Wednesday - April 13, 2011

Moonbat of the Week

Welcome to the Iron Dojo Blog.

Two posts enter. One post leaves.

They post.  I link. You choose.

Ready?
Hai!

Ready?
Hai!!



Fight!!

Posted by Drew458     on 04/13/2011 at 10:17 PM   
Filed Under: • Insanity • Moonbat Award to: •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

GOP vs EPA

A guest post by Scott P.

Throughout the early months of 2011, the budget has been a hotly contested issue. With President Obama finally coming to a conclusion on a proposal this week, there are certainly still some issues at hand. One of the most debated aspects of the budget has been the slate of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The criticism and talk over the EPA’s budget has waged on back and forth from business owners and the GOP, to environmental supporters.

The business owners and GOP are right to continue on the barrage against the EPA. It is after all, the EPA regulations and monitoring that ends up costing businesses huge amounts of money and cutting any chance of employment growth. When Barack Obama introduced the original budget proposal at the start of the 2011 year, it called for around a 10 percent cut to the EPA’s budget, with minimal impact on their programs. The GOP used the early months to bring up another proposal that would’ve cut the EPA’s 2010 slate by nearly 30 percent in total. When it was settled this week, there looks to be around a 16 percent cut to the EPA’s budget.

This is certainly better than the 10 percent proposal from the President earlier this year, but there is still work left to do in cutting some of the resources of the EPA that are unneeded. Aside from the proposed EPA budget cuts, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 was also introduced. Brought on by a group of republican senators in March, this act would serve to put an end to the “Cap and Trade” agenda that the EPA is so notorious for with businesses. With an end to the cap and trade agenda, the EPA’s ability to monitor and regulate greenhouse gas emissions would be lessened. This would give some power back to the businesses and allow for revenue and employment to hopefully prosper once again.

While it looks like the GOP and business have essentially downplayed the role of the EPA as a whole, that isn’t the case. They simply believe that the resources and budget are being used improperly by the environmental agency. They’d rather see more resources go into some of the programs that have direct impact on the health risks associated with the environment. For example, an EPA program such as asbestos removal and preventing health risks like mesothelioma and asbestosis could use some more resources than something like the Clean Air Act, which has certain inefficiencies. Asbestos removal helps keep a number of people safe from these health risks every year, it can sometimes be life saving. For example, these diseases connected to asbestos are very severe and mesothelioma life expectancy[ objectionable link to mesotheliomasymptoms.com removed ] can be as short as a year. Certainly there are a great amount of other programs within the EPA such as this that could stand to use some more of their resources.

Given that the finalized budget was nowhere close to the proposed GOP slate for the EPA, it should be expected that these businesses owners and republicans are far from done trying to help their own revenues and employment. Along with further criticism of the EPA budget, look for more acts to follow that would cut down on costly regulations that are issued out by the environmental agency.

[ Drew: I am all in favor of clean water and air and as little environmental pollution and damage as possible. But you can not bankrupt businesses to get that last little smidgen of purity. “Good enough” is good enough, and anything radically more is pushing diminishing returns out to the asymptote. It’s long past time to find a happy realistic medium level and stick to it, no matter what the particular regulation is. What passed for a clean bill of health in the early 60s in terms of blood lead levels gets you hauled into the hospital today. Things have gone too far.

Remember how that oil sucking ship couldn’t be used during the Gulf Oil Disaster because it only removed 99 7/8% of all the oil? That was pretty stupid. Shutting down 2/3 of our drilling rigs “just in case” because one leaked was just as stupid. Especially while selling leases to the damn Chicoms to slant drill in the same spot any way they felt like, but that’s another rant. Similar regulations exist for the strip coal mining industry, the heavy metals and rare earths mining industry, et cetera. Actually darn near any productive business is just about buried in EPA regulations; it is no coincidence whatsoever that the vast improvements we’ve seen in the air and water quality in the USA started at about the same time our entire industrial base started going oversees. Where the EPA leaves off we have OSHA, throwing in so damn many safety regulations that you nearly need a back brace and a government permit to pick up a pencil in the office. The hippies are in charge of the hen house, to mix several metaphors. And they only take, never give. Not only do we need industry back in our own country to stop bleeding money to foreign nations, we need the jobs that come with it. The far left has had it’s own way virtually unopposed for more than a generation, and it has gone too far. Save paper - wipe your arse with a single sheet of tissue - because trees aren’t a renewable resource! Because if you plant them, they grow. But not instantly, therefore they aren’t renewable!! It’s that far gone.

But of course, the very instant that any Republican even mentions rolling back some of these onerous regulations, and out comes the freak show to yell and scream and protest and beat their bongos and claim how the slightest alleviation will instantly turn the whole earth to burnt poop and that all Republicans are evil earth raping bastards. Hell, they yell all that crap automatically anyway if there’s an R in the White House. It doesn’t matter if any of the accusations are true. Conversely, Obama could burn down the redwoods and salt the Everglades, and it would not make the news or even get a pout from the Sierra Club.

Come to think of it, the standard leftist tantrum is pretty much the same no matter what proposal the Right puts forth. Funny how the media and vast percentages of the population never ever wise up to this tactic, even after having dozens of provably false “disasters” thrown at them, from Global Cooling to Global Warming, Zero Population Growth, and 5 dozen different freak shows about how this food or that one is worse than snorting arsenic. Do parents even read “The boy who cried wolf” to their kids anymore? Does anyone listen?

Create a set of standards that are two steps greener than what passes for acceptable in the rest of the world (find the average between the EU’s super-stringent regs and the Chicoms “we couldn’t give a shit”, then make it 10% stricter. We’ll come out with some mid point, possibly a bit less than we have right now), write those standards down, then disband the EPA. They’ve done their job and now it’s time for them to go.

Lest you think that the EPA still serves a useful function by creating even more rules, recall that it was this bunch that wanted to declare the carbon dioxide you exhale was a harmful pollutant. With fines and limits. Which would empower them to hit you up for five or ten if you were breathing too hard. That’s how you know they’re beyond the bend and have to go.  And we don’t even have to mention Mike Bloomberg and his lunacy, or the Unhappy Meal squad and their whackadoodle efforts, or those loons who live in trees in Berkley and take dumps in plastic bags. Those crazies don’t think the EPA does enough. ]

Posted by Drew458     on 04/13/2011 at 05:19 PM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

How much will it be tomorrow?

Then it was $60 billion.

Then we went through 2 solid weeks of shenanigans on the Hill, and they came away with $38.5 billion.

And today we learn that somebody was fapping the numbers, because the real bottom line is that they only actually cut $14.7 billion. And some of that money was for border security efforts.

The meat of the spending deal struck between the two parties late Friday night was revealed in a legislative omnibus released early Tuesday morning. The specifics show that finding nearly $40 billion in cuts during the 2011 fiscal year required clever accounting and, for the White House, a willingness to concede on rhetoric to find gains on substance.

For example, the final cuts in the deal are advertised as $38.5 billion less than was appropriated in 2010, but after removing rescissions, cuts to reserve funds, and reductions in mandatory spending programs, discretionary spending will be reduced only by $14.7 billion.

White House officials said throughout the process that the composition of the cuts was more important than the top-line number, and that including mandatory cuts allowed that top line to grow while limiting the immediate impact of the cuts.

The move also keeps the 2011 discretionary baseline slightly higher, a terrain advantage for the Democrats heading into the 2012 spending process.

Read it and weep. If Present is President without the ID, then it looks to me like John Boehner isn’t worth his “eh”.

“We’re going to overturn Obamacare.” Really? Really truly?

Health care reform, too, will be implemented, though now under the eyes of several Republican-imposed audits and studies. The deal does cut $2.5 billion, nearly half the funding, from an effort to set up health care co-ops that was opposed by the insurance industry, and eliminates another policy, opposed by both corporations and labor unions, that allowed individuals to use the funding from employer-provided health care benefits to shop for insurance on the individual market.

Good news, except that Obamacare was pretty much written by the insurance companies to being with. So defunding the part that they don’t like is just playing into their hands even more. And the second policy mentioned there takes away your freedom of choice. Of course the unions opposed that; they don’t want you to have any.

Wow. Such a victory. I fully expect that by this time tomorrow another look at the numbers will show that Bo-eh-ner actually agreed to a spending increase; he got X cuts in departments A, B, and C at the cost of 3X increases in departments O, F, U. Which is what it looks like the Obamunists did to him. Are we to expect another boo-hoo video Johnny boy?

The president also garnered an additional $700 million in spending for his competitive education funding program, “Race to The Top,” and though it includes new audits of the consumer protection agency created by the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory overhaul, it also raises funds to implement reforms at the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.

Go read “Race to the Top” and see if they’re actually talking about anything speed related. Or even academic, since the winning states won’t have to ability to target even half the awarded funds. 50+% of them are pre-mandated to certain LEA (local education agencies).  And will you ever be able to trust anything with the Dodd-Frank imprimatur on it? I won’t. This is starting to look more like a shellacking than a victory.

Posted by Drew458     on 04/13/2011 at 02:12 PM   
Filed Under: • Republicans •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

It Figures

Fire extinguishers could be removed from communal areas in flats throughout the country because they are a safety hazard, it has emerged.

The life-saving devices encourage untrained people to fight a fire rather than leave the building, risk assessors in Bournemouth decided.

There are fears that their recommendation, which has seen the extinguishers ripped out of several private, high-rise flats in the town, could set a national precedent.

Under the Fire Safety Order of 2005, fire assessments must be carried out to ‘eliminate or reduce risk as is reasonably practical’.

But Mike Edwards, who lives in one of the blocks, said he was ‘absolutely staggered’ that risk experts thought it a safe decision.

‘They are worried we will point them in the wrong direction or use the wrong extinguishers,’ he said. ‘But if you are trapped in a burning building, you will work out how to use one.’

The 61-year-old claimed his neighbours were now worried sick that a fire could break out.

Dorset Fire and Rescue defended the move, saying: ‘Obviously, in some cases, an extinguisher could come in useful but, with new building regulations, every escape route should be completely fireproof.’

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents backed their removal because different extinguishers should be used on different types of fire.

That’s why most American households have Class A-B-C extinguishers, which will do the job on anything other than burning Maseratis, which need those Class D extinguishers. The best informed of us who really love to deep fry have made the investment in a Class K extinguisher, made especially for fighting grease and oil fires, although I am reasonably sure that an A-B-C model can handle a small grease fire. Just step back a little so you don’t blast the burning grease right out of the pan or off the stove. Or have a big box of baking soda you can dust at it. A BIG box.

Pretty sure we learned in Cub Scouts that you shoot the source, not the flames. ”PASS”, right? Or was it PASS OUT - pull, aim, shoot, sweep, get OUT? Macht nichts. And that’s about all the training you need for most small fires.

Posted by Drew458     on 04/13/2011 at 11:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Health and Safety • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Food For Thought

I ran across two articles online this morning that I think are worth passing on. Both of the articles are straightforward, but both have comments that to me are more thought provoking than the articles themselves.



The first one is the NRO piece on the shelling of Fort Sumter, since yesterday was the 150th anniversary of the beginning of the Civil War. It tells the story with an even hand and provides a bit of background. And then the comments begin.

We did some post on the Civil War here at BMEWS once upon a time a few years back, and got a rather hot response. From those comments I remember Turtler’s the best, that history shows the South had many years - decades - of prior foot stamping and hissy fit throwing to the point of threatening secession whenever the slavery issue came up in any form. Thanks for that.

The comments on this new post at NRO are well worth reading, although there are many and some are quite long. I’m going to combine and paraphrase the few that really struck me: after the Articles of Confederation didn’t work and our new Constitution was formed, not all the citizens of all the States took national citizenship to be their primary personal identifier. They considered themselves citizens of their own State first, and after that citizens of the United States. The State’s Rights Justification crowd stills toes that line, 150 years later, as the cause of the hostilities. They point out that no central government had the right to wield the power to strip citizens, and the States that represented them, of private property - slaves - merely by legislative fiat. They point out how this preeminent statist loyalty even caused problems within the Confederacy, and use the building of railroads as an example. But then another comment points out that at some point the central Confederate government offered manumission for all slaves willing to fight for the Cause, and to me that brings down that entire house of cards, because no mention of recompense to the slave owners was made. Made in that comment; did such a thing exist in the CSA edict of the day? I don’t know, but without it the argument becomes “We’re fighting this war of secession because the federal government doesn’t have the right to tell us what to do with our own property, so we’ll form our own new government that ... um ... has the right to tell us what to do with our own property.” Interesting reading, and you can read for a long time before the trolls start to get in the way.



The second article is the Pajamas Media piece on Social Security. Yes, SS is a shell game. A Ponzi scheme. It’s an entitlement program that the Supreme Court decided 51 years ago that you have no actual right to, so in other words it’s just another tax. That’s why the money goes into the general fund, and the SS “lockbox” is full of nothing but worthless IOUs. Years ago I read a piece, an apologista I now realize, that said that FDR dreamed up Social Security as a beneficent measure, and how a greedy and evil Legislature almost immediately appropriated the funds that in theory were supposed to be set aside. At some later time I read a similar article that pointed out that setting the money aside would have done little more than just tighten up the money supply, which would have furthered the Depression the nation was in at the time. It took one of the comments in today’s article to get me to read between the lines and realize that slick old FDR - the President of whom it was said he’d never tell the truth when a lie would suffice; and we know today what a Red / Socialist he really was - really had in mind. Had the Social Security money been set aside, put under the control of an oversight group, and invested in America, we’d all be Communists now. Huh? Well, think about it. The feds take 12% of every dollar earned by every working citizen, and they invest it. How? By buying stocks and bonds to support American business. How many workers, how many years, how much money? Scores of millions of workers, for more than 75 years, to the tune of untold trillions of dollars. The federal government, through the auspices of it’s oversight group, would have controlling ownership in just about every stock on the market. Whoever ran that oversight group would have more economic power than any tyrant who ever lived. Communism through Oligarchy (and how is that any different from what we have under Obama today?) Did Congress realize this at the time? I don’t know. But it was a beggar’s choice between absolute economic tyranny and an ever fruitful Money Tree to fatten up the federal coffers. Would taking a few billion and seeding an investment portfolio for every working citizen have been a better approach? Probably. But let’s remember that those were the days before computers, and it would have taken a massive army of accountants to track the contributions and worth of the hundreds of millions of individual accounts; even if the accountatnts were poorly paid that cost alone would have eaten up most of the profits. Putting the investment effort down at the payroll level would have been easier, but any investment scheme more complex than a CD would have required those same armies of bean counters, except that they’d all be working for the brokerages. There is no easy way out of the SS mess and there is not one legislator with the guts to touch this live wire, or the ability to avoid the rabid dogpile if he were to do so.

Posted by Drew458     on 04/13/2011 at 08:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Economics • History •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - April 12, 2011

EYE CANDY

BRITTANY SNOW

CANDICE SWANEPOEL

KATE UPTON

THE END IS NEAR. IN FACT, SHE’S BELOW THE FOLD.

Posted by peiper     on 04/12/2011 at 01:59 PM   
Filed Under: • Eye-Candy •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

riots of 30 yrs ago caused millions, renamed an uprising by the left

Thirty years ago today there occurred what has been described as the worst rioting seen here in a hundred years.  I was of course aware of it then, being married to a Brit.
Over time I guess I failed to remember it and anyway, there were problems of like nature in my own country.  After moving here 7 years ago come April 28, I was reminded of it more then once.  The subject comes up often.

The rioting started in a place called Brixton, south London.  Not exactly an up market location, and home to mostly Negroes.  The violence they conceived and carried out along with their usual appetite for looting and vandalism was unprovoked.  Sure, there have been lots of times a white cop has exceeded his authority.  But when so much crime is committed in one area by one particular group, it must be difficult at best for a policeman to ignore ppl he suspects might be up to something.  Yeah, it is true that various ethnic groups, not just blacks, have been treated badly.  The only thing I can say in defense of the cops, is that their stop and search tactics were meant to combat a growing menace of drugs.  Depending on your own POV, that still might not be a good idea for overstepping your remit.  But it’s a damn fair explanation.  And yes, I’d be pretty well PO’d if I were an innocent victim of the tactics of that day.  But I really don’t think I’d see it as an excuse for looting and throwing fire bombs.

Some estimates put the injuries to police at 300. And please do not make any mistake about this. It was left wing agitators that egged the rioters on. More then 100 shops were looted, 30 buildings were set on fire, 120 vehicles were torched as well.
Authorities called it wanton rampage and criminality.

Just how’d it start?  Well, police went to the aid of a black who’d been stabbed.
They were then surrounded by a crowd and accused of not doing enough to help.
Yeah, that little incident triggered a full blown riot involving 5,000 ppl and damage in the millions. Think Watts riots or Rodney King.  Some ‘ethnic’ groups don’t need any real excuse to burn a city and create havoc and mayhem. But when they find something that looks good and they can adopt it as an issue, well hey. They go for it.
And so they did 30 yrs ago egged on by socialist and left wing apologists who claimed they would bring down the police.  And looking at things these days 30 yrs on, I guess they did just that.  In fact, a councillor of the day did say he wanted to “break the metropolitan police.”

Naturally enough there was an inquiry as there always is. It was led by a very liberal judge, and so began political correctness. 
Eventually, some time later as old readers may recall, I did a post about a police chief who bragged that he was” proud to be politically correct.”

Well now, the story doesn’t end here. Oh no. History is not only in the making, it has been re-written by a cash strapped city council, who has renamed the riots as, an uprising.  Needless to say the council is quite left. And here’s the whole sad, stupid story.

Cash-strapped council rebrands Brixton riots as an ‘uprising’ (and funds the 30th anniversary ‘celebrations’)
By RYAN KISIEL

For those who were caught up in the violence and destruction, the Brixton riots are best forgotten.
Yet Labour councillors are spending thousands of pounds remembering tomorrow’s 30th anniversary of the carnage in South London which put 279 police officers in hospital.
The incident has been renamed the ‘Brixton Uprising’ and will feature ‘first-hand witness accounts’ along with ‘special guests’ to provide the entertainment
Lambeth Council is staging the celebration in its Windrush Square and Tate Library. It will be recorded for the council’s Black Cultural Archive.

The Jamaican ‘dub poet’ Linton Kwesi Johnson, whose work contains graphic descriptions of alleged police brutality during the 1980s, including one entitled ‘Ingland is a Bich’, is due to perform.

(just WTF is a ‘dub poet?’ No, don’t tell me. I don’t wanna know. They call his tripe, his work? Oh how literate and articulate this negroe is. And if England is so bad, what’s he doing here? Collecting benefits no doubt.)

The Labour-run authority is funding the event despite constant complaints by its leader, Steve Reed, that government-imposed cash cuts would lead to a rise in crime and another ‘Baby P tragedy’.

Lambeth has recently declared mass redundancies among street cleaners, park rangers and lollipop ladies, and closed all but one of its public lavatories.
A spokesman said tomorrow’s event was ‘community-led’ and part of its work engaging with the public.

But Conservative MP Patrick Mercer, chairman of the Commons sub-committee on counter-terrorism, said: ‘I would question the act of celebrating an insurgency.
‘It was difficult and dangerous at the time and I don’t want to remember it.
‘The law is the law and, just because it was chaotic 30 years ago, there is no need for celebrations.’

Peter Smyth, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said: ‘This is crazy and a complete waste of public money.
‘Calling it an uprising justifies and celebrates that people were injured and property was damaged.
‘Anybody who celebrates violence is despicable. The public purse is being pulled tight and it is not right to celebrate violence, especially in the current climate when there has been a recent return to violent protest.’
More than 5,000 rioters rampaged through Brixton in 1981 after police increased stop-and-searches in the area.
A total of 28 shops were burned, 118 were looted and 120 cars were set on fire as police fought running battles with the rioters in the streets. Socialist and left-wing groups first referred to it as an ‘uprising’ to give it an air of legitimacy, arguing that it was a poor social underclass who revolted against their capitalist masters.
But the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said: ‘Nothing, but nothing, justifies what happened.’

source

Posted by peiper     on 04/12/2011 at 01:06 PM   
Filed Under: • Commies • Politically Correct B.S. • UK •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

just what europe needs right now. more muz. refugees/immigrants

No big surprise that the refugees from Tunisia are flooding Italy, and very soon now other places in Europe. And especially worrying, the UK.
And apparently Germany is very worried and is tightening border controls.
Italy looks to be opening the flood gates to a refugee tsunami, and the Germans are not best pleased.

Some politicians (German) are understandably concerned while a Catholic spokesman for the church stupidly can not see the difference between the refugees at the end of WW2, and this latest flood of humanity (?) that will eventually turn Europe into another ‘dark continent.’ And possibly a muslim one at that.

Berlusconi really surprises me with his liberal attitude on the subject.  Saying that however, I do understand the Italian problem.  The island the darkies are over running, now total more of them (think in terms of an ant swarm) then actual natives (Italian) who live there. And the natives have demanded immediate action be taken to relieve the problem.

If the govt. empties the island quickly, they leave space for even more unsuitable sub-species invasion. 

H/T Deutsche Welle and Europe News

Germany tells Italy to ‘solve its own problems’ in Tunisian refugee row

Boatloads of migrants continue to arrive on Lampedusa

German officials have raised the possibility of reinstating border controls after Italy said it would provide thousands of Tunisian refugees with temporary travel visas allowing them to enter many European countries.

Germany sharply rebuked Italy over the weekend over its decision to grant thousands of Tunisian economic migrants temporary travel visas, allowing them to leave Italy for other European countries in the border-free Schengen Area.

Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich told the Monday edition of newspaper Welt that Italy had to “regulate its own problems” and not force them on other countries.

Together with Cyprus and Malta, which have also been inundated by the recent wave of North African migrants fleeing instability in the region, Italy wants to activate a clause in EU law dating back to 2001 that would see the refugee burden shared among the EU member states.

As it stands, refugees must remain in the European country of their arrival while their claims for asylum are being processed. Some 25,000 North African refugees have landed on the Italian island of Lampedusa, located between Sicily and Tunisia, since the start of this year.

But Friedrich argued against using the clause, which he said was originally created to accommodate the influx of migrants in the wake of conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

Border control threat

Hans-Peter Friedrich wants Italy to accommodate the thousands of refugees
Meanwhile, the interior minister of the southern German state of Bavaria, Joachim Herrmann, has said border controls on the German-Austrian border could be reinstated in a last-ditch effort to prevent the migrants from entering Germany.

In an interview with newspaper Welt am Sonntag, Herrmann called on Italy to get its house in order without resorting to issuing temporary visas.

“We will not accept that the Italian government simply declares that the Tunisian migrants are tourists and uses this to push them into other countries,” he said.

Herrmann conceded that the move would impact relations between Italy and Germany, and called for a common EU stance on economic migration.

“They must be sent back to their homelands,” Herrmann added.

Boris Rhein, Herrmann’s counterpart in the neighboring state of Hesse, told Welt that if Italy went ahead with issuing the temporary visas, “it would be necessary to consider whether the [visa-free travel] Schengen Area should be temporarily abolished in Germany.”

Germany admonished

Berlusconi wants EU countries to help with the refugee burden
As German politicians criticized Rome over its refugee policy, a top official with the Catholic Church has slammed Germany’s refusal to take in some of the thousands of Tunisian migrants currently in Italy.

“I’m astonished by the position of closure adopted by my country,” German-born Cardinal Walter Kasper said in an interview with Turin-based daily La Stampa on Sunday.

“I grew up in a Germany destroyed by the [Second World] War, but which still knew how to welcome masses of displaced persons and to give a home to entire populations who were fleeing from misery and despair,” the 78-year-old Kasper said.

Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi commented this week when visiting Lampedusa that the refugee crisis was akin to a “human tsunami” and called on the EU for assistance.

“Either Europe is something real and concrete, or it is nothing,” Berlusconi said. “If the latter is the case, it would be better if we all went out own ways and each determined our own politics and allowed selfishness to follow.”

DEUTSCHE WEELE

Posted by peiper     on 04/12/2011 at 10:40 AM   
Filed Under: • EUro-peons •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

a pat condell video on liberal apologists

Eight minutes of liberal bashing by Pat Condell.
I think this might be one of the strongest he has done in awhile. It’s evident he’s also angry due to response from his last one.
He certainly pulls no punches.

Posted by peiper     on 04/12/2011 at 09:50 AM   
Filed Under: • PAT CONDELL •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

The Forgotten Man

Probably the most thoughtful artwork you’ll see today.

A visit to Jon McNaughton’s website will show this image. If you put your cursor over the image, the name of that President will pop up.

Posted by Christopher     on 04/12/2011 at 07:07 AM   
Filed Under: • Art-Photography •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

drew,lyndon and all bmews regs. remember your blood pressure before reading

This honestly is a coincidence.  Not normally here this early. Caught this in the morning paper and knew I couldn’t ignore it.

What the heck do ya make of this?

He said he was unconvinced that they had enough evidence to convict the pirates – even though they were heavily armed, were carrying hostages and had confessed

RULE BRIT .... OH COME ON PEOPLE. SING ALONG.  RUUUULE BRI-TANNIA, BRI-TANNIA RULED THE WAVES .....I CAN’T HEAR YOU!

What a load of rubbish this is.  No wonder pirates are so successful.  Word in the newspapers reports that they are becoming more violent too.

This is most definitely an RCOB story.  And btw, with regard to the one Drew posted on another pirate capture.  The article didn’t say what our guys did with the black bastards.  Probably read em Miranda rights or something else ridiculous.

Here ya go. Look at this. You may want a calming drink first.

HMS Nursemaid:

Shame as Navy seizes 17 armed Somalis, gives them halal meat and nicotine patches… then sets them free!

By TOM KELLY and PAUL REVOIR

When a Royal Navy warship captured a crew of Somali pirates, it seemed like a rare chance to strike back at the ruthless sea gangsters.

The 17 outlaws were armed with an arsenal of AK 47s and rocket-propelled grenades, and had forced hostages on a hijacked fishing vessel to work as slaves for three months.

But instead of bringing them to justice, the British servicemen were ordered to provide the pirates halal meals, medical checks, cigarettes – and in one case even a nicotine patch – before releasing them in their own boats.

The extraordinary treatment – revealed in a Radio 4 documentary to be broadcast tonight – came at a time when Somali piracy is causing mayhem to shipping in the Indian Ocean.

More than £60million was paid in ransoms last year and pirates currently hold 30 ships and nearly 800 hostages.

HMS Cornwall is one of two Royal Navy frigates patrolling two and a half million square miles of ocean to try to capture pirate ships.

The apparent breakthrough came in February when the captain of a merchant ship crossing the ocean radioed to say he had seen something suspicious.

A helicopter was scrambled and spotted a Yemeni fishing vessel which had been hijacked by pirates and was being used as their ‘mother ship’ to attack other vessels.

Armed Royal Marines launched boats and swooped on the pirates, who were found with nine AK 47s plus rocket-propelled grenade launchers and boarding ladders.

The five slave crew from the fishing vessel were released and the 17 pirates initially detained on board the warship.

Commander David Wilkinson, Cornwall’s captain, said: ‘This team admitted their intention was to commit piracy activities.’

But after compiling the evidence against them and submitting it to his superiors he was ordered to ‘set up arrangements for putting them ashore in Somalia’.

Before being freed, the pirates were given a medical check-up in accordance with UK law and food which included a halal option to take into account religious needs.

After showing they were compliant, some were given cigarettes, and one was given a nicotine patch on medical advice because his tobacco withdrawal had caused his heart rate to soar.

Close to shore, the British servicemen set them free in two skiffs which they had earlier seized from the gangsters – with no food and just enough fuel to get them to land.

MP Henry Bellingham says said the Government is reviewing the ‘catch and release’ approach to piracy

As they stepped off the warship, Commander Wilkinson told the head of the pirate gang: ‘If you are a leader, go back and lead for good.

‘If you are going to carry on in this trade, expect to find me and my colleagues waiting for you. And if I see you again, it’s not going to go well.’

Commander Wilkinson added that he believed the order to free the pirates was the ‘right decision’ because he was not convinced bringing them back to the UK would have been a deterrent.

He also said he was unconvinced that they had enough evidence to convict the pirates – even though they were heavily armed, were carrying hostages and had confessed.

The decision to release the pirates was made by the UK’s Maritime Component Commander based in Bahrain after considering UK policy and law.

Foreign Office Minister Henry Bellingham said the Government is reviewing the ‘catch and release’ approach to piracy.

‘It is not going to happen in the future unless there isn’t any other alternative.’

The Sea Gangsters is on BBC Radio 4 tonight at 8pm.

DAILY MAIL

“If you are going to carry on in this trade, expect to find me and my colleagues waiting for you. And if I see you again, it’s not going to go well.”

Right.  Bet the pirates were shaking with fear at that threat.

Posted by peiper     on 04/12/2011 at 04:59 AM   
Filed Under: • Pirates, aarrgh! •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - April 11, 2011

Don’t Ask, And The Navy Won’t Tell

Guided missile destroyer USS Mason (DDG 87), flagship of the Singapore-led Combined Task Force (CTF) 151, freed a dhow from suspected pirates in the Arabian Sea, April 10.

The FV Nasri was initially sighted on April 9, by an Australian Maritime Patrol Aircraft. USS Mason, being the nearest warship, was tasked immediately to close and investigate.

Mason and its embarked helicopter located the Nasri early on the morning, April 10. The helicopter’s crew saw 16 personnel, a motored skiff, a ladder and several oil barrels on board. The personnel on the dhow complied with verbal warnings to stop, and assemble on the deck where they could be clearly seen.

The boarding team from Mason searched the dhow and found weapons and other common piracy paraphernalia, such as ladders and excessive fuel drums. They identified 11 of the men as suspected pirates, and five as members of the dhow’s crew.

Pirates are known to use the crew of captured vessels as hostages and also to operate their vessels as mother-ships from which to launch further attacks.

The Nasri was returned to its crew and departed the area.

Republic of Singapore Navy Rear Admiral Harris Chan, Commander, CTF 151, was delighted with the coalition effort and said, “the success of this operation is a testament to the operational readiness of CTF 151 and its units. As USS Mason has demonstrated, we are able to respond swiftly to disrupt any pirate activity, and will continue in our efforts to ensure the security of maritime activity in this region.”

So the 5 hostages got their little dhow back and went on their merry way. And the 11 pirates ... ?

I wonder if we have new material for those sharks in the latest Snickers ads?

Posted by Drew458     on 04/11/2011 at 09:05 PM   
Filed Under: • Pirates, aarrgh! •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Some Very Dark Numbers

Since it’s tax time again, I’ve been spending a lot of time using the old spreadsheet. I’ve had the TV on in the background, listening to the news people go on endlessly about the latest budget BS. Oh joy, after 2 weeks of wrangling, the wonderful federal legislature managed to cut just about 1% off the projected budget. The problem is that a huge portion of the budget is based on borrowed money, and unless it is the double super secret plan of our elitist superiors in DC to borrow and borrow and borrow from other nations until they beggar the world, and then claim bankruptcy, we’re pretty much screwed. Hey, I’ve long wondered if that isn’t their actual energy policy - suck the world dry before using our own assets, so it wouldn’t surprise me if that was their fiscal policy. We’d just better keep enough functional nukes on hand though if that’s the case. I hope it isn’t.

We’ve heard a lot of talk about “mortgaging our future”. You know what? It’s true. It’s worse than true, if by worse you can conceive of a mortgage that lasts 50 or more years instead of the more normal 30.

So I wondered, just how much of the federal pie goes to pay down the debt? And the current answer is actually impossible to find, because our wonderful Hopey Changey Democrat controlled government didn’t even bother to make a budget for 2010. And here we are in mid-April 2011, and there isn’t a budget yet for this year either. Seems to me like they aren’t doing their jobs. At all. But that’s a rope/tree/some assembly required rant for another day.

We always hear how China and other countries are financing us by buying our debt. Now, maybe I wasn’t listening close enough, but what rate is the USA getting? Prime? Half of prime? Are the wonderful communists in China just giving us the money for free, pay us back when you can, no worries? The hell they are. It’s business, and they’re moving major amounts of paper, so you know the rate is going to be most profitable.

I found two pretty good pages on the budget and where the money goes. Here and here. I know they’re out of date at this point, but as the saying goes ... it’s good enough for government work.

I ran some numbers and they are beyond bleak. The current level of spending, borrowing, and repayment does not even hold the line against the interest accrued on our debt, unless that entire 14.2 trillion dollars was lent to us at 1.73% interest or less. Do you wish you could refinance your home at 1.73%? Oh I bet you do!

So I assumed two possible interest rates: 2.5% and 5%. Then I applied a total Drewsolution, a draconian move that would cause riots and suicides all over. Keeping the tax level the same, I cut the entire federal budget in half. No sacred cows, no special interests, no “uncuttable” mandatory spending. For every dollar they’re spending now, they only get to spend 50¢ under my new plan. And every last cent of surplus taxes goes to paying down the debt, plus the one half of the amount we’re currently paying.

And the numbers absolutely suck.

Cutting the $3.83 trillion dollar budget IN HALF gets it down to $1.92 trillion, and with a revenue base of $2.56 trillion we no longer need to borrow the ONE THIRD of the budget as we are doing right now. So let’s go crazy, send the old folks and the poor folks out to starve and die of horrible diseases, and see what we could do then. I have to assume a stable tax base and no further devaluation of our money. Yeah, that’s unreal, so this is an academic exercise. But it makes the point: this $38.1 billion stuff on the news is horse manure. Passing an amendment to require a balanced budget is horse manure. The one and only way to pay down the debt is to apply something akin to Sharia law for the spenders: if I see your hand with a pen in it writing a check, I get to cut off your arm with a sword. Or, as Nancy Reagan would say, “Just say NO”.

With $14.2 trillion dollars in debt, cutting the budget in half and keeping it at that amount for decades would let us apply $765.5 billion a year to our debt. That’s almost 40% of the new death-by-austerity budget.  But this is what you have to do, this is how you have to live if you find yourself up to your eyeballs in debt. The United States of America does not get to call a Mulligan. We don’t get to say “oops, sorry, never mind”. We owe the money, and a very large amount of it has to be paid back. We’ve been borrowing since 1969, and we’ve only even balanced the budget once or twice in all the years since. The chickens have come home to roost, but they’ve metastasized into vultures. Hungry vultures. The only way to get rid of them is to carve up the dead horse they’re circling and burn it, one chunk at a time. And we have no choice but to stand down wind of the pyre. It’s really going to smell. Tough noogies; it’s our horse so it’s our responsibility. “First, stop feeding the horse” is a Stuck On Stupid Step. It’s a true one, but it only helps to clarify the situation if you’re trying to convince drooling imbeciles who are willfully blind. So, um, Mr. Government? First, stop feeding the horse!!!”

If we got those trillions for only 2.5% APR, and we stick to the plan come hell AND high water, then it would take 13 years to pay the debt down to the “manageable” $8 trillion point. It would take 25 years to pay it all off. And this is with super low interest and a budget that would just about cause a revolution. And absolutely sticking to the plan. I know, I said that already. I’m saying it again because these are completely new words to anyone in the legislature. Stick. To. The. Plan. Without. Exception.

At 5%, it would take 38 years to get the deficit down to $8 trillion. THIRTY. EIGHT. YEARS. It would take 53 years to pay it off. And in all that time the federal budget would not increase by a cent.

And if we maybe borrowed that money at 10%? Don’t even go there. Uh uh sistah no way no how. Talk to da hand! Don’t even consider any interest rate higher than 5.385%, because even under my wildly Draconian plan which puts nearly three quarters of a trillion dollars against the debt annually and does not borrow even a single penny, it can not be done. Even when it’s only compounded annually, the interest on $14.2 trillion is more than the amount my ultra-austerity budget pays if the APR is higher than 5.385%.

There is another way out of this mess. If we pay off our debt in straight dollar amounts, but the US dollar becomes second hand Charmin like the Zimbabwe Buck, then our national debt evaporates, because the money becomes worthless. And the kid pushing a broom at McD’s is earning $275,000 an hour. And we get the whole world off our back ... and our entire nation is bankrupt.

Hey, I hear the Democrats want to raise the debt ceiling again, and that Obama’s latest budget calls for borrowing half a trillion more than he did last time! Sweet. How’s that Hopey Changey shit working out for you?

Posted by Drew458     on 04/11/2011 at 07:28 PM   
Filed Under: • Economics • Politically-Incorrect •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

A Different Kind Of Freedom

The speed limit on some highways in Texas may be raised to 85 mph, the highest in the nation, under legislation the Texas House approved Wednesday.

The measure passed on a voice vote was part of a larger transportation bill. It would authorize the Texas Department of Transportation to raise the speed limit on designated lanes or entire stretches of roads after doing engineering and traffic studies, The Dallas Morning News reported Thursday.

The Senate is considering a similar bill.

“They have high-speed roadways in Europe, and there could be some merit in having some of those highways in Texas,” said Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, who introduced the bill. “Given the right engineering, we should consider it.”

Texas has more than 520 miles of interstate highways on which the speed limit is 80 mph.

One such stretch of Interstate 10 “is as nice a road as you can build; it’s flat with a long line of sight, wide lanes and good shoulders,” said Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso. “For people like us who travel that long distance, it could be good” to raise the limit to 85 mph, he said.

Some auto insurers oppose the measure, citing safety concerns.

“Obviously, the two things that kill most people on our highways are speed and alcohol. Increasing it to 85, or even 75, will have a dramatic impact on the death and injury rate on those highways where it’s implemented,” said Jerry Johns, a spokesman for the Southwestern Insurance Information Service.

He said drivers already exceed 70 mph highway speed limits.

“But 85 mph is simply too fast to drive even on a flat road. Any little hitch can cause an accident at that speed. There is still traffic on those roads, and to drive 85 mph is simply ludicrous,” he said.

85 is ludicrous? And just too dangerous? So I guess this means that all those people in those bitsy little wind-up cars in France, Italy (where you can go 93mph on the big highways), Germany (das autobahn, duh) must all just fall over dead non-stop. Give me a break. Even in tiny little Ireland the speed limit is 75mph.

But it’s for your own good! And besides, driving fast wastes gasoline!

Some car insurers, however, oppose the bill:

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, high speeds were a factor in about one-third of all fatal crashes in 2009. The faster you’re traveling, the greater the distance needed to bring your vehicle to a complete stop and the longer it takes a driver to react to emergency situations, according to IIHS. If an accident does occur at a higher speed, there is a strong likelihood that the crash impact will exceed the protection available to vehicle occupants.

On top of safety concerns, speeding increases fuel consumption. Every 5 mph you drive over 60 mph is like paying an additional $0.24 per gallon for gas, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

To that last point I call bullshit. No, I am not denying the physics, I understand how doubling the velocity quadruples the amount of work done, which is another way of saying that it’s much harder to push a car through the air at higher speeds than it is at lower speeds. My counter point is that most cars in America are simply geared wrong for driving at those kinds of speeds. I’m certain that this can be overcome.

Look, I drive a mangy old Saturn. It was no hot rod to begin with, with it’s 1.9L 124hp/122 lb/ft engine and a 5 speed. While the car is quite aerodynamic, that little engine is spinning way too fast at 85mph. In 5th gear that’s about 3500rpm. Hey, I live in NJ, and on the weekend there is no speed limit on the highways. NONE. No, that’s not true. The speed limits are almost never enforced, and the entire state gets out on the highways and drives around like Al Unser, making up for the bumper to bumper traffic plodding they do on the same roads at rush hour M-F. So they’re out there going 80, 85, 90 ... and you’ll still have some damn SUV or mongo pickup truck tailgating you, or some idiot passing you on the right and diving in right in front of you. But that’s Joisey; only the strong survive. My point is that I’m pretty certain my car could hold that speed if the engine was turning 1000rpm less, maybe even 1250rpm less. I find myself looking for an extra gear every time I get up to 70mph. My secondary point is that 85mph or faster is the reality in tiny little NJ, with the most dense population in the country. We do it and manage not to die constantly. So big old wide open Texas should be able to handle it with no sweat. And our deer population is at least as big a road hazard as their armadillo population.

My wife’s Spec V has a 6 speed, and her car has almost half again more power than mine (175hp/180 lb/ft). The two vehicles are about the same size and weight; hers is way faster than mine. But her 6 speed is a very close ratio one, and even in 6th at highway speeds the engine is turning far too much. At 80mph her car could easily turn 2000rpm less and hold the speed even on a moderate grade. As it is right now, at 85 in 6th her car is just waking up and starting to get rowdy. Tap the gas and it leaps to 100 in a couple seconds. Her 2.5L engine has enough pull down low so that you can drive around town at 30mph in 6th gear and not lug the engine. It has the wrong gears for the amount of engine, period. 6th should run the engine at idle at 50mph. It shouldn’t be usable at all outside of the highway.

And we both drive weak little 4 cylinder cars compared to the V6 and V8 vehicles everyone else has, where 250hp is below average. Given a proper overdrive gear designed for this speed, they’d get the same highway gas mileage they do at 65mph, because their engines are already providing far more power than required. So let’s see some better gear ratios, m’kay?

As for the safety angle ... well, I’ve got a couple ideas. The Staties everywhere should patrol the highways and give out more tickets for following too closely than they do for speeding. Speed doesn’t really matter, it’s how far away you are from the car in front of you when somebody does something unexpected. Paying attention helps a lot too, and Americans utterly suck chunks at that. We’re too busy eating, texting, talking on the phone, fiddling around with the music, etc to pay any heed to the road. And our big fat asses are sunk into those big plush seats in our cars with their super soft ride and total sound insulation: even the driver is just along for the ride. It’s hard to find a car or truck that even has a manual transmission. Shifting gears is too much to ask of us. We aren’t really involved in the process.

In the same vein I’d set standards for breaking distance. Fill the car or truck up to it’s rated carrying capacity, and a full tank of gas. Now from 65mph it has to stop 10 times in X distance or less, then it has to stop in Y distance or less from 90mph, 10 times in a row. Doesn’t matter at all what size vehicle it is, whether it’s a moped or a city bus or a cement mixer. If it can go that fast, then it has to be able to stop properly. Vehicles that can’t handle the high speeds carry a rear window sticker with their maximum rated speed, and woe be unto the driver going 85 in a truck only brake rated for 60.

Vehicle inspections would be stricter as well. New Jersey would have to go back to that shock absorber thing they used to do, where some gizmo made your car bounce up and down. They don’t do that one anymore. Come to think of it, the state run outsourced inspection rather sucks, but to “save money” they give you a 2 or a 4 year sticker.

In Germany I’ve heard that the highway police check your tires when they pull you over, and if you’ve been out on the autobahn going 150mph and your tires are only rated for 85mph ... well, they don’t like that very much. And they’re Germans. So you know what happens. (what, you mean they invade Poland? Again?? No wise-ass, they fine your butt off, big time)

So 85mph on American highways can be perfectly safe. We need to make sure we have the right kind of vehicles for it, in good repair, we need to learn how to actually drive instead of riding along, and we need to learn to give the guy ahead plenty of room. And if you are the guy ahead, that means you move over to the next lane when someone comes up behind you. You hear that Pennsyltucky drivers? Try and wrap your pointy little heads around that one: you don’t own the fast lane, so move the EFF over when someone comes up behind you. Geex.

Posted by Drew458     on 04/11/2011 at 01:48 PM   
Filed Under: • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • planes, trains, tanks, ships, machines, automobiles •  
• Comments (6) • 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