New Tizona Post

While the sheeple pretend to live in the freest nation on the face of the Earth, the police state expands. TSSA - coming to a highway near you.

Science scare tactics

I for one am sick and tired of science and its over-hyped, overblown, overly dramatic "findings". At the heart of each of those "findings" is the need for a "solution" that will require massive amounts of funding for more "science" or bigger government.

Here's a recent sampling.

World is 'one poor harvest' from chaos, new book warns
Summary: overpopulation and global warming are going to wipe us out if we don't do something. "Something" isn't defined exactly, but more science funding is the implied "solution".

If Quakes Weren’t Enough, Enter the ‘Superstorm’
Summary: a superstorm could hit California, dumping up to 10 feet of rain on the state in a short span of time. This would result in the Sacramento valley becoming an inland sea. Considering that this "study" was funded by FEMA and CEMA, I'll leave it to you to figure out if there was any ulterior agenda in the "findings".

Smoking Damages DNA Within Minutes, Research Shows
Summary: Okay, setting aside the utter absurdity of the premise, that you're doing life-threatening damage to your body the instant you smoke your first cigarette, the study aims to scare smokers and those who might consider starting to smoke by claiming that your DNA is damaged and your risk of short-term cancers increased within minutes of your first puff. Chemicals called PAHs are to blame. Obviously, more money must be spent in researching these all-powerful and lethal carcinogens.

Is it any wonder that no one outside of the collectivists who wish to herd us all together into sheeplehood believes in AGW any more? All of science's "solutions" involve increased taxation and more power to the almighty Staat. Science is coming dangerously close to losing its credibility.

Hmm. Maybe that's not such a bad thing.

Vulture Droppings: Most Importantist Election Ever Edition

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

There's an election tomorrow.  Hey, how 'bout that? [/sarcasm]

"Shame on you, Vulture!  It's the most importantist election ever!"  Uh huh.

"Vulture!  It's all different this year!  The Tea Party is gonna change everything!"  Really?  How so?  The Tea Parties have been completely co-opted by Team Elephant.  Why would I say that?  What evidence do I have of such a thing?  A sampling:

Some traditional Republican consultants are advising — with a straight face — that newly elected Republican members of Congress "reach across the aisle…and "work with the Democrats."

John Boehner "rallies the troops" with empty (and limp) words "backing" Tea Party principles.  He swears spending will be rolled back to "pre-bailouts levels".  Seriously?  Going from $1.5 trillion deficits to $1 trillion deficits?  Oooooh!  I'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO impressed!

And worst of all, the Queen of Inside the Beltway faux conservatism "celebrates" the Tea Party as having "saved" Team Elephant from King George the Dim.  Ms. Noonan, for those of you who weren't paying attention, was one of King George's biggest apologists during his 8 year reign of error.

---

"Vulture! Even YOU have to admit that we're better off with Republican-co-opted Tea Party candidates than with the Dhimmi-crats who have rammed a 50-year wish-list of Progressivism down our throats the past 4 years!"

Better?  Better HOW?  BETTER would have been for the Tea Parties to have come together as a third party or under the umbrella of one of the existing third parties (Libertarian or Constitution, for example).  BETTER would be for those candidates to be able to enter Mordor on the Potomac (hat tip: Mike Church) with a clean slate and a fresh canvas than to walk into the clutches of Mitch McCommie and John BaneTurd.

---

Here's the big reason I'm so unenthusiastic.  I'll lay it out in a single sentence.  The co-opting of the Tea Parties by Team Elephant guarantees the failure of the principles that brought those people together.  Guaran.  Effing.  Tees it.

There is no principle that Republicans will not run from, no compromise they will not accept, no stand crucial enough for them to make.

What happens to the Tea Parties after their "champions" are relegated to the Congressional equivalent of the Back Bench, and the John Boehner Business-as-Usual express continues propping up Crony Capitalism?  What happens after Mitch McConnell compromises for the umpteenth time on a point of principle that just SCREAMS for men of courage and conviction to just say "NO!"?

You kill this once-in-a-political lifetime awakening of the sheeple, and you kill any chance we ever have of wresting power away from the looters.

But that's the idea really, isn't it?  That's why the GOP has co-opted the Tea Parties.  They like the gravy train that is "public service" in Washington every bit as much as Team Donkey does.

---

Further proof "conservatives" don't get it

I frequently receive email advertisements from NewsMax.com.  It's what happens when you don't pay attention to checkboxes when you "register" for a website.  I could unsubscribe.  But then I'd miss gems like this.

It is remarkable that Theodore Roosevelt (TR to his friends), who has been beloved as an iconic patriot and president, would become a controversial figure today.

This unusual development is largely due to the rise of Glenn Beck.

Glenn has been right on many issues and his views are resonating with Main Street.

But he is wrong on one big issue: Theodore Roosevelt is not, as he claims, the root cause of President Obama’s intrusive, “big government” policies.

It is no accident that TR’s face is chiseled into Mount Rushmore along with those of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, as he is rightly regarded by historians as one of the greatest presidents in American history.

As TR himself might say, "Balderdash!"

TR is on Mount Rushmore because President Calvin Cooledge was adamant that, in addition to the Father of our Country, George Washington, the monument must include two additional Republicans and one additional Democrat.  Since Republican Presidents not named Reagan have been uniformly dreadful, TR was settled upon as the second Republican, the tyrant Abraham Lincoln being the first.

Notice that the two Democrats chosen for the monument had been dead in the neighborhood of 100 years at the time they were chosen.  You really do have to go back that far to find a Democrat who was worth a damn.

Back to TR.

I've been reading a book called American Progressivism.  It's a tough read; it mostly consists of the speeches and political writings of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.  Mr. Ruddy, TR was everything Glenn Beck says he was.  He may even be worse than Beck has alleged.  Roosevelt was actually proposing grander Fascist policies during the 1912 Presidential campaign than Wilson was!  While Roosevelt may not have brought about the world's first Fascist government -- that was left for Wilson to accomplish -- he was instrumental in setting the table for Wilson's abuses.

So why is Ruddy so adamant in defending Roosevelt?

A few words of disclosure here: I am an ardent Theodore Roosevelt devotee and have been a longtime member of the Theodore Roosevelt Association (the membership roster has me listed after another TRA member, Karl Rove).

And my brother, Daniel Ruddy, a historian, is the author of a new book called “Theodore Roosevelt’s History of the United States” (published by Harper Collins). It draws upon TR’s own words to construct a unique history of the United States based on Roosevelt’s colorful insights and provocative views.

Ah, now it becomes clear! His brother has written a "history" of Roosevelt. The word "history" is in scare quotes because we're all familiar with the kind of "histories" we get when authors with a predisposition to adulation for the subject of their work write.  They tend to produce slavering paeons that conveniently omit the subject's peccadillos.

Anyone who calls themselves a conservative but thinks that TR was peachy keen is no friend of freedom.  No one -- I repeat, NO ONE -- who loves freedom can justify the policies and pronouncements of this smug, "I know best what's good for you the sheeple" elitist a-hole.

Of course, that's the kind of disinformation we get from the Team Elephant mainstream these days.  Get used to it.  Because, notwithstanding all pronouncements to the contrary, this Elephant hasn't changed its spots.  It's every bit the Donkey Lite party in 2010 that it was in 2008.

Vulture Droppings: Health in the balance

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

As I write this, the hinges are being torn off of the gates and the barbarians are storming the Bastille.  No, wait, that's what we have to look forward to in about 10 years.   Right now, our Noblesse Oblige government is going through the motions of a parliamentary ritual designed to fool the sheeple by giving them the impression that the process is on the up-and-up.  Hint: it isn't.

---

Here is the latest.  The House will vote on the original Senate Health Care Reform Bill Takeover Bill as-is.  This bill includes the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kick-back, and other bribes yet to gain the infamy of those first two.

The House Pro-Life Democrats have been assured that no federal abortion funding will be part of the legislation...even though the bill specifically mandates it...because Il Duce promised to sign an Excecutive Order prohibiting federal spending on abortions as part of the Health Care bill, thus proving, as we have long suspected, that Rex est Lex in the Obama administration.

There are problems with that little scheme.

1. There's no Constitutional provision for such an action.
2. The President doesn't hold the keys to the national purse.  Congress does.
3. Why do we even BOTHER with a legislature if Il Duce can simply sign a paper and - voila! - it is law?

Then, once that steaming abortion of Legislative assault against what was once a free, sovereign people, has passed, the House will vote on the "corrections" to that legislation - the Reconciliation.  After all, they had to shine that turd and make it nice and pretty for the folks back home serfs so that they will have some prayer of being re-elected.  Once the steaming Fascist takeover bill has passed, the Reconciliation bill has passed, and Il Duce has signed his little Executive Order and the Legislation itself, there will be dancing in the streets.  Yeah......dancing.

---

There's just one itsy-bitsy problem with that scenario.  It's illegal.  The "Limitation of Changes to Social Security Act" of 1985 prohibits Reconciliation for any bill that impacts Social Security funds.

What does that mean?  It means that we've been presented with a bait-and-switch.  What we'll be left with when all is said and done is the Senate bill, complete with the Louisiana Purchase, etc.  And, knowing Il Duce as we do, who's to say that he won't go back on his dubious Executive Order once the Reconciliation Bill hits the fan?

It's the worst possible scenario.  It's a horrendous bill that make health care worse and cedes individual freedoms to the complete control of government bureaucrats.  With the passage of the Senate Bill, we will have officially made the transition from citizens to serfs.

---

Fortunately, it's not really over once the legislation has passed.  As I posted a few days ago, Idaho, Virginia, and perhaps as many as 35 other states plan to sue the Federal Government on the grounds that several provisions of the legislation are unconstitutional.  Several?  Try the whole steaming mess!

Whatever.  As long as there is some hope that this corrupt, freedom-ending nightmare can be shot down, there is still hope.  But I wouldn't get too exited about those prospects.  Remember, one of the key bribery tools in Il Duce's bag of dirty tricks is the appointment of Federal judges.  I'll be amazed if this hostile take-over is interrupted, rolled-back, or otherwise deterred in any meaningful way.

Welcome to Amerika!  Now take a number.  You might get sick soon.

---

How to offend folks on both sides of an issue

Audi has accomplished something I had previously thought impossible -- they've managed to offend people on both sides of the "green" issue. If you watched the Super Bowl, I'm sure you saw the ad. It was, not to understate the obvious, epic in its effect on people, regardless of political persuasion.

The Left hates it, yet nonetheless has tried to spin it as positive in that it targets "urban and suburban professional males in Audi’s target market", as opposed to the "teabaggers" targeted by the rest of the advertisers. The telling quote was this one.

The ad only makes sense if it’s aimed at people who acknowledge the moral authority of the green police—people who may find those obligations tiresome and constraining on occasion, who only fitfully meet them, who may be annoyed by sticklers and naggers, but who recognize that living more sustainably is in fact the moral thing to do. This basically describes every guy I know.

He obviously doesn't know me, a suburban professional male who USED TO BE in Audi's target market. Until the commercial, that is.

The Right sees the add as tomorrow's reality if we don't stand up to the forces of political correctness. Jonah Goldberg put it this way.

[T]he moral of the story is that we should welcome our new green overlords and, if we know what's good for us, surrender to the New Green Order.

Funny, but that's kind of the take overall around my house when we watched the commercial live.

The casa Vulture is a place where libertarianism is the de facto political belief system, from papa Vulture on down to Baby Vulture (if one can call an almost 21-year-old "baby"). Oldest son stated emphatically, "Well, I'll never buy an Audi."

And, in truth, who would? Why would anyone who believes in the freedoms espoused by the Founders EVER dignify such a dehumanized portrait of what we should be? Is that what Audi sees as the future, the US as a nation of sheeple who meekly submit to Das Überwachenden constantly in your business?

Bad move, Audi. Bad move indeed.

Better than WHAT?!?!?!

Has the DoublePlusGoodHopeChange jumped the shark? Apparently it has, so much so that even King George the Dim's dismal reign is seen as preferable to 44% of a recent poll's respondents.

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama's declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they'd rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that's somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country's difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited.

Gee, what a surprise [/sarcasm].

It may well be the biggest insult that one can make to a President. "You suck so bad I'd rather have a dim-witted Neocon with the common sense of a lamp post than you."

Consider the question as posited by the pollsters. Which practitioner of Fascist economics would you prefer, the Neocon, or the Neo-Commie? It's like asking you about your preference for your own execution: death by fire ants, or death by drowning.

I noticed that the poll results didn't add up to 100%, so perhaps the missing 6% of respondents answered (as I would have) with a resounding, "You want me to pick one of those two bozos? Go sell crazy somewhere else!"

The Big Lie

One of the hallmarks of Nazi propaganda in the 1930's was The Big Lie. Unlike American politicians, whose lies are nearly believable because of the occasional snippet of truth inserted into their "spread" every so often, the Nazis went whole-hog to the extreme of telling whoppers so audacious that they were almost believable. Propagandists like those are a breed apart.

Guess what? They're B-A-A-A-A-A-A-C-K.

Climate change kills about 315,000 people a year through hunger, sickness and weather disasters, and the annual death toll is expected to rise to half a million by 2030, a report said on Friday.

The study, commissioned by the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum (GHF), estimates that climate change seriously affects 325 million people every year, a number that will more than double in 20 years to 10 percent of the world's population (now about 6.7 billion).

Economic losses due to global warming amount to over $125 billion annually -- more than the flow of aid from rich to poor nations -- and are expected to rise to $340 billion each year by 2030, according to the report.

"Climate change is the greatest emerging humanitarian challenge of our time, causing suffering to hundreds of millions of people worldwide," Kofi Annan, former U.N. secretary-general and GHF president, said in a statement.

Holy crap! Where's my shovel?

This isn't just a pack of lies, or a well-packaged shipment of manure. This is 100% USDA Prime bullshit.

For starters, warming - if it were still ongoing - is a net benefit to mankind. Don't take my word for it, check out this excellent Vin Suprynowicz article. Suprynowicz (one of my favorite columnists; if you're not currently reading his blog, start!) cites several scientific studies that present evidence that warming is a net boon to mankind because it significantly decreases cold weather-related deaths (which, contrary to the official propaganda, outnumber heat-related deaths by about 7-to-1 in the US and 9-to-1 in Europe) and also makes for an extended growing season for crops.

Don't just take my word for it!

“The data from the Eurowinter Group (Lancet 1997) on mortality versus temperature can be used for a quantitative estimate of mortality benefits from warming,” DDP conclude. “This would lead to an estimated 25,000 to 50,000 fewer deaths in the U.S. per year for a 1 C temperature rise. This can be compared to 30,000 deaths per year from breast cancer, 30,000 for prostate cancer, or about 40,000 from motor vehicle accidents.”

Furthermore, “Heat deaths often represent “displacement” (i.e. weakened people die a few days or weeks before prior expectation), but deaths due to cold usually result in months to years of life lost,” the newsletter points out. “Thus the benefits in life expectancy from warming in cold periods may be much more than nine times greater than life span lost in warm periods.”

And that’s before we even look at the advantages of being able to grow food closer to the Arctic circle.

The Big Lie is alive and well. The press release I cited above is meant to excite the sheeple and to generate support for whatever kind of draconian wealth-transfer nonsense the political class chooses to foist upon us in order to "save the Earth".

We would do well to remember how things turned out the last time propaganda of this quality was in vogue.

Wiener of the Week

This week the WotW is all about stimulus. Phony stimulus. I mean, c'mon! REAL stimulus would involve putting money in the hands of businesses and consumers in the hope of jump-starting the economy, right? Instead, this steaming pile of legislation seeks to reward those who helped get them elected -- like voter registration fraud organizer ACORN -- as well as increase the size and power of government.

Perhaps the part of the stimulus bill that I find most vexing is the new Agency For Healthcare Research And Quality. This is the camel's nose in the tent, the first baby steps towards single-payer socialized medicine.

So, given that the stimulus bill is a steaming POS, who gets the Wiener? I'm going universal on this one.

1. The President, for failing to provide leadership
   
2. Congress, especially that moron Little Nancy Pelosi, for piling steaming pile after steaming pile of pork and largesse onto a bill that is supposed to be about rescuing the country from financial ruin
3. Big Media (the BM for short) for hiding the true nature of the legislation
4. The American public (for swallowing this steaming mess)
5. The nice but clearly misinformed lady who was handing out flyers in downtown Frederick at First Saturday urging our support for the stimulus bill

All of you, congratulate yourselves. You're the Wiener of the Week.

People agree with me -- by 5 to 1!

This may shock and alarm you, but a survey shows that the American public agrees with me about something -- by a 5 to 1 margin. I know it shocks and alarms ME!

Seven out of 10 voters (69%) remain convinced that reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and this year by a nearly five-to-one margin voters believe they are trying to help Barack Obama.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of voters think most reporters are trying to help Obama win versus 11% who believe they are trying to help his Republican opponent John McCain.

When even the sheeple have figured out that the national media is in the tank for their Lord and Savior, Barack, it can only mean that Big Media (BM) has lost their ability to propagandize effectively.

It also means that their over-the-top persecution of Sarah Palin (and family!) is blowing up in their face.

They just couldn't leave well enough alone. McCommie is a thoroughly unlikeable candidate, and would have lost this Fall had BM just left it alone. But they just HAD to seal the deal. They just HAD to push, push, push for St. Obama.

Now their guy is (depending on the poll in question) either in a dead-heat with McCommie or trailing in the race. He's flailing so badly that even Michael Dukakis has to be chuckling to himself somewhere.

Reporting the news: good. Trying to influence the course of an election: bad. Americans get that. Too bad ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, and the New York Times don't.

The sheeple have spoken

Just when I thought I couldn't possibly get any more pessimistic about the restoration of our freedoms, I come across this little tidbit.

Nearly half of Americans (47%) believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary

---

31% believe the Internet sites should be forced to balance their commentary

Okay. I want you to focus on certain keywords.

Require.
Force.

Even with the words "force" and "require" (the same thing when we're talking about government), these empty-headed sheeple thought that speech limitation is a swell idea.

I can't believe there is one person who favors the limitation of speech via government coercion, let alone almost half the f'ing populous!!!

Good God.