Resolutions

Many of my fellow bloggers are posting their resolutions.  Lame, though it may be, here's mine:


More of the same. Build on success, learn from failure. If this didn't work, try that. Brew more beer.






Happy New Year

What Am I Missing Here?

Big Sis is in Kabul, worried about the security of the Afghan border?  Really?  If I'm concerned about my border security, the United States is the last place I'm looking.

Hey, Janet!  You are failing miserably here in the US.  Maybe you should come and fix our southern border first?

Nah...that's just crazy-talk.

Tomorrow May Be The Worst Day of Your Life

Tomorrow, an unelected EPA begins regulating (alleged) Greenhouse Gas (while there are many, the chief bogeyman is Carbon Dioxide, CO2).  Currently, the only requirement is reporting the amount generated. Don't worry, you don't have to report what you exhale.  That may not come for years.

But this is not about (alleged) AGW.  I have come to the conclusion that in the religion of Environmentalism, fossil fuels are the Devil.  And don't kid yourselves, it is a religion.  Anything that requires changing the landscape ("scarring Gaia") or emitting really anything ("poisoning Gaia") must be stopped, then destroyed.  The "Angels" in this religion are solar and wind power.  Never mind that the materials required to make them are very direct-energy intensive.  That is, they require massive amounts of heat, generally from coal or a coal product to make.  Steel and glass are particularly energy-intensive.  The processes to manufacture semi-conductors required for control of solar and wind generation generate large amounts of toxic waste.  Plastics are toxic, ceramics require large scale energy. But the Eco-Priests and their flocks either don't know or don't care.  The Devil  must be destroyed.

Nor do the adherents care about jobs as the comments on the linked article make quite clear.  Their fealty to their religion is quite remarkable.  Christians should be such strong adherents. The cost of reporting (alleged) GHG - let's be honest here and call it CO2; no other (alleged) GHG is reported - is quite expensive.  Having seen it first-hand, the recordkeeping is quite onerous.  While my employer has a large staff to which this task has been assigned (in addition to their regular duties), many lack that luxury.  The proposed tax in CO2 emissions ranges from $20/ton to $80/ton.  Energy prices will "necessarily skyrocket".  Energy may remain plentiful, but unaffordable.  Americans average about 30 tons of CO2 per capita annually.  So you can expect your energy costs to increase by $600-$2400 per year.  But this is only the beginning.  The idea is to have you reduce your CO2 emissions to around 2 tons per year.  Good luck with that.  There will be the inevitable corruption and exemptions and your mileage may vary.

Rest assured that the Al Gores of this world will continue to have their huge estates, limos and private jets while you and I "freeze in the dark".

I Should Listen To This Guy Because......?

CNN or any other news organization is welcome to give this guy voice.  But he has no cred after reading this (I'm not sure he had cred before).


Kumi Naidoo is probably a reasonably smart guy.  He's also a "watermelon" - Green outside and Red inside.


"I recently returned to Amsterdam from the latest round of U.N. climate talks in Cancun, Mexico, and found this city of canals covered in snow. It was a beautiful sight. Yet rather than filling me with joy, it caused me concern.


Over the past few years, climate-change skeptics have repeatedly used cold snaps as proof that our planet is not heating up."


These are not "cold snaps".  Further, for NASA to claim 2010 as the "hottest on record" is absurd.  They made this claim with a month left in the year and had to have made that determination a month before.  


Naidoo continues to make unprovable claims:


"(O)ur planet is steadily heating up, a delicate set of climatic imbalances creates an increase in extreme weather events."


Dude...facts not in evidence.  He makes a claim that may-or-may-not be true.  Scientists have no clue how our climate works.  They have a bunch of computer models based on assumptions of how they think the climate works.  Said models have yet to model past climate with any accuracy.  Garbage In-Garbage Out.


"Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Joel Pett may have hit upon something with a cartoon he drew for last year's climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark. It shows a scientist addressing a large audience at a climate summit. A spectator at the left side of the panel asks his neighbor: "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" The answer emerges on the right side of the panel where the following list appears on a chalkboard: energy independence, preserve rainforest, sustainability, green jobs, livable cities, renewables, clean water and air, healthy children, etc., etc."


People don't die because they have cheap, plentiful energy.  Children are not healthy when they cook their food over dung and are unable to stay warm because the solar panels are covered with snow or the cold prevents the operation of the windmills.  Cities are "unlivable" because the "Progressives" make  them so by forcing out jobs with taxation and regulation. 


"Speaking with a Dutch friend, I commented that the snow -- which has caused great travel difficulties around Europe -- was at least a wonderful thing for children, who are out in force making snowmen. "Yes," he replied, but when I was growing up, winters were so cold the canals would freeze over every year, and we could skate on them. Last year was the first time this happened again in over a decade."


