Monday - February 12, 2007

Quote Of The Day

“Global warming is a myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it’s a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It’s neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists.

These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it’s an undignified slapstick that people don’t wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the “but’s” are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.

This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.”

-- Václav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/12/2007 at 12:39 PM   
Filed Under: • Climate-Weather •  
• Comments (12) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

NoKo Games Continue

In the Land Of Noko, The Dark Lord ruled over an army of ugly Orcs and oppressed, starving hobbits. Darkness ruled the land - especially at night when electricity was turned off everywhere except the castle of the Dark Lord.

The Dark Lord, Kimjung, bathed in champagne, ate heartily and provided the latest weaponry for his evil warriors but would not even attempt use any of his dark magic to provide power - or even food - to the starving hobbits.

Instead he insisted on blackmailing the elves and the kingdoms of Man to force them to give him electricity and food which he intended to be used for him and his warriors before any of the hobbits got any.

Meanwhile, Frodo is struggling with Gollem over possession of the Ring Of Nuclear Power. The saga continues in Episode Three ...

Nuclear Talks on North Korea Hit Roadblock
_{BEIJING (NY TIMES) - February 12, 2007}

Negotiations on a step-by-step deal that the Bush administration hopes will lead North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program appeared near collapse on Sunday over North Korea’s demands for huge shipments of fuel oil and electricity before agreeing to a schedule for turning over its nuclear weapons and fuel.

The chief American envoy, Christopher R. Hill, said he and North Korea’s envoy, Kim Kye-gwan, held a “lengthy and very frank” meeting on Sunday. But Mr. Hill seemed much less optimistic that a deal could be struck. Negotiators are planning to end the talks on Monday, and other envoys were pessimistic that any breakthrough would emerge on the final day.

Meanwhile, a summary of the proposed agreement being circulated among senior policy makers in Washington makes it clear that even if the North agreed to take the listed first steps — sealing its main nuclear reactor and inviting international inspectors back into the country — there was no specified time period during which it would be required to turn over any nuclear weapons or weapons fuel that it has produced in recent years. And such a turnover would happen only after reaching another agreement.

In essence, the agreement Mr. Hill, an assistant secretary of state, is negotiating could prevent the North from producing more weapons, but defers discussions over the weapons and fuel it has stockpiled. Mr. Hill had earlier suggested that if there was agreement, follow-up talks could be set up in March and April.

The summary calls for all six nations in the talks — the others are South Korea, Japan, China and Russia — to “create working groups for full and rapid implementation” of a September 2005 agreement in which the North agreed in principle to abandon its nuclear weapons.

But in the past, the North Korean envoys to similar working groups have proven to have no real negotiating authority. Furthermore, the proposed agreement sets no dates on nuclear action beyond shutting down the nuclear plant at Yongbyon and allowing inspectors in within 60 days; it leaves unresolved what the North would get in return. The summary was given to The New York Times by a person trying to explain the timing and vagueness of the deal’s elements.

After months of preparation that created unusual optimism within the Bush administration, failure to reach even a preliminary agreement could cast doubt on the prospects of disarming North Korea in the administration’s last two years. Several Asian diplomats said they feared that North Korea had sensed the American distraction in Iraq and could be trying to run out the clock until the election of a new president.

At the same time, the North is under pressure because of the effectiveness of financial sanctions, particularly those aimed at Kim Jong-il and other North Korean leaders, and it may feel this is a good time to extract concessions from the South Korean government, which is clinging to economic ties to the North.

Mr. Hill, a seasoned negotiator who played a critical role in the Dayton accords that ended conflict in the Balkans in 1995, made it clear that the United States would not sign a deal that provided North Korea with energy but failed to ensure that it gave up its nuclear material.

“We’re not looking to provide energy assistance so that they could avoid taking the further steps on denuclearization,” he said at a news conference late Sunday in Beijing. “We understand that you can’t just get there in one jump, you have to take several steps, so we’re prepared to take several steps.”

