This about sums it up

Dennis Prager explains why he thinks the Obama administration has inflicted the most damage of any presidency in our nation's history.

On Robin Williams' death

I haven't posted something in so long, and it feels kind of strange to do so now. But, over the past couple of days I have felt a little more introspective, which has lead me to post a couple of things on Facebook that are more serious than typical for me. Anyway, I thought I would re-post my reaction to Robin Williams' death here. 

From my Facebook:

I just wanted to flesh out a comment I made relating to the tragic death of Robin Williams that struck a chord with me. I wrote, "I think we collectively feel the loss of [this] 'joy giver' much more acutely today because of the cascade of horrific stories that have dominated the news feeds, which feel so overwhelming."

Even a cursory reading of current events makes it plainly evident that darkness is spreading in many corners of the world, and even in certain places here at home. There is a prevailing sense that evil has the upper hand. And the trend lines are not positive. Our society places great value upon those relatively few individuals who lift us out of despair by making us laugh, love, think, sing, etc. For many, these celebrities provide a respite from suffering, fear, and sadness. Robin Williams was one of those individuals--a light in the darkness. His light was extinguished in an unexpected and tragic way today--and the darkness advanced yet a little more. 

I added: 

There are precious few "joy givers" in this world, which makes us feel his loss so much more intensely. This sadness is exacerbated by the idea that Mr. Williams apparently didn't know how much he was truly loved. Another important point, I think, is that as our entertainment options have become increasingly digitized, our choices have increased substantially. Prior to the internet and cable TV there were only the networks on which our favorite shows were broadcast once a week (or during holidays). It was a shared experience that helped to shape our culture. The explosive growth in our entertainment options has been mostly positive. But arguably it has had at lease one deleterious affect in that many of us no longer share the same heroes/villains. I think this is one of the reasons for our collective sadness.

Dusting the 'Ol Blog Off

I obviously haven't posted in a loooonnng time. So many things have happened in the last couple of years I could spend months posting. But, I think I'll keep most of that to myself for now. Suffice it to say that, in the immortal words of my all-time favorite band, "it's getting better all the time." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk0dBZ1meio

Local Politics Are Not For Me

Tuesdays are busy days for me. After work I pick up little man for soccer practice (I'm the head coach) and, after an hour-and-a-half of chasing fifteen 11-year-olds around, I take him home and head over to band practice. Practice last night was pretty fun, despite my tiredness. Dan Mole's (the bass player) wife came to watch us play. It was the first time in their 8-year marriage that she had seen him play. She seemed impressed. 

Afterward, Dan, his wife (can't remember her name), and I had a chance to chat a bit. He reminded me of the time a few weeks prior that I ran into him at the Nixon Library during a live broadcast of the John Phillips radio show (Ann Coulter was Phillip's guest for the evening). Dan was surprised to see me there. He and his wife have both been politically active over the past few years. Dan was the Orange County chairman of the Carly Fiorina campaign for the U.S. Senate. His wife had been on staff for a U.S. Congressman. 

Dan told me that he used to think the major power center was in D.C. However, he later learned that local politics is where the real levers of power are located. He said that he could introduce me into the political scene if I wanted. I've always been intrigued by the idea, but have contented myself with blogging and/or discussions with friends. My brief flirtation with the idea ended after Dan told me how jaded he had become after getting heavily involved in local politics. "You think the Republicans actually believe what they say about lower taxes, freedom, liberty...", he said. "But they are really in it for the money, the prestige...which committee they can get on to gain status." I was disheartened by that. I truly believe in the concepts of limited government, lower taxes, liberty, and the like. I am not naive about politicians, but Dan made it sound as though there were no true believers. This notion disabused me of any desire to involve myself in local politics. 

So...I guess it's back to blogging!

Hello

I have been away for many moons. Had a thought to look up my blog and take a stroll down memory lane. Glad I did.

Taxing My Patience

• Tim Geithner -- Obama's nominee for Secretary of the Treasury. Failed to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for several years while working for the IMF. Taxes owed: $34,000. 

Status: nomination confirmed.

• Tom Daschle --  Obama's nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Failed to fully pay taxes for 2005 through 2007. Last month he paid $128,203 in back taxes and $11,964 in interest. On Monday of this week, Obama said that he "absolutely" stood by Daschle's nomination. The next day Obama admitted that he "screwed up." 

Status: nomination withdrawn. 

• Hilda Solis -- Obama's nominee for Secretary of Labor. Her husband paid $6,400 to settle tax liens against his business, some of which had been outstanding for 16 years. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated that her husband's problems shouldn't be held against her since "she's not a partner in that business." Powerline notes that, while that may be true, she is a partner in any profits the business makes. 

Status: today's scheduled nomination hearing has been cancelled.

• Nancy Killefer -- Obama's nominee for Chief Performance Officer (whatever that is). Tax lien filed on her house for failure to pay unemployment tax for household help. The administration refused to answer questions about her tax issues. 

Status: nomination withdrawn.

And it's not just Obama's nominees. Long-serving Democrats are being exposed, as well. the most egregious violator:

• Charles Rangel -- Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Reportedly, the non-partisan Sunlight Foundation identified 28 instances where he failed to report "acquiring, owning, or disposing of assets" worth between $239,026 and $831,000. JWF comments: "One wonders how Charlie Rangel avoided an Obama cabinet appointment." 

Status: under investigation by the House Ethics Committee.

Representative Eric Cantor (R-VA) said it best: 

"It's easy for the other side to advocate for higher taxes because, you know what?, they don't pay them"

I assume that Obama searched for the best and brightest people from his party to nominate for cabinet positions. Can't he find anyone who has actually paid all of their taxes? What do these faulty nominations say about his vetting process? And why is it that some leaders of the Democrat party, people who love to raise taxes, completely disregard paying them?

I'm sick of hypocritical politicians/entertainers (same thing?) telling me how I should behave, while they flaunt every rule they profess to love. Global warming, paying taxes. These people are shameless. Especially Rangel, who is the Chairman of the committee that writes tax policy! Brazenly evading the rules he took part in creating. How does he justify ignoring his own laws? If any average citizen did what these people have done, they'd have their wages garnished and/or be sitting in jail. It's outrageous.

The debate about the debate is over.

"He's from Hawaii, O.K.? He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there." 

That was David Axelrod's explanation of why President Obama's thermostat is set so high in the Oval Office. 

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times...and then just expect that other countries are just going to say 'O.K.'"

That was the president on the campaign trail. Let's see...his presidential limo is purported to get less than 10 miles to the gallon, and he keeps the Oval Office nice and toasty. Right. I understand the need for an armored car, but is it that difficult to lower the thermostat? Or is he exempt from making the same sacrifices he expects us common folk to make? And what of his concern about what "other countries" think of us? (note: apparently Democrats don't care about world opinion anymore. What else would explain the Buy American clause in the stimulus bill?) 

Forget about other countries. We've got enough problems here at home. Tonight, nearly half a million Americans in Kentucky and neighboring states are without power, and some are freezing to death. What has Obama done about it? Why did it take FEMA 9 days after the storm to show up in the State, while 101 counties had declared a state of emergency? Isn't this a scandal? Why hasn't the mainstream media reported it as such? Does Obama hate white people? Veterans? Where's Kanye West? (O.K. the last three questions weren't serious).

And can we put to rest the ridiculous notion that there should be no more debate about whether global warming is primarily man-made?

Global warming has been in the public consciousness for several years now, due in no small part to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a UN-established organization created to evaluate the impact of human activity on the earth's climate. I've always been suspicious of claims that the IPCC is a purely scientific body, considering its ties to the UN--an organization that, in my opinion, is mostly interested in appropriating political power unto itself (perhaps a good subject for a blog on another day).

It wouldn't bother me so much if global warming alarmists used traditional forms of debate to persuade skeptics of the merits of their arguments. But, to the true believers, the debate about man-made global warming is over, and any dissent must be suppressed. 

Or worse. 

Case in point, one of the world's leading climate scientists, James Hansen of NASA, is calling for the chief executives of fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the lines between smoking and cancer. Some hear the echo of Stalinism in the clamoring for the heads of these perpetrators of violence against Mother Nature.

Interestingly, Hansen's boss at NASA, John Theon, has come out as a global warming skeptic and stated that Hansen embarrassed the organization "by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress." Theon declared that Hansen's climate models are "useless," and then stated:

"My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy."

John Hinderaker at Powerline exposes another example of scientific malpractice, a graph of global warming patterns known as the Mann hockey stick, which has been used in support of the theory by proponents:

More recent scientific work has thoroughly debunked the Mann "hockey stick" analysis. It has been shown to rest on "collation errors, unjustified truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, incorrect principal component calculations, geographical mislocations and other serious defects," as well as "incorrect mathematics." There are indications, at least, that some of the errors on the part of Mann and his collaborators were deliberate--an instance of the corruption of science by politics and perverse financial incentives that underlies the entire global warming movement.

Andrew Bostom provides an excellent short summary of the significance of the hockey stick and its debunking by more rigorous scientists, which is readily understandable by the lay reader.

If you really want to worry about the climate, consider the fact that we are due for another ice age.

One more thing that's a little off subject, but related: it still amazes me that Al Gore has made tens of millions of dollars and won an Oscar and a Nobel Prize for foisting what now appears to me to be a massive fraud upon the people of this planet. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the same organization that gave a Peace prize to the terrorist Yasser Arafat would bestow the same award on the Goracle.

Gore is like a cult leader to extremist environmentalists, particularly in the entertainment industry. What is it with the propensity for some on the left to deify their leaders (including a certain US President--I'll let you guess which one)? It's downright creepy. I admit that I get a chuckle every time he gets snowed out trying to give a talk to Congress on global warming. 

But mostly, I think this guy, who flies around in private jets and lives in a mansion that consumes more energy in a month than the average American household in an entire year, is a hypocrite and a fraud. 

Look, I think global warming probably exists. But, based on everything I've read and the documentaries I've watched, I believe that it is predominately due to natural cycles. Humans may have an impact, but it is likely so small as to be almost irrelevant in the overall scheme of things. Having said that, I believe that we should be doing everything we can to get away from fossil fuels and other pollutants, so as not to despoil the earth. To do this, we must implement rational policies based on science that's been rigorously tested and peer reviewed. Also, these policies have to be implemented gradually so as not to decimate the world's economies--particularly in the third world, which is trying desperately to lift itself out of crippling poverty.