A decade is hardly a long enough period to establish the "fact" of (alleged) AGW.


Remember....heat waves are proof of (alleged) AGW.  So are frigid winters, snow storms, and every other weather event.  Except when "weather is not climate".


These people are absurd.

Rex Ryan And His Wife Like A Little Role Playing

Look...Rex Ryan and his wife are consenting adults.  If they like a little role-playing and have a foot thing, so what?

I'm not posting a link to the video and I'm not going to say any more about it.

What Has The Left Been "Right" About?

Over at Legal Insurrection, a commenter made the claim that the Left has been "right" "for long before you were born".  I've been wondering what they have been "right" about.  Let's see:

• The Left (Progressives) gave us the War on Poverty.  It was a continuation of "the dole" and has only resulted in the same poverty we have always seen.
• Peace through appeasement.  Didn't work with Vietnam and has not worked since.  Not with the Soviets, not with NoKo, not with Iran, not with Russia.  The only thing lowering our defenses has done is made us defenseless.
• Schools.  The whole idea that "self-esteem" comes before learning is absurd and has been shown to be so.  Our schools are an abject failure with teachers and administrators who are in it for their own gain.
• "Environmental Protection":  Progressives gave us MTBE and ethanol, the idea that the environment never gets better, only worse (those who are my age know that is a lie), the idea that economic success is always in opposition to Gaia.  They believe humans are powerful enough to change the climate.  They believe that solar and wind power can meet all of Earth's energy needs, in spite of the math.
• Keynesian Economics:  Obviously.
• Single mothers:  The idea that men are obsolete, that a woman can have a child and a career without a man was absurd from the start.  Single mothers are far more likely to live in poverty.  I am reasonably certain there are other statistics that show adverse results for the children of single mothers.

Should I go on?

Merry Christmas Everyone

Even if you don't want to hear it.

;-)

"Natural Variability"

Remember, warmer winters are "Global Warming"...."Climate Change"...."Climate Disruption", while colder winters are "natural variability".

No, really.

H/T: WUWT

Baby It's Cold Outside

H/T Real Debate

Another reason to get high speed rail in Wisconsin.  No, really.

(Alleged) AGW Terror?

Big Sis can't secure the southern border, but when it comes to environmental justice, she's on that like a duck on a June bug.

Whiskey.....Tango.....Foxtrot?  I suspect people on the southern border are at a much greater risk from failure to secure that border than they are from (alleged) AGW...Climate Change...Climate Disruption.

The Next President of the United States?

I hope so. H/T: JACG (again)

NAGs With Hooters

The Beer:  After Christmas, I will be getting the hardware I need to start all-grain brewing.  First up will probably be an easy Pale Ale.  But I also want to brew up a Bad Santa for next year.


The Bicycle:  I am taking my Trek Singletrak apart and cleaning it up for next spring.  I'm finding it's not that difficult.


The VRWC:


H/T: JACG.


In the category of Saturday Silliness, The National Association of Gals (NAG) has filed a complaint with Orange County officials, alleging two local Hooters restaurants exposed children to sexual entertainment.


This is nothing more than an attempt by the NAGs to stay relevant.  It isn't working.  They look laughable.  And that is what we should do.  Laugh at them.  


So share this with your friends, neighbors and acquaintances.  Right now, we all need a good laugh.

RIP

A former colleague took his own life yesterday.  I can't say we were friends; while we had worked together for a couple years, we were just getting to know each other better when he left for another employer about 18 months ago.  I do know that he told me he was as happy at that time as he had been.

I don't understand what it is in life that makes one feel that ending it is the only solution.  I  have never understood.  What I do know is that he left behind people much closer to him than I who wonder why and will always wonder what they could have done.

I May Be Repeating Myself Here

OK....here's the deal.

• Sierra-Tango-Foxtrot-Uniform
• If you are 50 years old or older, you get Social Security as it is now
• If you are younger than 50 you can either stay in the current system or you can elect to take your current "account" (I realize there is no such thing, but bear with me) and all future payments and put them in a government-approved investment - I'm thinking government bonds.  Help the Federal Debt and get something back for it.
• If you are not yet paying Social Security tax, you will take the government-approved investment program.
• The general fund will ensure that all payouts are made as they should be for everyone who remains in the current system.

Now stop screaming "THEY ARE STEALING YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY" and get back to some real work.

I am happy to bring you this public service.

Here Comes EPA

The Beer:  I believe it is time to start trying my hand at all-grain brewing.


The Bicycle:  The Univega is on the cleaned up, on the trainer and only groans a little when I get on.


The VRWC:


In the absence of Cap and Trade, EPA is already issuing requirements for (alleged) greenhouse gas emission reductions.  From Friday's Federal Register:

SUMMARY: The EPA is issuing a finding that the EPA-approved state 
implementation plans (SIP) of 13 states (comprising 15 state and local 
programs) are substantially inadequate to meet Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requirements because they do not apply Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD) requirements to greenhouse gas (GHG)-emitting 
sources. In addition, EPA is issuing a ``SIP call'' for each of these 
states, which requires the state to revise its SIP as necessary to 
correct such inadequacies. Further, EPA is establishing a deadline for 
each state to submit its corrective SIP revision. These deadlines, 
which differ among the states, range from December 22, 2010, to 
December 1, 2011.

Generally, states have their own air emissions (Title V)permitting programs.  EPA is saying some of these are not adequate because they do not address (alleged) GHG.

Unusually, Wikipedia has a fairly succinct, accurate and straightforward summary of the EPA and regulation of GHG.

As I have stated multiple times before, this is politically motivated science and EPA out of control.  This will be our undoing if Congress does not defund these programs.

Payroll Tax Cuts

AP story today.

Right out of the box:

President Barack Obama's plan to cut payroll taxes for a year would provide big savings for many workers, but makes Social Security advocates nervous that it could jeopardize the retirement program's finances.


First and Foremost, it's not the plan of The Chosen One.  It was forced on him by the GOP.   Second, Social Security is not a retirement program and was never intended to be one.  When I started working, my paycheck showed a deduction for OASI - Old Age Supplemental Income.  That was the intention.  To supplement what you should have saved.


The government would borrow about $112 billion to make Social Security whole. Advocates and some lawmakers worry that relying on borrowed money to fund Social Security could eventually force it to compete with other federal programs for scarce dollars, leading to cuts.


Because Social Security in "on the books", we are de facto borrowing to fund it now.  It was put on the books to make  the budget deficit look smaller than it was and to allow the fund to be raided by politicians for their pet programs.

Social Security taxes "ought to be held sacrosanct," said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security.

"When you start to signal that the (Social Security) tax levels are negotiable, you end up in long-term trouble, I think, in terms of making absolutely certain that the entitlement funding streams are secure," Pomeroy said.

I don't really have too much problem with the tax levels being "negotiable".  This is a program desperately in need of reform.  The current funding method is unsustainable both short and long term. 


At the wealthy end of the pay scale, workers making $106,800 — the maximum amount of wages subject to Social Security taxes — would see their payroll taxes reduced by $2,136. That worker's spouse could also get a payroll tax cut of up to $2,136, if he or she makes at least $106,800.


Now $106,800 is wealthy?  This is just a veiled attack on people who earn.  The term wealthy as used to  describe higher wage earners has become a perjorative and a way to demonize.  


"Worker contributions have successfully funded the program for 75 years and that critical linkage between contributions and benefits is what keeps Social Security a self-funded program."


This is just not true.  With the raiding of Social Security over the years, there is nothing but IOU's and whatever comes in immediately goes out (after The Beast gets it's cut).


The new Congress has a great opportunity to take control of the conversation and begin to move social Security to a sustainable footing.  Do it.

Teachers and Change

JSOnline talks about Teachers and Change.

My comments:

Teachers are the only employees I know of who can vote on their own raises (Our "rulers" not withstanding).  Teachers want to be known as "professionals", yet belong to a "labor union".  In my experience, teachers don't particularly care what their employers (taxpayers) have to say; they want what they want.  Teaching is a "closed profession".  That is, nobody cares what you know or how well you can teach it to others.  You better have that piece of paper that says  you are an "educator".  Teachers are (generally) not experts in the subject they teach.  The are experts in "education".  The idea that teachers are underpaid is ridiculous.  In many places, they start at a salary that would be the envy of many coming out of college into their first job.

I used to respect all teachers.  Then I started attending school board meetings.  Go to one and you will see what I mean.

Tax Cuts For The Wealthy

There is much hand-wringing in the media about these "tax cuts for the wealthy".  Bad news....

It's not a tax cut.  It's not reducing federal revenue one whit.  This is avoiding a massive tax increase.  We need to take charge of the conversation and make sure this is understood.

"It's the spending, stupid".

On Being Presidential

Rhetoric has always been part of politics.  It is the nature of the beast.  But I have never heard the kind of rhetoric (if it even is "rhetorical") that I hear from this President.  These are the kinds of things politicians have always been saying behind closed doors.  "Hostage takers", attacking his own party, "I won".

There has been no President in my lifetime who is so publicly thin-skinned.  This will get worse.

Taxing the Wealthy vs. Taking the "Working Class"

I heard it again tonight.  On Hannity, Joe Sestak ("Ih..did not offer a job to that guy Sexact...uh Sextact, I mean Sestak...so he would leave pull out...Ih mean..withdraw....from the primary") stated we need to give some relief to the "working class" and should therefore increase taxes on "the wealthy".  Hannity gave it a pass.  The correct response is for Hannity to ask whether or not Sestak thinks people who make over $250,000 a year "work" for a living or if they, instead won some sort of lottery...or maybe inherited their wealth?

This is "income tax".  It is a tax on money people earn.  Money people work for.  People increase their wealth by working for it.

Changing The Education Paradigm

H/T: Jill at Potluck.





I receive the output of  the education factory in a work (industrial) setting and have to educate it again.  It is clear to me that the system is an abject failure.  I was struck by a couple things in this video:  First, the "Date of Manufacture" as the most important part of educating our children. Stunning in it's simplicity and setup for failure.  Why not treat the children as a "one-piece flow" system, whereby they move forward, not by their age, but by their progress.

Second, I was struck by the decline in Divergent Thinking through education.  We clearly tend to become set in our ways at an early age.  Few of us think "outside the box" at my age.

How much different (and better) can education be if we start to Change the Paradigm?

Give Blood, Get College

I appreciate the gesture and the desire to become legal United States citizens.  I really do.  Your parents came here illegally and you had nothing to do with it, so why should you be punished?  You're not hurting anyone, right?


Wrong.


There are people standing in line for years waiting to become citizens.  THEY are the ones who are being screwed here.  How would you feel if you were in their shoes?  You came here years ago, went through the process, waited your turn, only to find that if you had come here illegally, your children could pay the price just by going to college.  Subsidized by the US taxpayer.  Gosh, now THERE's some fairness for ya.


This is all for show.  Politically motivated and orchestrated.  Give a pint of blood to show what a good citizen you are?  I've given many pints of blood over my 54 years.  I never counted them, never really gave it much thought. Maybe I should be asking for....oh, I don't know....a reimbursement of my college tuition?  Six years back in my life for military service?  Maybe just a tax break.


No.  No to the DREAM Act, no to illegal immigrants and their children.  They show themselves in the full light of day and we do nothing.  


I want immigrants to come here.  Their distinctiveness becomes our own (to paraphrase The Borg).  But they cannot come here illegally.

H/T Gateway Pundit.  I absolutely cannot abide this woman.



Thanks, Claire.  No, really.  I mean, you went ahead and spent that $3 trillion over the last couple years and never paid for it.  And really, it's done SO much for the economy.  The won't-get-above-8%-unemployment is now the 9.8%-unemployment-is-the-new-norm.  Wow.  That's really great.  And you think you are entitled to more of our hard earned property because you and the rest of government are so incredibly inept?  You are more entitled to the property that I have earned than I am?

That tax code you complain about...you are a freakin' United States Senator.  You can fix that tax code any time you want.  Maybe have everyone pay, say...15% above a certain threshold of maybe... $20,000.  I don't know.  Maybe get some economic growth going and more money to the federal coffers.  But nah...that's just crazy talk.  We should continue to feed the beast that threatens to consume us.  We should continue to give money to a government that doesn't respect us, that continues to force us to do their will.

No, Claire.  The torches and pitchforks are coming for you.  Figuratively.  In 2012.

Food Police

The Beer:  The Liberty is nearly gone; the Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot is not far behind.  Both have been a delicious part of my nutritious life and Empress Michelle wouldn't want me partaking.


The Bicycle:  On the work stand waiting for an inside-project day between now and March.


The VRWC:  Gosh...this is a shock....no, really.


Here is the bizzaro-world comment of the entire piece:

Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest says the bill is aimed at curbing daily or weekly bake sales or pizza fundraisers that become a regular part of kids' lunchtime routines. She says selling junk food can easily be substituted with nonfood fundraisers.

"These fundraisers are happening all the time," Wootan said. "It's a pizza sale one day, doughnuts the next... It's endless. This is really about supporting parental choice. Most parents don't want their kids to use their lunch money to buy junk food. They expect they'll use their lunch money to buy a balanced school meal."

In what UNIVERSE does that work?  What if I WANT my kid to have pizza and doughnuts every day?  But seriously, what's next?  Only organic food can be served at schools?  Children can no longer eat meals at home? They must eat the government-approved menu at school?

This is what we get in Lame Duck.  And Republicans voted for this abomination!  

Throw them all out.

A "Sputnik Moment"?

Steven Chu thinks that the Chinese, putting up an infrastructure of inferior energy supplies is a "Sputnik Moment".  You remember the moment, right?  When we first heard the Soviets had placed a satellite in orbit and had the "high ground" in the Cold War?  It was widely believed that, if we did not match them, they would be able to "nuke us from orbit".  This compares....how?

GAWD!

Fuzzy Is In Fine Form

This piece is exceptional.  My concern is if we don't get control now, we will not recover to see this scenario.