A Santa Story…

Well sort of….  It’s really about energy & the environment.

Admittedly, I’m  not very pro-green.  But then, I don’t lie about what I am and what I think.  I don’t like pollution.  I do not litter.  And I drive a gas guzzler.  So does my wife, the biggest SUV I could put her into.  Is there any “clean energy” I support?  Maybe, how much does it cost? According to figures from the Energy Information Administration, oil and gas subsidies compute to about 25 cents per megawatt hour, while wind and solar is about $24.(1) You want me to drive an electric car?  OK,  I will consider it, after you build the power plants to charge 100 million other electric vehicles.  Oh, and you have to do that without any subsidies (meaning taxes).  So, what kind of power plants will you build?  It seems to me, that every time they attempt to build a solar or wind farm, it’s the environmentalists that stop it.

Can environmentalism be bad for the environment?

In Massachusetts, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound has led the fight against providing alternative energy with a wind farm off of Cape Cod. Greenpeace declares that “nuclear power is unsafe, uneconomical and unnecessary.” In Canada, the Sierra Club fights against the development of hydroelectric power, fearing “toxic mercury increases in fish.” In these cases, groups are putting local environmental concerns first and the planet second. Wind farms, nuclear power plants and hydroelectric dams are ways of providing clean energy, which would reduce carbon emissions and the threat of global warming.(2)

And from the left coast. Green vs. Green in California By Greg Pollowitz

Enviros are getting angry that other enviros are suing to to block green projects because they harm the environment:

Several solar thermal power plant projects to be constructed on public lands are on hold pending lawsuits by environmental groups, including Sierra Club, and Native American tribes. The Sierra Club petitioned the California Supreme Court to overturn the license for the Calico Solar Energy Project because it would harm desert tortoise and other wildlife. California Unions for Reliable Energy, a labor group, filed a similar petition. Calico is a 663.5 megawatt (MW) solar power project. Solar Millenium filed an application with the California Energy Commission to build a 250 MW solar trough plant on 3,920 acres of government-owned land in the desert, called the Ridgecrest Project.

Local officials had several complaints about the project, including the 815 million gallons of water a year the project would need to cool the power plant, so project organizers switched to a more efficient cooling technology. Local officials were also concerned the Mohave ground squirrel, a protected species, might be harmed. As a result, Solar Millennium canceled the project in January after 16 months after trying to get it approved. “A review of the record strongly suggests California agency’s staff is unlikely to be open to a recommendation of approval,” Josef Eichhammer, chief executive of Solar Millenium’s American subsidiary, wrote in a Jan. 21 letter to state officials. “In light of these circumstances, it would not be economically viable to continue to pursue either the study or the project.” “It’s green-on-green violence,” said Ted Sullivan, an analyst at Lux Research in New York. “Do you want reduced carbon emissions or do you want to save an endangered species?”(3)

A study was done on permit challenges to energy projects.

“We were starting to see more and more coal and gas, but we were also starting to see renewable projects too,” Kovacs said of projects caught up in red tape. “The fact that we ended up having more renewable projects than coal was probably the biggest surprise in the entire study.”   One specific project Kovacs mentioned is Sunrise Power, a renewable power plant in California that waited on a permit from 1980 to February 2011. (4)

So you can’t build a solar farm in the desert.  Could we build an ice cube factory in the arctic?  No, don’t answer.  I’m sure it would harm something.  Instead, lets mandate choices like banning incandescent light bulbs and force us to switch to fluorescent.  Never mind the mercury poisoning we risk if one breaks.  At least they are all made in China, so our workers are not risked making them(helps them address their overpopulation), and we don’t need the power plants to supply all the machinery!

Remember the Stimulus?  All those “shovel ready” jobs?  A shovel is needed!

Green jobs company endorsed by Obama and Biden squandered $535 million in stimulus money

Solyndra was  the first recipient of an Energy Department loan guarantee under the stimulus in March 2009, which was intended to “finance construction of the first phase of the company’s new manufacturing facility” for photovoltaic solar panels. The Energy Department estimated in a March 20, 2009 press release that the loan guarantee would create 3,000 construction jobs and a further 1,000 jobs after the plant opened.
“These jobs are the jobs that are going to define the 21st century that will allow America to compete and to lead like we did in the 20th century,” Biden said.
According to Biden’s speech, the $535 million loan guarantee was a smaller part of the $30 billion of stimulus money the administration planned to spend as part of its Green Jobs Initiative. Instead, Solyndra announced on Nov. 3 it planned to postpone expanding the plant, which put the taxpayers on the hook to the tune of $390.5 million taxpayers**, or 73 percent of the total loan guarantee, according to the Wall Street Journal. It also announced that it no longer planned to hire the 1,000 workers that Obama and Biden had touted in their speeches and that it planned to close one of its older factories and planned to lay-off 135 temporary or contract workers and 40 full-time employees. A closer look at the company shows it has never turned a profit since it was founded in 2005, according to its Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings. A June 2010 Wall Street Journal report indicating that Solyndra’s majority owner, Oklahoma billionaire George Kaiser, was a major fundraiser for the 2008 Obama-Biden campaign has stimulus opponents such as Citizens Against Government Waste crying foul.(5)

And why are we trying so hard to “go green”?  Nancy Pelosi said it was to save the planet.  I know the US is far from perfect, but I think we have a better track record than China.  China is reported to be building a new coal power plant every week!  They recently completed the largest  coal acquisition in Australian history (Felix Resources).  Additionally, they are buying oil, uranium, natural gas, every available energy resource.  They are also half the world’s market for renewable energy, building as many wind farms as the rest of the  world.  They plan to build 60  nuclear reactors by the end of this decade, while the US has not approved a single one of the 21 pending.(9)

Al Gore admitted he only supported ethanol  to win support from the farmers in his home state.  The ethanol in our gasoline costs us over $6 billion a year and emits FOUR MILLION TONS more CO2!(7) Maybe corn is the wrong product to make it from? There must be a higher energy plant we can use?
David Pimentel, Cornell University professor emeritus, states that corn requires 29% more energy than the fuel produces, switchgrass requires 45% more energy than the fuel produces, and wood biomass requires 57% more energy than the fuel produces.  In other words, Professor Pimentel finds that the biofuel industry wastes more energy than it produces. A gallon of ethanol contains only 61% of the energy of a gallon of gasoline.  No wonder it gets such poor mileage. (7)

2011 Chevy Volt sells for $40,280

Is there any “go green” project that’s worthwhile?  I will admit, the Prius is a sweet ride!  It will get you to 100+MPH with no problem, but that is not a pure electric that fits the greens dream.  Obama wants to give people $7,50o tax credit for buying a Nissan Leaf or  Chevy Volt.  I think you would have to pay them something to drive a vehicle with a 100 mile range and eight hours charge time.  Add to that, owners this winter found out cold weather cut their range/power roughly in half, not counting electric heater use!

