Radioactive Communist Zombies

What's Left to Blog About?

I'm, once again, finding it hard to blog because there is nothing new under the sun.  The Spendocrats and the Obama Administration are in a head-long rush to ruin this country.  But I've railed against Waxman-Markey; I've railed against any form of government-run health care; I've railed against the spending.

There is one new thing, EPA Administrator Jackson admits that if other nations don't do anything, cap-and-trade won't work (as if it would work anyway against warming that hasn't happened for going on 9 years now).

So nothing seems worth the bother of blogging about.  Sorry to my faithful readers (both of them).  I'll try to do better.   

Don't Monitor the Police Cameras

(Hat Tip Instapundit)  Apparently there's an iPhone "app" that warns you of police cameras and other revenue-raising tactics such as speed traps.  The Washington Examiner reports that the police aren't happy about it:

That has irked D.C. police chief Cathy Lanier, who promised her officers would pick up their game to   counteract the devices, which can also help drivers dodge sobriety checkpoints. 

"I think that's the whole point of this program," she told The Examiner. "It's designed to circumvent law enforcement -- law enforcement that is designed specifically to save lives."

Actually, it's law enforcement to raise revenue:

Photo radar tickets generated nearly $1 billion in revenues for D.C. during fiscal years 2005 to 2008.

In the current fiscal year, Montgomery County expects to make $29 million from its red light and speed cameras.

Don't let 'em tell you traffic cameras are about safety.

Well, I know where the three traffic cameras are in my town.  But when you go out of town, this would be useful to have.  What would be better is to ban these Orwellian devises all together.  But that's not going to happen (see above reference to revenue).

Can it be 2011, Soon, Please?

There's rumblings in Washington D.C. of a second stimulus ('cause you know, the first one worked so well).  Meanwhile, Spendocrats are trying to keep the bill for health care reform under $1 trillion ('cause you know, we have so much extra cash right now).  Health care reform that will inevitably lead to higher costs and lower quality care.  If you don't believe me, just look at Canada or the U.K.  And the Senate is considering Waxman-Markey with a 60 seat supermajority.  Nothing can stop them now unless we get some Republican seats back in 2010.

But what's left of America may not be around in 2010.  And with ACORN and voter fraud, 2010 may look like Iran 2009.  It won't matter who you'll vote for, Democrats will win.  Think I'm being paranoid, look at Minnesota this year, Washington State in 2004, and almost Florida in 2000.

So I'm in one of my blue moods.  It's hard to stay positive when there is a constant barrage of bad news.  Maybe, just maybe 2010 will look like 1994.  At least a little bit.  Please?  Maybe all those people who voted for Obama will skip out on this midterm election and all of us going stark raving mad about what Obama is doing for the country will turn out.

Can only hope.  Assuming we're not already France by then.

Hold Them Accountable

From the NRSC:

"Force" You Out of Your Car

As part of the Obama Adminsitration and the Spendocrats in Congress's ongoing program of micromanaging your life, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood as said he wants to "coerce people out of their cars."

"Coerce" is an interesting word to use.  Look it up.  According to Mirriam-Webster it means: "1)  to restrain or dominate by force, 2)  to compel to an act or choice, 3)  to achieve by force or threat."

So you can read Mr. LaHood as saying he wants to force you out of your car.  Hope you have good public transportation where you live.

As Gabriel Roth writes in today's Wall Street Journal the Spendocrats are already working on this:

First there was the "Federal Surface Transportation Policy and Planning Act of 2009," introduced in May by Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation. Next, in June, came the "Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009," introduced by James Oberstar (D., Minn.), chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Messrs. Rockefeller and Lautenberg aim to "reduce per capita motor vehicle miles traveled on an annual basis." Mr. Oberstar wants to establish a federal "Office of Livability" to ensure that "States and metropolitan areas achieve progress towards national transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals."

Which means changes in your lifestyle:

 People would be "coerced," in effect, to live in less desirable places or work in less desirable jobs; shop in fewer and closer stores; see their doctor less frequently; visit fewer family members and friends.

Not to mention go for less pleasure drives, vacation less by car, and other pleasant things the automobile allows.

