency's Web site, Fisker said some hose clamps were not properly positioned, which could allow a coolant leak. “If coolant enters the battery compartment an electrical short could possibly occur, causing a thermal event within the battery, including a possible fire in the worse case,” the company told the safety agency.
The National Journal reported last week that Newt Gingrich has killed a chapter on climate change in a post-election book of essays about the environment.

Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist at Texas Tech and author of the chapter, said that she had been asked to write a chapter on climate change for the former House speaker's book. She said she was approached by former Palm Beach Zoo CEO Terry Maple, Gingrich's coeditor, at an annual meeting of Republicans for Environmental Protection.

Asked to confirm her chapter was dropped, she replied, “I had not heard that.”

•The climate-change issue arose last week when a woman expressed concern about the chapter to Gingrich. She said she heard about it on Rush Limbaugh's radio program. As she began to tell Gingrich who the author of the piece would be, Gingrich interrupted. “That's not going to be in the book,” he told her. “We didn't know that they were doing that, and we told them to kill it.”

Hayhoe, an avowed KoolAid drinker of anthropogenic global warming nonsense, initially claimed ignorance to the claims.

She has claimed previously that “…among climate scientists…there is no debate regarding the reality of climate change and the fact that humans are the primary cause…”

Hayhoe also said in that interview, “It is primarily laypeople, such as talk-show hosts, or those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo, who are perpetuating the idea that there is no scientific consensus.”

Rush Limbaugh picked up on those quotes, including Hayhoe's poke at talk-show hosts. He called her “one of Newt's experts” and said she believes in man-made global warming. That no doubt created heartburn for Team Newt and certainly played a part in his fall in the polls leading up to the Iowa Caucus. .

This following one really has me torqued.

The light bulb efficiency standards began phasing in on January 1 despite intense opposition from conservatives, who have blasted the rules as a textbook unnecessary federal regulation.

While Republicans did get funding blocked for enforcement of the standards in a year-end spending bill, energy efficiency groups claim the provision will have little practical impact. The Energy Department rules will go into effect at the start of 2012.

The spending bill cut funding for enforcement, but the law is still in effect.

So you can still buy 100 watt incandescent light bulbs, but they've got nobody to come and arrest you.

Keep stockpiling the incandescent bulbs folks.

•And welcome to 2012 – the year we take back capitalism and the free markets.

(We’re taking back the free markets each and every week with a Parallax Look. Reach Brian at bkubicki@kc.rr.com)


For earlier columns, click here

 

For earlier columns click here