Mercedes-Benz C350 sells for $39,990..(8)

But at least a “President” agrees with me, to bad it’s not a US president. Czech President Vaclav Klaus has  warned that environmentalism and measures to curb climate change are a threat to human freedom. “This ideology,” Klaus said, “wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central, now global, planning of the whole world.” The Czech President is strongly opposed to environmentalism, which he calls a “religion based on political ambitions rather than science,” and accuses environmentalists of using “sophisticated methods of media manipulation” to spread “fear and panic”.(6)

I like that, “a religion based on political ambitions rather than science,”. Could he be correct? Secretary Napolitano created a “Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force” that is charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.(10)
And after the disaster that struck Japan, there has already been a outcry to halt all nuclear plant construction.  I think there are two scheduled to go out of service in 2014 in Pennsylvania.  At least then we won’t have to worry about those two being hit by a tsunami (What?  Pennsylvania isn’t close to an ocean?  Well, an earthquake or alien invasion or some other natural disaster then!).
We need to shift to “safe” power, like wind!
According to the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, there were 35 fatalities associated with wind turbines in the United States from 1970 through 2010. Nuclear energy, by contrast, did not kill a single American in that time.(11)

Ethanol emits more CO2 than regular gasoline, and yet we are pushing to increase it from 10% to 15%.  China is buying our coal and oil, which they will then burn less cleanly than Americans.  I still tell my kids about Santa, which might be a lie, but it makes them feel good.  Could that be what environmentalism is all about?  They want to believe so badly, that we can do away with all the nasty things in modern life, and elves  or some other magic will make it all work the way it should in their dreams.
I have no objection to their dreams.  I do object to them lying.  If there is a  green energy that works, cost effective and lower emissions, great, there would be no argument.  But there’s not.  All the green energy projects seem destined to turn out like many other good intentions.  Like when San Francisco “forced” it’s citizens to switch to “low-flow” toilets.  They hadn’t installed the “low-flow” sewer system to go with the toilets.  They just ordered $13 million of Clorox to flush the system.  So if your in SF, walking thru AT&T Park… that smell… well that’s green you smell!(12)
These are the sources cited in the article:
More sources, not used in article:



  1. Good stuff. I have to say I’m very guilty of just not giving a crap about this particular issue (going green, I mean). I probably should, but I figure I won’t be here long enough for it to make a difference and I really don’t worry about my great, great, grandchildren (chances are the little SOB’s will be Skankie and Jet or Giant fans) … but the nonsensical infighting between green groups you point to just makes it all the more nonsensical (for me). All I see are lawyers billing out at $750.00 an hour at our expense. Foolish beyond words and one area I’d have little protest against doing away with some of the regulations. Oil in the gulf is another story; I’m fine with the exploration, but there should be built in guarantees that there will be money for those affected by screwups like Deepwater Horizon.

  2. No argument from me as I have known all along this “green garbage” was nothing but political garbage!

    Al Gore made millions with his “Convenient Lie” movie!

  3. gmanfortruth says:

    Good Artlicle LOI! 🙂 I could go on a good rant about the eco-fascist SOB’s, but it may take to long to read, so instead I’m going outside later a burn limbs and cut trees all day. I’m to spew CO2 all and enjoy every moment of it, 😆

    CYNDI P sent this to me just yesterday, it sure does fit:

    The Green Thing

    In the line at the store, the cashier told the older woman that plastic bags weren’t good for the environment. The woman apologized to her and explained, “We didn’t have the green thing back in my day.”

    That’s right, they didn’t have the green thing in her day. Back then, they returned their milk bottles, Coke bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, using the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled.

    But they didn’t have the green thing back her day.

    In her day, they walked up stairs, because they didn’t have an escalator in every store and office building. They walked to the grocery store and didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time they had to go two blocks.

    But she’s right. They didn’t have the green thing in her day.

    Back then, they washed the baby’s diapers because they didn’t have the throw-away kind. They dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts – wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

    But that old lady is right, they didn’t have the green thing back in her day.

    Back then, they had one TV, or radio, in the house – not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a pizza dish, not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen, they blended and stirred by hand because they didn’t have electric machines to do
    everything for you. When they packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, they used wadded up newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.

    Back then, they didn’t fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. They used a push mower that ran on human power. They exercised by working so they didn’t need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

    But she’s right, they didn’t have the green thing back then.

    They drank from a fountain when they were thirsty, instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time they had a drink of water. They refilled pens with ink, instead of buying a new pen, and they replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

    But they didn’t have the green thing back then.

    Back then, people took the streetcar and kids rode their bikes to school or rode the school bus, instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. They had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And they didn’t need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

    But they didn’t have the green thing back then!

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Good read G-Man – funny – was actually thinking of which trees to use to hang laundry this Spring. Bet that would piss my neighbors off!

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I did it all the time, saves money in the summer, the clothes smell better and screw my neighbors, this is my piece of dirt and my trees!

        • Naten53 says:

          I occasionally hear about sub divisions that have Home Owners Associations that try and ban outdoor drying. They are usually in the left leaning / protect the environment areas.