He added, “But we’re not interested in providing that kind of assistance so that they don’t have to take the next step.” In the past, the North has always insisted that it get rewards before giving away the nuclear ability that Mr. Kim regards as his sole international bargaining chip.

Kyodo, the Japanese news agency, has reported that North Korea wants an annual energy package of two million tons of fuel oil and two million kilowatts of electricity for taking the first steps in the agreement. It quoted unidentifed diplomatic contacts who said the North also wanted a short-term infusion of hundreds of thousands of tons of fuel oil almost immediately. That presumably would be a reward for shutting down Yongbyon, even though it does not provide electric energy.

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/12/2007 at 12:11 PM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

What About Iran?

Iran is working as fast and hard as they can to develop nuclear weapons. The Mad Mullahs are promoting violence in the region by sponsoring Hezbollah in Lebanon. They’re also sending in explosives and insurgents to help keep Iraq unstable and kill US troops. Not surprisingly, Democrats here at home say we should leave Iran alone.

Instead of conducting covert operations inside Iran to destabilize the government and assist a growing, dissatisfied populace and perhaps quietly taking out Iran’s nuclear plants, we’re hamstrung by partisan politicans in the Democratic Party. So nothing will get done and the Mad Mullahs in Iran will continue to cause trouble.

Why? Because it is more important for Democrats to harass the Bush administration and eventually regain the White House than it is to protect America’s interests overseas and the American people here at home. What’s really sick about all of this is that when Iran eventually develops a nuclear weapon, and uses it, the Donks will blame Bush for not having done anything to stop them.

You don’t have to be Nostradamus to see where this is going ...

_{Ed Stein - The Rocky Mountain News}

US Accuses Iran Over Iraq Bombs
_{(BBC) - Sunday, 11 February 2007, 20:26 GMT}

The US military has accused the “highest levels” of Iran’s government of supplying increasingly sophisticated roadside bombs to Iraqi insurgents. Senior defence officials told reporters in Baghdad that the bombs were being used to deadly effect, killing more than 170 US troops since June 2004.

The weapons known as “explosively formed penetrators” (EFPs) are capable of destroying an Abrams tank. US claims the bombs were smuggled from Iran cannot be independently verified.

The US officials, speaking off camera on condition of anonymity, said EFPs had also injured more than 620 US personnel since June 2004. They said US intelligence analysts believed the bombs were manufactured in Iran and secretly sent to Iraqi Shia militants on the orders of senior officials in Tehran.

“We assess that these activities are coming from the senior levels of the Iranian government,” one official said. He pointed the finger at Iran’s elite al-Quds brigade, a unit of the Revolutionary Guards, saying that a senior commander from the brigade had been one of five Iranians seized by US forces in a raid in the Iraqi town of Irbil in January.

The defence official said that when the men were captured they had been tying to flush documents down a toilet and that one of them had been contaminated with explosives residue. They had also reportedly shaved their heads to alter their appearance - bags of their hair were found during the raid.

- More ...

Dems Skeptical Of Starting Row With Iran
_{WASHINGTON (AP) - Ferburary 12, 2007 01:28AM ET}

Skeptical congressional Democrats said Sunday the Bush administration should move cautiously before accusing Iran of fomenting a campaign of violence against U.S. troops in Iraq.

The members of Congress spoke on the morning talk shows as the U.S. military said it believes orders came from the highest levels of the Iranian government to send components for sophisticated roadside bombs in Iraq.

The military told reporters in Baghdad that between June 2004 and last week, more than 170 Americans had been killed by the bombs, which the military calls “explosively formed projectiles.” Those weapons are capable of destroying an Abrams tank.

“Explosives seem to be flowing into Iraq from Iran, but does it stem from a deliberate government policy or rogue elements within the Iranian government?” asked Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Sen.John Kerry(D-MA) said that ultimately Iran wants a stable Iraq and that the United States needs to engage in diplomacy.

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) said the administration could be laying the groundwork for an attack on Iran and that “I’m worried about that. That’s how we got into the mess in Iraq,” by relying on what Dodd called “doctored information.”

Senate Intelligence Committee member Ron Wyden (D-OR) said “the administration is engaged in a drumbeat with Iran that is much like the drumbeat that they did with Iraq. We’re going to insist on accountability.”

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/12/2007 at 02:01 AM   
Filed Under: • Middle-East •  
• Comments (14) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Most Ridiculous Item Of The Day (so far)

Snorkeler Mistaken For Rodent, Shot In Face
_{EUGENE, Oregon - (CNN) 10:48 p.m. EST, February 10, 2007}

A snorkeler who was shot in the face after he was apparently mistaken for a swimming rodent was in good condition after surgery, a hospital said Saturday.

John William Cheesman, 44, of Springfield, underwent eight hours of surgery Thursday to remove bullet and bone fragments from his face, said his wife, Shelley Cheesman.

“He’s doing really well,” Shelley Cheesman said. “The bullet hit in front of his right ear, where the bone is the most dense. It just fragmented and didn’t go into his brain.” He was listed in good condition at Oregon Health & Science University Hospital in Portland.

William Roderick, 60, of Reedsport, has been charged with assault, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and possession of methamphetamine and marijuana. He was being held in the county jail.

Roderick told deputies he thought Cheesman was a nutria swimming in the Smith River near Reedsport, about 90 miles southwest of Eugene, and shot him with a .22-caliber rifle, police said.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/12/2007 at 01:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Grammy Goofiness

First, a confession - I subscribe to Rolling Stone ... in spite of the Leftist, political slant the mag has taken in recent years. I just like music and there are are at least two or three pages of actual music news in each issue. Why am I telling you this? Because, to the best of my recollection, the Dixie Chicks new album only stayed on the charts for a couple of weeks last year before disappearing and never made it higher than #8.

In addition, they managed to keep pissing off enough people with their Leftist politics that concerts were canceled all across the country. So why did they walk off with all the major Grammy Awards last night? If any of you have any inside information about this, please clue me in. Is this just more of the entertainment industry’s out-of-touch, mutual back-scratching? Don’t these people ever step outside of their insulated little world and actually communicate with us little people ... ?

Dixie Chicks Earn Grammys Triumph
_{(BBC) - Monday, 12 February 2007, 05:13 GMT}

Country trio The Dixie Chicks have made a triumphant comeback by dominating the major honours at the Grammy Awards. The group’s five prizes come four years after they caused uproar among many US country music fans for saying they were “ashamed” of President George Bush.

Their awards included best song, record and album. The Red Hot Chili Peppers won four, while Mary J Blige won three. The ceremony was opened by reformed pop group The Police - but it was a bad night for other Brits like James Blunt.

The UK singer was up for five awards but went home empty-handed. Other British nominees like Corinne Bailey Rae, KT Tunstall and the Arctic Moneys also lost out.

The Dixie Chicks’ victory in the top three categories represents vindication for a group who were banned from many US radio stations and received death threats after making their controversial comments.

At a concert in London on the eve of the Iraq war in 2003, singer Natalie Maines told the crowd she was “ashamed” that Mr Bush came from her home state, Texas.

At the Grammy ceremony on Sunday, their single Not Ready to Make Nice - including lyrics like “I’m not ready to back down, I’m still mad as hell” - was named song of the year and record of the year. It also picked up best country performance by a duo or group.

Their haul was completed by best album as well as best country album for Taking The Long Way. “That’s interesting,” Maines said on accepting one award. “Well, to quote the great Simpsons: ‘Heh-heh.’” Bandmate Emily Robison added: “We wouldn’t have done this album without everything we went through, so we have no regrets.”

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/12/2007 at 01:01 AM   
Filed Under: • Celebrities • Hollywood •  
• Comments (11) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - February 11, 2007

The Week In Review

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/11/2007 at 01:27 PM   
Filed Under: • News-Briefs •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

Business As Usual On K Street

Tom DeLay and other Republicans got in serious trouble recently for accepting lavish trips to Scotland to play golf among other things paid for by the lobbyists who swarm around K Street in Washington looking to buy someone’s vote in Congress.

Then Democrats rode to the rescue and proudly shouted that they were going to fix the evil system of corruption by passing laws to prohibit lobbyists from taking members of Congress on these pleasure jaunts. Then you people believed their lies and elected them.

That was then, this is now. They passed their law and now lobbyists can’t fire up the corporate jet, load up with a Congressman and his family and fly them to Disney World with all expenses paid. Nope. no can do.

However ... (stop me if you’ve heard this joke before) ... lobbyists can donate a million dollars to a Congressman’s political action committee (PAC), which can then pay for the trip to the House of Mouse for Congressman Jerkwad and his brood - accompanied, of course, by ... (guess who) ... the lobbyists who just indirectly paid for the whole shindig.

Question: why do we keep electing the crooks who are experienced professionals at finding creating loopholes in laws to go to Washington to write those very same laws? Answer: because we’re stupid.

Even worse, we believe them when they occasionally express outrage over corruption and promise to clean things up. The incredibly stupid masses keep electing corrupt, lying politicians ... and we wonder why the country is going to hell in a handbasket?

If, instead of targeting the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, Osama Bin Laden and his thugs had aimed the planes at the Capitol building when Congress was in session, not only would Osama have been declared a national hero and given a ticker-tape parade to celebrate but he could have been elected President easily by a grateful American people. He’d have my vote fer sure ...

Congress Finds Ways to Avoid Lobbyist Limits
_{WASHINGTON (NY TIMES) - February 11, 2007}

The 110th Congress opened with the passage of new rules intended to curb the influence of lobbyists by prohibiting them from treating lawmakers to meals, trips, stadium box seats or the discounted use of private jets. But it did not take long for lawmakers to find ways to keep having lobbyist-financed fun.

In just the last two months, lawmakers invited lobbyists to help pay for a catalog of outings: lavish birthday parties in a lawmaker’s honor ($1,000 a lobbyist), martinis and margaritas at Washington restaurants (at least $1,000), a California wine-tasting tour (all donors welcome), hunting and fishing trips (typically $5,000), weekend golf tournaments ($2,500 and up), a Presidents’ Day weekend at Disney World ($5,000), parties in South Beach in Miami ($5,000), concerts by the Who or Bob Seger ($2,500 for two seats), and even Broadway shows like “Mary Poppins” and “The Drowsy Chaperone” (also $2,500 for two).

The lobbyists and their employers typically end up paying for the events, but within the new rules.  Instead of picking up the lawmaker’s tab, lobbyists pay a political fund-raising committee set up by the lawmaker. In turn, the committee pays the legislator’s way. Lobbyists and fund-raisers say such trips are becoming increasingly popular, partly as a quirky consequence of the new ethics rules.

By barring lobbyists from mingling with a lawmaker or his staff for the cost of a steak dinner, the restrictions have stirred new demand for pricier tickets to social fund-raising events. Lobbyists say that the rules might even increase the volume of contributions flowing to Congress from K Street, where many lobbying firms have their offices.

Some lawmakers acknowledge that some fund-raising trips resemble the lobbyist-paid junkets that Congress voted to prohibit. Jennifer Crider, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said its leaders had decided to stop holding fund-raising events for lobbyists with political action committees because of the seeming inconsistency.

So the committee canceled its annual Colorado ski weekend for lobbyists and lawmakers to raise money for the next campaign. Gone, too, is its Maryland hunting trip with Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan, the avid hunter who is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

But other Congressional party campaign committees have not stopped their events, including the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s annual Nantucket weekend for donors who contribute $25,000. And individual lawmakers are still playing host to plenty of events themselves.

The excursions would be illegal under the new ethics rules if lobbyists or their employers paid for them directly. (The rules, passed by both houses in early January, have already taken effect in the House and are expected to take effect in the Senate later this spring.) And some outings involving personal entertainment or recreation for lawmakers could also run afoul of legal restrictions on the personal use of campaign money if they were paid for by a lawmaker’s re-election campaign.

But they are allowed, and increasingly common, because of a combination of loopholes. First, the ethics rules restrict personal gifts but not political contributions, so paying to attend a fund-raiser is still legitimate. Second, the “personal use” restrictions apply to lawmakers’ re-election campaigns but not to their personal political action committees, which can spend money on almost anything. Lawmakers use their personal PACs to sponsor most of the events. (Lawyers disagree about whether Congressional ethics rules restrict personal use of members’ PACs.)

The lawmakers’ so-called leadership PACs began proliferating about two decades ago, initially as vehicles for senior members of Congress to build loyalty among their colleagues by funneling money to their campaigns. These days, however, even the newest members of Congress usually start them. Two newly elected Democratic senators, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Jim Webb of Virginia, already have. And many use them mainly to pay for travel or miscellaneous other costs.

Over the last two years, the roughly 300 PACs controlled by lawmakers raised a total of about $156 million and used only about a third of that on federal campaign contributions, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a group that tracks political fund-raising. Some members of Congress said it would not bother them if the upshot of the new rules turned out to be more contributions.

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/11/2007 at 11:51 AM   
Filed Under: • Politics •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Cosmic Ray Attack

I love this whole glowbull warming crap. It just gets more and more interesting every day. Today we find out that cosmic rays seem to be responsible for part of the damage. The science makes sense to me but I would like to see the results of the experiments they plan on conducting in Switzerland.

The cycles of heating and cooling seem to coincide with high solar activity and other factors that could influence the amount of cosmic rays hitting our atmosphere. Factor in fluctuations in the Van-Allen Belt and this team of scientists could be on to something. Then add in the fact there are fewer pollutants in the air nowadays thanks to clean air acts and what you have is a lot of clear skies over our heads. Them cosmic rays are pounding us! HELP! RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!

Cosmic Rays Blamed For Global Warming
_{LONDON (TELEGRAPH-UK) - 1:08am GMT 11/02/2007}

Man-made climate change may be happening at a far slower rate than has been claimed, according to controversial new research. Scientists say that cosmic rays from outer space play a far greater role in changing the Earth’s climate than global warming experts previously thought.

In a book, to be published this week, they claim that fluctuations in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere directly alter the amount of cloud covering the planet. High levels of cloud cover blankets the Earth and reflects radiated heat from the Sun back out into space, causing the planet to cool.

Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre who led the team behind the research, believes that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. This, he says, is responsible for much of the global warming we are experiencing.

He claims carbon dioxide emissions due to human activity are having a smaller impact on climate change than scientists think. If he is correct, it could mean that mankind has more time to reduce our effect on the climate.

The controversial theory comes one week after 2,500 scientists who make up the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change published their fourth report stating that human carbon dioxide emissions would cause temperature rises of up to 4.5 C by the end of the century.

Mr Svensmark claims that the calculations used to make this prediction largely overlooked the effect of cosmic rays on cloud cover and the temperature rise due to human activity may be much smaller.

He said: “It was long thought that clouds were caused by climate change, but now we see that climate change is driven by clouds. “This has not been taken into account in the models used to work out the effect carbon dioxide has had. “We may see CO2 is responsible for much less warming than we thought and if this is the case the predictions of warming due to human activity will need to be adjusted.”

Mr Svensmark last week published the first experimental evidence from five years’ research on the influence that cosmic rays have on cloud production in the Proceedings of the Royal Society Journal A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. This week he will also publish a fuller account of his work in a book entitled The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change.

A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere. They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.

Mr Svensmark’s results show that the rays produce electrically charged particles when they hit the atmosphere. He said: “These particles attract water molecules from the air and cause them to clump together until they condense into clouds.”

Mr Svensmark claims that the number of cosmic rays hitting the Earth changes with the magnetic activity around the Sun. During high periods of activity, fewer cosmic rays hit the Earth and so there are less clouds formed, resulting in warming. Low activity causes more clouds and cools the Earth. He said: “Evidence from ice cores show this happening long into the past. We have the highest solar activity we have had in at least 1,000 years.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/11/2007 at 05:01 AM   
Filed Under: • Climate-Weather •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Sunday Funnies

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/11/2007 at 04:34 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - February 10, 2007

Obama-Rama-Shama-Lama-Ding-Dong!

The man whose middle name is HUSSEIN and whose last name rhymes with OSAMA and who is half-white, half-African and who has been in Washington as a Senator just about long enough to find an apartment and unpack his office has decided that he is the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln and he wants to be your President. No, really. He seems to be taking himself seriously and the media loves him and he is a Democrat, not one of those E-V-I-L Republicans.

Somebody wake me when this comedy gets to the punch line. I am hereby tuning out all Democratic candidates for President until further notice. My Bullshit Meter™ is already pegged out and I need to give it a rest from all of these “pre-emptive strikes” on the 2008 Election. Besides ... I’m really hoping that all you good people will vote for me in 2008. I promise to be the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. No, really ...

Obama Evokes Lincoln to Launch 2008 Bid
_{SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (MYWAY NEWS) - Feb 10, 5:46 PM (ET)}

Barack Obama announced his bid for president Saturday, a black man evoking Abraham Lincoln’s ability to unite a nation and a Democrat portraying himself as a fresh face capable of leading a new generation. “Let us transform this nation,” he told thousands shivering in the cold at the campaign’s kickoff.

Obama, 45, is the youngest candidate in the Democrats’ 2008 primary field dominated by front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and filled with more experienced lawmakers. In an address from the state capital where he began his elective career 10 years ago, the first-term U.S. senator sought to distinguish himself as a staunch opponent of the Iraq war and a White House hopeful whose lack of political experience is an asset.

“I know I haven’t spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I’ve been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change,” Obama said to some of the loudest applause of his 20-minute speech. Obama is looking to cap his remarkable, rapid rise to prominence with the biggest political prize of all - the presidency. His elective career began just 10 years ago in the Illinois Legislature. He lost a bid for a U.S. House seat, then won the Senate seat in 2004, a relatively smooth election made easier by GOP stumbles.

In his speech, Obama did not mention his roots as the son of a man from Kenya and a woman from Kansas, his childhood in Hawaii and Indonesia or the history he would make if elected. That compelling biography has turned him into a political celebrity. Instead, he focused on his life in Illinois over the past two decades, beginning with a job as a community organizer with a $13,000-a-year salary that strengthened his Christian faith. He said the struggles he saw people face inspired him to get a law degree and run for the Legislature, where he served eight years.

He tied his announcement to the legacy of Lincoln, announcing from the building where the future 16th president served in the state Legislature. “We can build a more hopeful America. And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a house divided to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for President of the United States of America,” Obama said. His voice rose to a shout as he spoke over the cheers from thousands who braved temperatures in the teens.

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/10/2007 at 07:02 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Satire •  
• Comments (15) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

Guest Post: Driving Off

A Very Simple Solution (to many problems)
-- by Scooter

Here we are, with everyone complaining about high gas prices, dependence on foreign oil, outrageous insurance premiums, global warming, drowning polar bears, and sweaty penguins….  Seemingly, everyone and their brother has a solution, whether it is electric or hybrid cars, more funding for public transportation, corn to ethanol, or remembering how to ride a bike.

At face value, each and every one of these taken alone sounds great, until you dig a little deeper.  At up to 60 miles (supposedly) per gallon, a hybrid car is great for tooling around town, which is a three fold savings in fuel cost, and CO2 emissions.  Has there really been a savings for your wallet when it comes time to replace the batteries due to wear, or an accident?  According to my research, replacing the batteries cost between $3600 and $7000; using the low estimate at $2.25/gallon, that is 32,000 miles of driving for my car, at the high end over 62,000 miles. 

OK, you saved money on fuel, spared the environment countless tons of carbon and still made it to work on time. But, what happened to those batteries after they were replaced?  What about the cost to retrain and reequip the rescue crews to avoid electrocution to extract you from your car?  I am sure you feel good about your personal part of saving the environment, but think ahead.

I can’t say enough about public transportation.  Nothing like hopping on the bus to get four or five miles down the road.  46 minutes later at my stop, I am only a half a mile from where I need to be.  Talk about convenience.  My $1.50 bus ride saved me 56 cents in gas and cost me 46 minutes (walk time included).

Tell the people in Mexico now about how great ethanol is.  One of their main subsistence foods is now being turned into fuel for the few to burn.  Although it is almost never said in the media, after all is said and done, it currently takes more energy to produce ethanol than it gives off; it cannot be transported by pipeline; must be mixed with traditional gasoline, and actually reduces fuel efficiency by up to 15%.  Wow, what a miracle.

Now I love to ride my bike.  If I could, I would drive it to work, but I just can’t figure out how to carry my table saw, miter saw, two dozen two by fours, three sheets of plywood and my drill on the back.  If, however, I had Home Depot deliver all of my supplies, it would only cost me $75. Money well spent since that would have filled my car up more than twice.

Oh wait, I haven’t gotten to my solution – the one that would solve all of these issues.  As (I hope) you know, economics is about supply and demand.  Prices are set where supply equals demand – too much supply, prices go down; too much demand, prices go up.  My solution will reduce demand while increasing public transportation ridership (maybe they will break even someday, but we are all paying taxes for it now), and for those who can, reduce the price of gas. It is actually very simple ...

STOP HANDING OUT DRIVER’S LICENCES TO ANYONE WHO CAN SPELL THEIR OWN NAME!

In this, and every country, driving is not a right; it is a privilege.  Stop giving out driver’s licenses to people who can barely drive around the block. Stop handing them out to people who spend more on the sound system than they do on the upkeep of the car, who have enough money to have spinners, but not enough to keep that tailpipe from spewing blue smoke so thick you feel like you are in San Francisco in June; who can afford customize the paint job, but cannot pay for the insurance.  This privilege is not only for the privileged; it is for anyone who cares to take the responsibility of wielding a two-ton weapon in a serious manner.

I daresay, that by increasing the training, testing and roadworthiness of the drivers and their vehicles, there would be an immediate 75% reduction in cars on the road.  That would have huge economic and environmental effects that everyone could be proud of.  Those who made the cut and passed their very strict drivers test would have cheap gas available due to the sudden drop in demand.  The idiots who really cannot drive, but can spell their name would be off the road, which would drastically reduce the insurance risk, therefore the premiums.  The number of people who utilized public transportation would skyrocket (saving gas and making it self sufficient).  There would be a 75% reduction in emissions making the environmentalists happy(ier). Finally, the big oil companies would not make nearly as much profit that, for some reason, pisses off half of the country.

I do realize that the sudden collapse of the oil and automobile industries would be disastrous for the overall economy, but hey if that is the price we have to pay….

Posted by Drew458     on 02/10/2007 at 10:40 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

The Third World

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/10/2007 at 08:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor • Satire •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Climate Hysteria

You all know my position: the Global Warming freaks lost me when they started trying to tell me that the issue is settled, no more discussion will be tolerated and that I need to just STFU. I’ll be damned if I’ll just accept someone’s word that something is happening without verifiable proof. So far no one has demonstrated to me a direct correlation between mankind as the sole or even major cause of global warming and rising temperatures on a global scale with incontrovertible facts based on pure scientific research that has been peer reviewed by scientists on both sides of the argument.

I’m getting too much hysteria, media brainwashing, propaganda, finger-pointing and irrational accusations of conspiracies. In other words, too many people are peeing on my leg while trying to convince me it’s raining. I want to see some hard scientific data from both sides and an open discussion as well as continued research and more importantly ... long range planning that incorporates contingencies for rising temperatures and dropping temperatures. For the last time: the cause of climate change is not nearly as important as how we plan to adapt to it.

_{Mike Lester - The Rome (GA) News-Tribune}

A Skeptic’s Take On Global Warming
-- by Bill Steigerwald

Timothy Ball is no wishy-washy skeptic of global warming. The Canadian climatologist, who has a Ph.D. in climatology from the University of London and taught at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years, says that the widely propagated “fact” that humans are contributing to global warming is the “greatest deception in the history of science.”

Ball has made no friends among global warming alarmists by saying that global warming is caused by the sun, that global warming will be good for us and that the Kyoto Protocol “is a political solution to a nonexistent problem without scientific justification.”

Needless to say, Ball strongly disagrees with the findings of the latest report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which on Feb. 2 concluded that it is “very likely” that global warming is the result of human activity.

I talked to Ball by phone on Feb. 6 from his home on Victoria Island, British Columbia, which the good-humored scientist likes to point out was connected to the mainland 8,000 years ago when the sea level was 500 feet lower.

Q: The mainstream media would have us believe that the science of global warming is now settled by the latest IPCC report. Is it true?

A: No. It’s absolutely false. As soon as people start saying something’s settled, it’s usually that they don’t want to talk about it anymore. They don’t want anybody to dig any deeper. It’s very, very far from settled. In fact, that’s the real problem. We haven’t been able to get all of the facts on the table. The IPCC is a purely political setup.

There was a large group of people, the political people, who wanted the report to be more harum-scarum than it actually is. In fact, the report is quite a considerable step down from the previous reports. For example, they have reduced the potential temperature rise and they’ve reduced the sea level increase and a whole bunch of other things. Part of it is because they know so many people will be watching the report this time.

Q: Why should we be leery of the IPCC’s report—or the summary of the report?

A: Well, because the report is the end product of a political agenda, and it is the political agenda of both the extreme environmentalists who of course think we are destroying the world. But it’s also the political agenda of a group of people ... who believe that industrialization and development and capitalism and the Western way is a terrible system and they want to bring it down.

They couldn’t do it by attacking energy because they know that would get the public’s back up very quickly. ... The vehicle they chose was CO2, because that’s the byproduct of industry and fossil-fuel burning, which of course drives the whole thing. They think, “If we can show that that is destroying the planet, then it allows us to control.” Unfortunately, you’ve got a bunch of scientists who have this political agenda as well, and they have effectively controlled the IPCC process.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/10/2007 at 07:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Climate-Weather •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

Weekend Eye Candy

As all of you gents are aware by now, we lost a beautiful blonde last week. Anna Nicole Smith died Thursday afternoon after she was discovered unconscious in her hotel room at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Hollywood, Florida. She was 39. Actually, she was 38DD-26-38, but let’s not quibble.

As Hugh Hefner at Playboy put it, “I am very saddened to learn about Anna Nicole’s passing. She was a dear friend who meant a great deal to the Playboy family and to me personally. My thoughts and prayers are with her friends and loved ones during this difficult time.”

So ... for this week’s Eye Candy we’re going to take a trip back in time to 1992 when she first graced the pages of Playboy magazine. Click the image at right to visit the gallery. The usual warning applies: NSFW.

_{Christo Komarnitski - Bulgaria}

Posted by Hugh Hefner     on 02/10/2007 at 06:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Eye-Candy •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner