Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Olbermann: Imagine That!

By Rich Kozlovich

In an article entitled; “Fired Again: Keith Olbermann Humiliated by Current TV” by Katie Pavlich, she commented that “it is clear Olbermann just can't seem to get along with anyone, anywhere and has been fired from Current TV effective immediately” This is just after being fired by MSNBC about a year ago. She also noted that; “The progressive network issued an embarrassing statement surrounding the firing. Olbermann will not be allowed to sign off and say goodbye to viewers.” Imagine that!

Lucas Shaw, in his article quotes the official announcement by Current TV saying that their programming "was also founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers. Unfortunately these values are no longer reflected in our relationship with Keith Olbermann and we have ended it". He goes on in the article to claim there was a great deal of unhappiness with Olbermann over a great many things; including the supposed difficulties he had coming to work.  Small as it is, he won’t even have to opportunity to sign off to his audience. But here is the insult of insults. “Starting Friday night, the former New York governor Eliot Spitzer will replace him at 8 p.m.” Imagine that!

Replaced by Eliot Spitzer! Wow… I’m not sure what burns worse; getting fired twice in just one year for being an arrogant obnoxious jerk, or being replaced by Eliot Spitzer; poor Keith. Maybe it would help if he showed them his Cornell graduation papers that he must carry around with him to show people that he really is smarter than his viewers! He did however apologize; for Current TV's failure. He says, "I'd like to apologize to my viewers and my staff for the failure of Current TV." He says he is going to sue! Imagine that!

I really find this to be amazing. Are we to assume that the man was such an arrogant obnoxious jerk they wouldn't even let him sign off? Well, the man has played the role of an arrogant obnoxious jerk for as long as he has been on the air is it possible that's what he really is?

Based on public reports he left ESPN for being an arrogant obnoxious jerk; he appears that he was fired from Fox News for being an arrogant obnoxious jerk, (Rupert Murdock called him crazy, although that may the pot calling the kettle black) and seemingly he was fired for being an arrogant obnoxious jerk at MSNBC. Current TV hired this man knowing that he is generally viewed by a great many people who know him as an arrogant obnoxious jerk. If that is the case, one would have to assume that is what they hired him to be…. an arrogant obnoxious jerk. Right? Especially since he apparently reveled in the role! So now they are offended by him for being himself. Imagine that! Did they somehow think that in real life he wasn’t really an arrogant obnoxious jerk? I just can't imagine that!

What is even more amazing is the hiring of another man who seems to be roundly regarded as a corrupt arrogant obnoxious jerk, Elliot Spitzer, to take his place. A bully who made his bones by attempting to destroy the lives of innocent people; a man who abused his power at every turn; abused his wife and family by living the life of a serial womanizer; was forced to resign as the governor of New York state for corruption; and clearly has some serious emotional problems. What in the world could he possibly have to say that was worth listening to? 

He has already failed on one show, so why would anyone think he will succeed now? In days gone by a man with such a record of conduct would have been expected to ride off into the sunset as the disgraced cad he is and never be heard from again. He has no shame, and based on their declaration that Current TV was "founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers", they have no dignity or integrity. I wonder if they give psychological profile tests to their potential employees and what the criteria is?

One more thing! Aren’t these the same people that think Sarah Palin is stupid and incompetent?

Imagine that!


Friday, March 30, 2012

Lisa P Jackson - EPA Administrator: Fulfilling the UN Mission

Written by Dennis Ambler


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is an agency of the federal government of the United States charged with protecting human health and the environment, by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress.


The EPA is effectively no longer under the control of the US Congress; its allegiance is to the UN and implementation of the policies of Sustainable Development via Agenda 21.2 It has considerable involvement in the IPCC reports and claims the UN body as a peer reviewed authority, in pursuing ever more rigorous controls of “CO2 pollution”, to bring about the realisation of “environmental governance”.

Whilst Lisa Jackson is currently the face on the box at the EPA, she is simply carrying out the tasks expected of her by the globalist movement in setting the scene for more international control, under the leadership of the United Nations.  To Continue Reading .......


Steve Milloy on the EPA

These links all originated from Steve Milloy's RK 

EPA Announces End of Coal: Carbon Pollution Standard for New Power Plants
EPA is proposing to take common-sense steps under the Clean Air Act to limit carbon pollution from new power plants. EPA’s proposed standard reflects the ongoing trend in the power sector to build cleaner plants that take advantage of American-made technologies. The agency’s proposal, which does not apply to plants currently operating or new permitted plants that begin construction over the next 12 months, is flexible and would help minimize carbon pollution through the deployment of the same types of modern technologies and steps that power companies are already taking to build the next generation of power plants. EPA’s proposal would ensure that this progress toward a cleaner, safer and more modern power sector continues.

Rahn: No more GOP whining about overregulation
“Wake up, congressional Republicans… You have the power to stop it and many other outrages.”

William Yeatman: Good Guys Win Big Battle in EPA’s War on Appalachian Coal Production
Last week, property-rights advocates were ecstatic with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sackett v EPA that citizens subject to EPA Clean Water Act “compliance orders” can have their day in court.

EPA IG to investigate EPA air science advisers
Sen. Jim Inhofe made the request in August 2011. Steve Milloy’s March 2012 Washington Times op-ed made the IG act.

My Take – Please read the comments by Arthur A. Elkins, Jr., Inspector General. I think you find this interesting. One thing is for sure; time has shown that a great many people in positions of responsibility read Milloy’s If Milloy was an “erstwhile” scientist, as one blogger says, no one would be reading him.

Boston Herald: EPA gets comeuppance
“The Idaho case is not the only instance of EPA power-grabbing that needs correction, something Congress too rarely provides.”

Knight: Taming the EPA Monster
A worthy read even if the EPA administrator is named “Lisa” not “Janet” Jackson.

IBD: EPA’s Heavy Hand Seen In Gas Crisis
Fearing gas price spikes on the East Coast this summer, Washington pols are trying to talk refiners out of closing unprofitable plants. It’s the EPA they ought to hector.

EPA regulations eliminate more than 1,850 jobs
EPA’s Gina McCarthy once predicted that the MATS rule would generate 8,000 to 46,000 jobs. Rather than undertake expensive retrofits, more than two dozen plants simply closed.”

Boxer: Premature deaths from air pollution are ‘documented’
But Sen. Sessions cites the Junkman in questioning that assertion.

EPA’s Jackson to Boxer: Air pollution link with asthma hospitalizations, premature death ‘not speculative’
From today’s Senate EPW hearing on the EPA budget. JunkScience will soon blow these claims out of the water (again).

Greens see politics in EPA rule delays
No! Really? Politicians are more reluctant to stick voters with big costs when there can be electoral consequences… Go figure!


China: Nothing is Ever as it Appears


Bo Xilai Controversy: U.K. Asks China to Investigate Death of Briton Linked to Ousted Politician
If there is one truth that has accompanied the downfall of Bo Xilai, the prominent Chinese official who was removed from his post on March 15, it is that every revelation prompts more questions. The story is far from over, and this year’s leadership transition process, which the Chinese Communist Party hopes to present as smooth and orderly, is likely to be laden with surprises and intrigue. That much could certainly be gathered from the latest development, reported Monday by the Wall Street Journal, that the U.K. has asked China to investigate last year’s death of a British businessman who had ties to Bo. The newspaper reported that Neil Heywood was found dead in a Chongqing hotel room in November, and local authorities said he died of “excessive alcohol consumption” and quickly cremated his body. But friends said he didn’t drink, raising questions. Former Chongqing police chief Wang Lijun reported his suspicions about Heywood’s death to Bo, triggering a fallout with his boss, the Journal reported. The paper also said that Wang had claimed Heywood was involved in a business dispute with Bo’s wife, Gu Kailai.