      • TO hell with the neighbors….every neighborhood has a nosy busy bidy peering into backyards and complaining. I have been involved in the Homeownwers Association for some time and laugh at the things they can come up with…hang your clothes…fresh air is good….mow your lawn with a gas mower and douse your lawn with whatever pesticide you want. (You can still get Diazinon and DDT, you know). It is readily available from your……ready for this……. government county agent. You just have to fill out a form saying that you will properly dispose of the container….so…..burn it in a burn barrel when no one is looking.

    • Back then stores packed groceries in the boxes they came instead of paper and plastic bags. Now they just throw the boxes out the back door.

    • Loved it G!

      It’s amazing that environmentalist would like to do away with paper or plastic. And to force that, they want ever increasing taxes to raise the cost of goods to force us to change our behavior. Shudder, I hope they are required to run the diaper cleaning business as their reward.

  4. Ray Hawkins says:

    @LOI – still reading but wanted to stop for a quick fact check…..

    I don’t think the move is to fluorescent – I thought it was to CFL lights?

    Also – there are other products already in existence in our homes that contain mercury no? Fluorescent lights? Mercury thermometers?

    Don’t know about you – but I’ve been in my house for 11 years now – never broken a light bulb. Ever. The real risk is around PROLONGED exposure.

    2 cents in.

    • Never broken a light bulb 🙂 Wait until that boy gets bigger and 10 of his friends come over and the dogs are running around wanting to play-they will break light bulbs and the lamps you put them in. 🙂

      • Ha! you’ve been there too? Glad to know it’s not just my kids. 🙂

        • Yes I have-decided along time ago-if I liked it-they were gonna find away to break it 🙂 Decided I liked them better, just not always right at that exact moment in time.

    • Never broken a light bulb?..Give your little guys a few years to grow..the gang hangs out at my house alot… doesn’t matter if it’s a nerf ball or a hard ball or a broomstick or a shoe,,things start flying and light bulbs get broken…it’s a fact of life with kids.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Sure Anita – ruin all my fun! I actually hate having lights on – not that I’m a vampire or anything – but love natural light so much better (which my house isn’t real great for).

        • Lots of fun coming your way..just wait! Kids turn you bi polar! 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            That broken lightbulb theory went CA PUT real fast, 😆

            • Score one for the good guys 🙂

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Ray’s house lights respond: “We intend to encase ourselves in an impenetrable shield of wire and steel to prevent any small persons or four-legged furry creatures from breaking us. This will cause Mr. Hawkins to have to buy more of us since we will throw off less light per light. #winning!”

              • Ray’s house lights,

                Kids will find a way around all your defenses. You lose!

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Had my first experience last night of a toddler that didn’t have a proper afternoon nap then deciding that the nice bowl of homemade beef barley soup I made for him was not to his liking – he had a momentary “inspired by Jackson Pollock” moment as he flung the soup on his parents and his dogs and then ran his soup covered hands through the wonderful head of blond hair he has. While the dogs enjoyed cleansing each other of said soup, mother and father were less enthralled with the incident and escalated bedtime to something like “RIGHT NOW”. 🙂

            • I found my dogs very useful for clean up detail. 🙂

            • Inspired by Jackson Polluck.. I like that..

              No kids here.. yet, anyway.. but I guess that’s something to look forward to. Very funny, Ray.

              • It’s the things memories are made of-throwing food is just a little aggrevating when compared to being pooped and peed on. And I will never forget being woken up in the middle of the night because my son had just thrown up in my face. Hard to believe we all/most anyway still very highly recommend having them. 🙂 I remember my husband asking me throughout our children’s growing up years “Remind me again-why we had children” 😆

    • Heh heh….good morning, SIr Hawkins…….heh heh….Never broken one, you say. Perhaps you have never broken one and YOU may never break one…..but that little feller you have running around,,,,,,will have his days. Not wishing it on you, mind you, BUT..it is a “right of passage, ” for yer young gun…..and remember to call the EPA as the CFL guidelines suggest when one is broken. This is experience speaking to you having raised one son…with his minions parading around. What the gals forgot to mention….is the pillow fights at the slumber party for the daughter, which you do not have as yet. Even the ceiling lights get broken along with table and bedside lamps…. Just keep a case of bulbs in your atorage area……remember to just smile, replace the bulbs, (and these postings)…..but do NOT call the EPA…..that would be a crock.

      Good day to you and yours, sir.

      • Daughter was 13 at the time. Bought a new mattress and box spring for her bed (full size). Get the bed all made up nice..daughter and friend do the Nestea plunge onto the new mattress..entire bed frame breaks! I can’t have shit!

    • Ray,

      You are correct, it’s Compact Fluorescent Lights that are being mandated, I think to save energy was the reason given. A shame, LED’s are not far off from taking over the lighting industry. There are several problems with CFL’s. First, how dare Pelosi force us to change light bulbs. Second, nearly all of them are being made in China (was this part of our loan agreements with them?)
      Third, green intentions and the negative consequences. The EPA warns about the hazard of breaking a CFL.
      Fifth, lets take a cheap shot at Buck. I saw something on the legal requirements on cleaning up after a CFL is broken, you have to decontaminate the room. Lets say you broke a CFL and cleaned it up yourself, had a neighbor visit and mentioned what a pain that was, neighbor then sues you for the chronic illness they have suffered since that visit.

      Mercury thermometers? Well yes, but how often do you change those? Do it yourself or hire someone? And it’s a liquid, a little easier to see and deal with than gas vapors expelled at high temp.


    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


      CFL stands for Compact Fluorescent Light. They contain a crapton of mercury, so much so that many states have LENGTHY regulations for their disposal, and for how to clean up if you do actually break one. Check the regulations in Michigan for example.

      They also give off a very poor quality of light, and generally don’t actually last much longer than an incandescent bulb, despite what is advertized as a much longer life-span.

      The way to really go is LED lighting. They have improved the quality and brightness a LOT recently, and the things last forever while using VERY little energy. However, they are still quite expensive, and require complete replacement of your existing light fixtures, making them pretty impractical still for most people. Price is starting to come down though.

      For now, if you are not massively stocking up on incandescent bulbs while you can stockpile them (and still get them), you should be!

    • @ Ray
      The move is to Fluorescent. CFL stands for Compact Fluorescent Light. CFL’s contain mercury just like the Rod fluorescents do.

    • Ray, you said; “I don’t think the move is to fluorescent – I thought it was to CFL lights?”

      Did you know that CFL stands for Compact Fluorescent Lights? I got them in my home and they last a helluva lot longer than the old incandescent bulbs – cost a lot more though, but save on the electric bill a whole lot. Still haven’t broken one.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        You are VERY lucky that A) yours do actually last longer than your old incandescents (most CFLs actually don’t really), and you are also very lucky that B) you have yet to break one!

  5. Great article-I like your sense of humor-had me laughing and shaking my head at the insanity all at the same time. I find it unbelievable that issues of licenses/approvals can be drawn out for decades? Maybe the problem lies more with our legal system.

    • Buck the Wala says:


      • Ray Hawkins says:


      • Overruled. Please be seated.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Overruled (twice) Lack of standing 🙂

      • Mathius says:

        Sustained (twice)!

        • gmanfortruth says:

          We’re claiming seniority 🙂

        • Well, as the play attorney making the claim-I think the court needs to make up it’s mind. On second thought-this may help back up my claim. 🙂

          • Well I think he should have to clarify what his specific objection is. I don’t think you get to just stand up in court and shout “objection!” at the judge..

          • On TV the judge would ask for grounds for the objection.

            Oh, that would be me? Buck? Grounds?

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Ok fine, lets try this again:

              -Assumes facts not in evidence
              -Calls for speculation

              • Sustained!

              • Buck the Wala says:

                I may regret asking this, but who made you the judge?

              • More backup for my claim-BS on parade 🙂 But impressive attorney speak Buck 🙂

              • Now Buck-I don’t want to tell you how to be an attorney-but I don’t think it’s wise to attack those who are on your side. Maybe it’s a liberal thing. 🙂

              • One specific project Kovacs mentioned is Sunrise Power, a renewable power plant in California that waited on a permit from 1980 to February 2011

                Need any more evidence?


              • Buck the Wala says:

                BS on parade!? BS!? How dare you call this BS – these are tried and true rules of evidence I’ll have you know.

                Sorry Anita, my objection was already sustained. And now its being added too — failure to lay proper foundation for the admission of evidence.

                Judge Mathius: a ruling if you will.

              • OBJECTION

                This is SUFA court.. BS does not fly here!

              • Overruled.

                That’s what you get for questioning my authority, Buck.

                Anita, your objection to his objection is sustained.

              • Sustained!

              • Well now I’m just confused. Who are you sustaining, V?

              • Mark this date on the calender. In one breath Matt agreed with me and dissed Buck! There is a God!

              • Buck the Wala says:

                I guess I do regret asking the question then.

                I wasn’t questioning your authority, just curious as to how you became Judge of this honorable Court. No offense was meant.

              • Buck the Wala says:

                Besides, I’ll win on appeal. The evidence submitted was clearly inadmissible — counsel failed to lay proper foundation.

              • Oh, that’s fine then. I was appointed by Regan.

                Your (Buck’s) objection is now re-re-sustained.

                Anita, you’re now being held in contempt of court.

                And, if that’s all, I’m going to go take a nap now.

                Bull, see these people out.

              • YOU.. are no Judge Wapner. Bull rocks!

                I thought LOI was the judge anyway!

              • Buck the Wala says:

                Well then, who made LOI judge!?

              • OBJECTION:

                VH said,
                Great article-I like your sense of humor-had me laughing and shaking my head at the insanity all at the same time. I find it unbelievable that issues of licenses/approvals can be drawn out for decades? Maybe the problem lies more with our legal system.
                -Argumentative-Overruled, VH is interjecting opinion, but I see nothing argumentative in her post
                -Assumes facts not in evidence-Overruled, sources are cited
                -Calls for speculation-Overruled-we will have to discuss reasons why our energy programs are failing, some speculation is a natural part of the discussion
                -Inflammatory-Overruled- only a lawyer finds it inflammatory. Buck up!

                Who made me the judge? USW, as his stand-in author.LOL

              • Buck the Wala says:

                Argumentative — interjecting opinion rather than asking a question.

                Facts not in evidence — ok, but what about my objection for failure to lay proper foundation?

                Speculation — there is no room for calling for speculation from a witness; it must be factually based

                Inflammatory — the question (if you can call it that; see above, argumentative) is asked not to learn any facts but solely to prejudice the jury.

                LOI as judge – fair enough. I defer to your honor, but request my objections be entered into the record for appeal.

              • Buck, you’re in luck. LOI is, in fact, the trial judge, but I am the appeal judge.

                I will deny your appeal, recognizing the wisdom of LOI’s ruling.

                Anita, I thought you were wrong, but decided it must be me. But I agree, Bull rocks.

              • Buck the Wala says:


              • Crap-should of used a Question mark-but I still contend that using the word Maybe-makes it a question-not a statement of fact.

                And I call BS on Parade and totally illegal for the Appeals Court Judge to make promises to the opposing side.
                Matthius must go straight to SUFA jail.

              • LOI FOR SUPREME COURT!

                Matt: You’re right I was mixing the two..maybe I am getting senile!

              • Buck is already chief justice of the supreme court.. but I don’t think the SCOTUS would hear this case.

              • What do you know? You’re in jail!

                Correction..USW is the chief justice!

              • Buck the Wala says:

                I’d hafta recuse myself.

              • Buck the Wala says:

                The word ‘maybe’ does not convert a statement into a question. Now I throw the BS flag!

    • Tnks VH,

      Humor. PUT DOWN the COFFEE. Follow the #12 link.
      You just can’t make chit like that up!

  6. Good MOrning, LOI and a nice article. It is amazing, isn’t it? And we wonder where Mattel got the idea of jigsaw puzzles and endless mazes……..

  7. Dread Pirate Mathius says:

    Frak the desert tortoise.

  8. I still tell my kids about Santa, which might be a lie, but it makes them feel good. Wait! What? Santa’s not real?! Then explain the lump of coal* he game me one year.

    *disclaimer: I’m pretty sure the “coal” was just a large black rock.

  9. In 2007, more than a year before bailing out two of them, Congress inflicted $85 billion in new regulatory costs on the Big Three American automobile manufacturers by mandating a 40 percent fuel-efficiency increase by 2020. Those costs will be passed through to car buyers. Members of Congress told us that an increase in the CAFE standard was a benefit, despite the fact that it will increase the costs of automobiles and reduce their safety. The bailouts themselves will cost American taxpayers more than $85 billion.

    Legislation isn’t the only regulatory problem source. Regulation by unelected-bureaucratic fiat must be stopped. In December, 2010 the US Department of the Interior assumed the authority to declare public lands “Wild Lands,” a usurpation that will allow the agency to control development of domestic energy resources. At a time when the cost of energy is skyrocketing, allowing the government one more tool to impede energy exploration and production is overkill.

    Also in December, the federal Environmental Protection Agency declared plant-sustaining CO2 a greenhouse gas, intending to regulate electric generating plants and oil refineries. Cap-and-trade failed in the Congress, but the EPA would implement cap-and-trade by regulatory means.


  10. PeterB in Indianapolis says:
    • Thanks Peter!

      I think it’s a problem that there is no published report on every solar or wind farm on how much they produce is from their “primary” source, and how much comes from their supposed”back-up”, usually natural gas?

  11. Huzzah for wind power!

  12. Good Grief -this is unbelievable

    Another strong quake strikes off tsunami-hit Japan

    Associated Press – 2 mins ago

    TOKYO – Japan was rattled by a strong aftershock and tsunami warning Thursday night nearly a month after a devastating earthquake and tsunami flattened the northeastern coast.

    Announcers on Japan’s public broadcaster NHK told coastal residents to run to higher ground and away from the shore.

    The Japan meteorological agency issued a tsunami warning for a wave of up to 6 feet (two meters) after the magnitude-7.4 aftershock. The warning was issued for a coastal area already torn apart by last month’s tsunami, which is believed to have killed some 25,000 people and has sparked an ongoing crisis at a nuclear power plant.

    Officials at the tsunami-ravaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant said there’s no immediate sign of new problems caused by the aftershock. Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said it evacuated two workers there and seven at a sister plant to the south that was not badly damaged.

    Officials say Thursday’s aftershock hit 16 miles (25 kilometers) under the water and off the coast of Miyagi prefecture. The quake that preceded last month’s tsunami was a 9.0-magnitude.

    Buildings as far away as Tokyo shook for about a minute.

    In Ichinoseki, inland from Japan’s eastern coast, buildings shook violently, knocking items from shelves and toppling furniture, but there was no heavy damage to the buildings themselves. Immediately after the quake, all power was cut. The city went dark, but cars drove around normally and people assembled in the streets despite the late hour.

    Paul Caruso, a geophysicist at the U.S. Geological Survey in Golden, Colo., said Thursday’s quake struck at about the same location and depth as the March 11 quake. It’s the strongest of the more than 1,000 aftershocks that have been felt since, except for a 7.9 aftershock that day.

    The USGS said the aftershock struck off the eastern coast 40 miles (65 kilometers) from Sendai and 70 miles (115 kilometers) from Fukushima. It was about 205 miles (330 kilometers) from Tokyo.

    A Pacific Tsunami Warning Center evaluation of the quake said an oceanwide tsunami was not expected. However, it noted quakes of that strength can cause waves that are destructive locally.


  13. Carry over from previous thread, so not to lose the conversation:


    Double Grandmaster of Contradiction, that is your paradigm in a nutshell … or how did govt’s come about?

    I explained this before.

    Violence is profitable, but risky (people tend to fight back)

    If you can organize a system which people believe your violence on the People is a right, you win big.

    You get to steal and people agree with it.

    This is the concept of “legitimacy”

    This legitimacy is not only declared, but has to also have substance – people do not just wake up one day and agree to your theft.

    This substance – a musical chair game of sharing the stolen loot between a few people and the thief – called “government payouts”.

    For the chance to share in part of the stolen loot, people agree that the thief has a right to steal.

    All government existence and action can be completely addressed and explained within this understanding.

    If man was initially free (is in fact born free), then how oh how did all this slavery/savagery come about?

    Ah, I see your confusion.

    You equate “freedom” with “good men”.

    That is, you believe all free men are good men.

    Because you know this is impossible, you therefore believe there exists no such thing as freedom.

    It is your premise that is in error.

    The correction:

    A free man is merely free. Beyond that, how he acts is up to him.

    The “some men that will do evil” may well be too powerful to handle for other free men, si or no?

    Evil men are as capable of organizing themselves as Good men are.

    But that still is an insufficient excuse for Good men to do evil.

    What happens then?

    Who knows? A battle occurs, but the outcome is not determined until the end of the battle.

    However, civilization exists. (A fact)

    Therefore, far more often than not, in areas that are vitally important for mankind, good tends to win big.

    If evil wins more often than not, there cannot be civilization.
    Civilization is replaced by slaughter and savagery, and society collapses.

    Many civilizations in history have collapsed is such ways.

    The more powerful survive or men bond to protect one another?

    Yep and Yep

    You say it’s okay if it’s in the form of a mutual coop, but that a majority deciding on a government is evil.

    Read carefully:

    Choosing to do evil to solve evil guarantees a victory for evil.

    “Government” is the use of violence on the non-violent – it is a requirement of all government in history and in the whole future that MUST USE VIOLENCE ON NON-VIOLENT PEOPLE.

    It cannot exist without it

    So it matters not if a “majority” decide to use evil – it does not turn evil into good

    So, what to do with those free men (such as yourself)?

    Choose better.

    That is the most powerful thing about men, we can use reason to solve our problems, including problems of violent men.

    Personally, in certain places, I have had personal security.

    Their job was to defend me and my family and whomever happened to be with us at that time.

    They used self-defense without require attacking non-violent people.

    They did not demand a tribute from you walking across a street against a red light.

    They did not demand a tribute from you merely earning a living.

    They did not demand a tribute from you for crossing lines on a map.

    They did not demand that you fight their battle.

    Why do you see the existence of such a thing as impossible, when in fact it exists already?

  14. Mathius says:

    Quote of the day:

    “I have two grandchildren — Maggie is 11, Robert is 9,” Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church here. “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they’re my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.”
    -Newt Gingrich

    • JAC and BF will be mad at me but…this makes sense to me.

      • Mathius says:

        … care to elaborate?

        First of all, radical “Islamists” aren’t interested in imposing a secular society. They would want to impose an Islamic society. This is as nonsensical as saying “a fundamentalist Hindu society dominated by radical Christians.”

        Secondly, for Christ’s sake, they’re called Muslims. Islam is the religion, practitioners are called Muslims. “Islamists” strikes me as vaguely derogatory, like “Democrat party.” But even if it’s not derogatory, it’s obnoxious to deliberately (and don’t tell me he doesn’t know) use the wrong term. (Anita, if you give me any flack on this point, I swear I’m going to start referring to Christians and Christers).

        • First of all..You don’t even believe in Christ..so don’t take his name in vain!

          Second..I think you’re running the two ideas together..secular atheist country and dominated by radical Islamists.. I’m seeing two different things..both of which I believe..you don’t have to agree.

          Third.. FLACK..FLACK.. FLACK. You know EXACTLY what he’s getting at!

          • Mathius says:

            1. I do believe in him.. I believe he probably existed. I believe he was crucified. I believe he was a man, like any other. I also believe he was probably born in the fall. I do not believe he could walk on water (unless it was frozen). I don’t believe he could turn water into wine. I don’t believe there is anything inherently wrong with using his name as I see fit. These are, however, my beliefs and I apologize if I was offensive in my use.

            2. He said “they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists.” He is saying a secular society or, potentially, a secular society dominated by radical Muslims. The former is possible (ideal, even), the later is a non sequitur. You’re squirming around trying to find a way to read this so that it says what you want it to, not what it says. Imaging that Obama said “we’re going to have a green society, potentially one ruled by Al Gore” – would you still read this as “two different things..both of which I believe”?

            3. Re “Flack flack”.. OK.. you brought this on yourself.

            4. “You know EXACTLY what he’s getting at!” Yes. Yes I do. He’s hate-mongering. He’s throwing out the red meat. He’s playing off fear of “the other” – something he is especially good at. He is using dog whistles. He’s using a vaguely derogatory term so that he can bash a whole religion while leaving himself an escape hatch to pretend that he’s only talking about a specific subset. And, further, he’s combining the red meat (fear of Islam) with the red meat (fear of atheism) in a nonsensical way, but he isn’t worried, because he knows that people like you will find a way to give him a pass. Yes, I know what he’s getting at. Do you know what he’s getting at?

            • OMG! Drama que…King!

              You..the first person to say people.are.dumb. …are giving the American people a lot of credit. Do you really think that people(who are watching DWTS) are going to scrutinize every word as you have? How do you know what his motive is? I’m just looking at a bunch of words strung together.which I happen to believe is/are possible. You are looking for a problem..does that make sense?

              • Buck the Wala says:

                You’re right: People.Are.Dumb

                And thats why they won’t scrutinize what he actually said (as Mathius pointed out) as being nonsensical, fear-mongering bull crap.

              • Mathius says:

                I’m reading what he said. You are reading what you want to see.

                He said “they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists” – I read that as “they will be in a secular atheist country; potentially a secular atheist country dominated by radical “Islamists” “.

                You are seeing this and, somehow, reading “they will be in a secular atheist country or, potentially, a country dominated by radical Muslims instead.” This is not what he said.

                Take my example. If Obama said: “we’re going to have a green society, potentially one ruled by Al Gore,” would you read that as “we will be in a green society or, potentially, a society dominated by Al Gore”? Of course not.

                Blinders off, please.

            • Funny, 🙂 I understand exactly what he means-First I don’t believe it is meant to be insulting-he uses radical to pinpoint what type of Islam follower he is talking about-and he uses Islamist because he is not talking about all Muslams. Both qualifying words.

              As far as the other-lets look at Europe-a secular, atheist(mostly, sorta, I don’t know for sure) society. They are passing hate crime and hate speech and you can’t hurt anyones feelings when it comes to their religious beliefs laws which are being used to try and silence anyone who thinks this religion is overstepping. If you pass enough laws that cause people to be afraid to speak up-you may well see a secular, atheist society being controlled by radical islam and if you continue this long enough you may well eventually lose ones ability to stop them from doing anything they want9in the name of multiculturalism)

      • Mathius says:

        “they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists”

        For reference, Anita, “one” as used in this context is a pronoun. The antecedent is “country,” to which the adjectives “secular” and “atheist” are attached. This is grammatically inescapable.

        If you rewrite the sentence, replacing the pronoun with the full antecedent, you get: “potentially [a] secular atheist country dominated by radical Islamists.”

        You are dropping the adjectives in an attempt to isolate the noun “country” and then force the sentence into some semblance of a “or” structure. But “one” in this case is not referring to just “a country,” but rather a “secular atheist country.” My elementary school English teacher would slap your knuckles with a yard stick if she saw this.

        • I’m back…sorry to bail on the discussion…however…….

          1)Now you’re the grammar police! Antecedent? Please! I’m homeschooling and I have yet to come across that word. I haven’t heard it since I was in elementary school. You’re going to all that trouble to defend your position…do you really think Newt sat there and concocted up that sentence with the intention of passing off some subliminal message?
          I know politicians do that all the time but in this case I’m just not seeing it. Can’t some things just BE! As i said you are looking for a problem.

          2) How come I had to take all this grief but you gave V a pass?…

          3) Now I have to figure out how to deal with BF below!

          • Mathius says:

            1. He either said something completely boneheaded while trying to race/religion-bate and throw out red meat, or he thought it out and wrote it down in just such a manner as this. He is, evidence to the contrary, a smart guy and he has been doing this a long time. He knows how to leave himself just enough wiggle room that people like you will find a way to excuse the conflict while others will swallow it whole without giving noticing it.

            2. I was busy with work when I saw V’s response. If I had the time/energy, I would have roasted her over the coals as well.. or maybe I just like her more.. 🙂

            3. Good luck with that.. I’m sorry to have to put you through something like that.

        • SK Trynosky St says:

          You guys just don’t get it do you? You use the system to destroy the system, try it, it works like a charm. Then you pick up the pieces. Bolsheviks and Nazi’s though not technically religions (merely acted like them) perfected the con.

          Follow, for example the current Staten Island NY hysteria over the “hate crime” of the attempt to rip off the Muslim girl’s headscarf. It looks to us old fools that this was secondary to robbing her since one of the little miscreants was allegedly a Muslim himself.. but what the hell. We are so busy worrying about hate crimes against Muslims that they become a protected species and exempt from the same rules of conduct the rest of us have to abide by. When on the other hand they do something off the wall, it is excused. Can you imagine, a let’s all dress up like Hari Krishna’s day? How about reading from the “Book of Mormon” to encourage both sensitivity to minorities as well as diversity?

          Anita, you are right on.

          • Yeah we definitely tolerate religious hatred too much, especially Muslims. Like when Muslims burned the Koran in Florida or when they blew up abortion clinics in the name of religious atrocities.

            You don’t see it because you get to talk from a viewpoint of christian privilege. Since Christianity is the biggest religion in the United States it doesn’t scare Christians that there are groups of people like Atheists and Muslims because they are in MUCH less numbers therefore their voice can’t be heard. Muslims and people who sympathize are “scared and protective” because Christians and Fundamentalists who have a distorted view of Muslims (as proven time and time again by ignorant people who lump religious extremism into the Islam basket) persecute them for the sake of their fundamentalist counterparts. Not only that but they have the power to be able to do something about it.

        • Mathius . . . Since I do not believe that Islam is a viable religion – it is IMHO nothing but a murderous cult – that statement is an entirely accurate one.

          For a religion to be viable it must not advocate slavery, or demand that its followers go out and murder those who will not convert to it. Islam does both.

          • Mathius says:

            Slavery is A-OK
            Exodus 21:7
            “If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do.”

            Murdering non-believers
            Deuteronomy 17
            “If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshiped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.”

            • But Mathius, you’re taking the bible out of context. Christians NEVER take the bible out of context. I find your interpretations offensive and derogatory.


    • Buck the Wala says:

      I don’t know about you, but I would hate to be in a secular country dominated by religious radicals!

    • Anita,

      An attempt to prevent a circumstance that is merely a myth will create a circumstance of destruction that is not a myth.

      To save his grandchildren, his method will sow the seeds of their destruction.

      • I knew you were going to pop up! Since I have no clue how to argue with what you said..How about let’s get to the problem he’s trying to address..an America that will look totally different to his grandkids than what he, or you, or I have grown up with, and how are we going to deal with it. I’m pretty sure I know what you’re going to say but just for the heck of it..let me have it. 🙂

        • Anita,

          Do you believe “America” looks the same to you as it did to your grandparents????

          Change happens – nothing stays the same; the good old days were not that good compared to now; and attempts to stop change invokes the fable of the boy and his baby duck … the one where he squeezes to death to stop it from growing and changing.

    • USWeapon says:

      An idiotic statement from an idiotic man.

      How exactly does one formulate an atheist muslim society?

      • Mathius says:


      • Sorry Anita. Even though words like atheist and secular turn your christian oriented brain to terror…

        1.) Atheism and secularism isn’t a bad thing (dictionary def of the day, religious indoctrination) I don’t need a god to tell me to be a good person. Despite the fact that you may, I am not you.

        2.) That a non-religious religious society can possibly exist. Just saying that hurts the logic circuits in my brain.

        • 68W or is it Illiterate something or other? 😉 ,

          Sorry if my faith offends you but it works for me . I”m a good person with or without God but He sure makes the day go by easily. Try it, you might like it.

          After two days of this discussion I’m willing to concede that Gingrich could have worded his statement differently. I guess I’ll use Matt’s stance..we see different meanings to the sentence. Semantics aside..America sure looks different today than it did as we were growing up. Maybe you need a few more years under your belt to recognize the difference.

          • Anita

            You should worry if it does not look the same. That means it is not growing.

            African tribesmen never saw any difference at all in their “world” for 5,000 years. This is a good thing??

            • Grrrrrr!.. BF.. You’ve seen my posts enough to know what I’m talking about. Some day…some day..I’m going to meet you then maybe I can make myself CLEARER! (even though you’ll still whoop my ass in the debate.. I can still dream!)

              • Anita

                Yes it has changed.

                Some of those were good and some were not good.

                That is my opinion on the change.

                And I do not hold your view on Gingrich’s statement against you. I understood what he said and do not disagree with the possible outcome he describes. Or both possible outcomes depending on how one wants to interpret the words.

                Bottom line. It is possible for our culture to change in ways that would actually make it more vulnerable to take over by some other cultural norm.

                True, that is the nature of human changes over history.

                Equally true, we don’t have to like it nor necessarily accept it. We should just avoid violence or force as a means of protecting that which we cherish.

                Because after all, freedom and liberty and justice are part of that culture we want saved. The use of force against those who do not threaten force against us will simply hasten the destruction of those key values.

                This is also the vulnerability of a free society. It allows those who would wish to destroy it the freedom of speech and action to undermine the very thing that allows them to exist. Short of their own use of force of course.

                Our strength and potential survival as a culture and society lies in the strength of our hearts and minds. When one lives with clarity of understanding the gibberish of false prophets is much easier to understand for what it is.

                Best to you and yours.

                🙂 🙂

              • Oh how I wish I could speak it like you JAC.. 🙂

                Peace..I’m running fast before BF gets here..You’re in for it!

          • Yeah I wasn’t signed in when I posted under IV.

            YOUR religion doesn’t offend me at all. Before I made my decisions I was quite indoctrinated as well (so I’ve “tried” it and “it” failed.)

            “…by the time they’re my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.”

            What offends me is that he equates being American with somehow fundamentally being christian. Christian social values are the same values influencing congress to discriminate and hate against a whole wide range of people (Muslims, Gays, and Women.) Using “god” for that purpose is simply vile. I realize you probably have great experiences with religion as do most of my friends who are religious. That doesn’t excuse what is being done in the name of religion though. Religion and politics should always stay mutually exclusive for obvious reasons (ones which I’m sure have been beaten like the dead horse they are.) I don’t feel a need to elaborate on points you’ve heard thousands of times.

            • Full disclosure..I chased you down then followed your blogroll which is how I figured you out! Kudos to you and your blogroll compadre for your service.

              Now you jumped in with a whole different take on things which I hadn’t even considered(in relation to Gingrich’s statement).

              But here’s what gets me. I grew up with my folks listening to AM radio.(I never even listened to FM til high school) I fell asleep listening to news coming from the living room. The folks listened to Paul Harvey then Rush faithfully. Never in all that time do I recall christianity being attacked as it is today. These days its suddenly ‘cool’ to be godless..and I DONT LIKE IT. On top of that radical Islam is sneaking in and no one can or will stop it for fear of being intolerant. Following that thought..now America sits in the gutter with no clear path out. What’s up with that?

              Bonfire out back tonight..hafta run before the kids burn the neighborhood down.

              • Yeah I can totally understand you feeling Christianity is under attack. I think religion in general is actually under attack. For so many years people have been brought up in the bubble of their hometown culture harmlessly believing whatever they want to believe. With the ability to communicate so freely now and a diversity of population, it’s no wonder that the historically christian (look who we were founded by) United States is subject to cultural mixing. I think the “attack” comes from the fact that the church teaches “moral truths” and attempts to tread the moral high ground while still refuting popular and progressive ideas like gay marriage and religious tolerance. It doesn’t help the face of christianity to have preachers burning the Koran while whining about the attack on their religion. It also doesn’t help preaching that all people are equal in the eyes of god while claiming homosexuality is a sin and that gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry.

                In response to Atheism being “cool” I would disagree fervently. I was the brunt of a lot of criticism in high school for not believing in a god. People could understand me not being Catholic or Christian, but not believing in god was seriously taboo. Even now, saying I’m atheist doesn’t draw positive remarks. Usually people are more apt to say, “I’m not Christian but at LEAST I believe in a god.”

                Also in response to radical Islam sneaking in. I don’t see any evidence of this. Maybe an over-emphasized religious tolerance to Muslims simply based on being a religion misunderstood by many. But, look at the response to fundamentalist ideas. People are quick to condemn radicals for violence in the name of religion and forcing women to wear a hijab. I haven’t heard of any circumstance where fundamentalist violence was supported. Even fundamentalist Christianity gets a bad rap in the US.

  15. PeterB in Indianapolis says:
  16. Mathius says:

    I like this version:

  17. PeterB in Indianapolis says:
  18. This is the Appendix to Ron Paul’s new book, Liberty Defined.

    1. Rights belong to individuals, not groups; they derive from our nature and can neither be granted nor taken away by government.

    2. All peaceful, voluntary economic and social associations are permitted; consent is the basis of the social and economic order.

    3. Justly acquired property is privately owned by individuals and voluntary groups, and this ownership cannot be arbitrarily voided by governments.

    4. Government may not redistribute private wealth or grant special privileges to any individual or group.

    5. Individuals are responsible for their own actions; government cannot and should not protect us from ourselves.

    6. Government may not claim the monopoly over a people’s money and government’s must never engaged in official counterfeiting, even in the name of macroeconomic stability.

    7. Aggressive wars, even when called preventative, and even when they pertain only to trade relations, are forbidden.

    8. Jury nullification, that is, the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, is a right of the people and the courtroom norm.

    9. All forms of involuntary servitude are prohibited, not only slavery but also conscription, forced association, and forced welfare distribution.

    10. Government must obey the law that it expects other people to obey and thereby must never use force to mold behavior, manipulate social outcomes, manage the economy, or tell other countries how to behave.

    • SK Trynosky St says:

      Personally I love it. But, of course, it all comes down to “tax cuts for the rich” as Nancy and Harry would say.

  19. 😐 for comments

  20. I loved Top Gear’s review of the Tesla.

    An impressive car with lots of acceleration.
    But completely impractical.

    As they noted, for a person to drive from California to New York would take over 12 days – as the car can only go a couple of hundred miles, and then take …. 16 hours to recharge.

    • Mathius says:

      I was driving home a few weeks ago when I was passed by a Maserati. The license plate: “THE STIG”.

      I’m not a car buff, but that is one great show (the British version, not the American one).

      Meanwhile, Tesla’s range / recharge time is fine for a daily commuter, but I agree – not a good idea for a cross-country road trip.

    • SK Trynosky St says:

      Has anyone given any thought to building a miniature coal fired generator to put in the trunk?

  21. Does anyone besides me find it intriguing this article is titled a santa story and features the wisdom of the Czech president Vaclav Klaus. Maybe if we’re all good, he’ll bring us presents (which are much more environmentally sound than lumps of coal.)

    BOOM. Green that everyone can partake in. Now I just need to make a movie called “The pretty convenient truth: presents for everyone!”

    • Klaus, totally missed that or I might have tried to expand on it.
      Welcome 68W, sorry if wordpress has made posting difficult.
      We all have that problem at times. WordPress is pretty sure it’s Matt’s fault somehow.

  22. Anita, JAC

    There is nothing immutable about “culture” – if it does not change, it will drift to tyranny.

    Society must embrace change or it becomes stagnant – and its resistance to change always creates a demand to use force to stop it.

    Freedom is the root that must remain immutable, not any one culture or beleif system.

%d bloggers like this: