Sunday, December 20, 2009

The REAL Global-Warming Agenda

Today's 'watermelon' environmentalist (you know: green on the outside, but red on the inside!) is virtually always an anti-capitalist, anti-democratic statist (and Al Gore is a Democrat which, more and more, amounts to the same thing). This is not coincidence, but consequence: the Modern Left has adopted environmentalism, global warming and climate change as the vehicles by which to destroy Western democracy, and redistribute wealth to the so-called developing world (we call 'development' in an egg something else: rotting!).

They are beyond parody, and out of the reach of irony, in their belief that the West's wealth will remain and continue once they've achieved that goal. Because, of course, the failed history of Soviet-style collectivism that has died almost everywhere it's been tried -- and continues to fail even where it has survived, a la Cuba -- demonstrates with clarity that ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit suffocates without the motive and goal of personal profit. Now, that profit can come in the form of money, acclaim, or personal satisfaction, but it's beyond proven that those benefits accrue in the West's capitalist societies, and wither where the state claims all those benefits to itself.

On the other hand, how can one blame Bangladesh, Nigeria, et al, from seeking the shortcut of rescue by the forced distribution of someone else's assets after failing to husband any of their own virtually since existence? Pretty hard to figure, though, how turning the West into another Russia is going to result in anything but a disastrous and petty, universal plutocracy. I guess that would be a good thing for the would-be plutocrats, though. Hence, the efforts in the West to subdue populist democracy before the citizenry identifies their statist goasl.


Climate Change (Sigh!)

A couple of thoughts about global-warm(onger)ing, which seem obvious to anyone with a lick of sense -- which seems to leave out the modern, liberal anarchist:

  • It's not secret that 'global warming' has been going on for some time, or the Ice Age glaciers, for example, would still be covering half of North America. And, of course, some global cooling must have occurred before that to form those glaciers. All of which would seem to point to the fact that (drum roll, please!) EARTH'S CLIMATE CHANGES. Naturally. I lived through the "New Ice Age" warnings of the mid-'70s, so am amused that many of the same alarmists now are alarmists again, but at 180 degrees.
  • Is all of this -- or any of this -- man-made, and therefore man-preventable? That IS, of course, the Kyoto/Copenhagen argument. Obviously, the folks who think they know this for sure sure don't want to compare analyses with anyone who expresses any doubt. Again, this is emblematic of today's modern, liberal mind-set: "If we can't persuade you with our arguments, you must be a small-minded idiot incapable of reason, because if you won't simply accept our conclusions, you're being unreasonable. Don't be so stupid I have to explain things to you!" Because, you know, they can't. It's all Post-Modern emotionalism internalized, with nothing to do with rational thought. 
  • Finally, even if we were to conclude that humanity has caused the ice caps to melt, how does one predict the consequences -- particularly the unintended ones -- of returning our 'carbon footprint' to early-20th Century levels (and, understand, that IS what the stated goals amount to!)? Have we learned nothing about unintended consequences from all the centuries of recovering from them? I think there's an awfully good chance that even should we get the diagnosis right, we'd foul up the treatment. We're not nearly as smart as we are conceited. That's another symptom of the modern Left!


Thursday, December 10, 2009

Zero Population Growth, blah, blah!..

Well, since Canada's National Post won't let me post this in their comments about single-child, one-world regulation because it's too long, I'll post it here instead:

This isn't even an old argument, but an ancient one. It wasn't all that many decades ago that 6 billion people were considered 'unsustainable' for Earth by the so-called experts. But then, you know, along come the Norman Borlaugs and his like. It's ironic to think that you also cut in half the likelihood of such genius, too, when you cut the population in half.
It takes only a single flight over the western half of the North American continent to realize the world is nowhere near over-populated. And I'm not talking about supplanting food-producing regions with people, either. I'm thinking of all the absolutely empty, unused space. Is the National Post suggesting that we can dream of colonizing the moon or Mars, but not the Rocky Mountains?
At least until we take the profit motive away from entrepreneurs -- which DOES seem to be the latest trend, however stupid it is! -- I'm pretty confident that we'll figure out how to feed/water/house/employ the growing millions, even at current population growth, for a fair spell yet.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Well, so much for regularity...

I hadn't realized it had been 6 weeks since I'd posted here, even if I am seemingly, simply talking to myself. Nonetheless, it illustrates even to me how hectic my schedule has been.  Halloween weekend included a Friday-night school (where I teach) carnival; the following weekend was a round-trip drive to Natchez, MS via the Natchez Trace (one-way) http://picasaweb.google.com/tsousley62/NatchezTrace; the middle November weekend was the last round of 'in-season' yard work; Thanksgiving weekend; and now today.

I've come to understand fatigue better when I don't even get the weekends off!

During that time, however, a new fascination has come into focus: driving around the Mid-South has crossed my paths with a significant number of 3-wheeler, or trike, motorcycles. With the long 'riding season' here, it seems like a pretty attractive way of touring. Trouble is, I know next to nothing about motorcycles, not having been on one in about 40 years. Factory-built ones only come via Harley-Davidson, and are mucho pricy http://www.harley-davidson.com/en_US/Content/Pages/2010_Motorcycles/2010_motorcycles.html?locale=en_US&bmLocale=en_US#/model/flhtcutg. It may become one of those pipe dreams that never comes true, but I'll bite, I think, should an affordable, reliable one make itself available.



Sunday, October 25, 2009

A (Dropped) Penny For Your Thoughts...

Is the penny starting to drop for mainstream media journalists? ABC's Jake Tapper has broken ranks to question the Obama Administration's ostracism of Fox News over ideological differences and political criticisms.

Has it finally dawned on the left-leaning media that liberal Democrats -- and left-wingers, in general -- suffer badly from self-absorbed certainty? They are so sure they're right that any dissent is necessarily malignant, hindering them from exercising their superior ideas and intellects to our betterment. Who cares if there's a 200+-year history and tradition of political faction in this country -- it's US now, and just let US rule!

Gotta admit, it's an attitude that's much easier to practice than having to persuade with reasoned argument -- especially when your reasons and arguments are so weak! It's just that it's -- if I may paraphrase an Obamanoid -- you know, un-American.



Saturday, October 17, 2009

"...If not now, when?"

An important rejoinder from Roger Simon, following up the weak excuse by Obama media guru Anita Dunn's quoting Mao Tse-Tung as a 'favorite' political operative:

http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2009/10/17/the-maoist-explains-herself-egg-face-at-the-white-house/

My favorite lines are: "...Like his radical friends — Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Anita Dunn — Barack Obama wishes to transform the United States according to a model whose basic shape was supplied by the utopian schemes of the 1960s. That’s why Anita Dunn said that Mao was one of the thinkers she most often turned to for wisdom about big-think political problems. It’s not that she admires his penchant for industrial strength homicide: rather, she admires his success at fomenting an egalitarian revolution. It’s not what we bargained for when we elected Barack Obama. But that’s what we’ve got. The question is how much worse will things have to get before the penny drops?.."

As for me, I'm in for a penny AND a pound -- but, alas, I realized what we were getting BEFORE the revolution, so my agreement isn't worth much. I voted for the pretty brunette (who also happens to be a pretty sharp conservative!) nobody likes. I already knew Obama was the left-most presidential candidate we've ever had!


Friday, October 9, 2009

We Kept No Territory...

There is, I see, one glimmer of hope that the Nobel Prize conspicuously awarded to President Obama can actually benefit American interests: if he goes to Oslo in December and makes a convincing case that the U.S. that fought two wars in Europe for peace in the last century without claiming territory; which freed the territorial Philippines and Cuba after gaining their possession; which turned Germany and Japan into allies after bombing them to submission to conclude their dynastic tendancies of WWII; is to be appreciated for its generosity to the world in war and peace, and is unique in its liberal attitude toward the sovereignty of others.

Alas, I don't think that Obama has either the mindset nor eloquence (I'm not as enamored with his verbal pabulum as others seem to be) to pull it off...