How would the government reduce your driving?  One of three ways according to Mr. Roth: 1) raise gasoline taxes so gas costs $4/gallon, 2) not improve roads so that travel time takes longer, and 3) and least likely, give drivers some better alternative to driving.  That's not going to be public transportation as it is now configured by any stretch of the imagination.

But that is what they are offering.  That and the politically expedient option #2: not fixing roads.

Then you'll be "forced" out of your car and onto a city bus next to a proselytizing Jehovah's Witness that only bathes in odd months. 

Universal Health Care in America

Watch this:

Stimulus is not Stimulating

Remember back in January when Obama said that without the stimulus unemployment could hit double digits, but with the stimulus, it'd only hit about 8%?

Well, guess what?  Unemployment is at 9.5% and climbing.  They New Yuck Times reports:

The American economy lost 467,000 more jobs in June, and the unemployment rate edged up to 9.5 percent in a sobering indication that the longest recession since the 1930s had yet to release its hold.

“The numbers are indicative of a continued, very severe recession,” said Stuart G. Hoffman, chief economist at PNC Financial Services in Pittsburgh. “There’s nothing in here to show that the economy and the market are pulling out of the grip of recession.”

And some are calling for what didn't work (won't work) in the first place: more stimulus:

Some economists are now calling for another dose of government spending to stimulate the economy, though the White House maintains that enough money is in the pipeline already.

What economists?  Paul Krugman?

Obamanomics is not working.  And on top of that, Congress and Obama want to saddle the country with cap and trade and expensive universal health care we cannot afford (and the taxes to go along with it).  As more stimulus money hits the street, inflation will start and that'll do even more damage to the economy.

You sure this is the change you voted for?

Top 50 Reasons to Oppose Waxman-Markey

Waaaaay too long for me to excerpt here,  Stephen Spruiell and Kevin Williamson give 50 reasons to oppose Waxman-Markey at National Review Online.  It basically boils down to:

Waxman-Markey will create a lot of jobs for Wall Street sharps, Big Business rent-seekers, ACORN hucksters, utility-company lobbyists, grant-writers at left-wing organizations, college administrators, light-bulb-policing bureaucrats, and an army of parasitic hangers-on.

And it will transfer money from you to liberals' favorite groups (those that vote for or support them financially).

Read the whole thing, if you can stomach it.

 

AP: Government-Run Health Care has "Drawbacks"

Way to bury an important story on a weekend holiday: Today the AP has a report about European health care and the problems of government-run medicine.  It's a cautionary tale of what not to do to our health care system:

In Britain, France, Switzerland and elsewhere, public health systems have become political punching bags for opposition parties, costs have skyrocketed and in some cases, patients have needlessly suffered and died.

Actually, in a lot of cases, patients have needlessly suffered as they wait and wait and wait for basic care:

More serious problems in Britain's health care were reported last month, when cancer researchers announced that as many as 15,000 people over age 75 were dying prematurely from cancer every year. Experts said those deaths could have been avoided if those patients had been diagnosed and treated earlier.

And there's problems with manditory health insurance:

"The minute you make health insurance mandatory, people start overusing it," said Dr. Alphonse Crespo, an orthopedic surgeon and research director at Switzerland's Institut Constant de Rebecque. "If I have a cold, I might go see a doctor because I am already paying a health insurance premium."

And mandatory insurance will probably be a feature of whatever comes out of the cesspool of Congress.  And will have more government in our health care system despite warning such as:

"Government control of health care is not a panacea," said Philip Stevens, of International Policy Network, a London think-tank. "The U.S. health system is a bit of a mess, but based on what's happened in some countries in Europe, I'd be nervous about recommending more government involvement."

Too bad this story by AP got buried on a weekend holiday.  Too bad our leaders won't listen.

You REEP what You Sow

Now that Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill has passed the House, we are learning more of what's in it.

One provision is called "REEP" and that stands for "Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance."  But what does that mean?

It could mean you can't sell your house.

CNSNew reports:

 [REEP] would be to “facilitate” the retrofitting of existing buildings nationwide.
 
“The Administrator shall develop and implement, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, standards for a national energy and environmental building retrofit policy for single-family and multi-family residences,” the bill reads.
 
It continues: “The purpose of the REEP program is to facilitate the retrofitting of existing buildings across the United States.”

And:

This means that homeowners, for example, could be required to retrofit their homes to meet federal “green” guidelines in order to sell their homes, if the cap-and-trade bill becomes law.

You could have to spend thousands of dollars to bring your house up to some arbitrary standards of energy efficiency in order to sell your home.  This is just what the housing market needs.  This will really increase the value of homes, since owners will be locked into them unless they can afford the retrofit required by the government.

This is what happens when you put command-and-control Spendocrats in charge.  You sure this is the hope and change you voted for?

Protection for a Worm

Activists are seeking federal protection for a large white worm.  The worm is so illusive it's only been spotted four times in the past 110 years.  The Seattle Times reports:

Fans of the giant Palouse earthworm are once again seeking federal protection for the rare, sweet-smelling species that spits at predators.

They filed a petition Tuesday with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requesting the worm be protected as an endangered species.

"The giant Palouse earthworm is critically endangered and needs the protection of the Endangered Species Act to have any chance of survival," said Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Of course, in order to protect the worm, the "native" state of the Palouse prairie must be preserved.  But how do they  know it's endangered?  Maybe they are naturally just low in numbers, or shy and live deep enough that humans rarely see them, like giant squid. 

Only spotted four times in 110 years, I first wondered if it was a rural legend.  But apparently not.

So what human activity is going to have to be stopped to protect a species we don't even know what, if anything, might be threatening it?  This is just a grab to block off more economic activity in the name of all that is environmentally holy.

Unions Want Green Jobs

You know all those green jobs that cap-and-trade and all the other new regulations are supposed to create?  Well, apparently they'd better be union jobs, at least in California.

The New Yuck Times reported that two big solar plants were trying to get permits to be built in California (links original):

When a company called Ausra filed plans for a big solar power plant in California, it was deluged with demands from a union group that it study the effect on creatures like the short-nosed kangaroo rat and the ferruginous hawk.

By contrast, when a competitor, BrightSource Energy, filed plans for an even bigger solar plant that would affect the imperiled desert tortoise, the same union group, California Unions for Reliable Energy, raised no complaint. Instead, it urged regulators to approve the project as quickly as possible.

The difference between the two projects?  The latter (BrightSource) was going to use union labor to build and operate the power plant, Aursa wasn't.

As California moves to license dozens of huge solar power plants to meet the state’s renewable energy goals, some developers contend they are being pressured to sign agreements pledging to use union labor. If they refuse, they say, they can count on the union group to demand costly environmental studies and deliver hostile testimony at public hearings.

In other words, unions are going to horn in on green jobs and make sure they get these nice highly-subsidized employment opportunities.  And they'll use environmental laws to stop environmental projects that don't employ union workers.

Shouldn't this be called "racketeering"?  "Extortion"?  Illegal maybe?  Not with this union-loving elected-by-union-money group (i.e., the Spendocrats) in charge.

Agreement on the Cap

Wall Street Journal is reporting that the EU and 13 other countries have come to an agreement on the "cap" part of shutting down the economy--I mean reducing greenhouse gases (ghg):

Thirteen of the world's largest nations and the European Union plan to embrace "an aspirational goal" of reducing emissions of global-warming gases by 50% by 2050, according to a draft declaration by world leaders set for release next week in Italy.

The draft, seen by The Wall Street Journal, sets up a framework for detailed negotiations on the issue ahead of a final, United Nations climate conference in December. But it leaves key areas in the climate-change debate in dispute. The draft is subject to change ahead of a meeting of global leaders starting Wednesday.

Fifty percent of what is the question.  The EU wants it to be 1990 emission levels, the U.S. wants a later date.

The question that always seems to be left out of these discussions is: where are we going to get the energy to run our economy if we can only put out half the greenhouse gasses we did in 1990 (or whatever date they choose)?  Yes, we can get a little more power from solar energy and wind, but not enough because they are unstable, expensive, and unreliable.  And nuclear seems to be off the table.  So basically we're talking about shutting down economic activity.  That's the only way to do it.  That means more poverty, less jobs, and less prosperity for you and your children and your grandchildren.

All for a theory and computer models that have so far, not been very accurate. 

Blog Neglect

Yes, it's been since Sunday since I posted.  Monday I had nothing to blog about.  Then Tuesday I came down with the worst case of the flu.  I could barely move let alone think and write.  I didn't start feeling human until today.  So I haven't been blogging.  But I will soon, I promise.  Maybe even tonight.