Children of the Revolution: The History China's New Leaders Won't Confront
Not only did the now-disgraced Bo Xilai revive Cultural Revolution songs in Chongqing, where he was the Communist Party committee chair, his dramatic political downfall seemed to have ignited a renewed interest in the cultural revolution, that ignominious decade in modern Chinese history. Much of this new interest came from Premier Wen Jiabao's surprising comments at the conclusion of China's National People's Congress, in which he warned about history repeating itself if reforms are not carried out.  But it is more than just Wen's words. The new cohort of leaders -- Xi Jinping, Li Keqiang, and Bo Xilai too -- are all children of that revolution, having watched their families and communities torn apart by brutish and senseless politics. Despite their pedigrees and "royal" backgrounds, both Xi and Bo's fathers were publicly humiliated in "struggle sessions" that sought to instill ideological purity, whatever that meant. Families and friends turned on each other. Suspicions pervaded society and trust became a public scarcity. To give some sense of what transpired, these incredible photos of young Bo Yibo (Bo's father) and Xi Zhongxun (Xi's father) speak volumes:

China's "Rare Earths", and the Hypocrisy of the Obama Administration
By John Tamny
As is well known now, the Obama administration recently joined the EU and Japan in a lawsuit filed at the World Trade Organization over China’s alleged restrictions on the export of rare earth elements. For those who’ve properly ignored what until now should have been a non-story, “rare earths” are metals essential for the production of everything from smart phones, to hybrid cars, to military equipment.

Poorest Chinese See Better Access to Food, Shelter
By Steve Crabtree and Rajesh Srinivasan
Improvement coincides with economic recovery, poverty reduction programs - Although income inequality remains high in China, Gallup trends show the poorest Chinese are struggling less to afford life's most basic needs. In 2011, 6% of Chinese in the poorest one-fifth of the population said they did not have enough money to buy food in the past year, down from 23% in 2008…..The ability of low-income and rural Chinese to afford food and shelter is likely tied to recovery from the global economic crisis. China's rural migrant laborers -- who typically hold low-income jobs in the cities -- were among the hardest hit in the recession, as they tended to be the first to be laid off. However, these trends may also have been influenced by the Chinese government's concerted efforts to avoid social unrest among those at the lowest end of the income distribution. Poverty-reduction programs -- including a rural subsistence allowance and subsidies to offset rising food prices for poor families -- have been common in recent years.

My TakeWhat! Income disparity and lack of the necessities for large numbers of the population in a socialist society? Surely not in the “worker’s paradise”! Oh well…when you consider that Mao and his henchmen deliberately starved over 30 million of his own people to death by selling the food they needed to survive in order to buy arms.  We really do need to get this.  Leftists really do hate everyone! Don’t judge them by their words. Judge them by their actions.  Judge them by the socialist monsters of the 20th century, who when they took power, deliberately murdered over 100 million people; many of them were their own people.  Nobody hates like a leftie!  History is foundational to rational thinking and understanding.  Not the philosophical musings and mutterings used by many today, but the actual events and outcomes. 

China 'laws' contradict themselves
Frank Ching
On March 5, the day the 2012 session of China's National People's Congress opened, Premier Wen Jiabao promised to enforce the law “in both letter and spirit, respect and uphold the sanctity of the Constitution and laws, and govern in strict accordance with the laws.” He also said: “We will resolutely rectify the problems of laws not being abided by or fully enforced, lawbreakers not being prosecuted, uncivilized law enforcement, dereliction and neglect of duty, and corrupt practices in law enforcement.”… So when the premier spoke of laws not being abided by and lawbreakers not being prosecuted, he was in a true sense speaking of the failings not of the government but of the party. China is a country where there is no rule of law, where the judiciary is not independent and where conscientious lawyers struggle hard to discharge their fiduciary duty to their clients. According to the Justice Ministry, all new lawyers must within three months of acquiring licenses swear an oath of loyalty to the Communist Party, regardless of whether they are party members or not…. Since the government is led by the party, swearing an oath of loyalty to the party presumably means that whenever lawyers are defending clients being prosecuted by the government, they are required to put the government's interests first. This means that the accused are effectively being deprived of their right of legal representation.

China’s Reformers: MIA
By Russell Leigh-Moses
So what happened to China’s reformers? With the removal of Chongqing Party Secretary Bo Xilai earlier this month, the hope in many circles was that the Leftists he represented were a spent political force. Now was the time for China’s reformist Right— the intellectuals and activists and cadres who celebrated direct elections in Wukan a few weeks back, and have been advocating a transparent and accountable policy-making process – to step in and take control. Like so many political tales in China these days, the reality on the ground has quickly killed off those hopes….. No one should be stunned by the Left’s staying power, or the inability of the Right to simply move into the gap created by the supposed folding of the Chongqing model. Reformers have been weakened by nearly a decade of suffocation by a hardline Center bent on campaigning for “social stability.” Activists can post critiques in the Chinese social media, but they’ve been barred from real political dialogue with the party for the same reason: Many reformers and intellectuals are by now largely discredited because they have proved far better at complaining than they have been at putting forth realistic alternatives.

My TakeI have always been fascinated by this thinking. The Chinese government took over Hong Kong many years ago from the British. What did they do with it? Pretty much left it alone to stand as a shining beacon of capitalism.  As a result that is where a huge amount of their economic capital is created. So with this as the template what alternatives do they need? Nothing is ever as it seems in China!

China’s stability gambit
By Stephen S. Roach
While it is easy to get caught up in the swirling tales of palace intrigue that have followed, I suspect that Bo’s removal holds at least one far deeper meaning.
The first principle that I learned when I started focusing on China in the late 1990s is that nothing is more important to the Chinese than stability - whether economic, social or political. Given centuries of turmoil in China, today’s leaders will do everything in their power to preserve stability. Whenever I have doubts about a potential Chinese policy shift, I examine the options through the stability lens. It has worked like a charm.

My TakeNo matter what the author says; nothing is what it seems in China. Here are some of the basics. China has the world’s largest population of over one billion people. They have a two child policy and as a result most of the babies that are aborted are female. That leaves a huge gap in the male female relationship. There are a whole lot of young men in China that cannot find a wife. It is unlikely that they are happy about that. The country is huge, but most of the nation is either desert or mountains with small numbers of people living there. The vast majority of that 1+ billion population lives in a area no bigger than everything East of the Mississippi River in the U.S. Their banking system is in trouble and the possibility of economic crisis is very real. Those are the realities of China. What do dictators do when crises creates unstable populations? They start a war. Nothing is ever what it seems in China.

China’s Death-Row Reality Show
Jonathan Mirsky
Until it was taken off the air last December, one of the most popular television programs in China’s Henan province, which has a population of 100 million, was “Interviews Before Execution.” … Ding Yu would interview …condemned murderer who was about to face a firing squad or a lethal injection.….. There are 55 different crimes (recently reduced from 68), ranging from tax evasion to unspecified “crimes against the state,” that now qualify as capital offenses. The number of people executed for committing these crimes is a state secret. ….Ding Yu says that her object in doing the interviews is to show harsh punishment for evil deeds, and to urge viewers to be “reasonable and tolerant.” By the time they appear on her program, Ding’s capital offenders have gone through the Chinese justice system with no presumption of innocence and been sentenced, often in a quick court-room procedure without legal representation or witnesses…. She asks the convicted killers to apologize on camera. A man who stabbed his wife to death tells his daughter he is sorry for killing her mother. The daughter, with her back to the camera, sees this. Such scenes, says Ding Yu, “lift a stone from their [the murderers’] hearts.” Very young children are shown in an orphanage for the offspring of murderers. They do not speak of their parents’ crimes “because they are ashamed. “


Only Capitalism is as Stake!


The war on Wisconsin
by Michelle Malkin
Now is the time for all good tea partiers to come to the aid of Wisconsin. Fiscally conservative leaders in the Badger State are under coordinated siege from Big Labor, the White House, the liberal media and the judiciary. The yearlong campaign of union thuggery, family harassment and intimidation of Republican donors and businesses is about to escalate even further. This is the price the Right pays for doing the right thing

Democracy in Danger: The Origins of European Technocracy
Richard Griffiths
This quotation from President Roosevelt's 1933 Inaugural Address seems very familiar to us almost 80 years later. But it is not just in anti-banking rhetoric that our two periods have a great deal in common. Many of the more serious political reactions to the great recession of the Thirties find their counterparts in the present day, too. And perhaps there are lessons for us to learn from some of the mistakes of that earlier generation. Foremost among these is the lesson of the danger to democracy created by knee-jerk reactions to the crisis…… The temptation towards authoritarianism was experienced even in the United States, seen by many as the epitome of democracy. As Roosevelt put it, in his 1933 Inaugural Address:

I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require. These measures, or such other measures as the Congress may build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring to speedy adoption. But in the event that Congress shall fail to take one of these two courses, and in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis — broad Executive power to wage a war against the emergency.
Small wonder that Harold Nicolson, hearing that speech on the radio at a house in the US, should have said to his garrulous hostess, who kept talking during it: "Mrs Strachey, do you realise that your new President has just proclaimed that he will, if need be, institute a dictatorship?"

Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared on April 23, 2009

Hillary at the Latin American Summit
By Humberto Fontova

President Obama got an earful about "Yankee imperialism" last week at the Latin American Summit. Nicaragua's pedophile President, Daniel Ortega, led the verbal lynch mob with a 50 minute rant no different, in essence, from the daily lectures at most U.S. colleges and Universities by most U.S. professors of Latin American History.

Alas, a few of those professors occasionally get a rebuttal. And I can think of a dandy for President Obama's next run-in with the Nicaraguan Communist/pedophile: "The U.S. military interventions you denounce, Mr Ortega, in fact kept many Latin-American nations from degenerating into even worse pestholes. As exhibit A, I present your own Nicaragua. Under the "U.S.-backed" Somoza regime (in fact Jimmy Carter imposed an arms and economic embargo against Somoza to smooth your way to power) Nicaraguans enjoyed a per-capita income almost DOUBLE the one during your Sandinista regime, not to mention the normal gamut of freedoms, from travel to employment to conducting business, to not having 20,000 of them locked up and tortured as political prisoners by you and your eager Castroite understudies."


Federalist Number 14

Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered
Friday, November 30, 1787.
Author: James Madison

To the People of the State of New York:

WE HAVE seen the necessity of the Union, as our bulwark against foreign danger, as the conservator of peace among ourselves, as the guardian of our commerce and other common interests, as the only substitute for those military establishments which have subverted the liberties of the Old World, and as the proper antidote for the diseases of faction, which have proved fatal to other popular governments, and of which alarming symptoms have been betrayed by our own. All that remains, within this branch of our inquiries, is to take notice of an objection that may be drawn from the great extent of country which the Union embraces. A few observations on this subject will be the more proper, as it is perceived that the adversaries of the new Constitution are availing themselves of the prevailing prejudice with regard to the practicable sphere of republican administration, in order to supply, by imaginary difficulties, the want of those solid objections which they endeavor in vain to find.

The error which limits republican government to a narrow district has been unfolded and refuted in preceding papers. I remark here only that it seems to owe its rise and prevalence chiefly to the confounding of a republic with a democracy, applying to the former reasonings drawn from the nature of the latter. The true distinction between these forms was also adverted to on a former occasion. It is, that in a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently, will be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region.

To this accidental source of the error may be added the artifice of some celebrated authors, whose writings have had a great share in forming the modern standard of political opinions. Being subjects either of an absolute or limited monarchy, they have endeavored to heighten the advantages, or palliate the evils of those forms, by placing in comparison the vices and defects of the republican, and by citing as specimens of the latter the turbulent democracies of ancient Greece and modern Italy. Under the confusion of names, it has been an easy task to transfer to a republic observations applicable to a democracy only; and among others, the observation that it can never be established but among a small number of people, living within a small compass of territory.

Such a fallacy may have been the less perceived, as most of the popular governments of antiquity were of the democratic species; and even in modern Europe, to which we owe the great principle of representation, no example is seen of a government wholly popular, and founded, at the same time, wholly on that principle. If Europe has the merit of discovering this great mechanical power in government, by the simple agency of which the will of the largest political body may be concentred, and its force directed to any object which the public good requires, America can claim the merit of making the discovery the basis of unmixed and extensive republics. It is only to be lamented that any of her citizens should wish to deprive her of the additional merit of displaying its full efficacy in the establishment of the comprehensive system now under her consideration.

As the natural limit of a democracy is that distance from the central point which will just permit the most remote citizens to assemble as often as their public functions demand, and will include no greater number than can join in those functions; so the natural limit of a republic is that distance from the centre which will barely allow the representatives to meet as often as may be necessary for the administration of public affairs. Can it be said that the limits of the United States exceed this distance? It will not be said by those who recollect that the Atlantic coast is the longest side of the Union, that during the term of thirteen years, the representatives of the States have been almost continually assembled, and that the members from the most distant States are not chargeable with greater intermissions of attendance than those from the States in the neighborhood of Congress.

That we may form a juster estimate with regard to this interesting subject, let us resort to the actual dimensions of the Union. The limits, as fixed by the treaty of peace, are: on the east the Atlantic, on the south the latitude of thirty-one degrees, on the west the Mississippi, and on the north an irregular line running in some instances beyond the forty-fifth degree, in others falling as low as the forty-second. The southern shore of Lake Erie lies below that latitude. Computing the distance between the thirty-first and forty-fifth degrees, it amounts to nine hundred and seventy-three common miles; computing it from thirty-one to forty-two degrees, to seven hundred and sixty-four miles and a half. Taking the mean for the distance, the amount will be eight hundred and sixty-eight miles and three-fourths. The mean distance from the Atlantic to the Mississippi does not probably exceed seven hundred and fifty miles. On a comparison of this extent with that of several countries in Europe, the practicability of rendering our system commensurate to it appears to be demonstrable. It is not a great deal larger than Germany, where a diet representing the whole empire is continually assembled; or than Poland before the late dismemberment, where another national diet was the depositary of the supreme power. Passing by France and Spain, we find that in Great Britain, inferior as it may be in size, the representatives of the northern extremity of the island have as far to travel to the national council as will be required of those of the most remote parts of the Union.

Favorable as this view of the subject may be, some observations remain which will place it in a light still more satisfactory.

In the first place it is to be remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any. The subordinate governments, which can extend their care to all those other subjects which can be separately provided for, will retain their due authority and activity. Were it proposed by the plan of the convention to abolish the governments of the particular States, its adversaries would have some ground for their objection; though it would not be difficult to show that if they were abolished the general government would be compelled, by the principle of self-preservation, to reinstate them in their proper jurisdiction.

A second observation to be made is that the immediate object of the federal Constitution is to secure the union of the thirteen primitive States, which we know to be practicable; and to add to them such other States as may arise in their own bosoms, or in their neighborhoods, which we cannot doubt to be equally practicable. The arrangements that may be necessary for those angles and fractions of our territory which lie on our northwestern frontier, must be left to those whom further discoveries and experience will render more equal to the task.

Let it be remarked, in the third place, that the intercourse throughout the Union will be facilitated by new improvements. Roads will everywhere be shortened, and kept in better order; accommodations for travelers will be multiplied and meliorated; an interior navigation on our eastern side will be opened throughout, or nearly throughout, the whole extent of the thirteen States. The communication between the Western and Atlantic districts, and between different parts of each, will be rendered more and more easy by those numerous canals with which the beneficence of nature has intersected our country, and which art finds it so little difficult to connect and complete.

A fourth and still more important consideration is, that as almost every State will, on one side or other, be a frontier, and will thus find, in regard to its safety, an inducement to make some sacrifices for the sake of the general protection; so the States which lie at the greatest distance from the heart of the Union, and which, of course, may partake least of the ordinary circulation of its benefits, will be at the same time immediately contiguous to foreign nations, and will consequently stand, on particular occasions, in greatest need of its strength and resources. It may be inconvenient for Georgia, or the States forming our western or northeastern borders, to send their representatives to the seat of government; but they would find it more so to struggle alone against an invading enemy, or even to support alone the whole expense of those precautions which may be dictated by the neighborhood of continual danger. If they should derive less benefit, therefore, from the Union in some respects than the less distant States, they will derive greater benefit from it in other respects, and thus the proper equilibrium will be maintained throughout.

I submit to you, my fellow-citizens, these considerations, in full confidence that the good sense which has so often marked your decisions will allow them their due weight and effect; and that you will never suffer difficulties, however formidable in appearance, or however fashionable the error on which they may be founded, to drive you into the gloomy and perilous scene into which the advocates for disunion would conduct you. Hearken not to the unnatural voice which tells you that the people of America, knit together as they are by so many cords of affection, can no longer live together as members of the same family; can no longer continue the mutual guardians of their mutual happiness; can no longer be fellowcitizens of one great, respectable, and flourishing empire. Hearken not to the voice which petulantly tells you that the form of government recommended for your adoption is a novelty in the political world; that it has never yet had a place in the theories of the wildest projectors; that it rashly attempts what it is impossible to accomplish. No, my countrymen, shut your ears against this unhallowed language. Shut your hearts against the poison which it conveys; the kindred blood which flows in the veins of American citizens, the mingled blood which they have shed in defense of their sacred rights, consecrate their Union, and excite horror at the idea of their becoming aliens, rivals, enemies. And if novelties are to be shunned, believe me, the most alarming of all novelties, the most wild of all projects, the most rash of all attempts, is that of rendering us in pieces, in order to preserve our liberties and promote our happiness. But why is the experiment of an extended republic to be rejected, merely because it may comprise what is new? Is it not the glory of the people of America, that, whilst they have paid a decent regard to the opinions of former times and other nations, they have not suffered a blind veneration for antiquity, for custom, or for names, to overrule the suggestions of their own good sense, the knowledge of their own situation, and the lessons of their own experience? To this manly spirit, posterity will be indebted for the possession, and the world for the example, of the numerous innovations displayed on the American theatre, in favor of private rights and public happiness. Had no important step been taken by the leaders of the Revolution for which a precedent could not be discovered, no government established of which an exact model did not present itself, the people of the United States might, at this moment have been numbered among the melancholy victims of misguided councils, must at best have been laboring under the weight of some of those forms which have crushed the liberties of the rest of mankind. Happily for America, happily, we trust, for the whole human race, they pursued a new and more noble course. They accomplished a revolution which has no parallel in the annals of human society. They reared the fabrics of governments which have no model on the face of the globe. They formed the design of a great Confederacy, which it is incumbent on their successors to improve and perpetuate. If their works betray imperfections, we wonder at the fewness of them. If they erred most in the structure of the Union, this was the work most difficult to be executed; this is the work which has been new modelled by the act of your convention, and it is that act on which you are now to deliberate and to decide.



Thursday, March 29, 2012

The Trayvon Martin Saga, Part 3


By Walter E. Williams
Right now, there isn't enough known about the circumstances surrounding the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, a black, by George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old part-Hispanic, during his neighborhood watch tour in an Orlando, Fla., suburb. If evidence emerges that Zimmerman's actions were not justified, he should be prosecuted and punished; however, there's a larger issue that few people understand or have the courage to acknowledge, namely that black and young has become synonymous with crime and, hence, suspicion. To make that connection does not make one a racist.

Jesse: Trayvon Proves 'Blacks Are Under Attack'
Larry Elder
"Blacks are under attack," said the Rev. Jesse Jackson, irresponsibly turning the Florida shooting death of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin, at the hands of Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman into a barometer of black-white "race-relations." ….. But is Jesse Jackson right, that the death of Trayvon Martin suggests "blacks are under attack," presumably by racist non-blacks? … Look at the 2010 stats for New York City. While blacks comprise about 25 percent of the city's population, blacks accounted for two-thirds of murder victims. For black homicide suspects arrested, 85 percent of their victims were also black. …. How selective is the outrage about interracial crime -- when the bad guy is black? ….. Same town, a few years after the James Byrd murder, a black-white murder in the same fashion -- by dragging a man to his death -- but no story! Why? Well, Tillery was white, and the three suspects were all black. The irony alone would, one would think, guarantee lots of coverage. But how much coverage did the case get? An online search of 557 newspapers found that 22 covered the story.

High Numbers of Black on White Crime
More than 1,600 Whites are murdered by Blacks each year. Blacks murder Whites at 18 times the rate Whites murder Blacks. About 1 million Whites were murdered, robbed, assaulted, or raped by Blacks in 1992. In the last 30 years, 170 million violent and nonviolent crimes were committed by Blacks against Whites in the U.S. Some 90% of the victims of race crimes are Whites. Blacks commit 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than Whites, although they comprise only one-seventh of the White population. On a per-capita basis, blacks commit 50 times more violent crimes than Whites. Some 27 million nonviolent crimes were committed in the U.S. in 1992 alone. 31% of the robberies involved Black offenders and White victims; only 2% involved White offenders and Black victims. 1.3 million of the 6.6 million violent crimes committed in the U.S. each year are interracial. Between 1964 and 1994, more than 45,000 people were killed in interracial murders in the U.S., compared to 58,000 Americans killed in Vietnam and 38,000 killed in Korea.
1) 58% of all arrests for weapons violations are Blacks.
2) 46% of all arrests for violent crimes are Blacks.
3) 73% of all "justified self-defense" killings are committed by Blacks.
4) 60.5% of all Blacks are armed with some type of weapon at all times. 5) 98% of all youths arrested for gun fights in Atlanta are Blacks.
In 1989, the FBI reported the following:
A) Blacks commit 8 times more assaults than Whites.
B) Blacks commit 9 times more rapes than Whites.
C) Blacks commit 14 times more murders than Whites.
D) Blacks commit 19 times more armed robberies.
E) Black neighborhoods are 35 times more violent than White neighborhoods.
F) There were 629,000 interracial attacks committed in 1985.  Some nine out of every ten were committed by Blacks against Whites.
G. Black males (6% of the population) make up 46% of the nation's prison population.
Embarrassment Surrounding the Trayvon Martin Case
Katie Pavlich
Predictably, the liberal media has completely hijacked the narrative and the facts of the story. First, they used old and misleading photos of both Martin and Zimmerman for weeks. Finally this week, they started using up-to-date and accurate photos. Changes things a bit, doesn't it?

Then, multiple media outlets called Zimmerman a “white Hispanic,” in order to further push the narrative that this was a crime motivated by racism. Once again, we don’t know if the crime was racially motivated or not, but calling Zimmerman a “white Hispanic” only encourages racial tension, which is exactly what liberal media feeds off of. They just had to get the "white" part in there. Also, MSNBC, home of Al Sharpton, deliberately edited the phone audio between Zimmerman and the 911 dispatcher to make Zimmerman look like a racist.


The Birth Cirtificate Saga, Part 5


Lord Monckton: Sheriff Joe, posse 'right to be worried'
After a visit to Phoenix to get a first-hand look at evidence collected by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his investigative team, former Margaret Thatcher policy adviser Lord Christopher Monckton says he is convinced that the document presented by the White House as Barack Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent…..“My assessment is that they are right to be worried,” Monckton said in a video interview at the end of the day with WND’s Jerome Corsi. “That document is not genuine.”

Russian media expose Obama birth 'forgery'
But American news agencies still absent on presidential scandal - While many U.S. mainstream media outlets spike news about the Obama eligibility investigation, Russia’s government radio is keeping the world abreast of the scandal that has caused “the biggest censorship and blackout in the history of journalism.” The Voice of Russia – successor of Radio Moscow, the official station of the Soviet Union – published an exclusive interview with Sheriff Joe Arpaio March 26 titled, “Obama’s birth certificate may be forgery.” As WND reported, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse announced there is probable cause indicating the documents released by the White House last April purported to be Obama’s original, long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration card are actually forgeries….WND recently reported Russian news website Pravda published an accusation that the American media is “tame,” afraid to publish news and is “deliberately hiding the evidence published on the internet about [President Obama's] defrauding of the American public and the deliberate evisceration of the Constitution of the United States

State lawmakers revive eligibility requirement
Arizona considering plan to have candidates affirm qualifications - Arizona, which was at the forefront of last year’s effort among state legislatures to require documentation of candidates’ eligibility for the office they seek, is returning to the controversy, with a proposal by Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix, that would require candidates to sign an affidavit affirming they meet the requirements. The plan was promoted in a news conference yesterday attended by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose Cold Case Posse earlier this month detailed how the evidence regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility documentation suggestions both forgery and fraud – and a reason to continue the investigation.


Holding the EPA to Account

John Dunn and Steve Milloy

Texas Republican Congressman Joe Barton asked for EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's attention in his opening statement at a Feb. 28 House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing, berated her and held her to account.

Congressman Barton's opening statement ticked off the following list of problems he had with the EPA, including agency:
1. Failure to comply with Obama Executive Order 13563 requiring regulations that promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness and jobs with the least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends, taking "into account benefits and costs, both quantitative and qualitative" (quoting from the Executive order);
2. Promulgation of power plant regulations that have driven energy costs higher without reasonable justification;
3. Failure to Congressional criticism of regulatory actions, including requests for public health and economic research data and justifications of policy decisions;
4. Disregard of blatant conflicts of interest among its science advisers who receive tens of millions of dollars in research grants from the agency wile also posturing as independent reviewers of agency science;
5. Failure to require that its sponsored researchers follow established rules of public health research with respect to toxicology and epidemiology;
6. Inappropriate reliance on the precautionary principle;
7. Circumvention of Congressional oversight; and
8. Grant-giving to advocacy groups that then enter into collusive lawsuits and aggressive regulatory requests that promote the agency's agenda and expand its regulatory and political power.  (bold highlight is mine)
As Congressman Barton pointed out, "I believe that the American public and taxpayers should not be paying for an agency that manipulates data and funds researchers in the form of exterior grants, who in turn serve on the internal committees within the EPA to create policy and work in an oversight capacity. This is an incredible conflict of interest to the American public."

What are some solutions to the EPA's faults and shortcomings?

1. Shrink EPA. Most environmental protection is done at the state-level. Most environmental regulatory work is done by the states. The Federal agency has too much time and money and that results in overreach and aggressive policy making. (Editor's Note: This also one of the recommendations made by my friend Dr. Jay Lehr, who was one of the original scientists who helped create the EPA. RK)

2. End inherent conflict of interest. Research and regulation need to be separated into independent agencies. At a minimum, EPA science reviewers should not be grantee researchers or affiliated with grantee institutions.

3. Risk assessment (RA) and cost benefit analysis (CBA). All rules must be subject to the two. RA and CBA should be judicially reviewable. This could be done through a super mandate that modifies review criteria for all agency activities.

4. Judicial review. Aggrieved parties should have easier opportunities to challenge the agency in court. The "arbitrary and capricious" standard in the Administrative Procedures Act needs to be replaced with a standard that allows proper challenges, such as the standard of review for workplace rules administered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. This could be done with a "super mandate" that overrides all existing statutory law.

5. Impose stricter scientific standards. Obligate the Agency to research that is subject to objective, non conflicted peer review and appropriate evaluation of data and methods. Require that taxpayer funded research be reviewable for data and methods and that research comply with the scientific standards from authoritative resources such as the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence,written by truly independent experts to provide federal judges with guidance on what constitutes reliable scientific evidence in federal courts. If the Reference Manual is good enough for courts, it ought to be good enough for the EPA.
Congressman Barton's dressing down of EPA and its administrator was a first step in the right direction. But now Congressman Barton and his colleagues need to follow through by implementing real solutions that will stop the EPA's regulatory excesses.

Steve Milloy publishes and is the author of “Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them” (Regnery, 2009). I would like to thank Steve for allowing me to republish his works.


Federalist Number 13

Advantage of the Union in Respect to Economy in Government
For the Independent Journal.
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:

As CONNECTED with the subject of revenue, we may with propriety consider that of economy. The money saved from one object may be usefully applied to another, and there will be so much the less to be drawn from the pockets of the people. If the States are united under one government, there will be but one national civil list to support; if they are divided into several confederacies, there will be as many different national civil lists to be provided for--and each of them, as to the principal departments, coextensive with that which would be necessary for a government of the whole. The entire separation of the States into thirteen unconnected sovereignties is a project too extravagant and too replete with danger to have many advocates. The ideas of men who speculate upon the dismemberment of the empire seem generally turned toward three confederacies--one consisting of the four Northern, another of the four Middle, and a third of the five Southern States. There is little probability that there would be a greater number. According to this distribution, each confederacy would comprise an extent of territory larger than that of the kingdom of Great Britain. No well-informed man will suppose that the affairs of such a confederacy can be properly regulated by a government less comprehensive in its organs or institutions than that which has been proposed by the convention. When the dimensions of a State attain to a certain magnitude, it requires the same energy of government and the same forms of administration which are requisite in one of much greater extent. This idea admits not of precise demonstration, because there is no rule by which we can measure the momentum of civil power necessary to the government of any given number of individuals; but when we consider that the island of Britain, nearly commensurate with each of the supposed confederacies, contains about eight millions of people, and when we reflect upon the degree of authority required to direct the passions of so large a society to the public good, we shall see no reason to doubt that the like portion of power would be sufficient to perform the same task in a society far more numerous. Civil power, properly organized and exerted, is capable of diffusing its force to a very great extent; and can, in a manner, reproduce itself in every part of a great empire by a judicious arrangement of subordinate institutions.

The supposition that each confederacy into which the States would be likely to be divided would require a government not less comprehensive than the one proposed, will be strengthened by another supposition, more probable than that which presents us with three confederacies as the alternative to a general Union. If we attend carefully to geographical and commercial considerations, in conjunction with the habits and prejudices of the different States, we shall be led to conclude that in case of disunion they will most naturally league themselves under two governments. The four Eastern States, from all the causes that form the links of national sympathy and connection, may with certainty be expected to unite. New York, situated as she is, would never be unwise enough to oppose a feeble and unsupported flank to the weight of that confederacy. There are other obvious reasons that would facilitate her accession to it. New Jersey is too small a State to think of being a frontier, in opposition to this still more powerful combination; nor do there appear to be any obstacles to her admission into it. Even Pennsylvania would have strong inducements to join the Northern league. An active foreign commerce, on the basis of her own navigation, is her true policy, and coincides with the opinions and dispositions of her citizens. The more Southern States, from various circumstances, may not think themselves much interested in the encouragement of navigation. They may prefer a system which would give unlimited scope to all nations to be the carriers as well as the purchasers of their commodities.

Pennsylvania may not choose to confound her interests in a connection so adverse to her policy. As she must at all events be a frontier, she may deem it most consistent with her safety to have her exposed side turned towards the weaker power of the Southern, rather than towards the stronger power of the Northern, Confederacy. This would give her the fairest chance to avoid being the Flanders of America. Whatever may be the determination of Pennsylvania, if the Northern Confederacy includes New Jersey, there is no likelihood of more than one confederacy to the south of that State.

Nothing can be more evident than that the thirteen States will be able to support a national government better than one half, or one third, or any number less than the whole. This reflection must have great weight in obviating that objection to the proposed plan, which is founded on the principle of expense; an objection, however, which, when we come to take a nearer view of it, will appear in every light to stand on mistaken ground.

If, in addition to the consideration of a plurality of civil lists, we take into view the number of persons who must necessarily be employed to guard the inland communication between the different confederacies against illicit trade, and who in time will infallibly spring up out of the necessities of revenue; and if we also take into view the military establishments which it has been shown would unavoidably result from the jealousies and conflicts of the several nations into which the States would be divided, we shall clearly discover that a separation would be not less injurious to the economy, than to the tranquillity, commerce, revenue, and liberty of every part.


Zone of Reality: Castro Notes

This first appeared April 30, 2009

Arlen Specter, Castro's Dupe
By Humberto Fontova

Sen. Arlen Specter has visited Cuba and met with Fidel Castro three times in the past 9 years, and seems quite proud of the record. His second visit was shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attack, where Specter made a big show of presenting Fidel Castro with a FDNY cap. The Stalinist dictator and pioneering terrorist responsible for the Hemisphere's first plane hijackings in 1958, who two months later kidnapped 40 U.S. citizens from Guantanamo to use as human shields, and who twice came a hair from incinerating New York City itself, smilingly donned the New York Fire Dept. cap. Sen. Specter smiled with delight as a throng of camera men snapped pictures of the western hemisphere's godfather of terrorism, and the Philadelphia Senator mugging for the cameras……the fondest wish of Sen Specter's host that day would have made New York's 9/11 explosions appear like an errant cherry bomb, and overwhelmed the finest efforts of even the heroic FDNY.

"If the missiles had remained we would have used them against the very heart of the U.S., including New York City," admitted Castro's sidekick, Ernesto "Che" Guevara…..
“It wasn't until January, 1992, in a meeting chaired by Castro in Havana, Cuba,” writes former Sec.of Defense Robert Mc Namara, “that I learned 162 nuclear warheads, including 90 tactical warheads, were on the island at the time of this critical moment of the Missile crisis.”


Wednesday, March 28, 2012

The Birth Cirtificate Saga, Part 4

Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!  Unless of course it appears that it might look like some sort of conspiracy.  Then of course we must remember...there is no such thing as a conspiracy! No matter what you may have read in history books. 

Media blackout on Obama eligibility near-total
Despite vast public interest, 'mainstream' and 'conservative' press AWOL - Even though almost half of registered voters tell pollsters they are not convinced Barack Obama’s birth certificate is authentic – and even though the first official U.S. law enforcement investigation into the matter established “probable cause” that the document released with great fanfare by the White House last April is a computer-generated forgery – a virtual media blackout remains in effect on the most controversial story of the Obama presidency. Even when one of several bombshell findings of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s six-month investigation into Obama’s constitutional eligibility was rated last week by Internet ranking service as one of the most-read news stories in the entire world – due almost entirely to coverage by WND and the Drudge Report – not only the establishment press, but most of the “conservative” media as well, looked the other way. For example:

Townhall yanks column on Arpaio's findings
A popular column on – the self-described “leading conservative and political opinion website” – discussing Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president has unexplainably disappeared.  Earlier today, the column “Sheriff Joe Exposes Forgery of Obama’s Selective Service Registration” by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown of The Western Center For Journalism was’s most emailed and eighth most read column.

But then … it was gone.

Why the silence about Obama's historic scam?
Diana West whacks MSM for 'political blackout' of Sheriff Joe's eligibility probe - Warning: This column contains news of evidence of possible forgery and fraud in the long-form birth certificate of the president of the United States and – bonus – his Selective Service registration card.  I figure the warning is necessary to prevent Americans, particularly Americans who work in news media and politics, from hurting themselves on any hard, sharp facts that might poke through my discussion of what is surely the biggest scandal to emerge around the seemingly dodgy docs Barack Obama is using to verify his identity.

Mailman discouraged from telling Obama story
Told family and friends: They 'did not want to hear this' - A retired Chicago-area mailman who has come forward with his first-person recollection of a clean-cut young man he identified as Barack Obama who approached him and told him he was going to be president says he wasn’t worried about relating his experience, but he also wasn’t encouraged by friends and family. Allen Hulton, who previously told WND in a videotaped interview about meeting Obama long before his political career was launched in Chicago, was interviewed by Mark Gillar on his BlogTalkRadio program just days ago. Gillar asked him why he didn’t made a more concerted effort to tell people about how Mary Ayers, the mother of longtime Obama associate Bill Ayers and one of the residents to whom he delivered mail, boasted of helping this “foreign” student with his college.


Federalist Number 12

Federalist No. 12

The Utility of the Union In Respect to Revenue

Tuesday, November 27, 1787.
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:

THE effects of Union upon the commercial prosperity of the States have been sufficiently delineated. Its tendency to promote the interests of revenue will be the subject of our present inquiry.

The prosperity of commerce is now perceived and acknowledged by all enlightened statesmen to be the most useful as well as the most productive source of national wealth, and has accordingly become a primary object of their political cares. By multipying the means of gratification, by promoting the introduction and circulation of the precious metals, those darling objects of human avarice and enterprise, it serves to vivify and invigorate the channels of industry, and to make them flow with greater activity and copiousness. The assiduous merchant, the laborious husbandman, the active mechanic, and the industrious manufacturer,--all orders of men, look forward with eager expectation and growing alacrity to this pleasing reward of their toils. The often-agitated question between agriculture and commerce has, from indubitable experience, received a decision which has silenced the rivalship that once subsisted between them, and has proved, to the satisfaction of their friends, that their interests are intimately blended and interwoven. It has been found in various countries that, in proportion as commerce has flourished, land has risen in value. And how could it have happened otherwise? Could that which procures a freer vent for the products of the earth, which furnishes new incitements to the cultivation of land, which is the most powerful instrument in increasing the quantity of money in a state--could that, in fine, which is the faithful handmaid of labor and industry, in every shape, fail to augment that article, which is the prolific parent of far the greatest part of the objects upon which they are exerted? It is astonishing that so simple a truth should ever have had an adversary; and it is one, among a multitude of proofs, how apt a spirit of ill-informed jealousy, or of too great abstraction and refinement, is to lead men astray from the plainest truths of reason and conviction.

The ability of a country to pay taxes must always be proportioned, in a great degree, to the quantity of money in circulation, and to the celerity with which it circulates. Commerce, contributing to both these objects, must of necessity render the payment of taxes easier, and facilitate the requisite supplies to the treasury. The hereditary dominions of the Emperor of Germany contain a great extent of fertile, cultivated, and populous territory, a large proportion of which is situated in mild and luxuriant climates. In some parts of this territory are to be found the best gold and silver mines in Europe. And yet, from the want of the fostering influence of commerce, that monarch can boast but slender revenues. He has several times been compelled to owe obligations to the pecuniary succors of other nations for the preservation of his essential interests, and is unable, upon the strength of his own resources, to sustain a long or continued war.

But it is not in this aspect of the subject alone that Union will be seen to conduce to the purpose of revenue. There are other points of view, in which its influence will appear more immediate and decisive. It is evident from the state of the country, from the habits of the people, from the experience we have had on the point itself, that it is impracticable to raise any very considerable sums by direct taxation. Tax laws have in vain been multiplied; new methods to enforce the collection have in vain been tried; the public expectation has been uniformly disappointed, and the treasuries of the States have remained empty. The popular system of administration inherent in the nature of popular government, coinciding with the real scarcity of money incident to a languid and mutilated state of trade, has hitherto defeated every experiment for extensive collections, and has at length taught the different legislatures the folly of attempting them.

No person acquainted with what happens in other countries will be surprised at this circumstance. In so opulent a nation as that of Britain, where direct taxes from superior wealth must be much more tolerable, and, from the vigor of the government, much more practicable, than in America, far the greatest part of the national revenue is derived from taxes of the indirect kind, from imposts, and from excises. Duties on imported articles form a large branch of this latter description.

In America, it is evident that we must a long time depend for the means of revenue chiefly on such duties. In most parts of it, excises must be confined within a narrow compass. The genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise laws. The pockets of the farmers, on the other hand, will reluctantly yield but scanty supplies, in the unwelcome shape of impositions on their houses and lands; and personal property is too precarious and invisible a fund to be laid hold of in any other way than by the inperceptible agency of taxes on consumption.

If these remarks have any foundation, that state of things which will best enable us to improve and extend so valuable a resource must be best adapted to our political welfare. And it cannot admit of a serious doubt, that this state of things must rest on the basis of a general Union. As far as this would be conducive to the interests of commerce, so far it must tend to the extension of the revenue to be drawn from that source. As far as it would contribute to rendering regulations for the collection of the duties more simple and efficacious, so far it must serve to answer the purposes of making the same rate of duties more productive, and of putting it into the power of the government to increase the rate without prejudice to trade.

The relative situation of these States; the number of rivers with which they are intersected, and of bays that wash there shores; the facility of communication in every direction; the affinity of language and manners; the familiar habits of intercourse; --all these are circumstances that would conspire to render an illicit trade between them a matter of little difficulty, and would insure frequent evasions of the commercial regulations of each other. The separate States or confederacies would be necessitated by mutual jealousy to avoid the temptations to that kind of trade by the lowness of their duties. The temper of our governments, for a long time to come, would not permit those rigorous precautions by which the European nations guard the avenues into their respective countries, as well by land as by water; and which, even there, are found insufficient obstacles to the adventurous stratagems of avarice.

In France, there is an army of patrols (as they are called) constantly employed to secure their fiscal regulations against the inroads of the dealers in contraband trade. Mr. Neckar computes the number of these patrols at upwards of twenty thousand. This shows the immense difficulty in preventing that species of traffic, where there is an inland communication, and places in a strong light the disadvantages with which the collection of duties in this country would be encumbered, if by disunion the States should be placed in a situation, with respect to each other, resembling that of France with respect to her neighbors. The arbitrary and vexatious powers with which the patrols are necessarily armed, would be intolerable in a free country.

If, on the contrary, there be but one government pervading all the States, there will be, as to the principal part of our commerce, but ONE SIDE to guard--the ATLANTIC COAST. Vessels arriving directly from foreign countries, laden with valuable cargoes, would rarely choose to hazard themselves to the complicated and critical perils which would attend attempts to unlade prior to their coming into port. They would have to dread both the dangers of the coast, and of detection, as well after as before their arrival at the places of their final destination. An ordinary degree of vigilance would be competent to the prevention of any material infractions upon the rights of the revenue. A few armed vessels, judiciously stationed at the entrances of our ports, might at a small expense be made useful sentinels of the laws. And the government having the same interest to provide against violations everywhere, the co-operation of its measures in each State would have a powerful tendency to render them effectual. Here also we should preserve by Union, an advantage which nature holds out to us, and which would be relinquished by separation. The United States lie at a great distance from Europe, and at a considerable distance from all other places with which they would have extensive connections of foreign trade. The passage from them to us, in a few hours, or in a single night, as between the coasts of France and Britain, and of other neighboring nations, would be impracticable. This is a prodigious security against a direct contraband with foreign countries; but a circuitous contraband to one State, through the medium of another, would be both easy and safe. The difference between a direct importation from abroad, and an indirect importation through the channel of a neighboring State, in small parcels, according to time and opportunity, with the additional facilities of inland communication, must be palpable to every man of discernment.

It is therefore evident, that one national government would be able, at much less expense, to extend the duties on imports, beyond comparison, further than would be practicable to the States separately, or to any partial confederacies. Hitherto, I believe, it may safely be asserted, that these duties have not upon an average exceeded in any State three per cent. In France they are estimated to be about fifteen per cent., and in Britain they exceed this proportion. [1] There seems to be nothing to hinder their being increased in this country to at least treble their present amount. The single article of ardent spirits, under federal regulation, might be made to furnish a considerable revenue. Upon a ratio to the importation into this State, the whole quantity imported into the United States may be estimated at four millions of gallons; which, at a shilling per gallon, would produce two hundred thousand pounds. That article would well bear this rate of duty; and if it should tend to diminish the consumption of it, such an effect would be equally favorable to the agriculture, to the economy, to the morals, and to the health of the society. There is, perhaps, nothing so much a subject of national extravagance as these spirits.

What will be the consequence, if we are not able to avail ourselves of the resource in question in its full extent? A nation cannot long exist without revenues. Destitute of this essential support, it must resign its independence, and sink into the degraded condition of a province. This is an extremity to which no government will of choice accede. Revenue, therefore, must be had at all events. In this country, if the principal part be not drawn from commerce, it must fall with oppressive weight upon land. It has been already intimated that excises, in their true signification, are too little in unison with the feelings of the people, to admit of great use being made of that mode of taxation; nor, indeed, in the States where almost the sole employment is agriculture, are the objects proper for excise sufficiently numerous to permit very ample collections in that way. Personal estate (as has been before remarked), from the difficulty in tracing it, cannot be subjected to large contributions, by any other means than by taxes on consumption. In populous cities, it may be enough the subject of conjecture, to occasion the oppression of individuals, without much aggregate benefit to the State; but beyond these circles, it must, in a great measure, escape the eye and the hand of the tax-gatherer. As the necessities of the State, nevertheless, must be satisfied in some mode or other, the defect of other resources must throw the principal weight of public burdens on the possessors of land. And as, on the other hand, the wants of the government can never obtain an adequate supply, unless all the sources of revenue are open to its demands, the finances of the community, under such embarrassments, cannot be put into a situation consistent with its respectability or its security. Thus we shall not even have the consolations of a full treasury, to atone for the oppression of that valuable class of the citizens who are employed in the cultivation of the soil. But public and private distress will keep pace with each other in gloomy concert; and unite in deploring the infatuation of those counsels which led to disunion.


1. If my memory be right they amount to twenty per cent.



TheTrayvon Martin Saga, Part 2

Violent Death in America is an Equal Opportunity Crime
By Alan Caruba

...I would count the initial reporting on the killing of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, as among the worst media coverage in a while because, as the facts begin to emerge after a month, it turns out that there was an eye witness to the incident in which George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, suffered a broken nose and injuries to the back of his head consistent with an attack

Police: Trayvon protesters ransack store
North Miami Beach police said surveillance video shows dozens of high school students demonstrating in the Trayvon Martin case Friday ransacking a Walgreens store.

Trayvon Martin shooting: New details emerge from Twitter account, witness testimony
As George Zimmerman's supporters work to stem the rising tide of public outrage aimed at the neighborhood watchman who shot and killed Florida teenager Trayvon Martin last month, a new picture of the victim—culled from the 17-year-old's Twitter account and witness testimony leaked from local law enforcement—has emerged. "With a single punch," the Orlando Sentinel, citing police sources, reported Monday, "Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer ... climbed on top of [him] and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times, leaving him bloody and battered." "That is the account Zimmerman gave police," the paper said, "and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say."

Former NAACP Leader Takes On the Race Hustlers
By Arnold Ahlert
C.L. Bryant denounces Sharpton and Jackson for exploiting the Trayvon Martin tragedy.

Trayvon Doesn’t Matter to the Left
By Ben Shapiro
The real agenda.

Clearing the air on the EPA

EPA grants to its advisers triggers conflict-of-interest query.

By Steve Milloy

This appeared in the Washington Times on March 8, 2012

Rep. Joe Barton last week took the first official baby step in exposing the Environmental Protection Agency’s corrupt scientific advisory process.

In his opening statement at last week’s House Energy and Commerce hearing about the EPA’s 2013 budget, Mr. Barton of Texas came as close as any Republican ever has to reading EPA Director Lisa P. Jackson the riot act about the agency’s ever-increasing contempt for science, economics, Congress and even the Constitution.

While much of the aforesaid is widely known but typically left unsaid by timid congressional Republicans, Mr. Barton also raised an issue that should shock the conscience of anyone concerned about ethics in government: financial conflict-of-interest among EPA science advisers.

“I want to discuss the EPA’s science and research funding and support activities such as the quality assurance supervisory budget and the committees that monitor the EPA’s internal activities,” Mr. Barton told Ms. Jackson.

“You fund research with grants to people who also serve on your review committees. Is this a conflict of interest? Almost every single member of your Clean Air Science Advisory Committee has been directly or indirectly funded for research. This hand-and-glove policymaking by those appointed to also do your research and being funded by you at the same time is not appropriate. They are often asked to review other research they themselves were a party to on the original research team.How could one possibly expect them to be objective in any way?” undertook to put some meat on the bones of what Mr. Barton alleged and discovered that of the seven members of CASAC, six have received or still are receiving substantial sums in the form of research grants from the agency.

According to EPA records, CASAC Chairman Jonathan M. Samet is listed as a principal investigator on grants from the agency totaling $9,526,921. The other CASAC board members have received grants from the EPA: George Allen ($3,907,111); Ana Diez-Roux ($31,343,081); H. Christopher Frey ($2,956,432); G. Armistead Russell ($20,130,736); and Helen Suh ($10,962,364).

Although EPA records do not list seventh board member Kathleen Weathers as a principal investigator receiving any grants from the agency, her employer, the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, is listed as the lead institution in EPA grants totaling $3,570,926.

Other than for Ms. Weathers, these sums don’t include any grants awarded to the CASAC members’ institutions in which the CASAC member is not listed as the principal investigator. So these sums could just be the tip of the iceberg.

While the above-mentioned information is available to the public, not only do you have to look for it, you’ve got to first imagine that such immense and obvious conflicts are possible in the first place.

The EPA, after all, dissuades the public from even considering the possibility of this issue, as the first statement on the agency’s website is, “The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) provides independent advice to the EPA Administrator on the technical bases for EPA’s national ambient air quality standards.” I suppose it depends on what the meaning of “independent” is.

So exactly what is the “independent” aspect of a process in which researchers are paid millions of dollars to conduct research and then get to review and rubber-stamp that research so it invariably advances the EPA’s own political, regulatory and bureaucratic interests?

Mr. Samet, the CASAC chairman, recently opined in the New England Journal of Medicine that air-quality rules should be tightened “for ozone and particulate-matter pollution, because no thresholds have been identified below which there is no risk at all.”

Given that the Clean Air Act technically prohibits the consideration of cost in setting ozone and particulate-matter standards, the view of the handsomely compensated Mr. Samet effectively provides cover for the Obama EPA to regulate industry, agriculture and the public as it chooses, regardless of scientific reality or economic practicality. It has done so already with rules such as the recently promulgated Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, which will cost our economy tens of billions of dollars for no benefits in public health.

Coming down the pike are the recently delayed, more stringent standards for ground-level ozone and the tightening of fine particulate-matter regulations – rules that could cost more than a trillion dollars and millions of jobs by 2020.

America’s air is clean and safe. But Americans will not be learning this from CASAC’s advice to the EPA. Whether this is because CASAC’s members are incompetent or corrupt is anyone’s guess.

But thanks to Mr. Barton, the subject has been broached. Let the debate and investigation begin.

Steve Milloy publishes and is the author of “Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them” (Regnery, 2009). I would like to thank Steve for allowing me to republish his works. Tomorrow I will be posting another article dealing with how to fix the EPA by Steve Milloy and Dr. John Dunn.

Stossel on Warming

Stossel interviews Roy W Spencer on EPA CO2 endangerment finding

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Logical Fallacy of the Week, Week 28: Ecological Fallacy


Ecological Fallacy

An ecological fallacy (or ecological inference fallacy, also referred to as the fallacy of division) is a logical fallacy in the interpretation of statistical data in an ecological study, whereby inferences about the nature of individuals are based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which those individuals belong. In epidemiology, the ecological fallacy is committed when a correlation observed at the population level is assumed to apply at the individual level.  This fallacy assumes that individual members of a group have the average characteristics of the group at large. However, statistics that accurately describe group characteristics do not necessarily apply to individuals within that group. For a mathematical explanation of this see how variability of individuals is much greater than the variability of their mean.

Stereotypes, which assume that groups are homogeneous, are one form of ecological fallacy. For example, if a particular group of people are measured to have a lower average IQ than the general population, it is an error to assume that any or all members of that group have a lower IQ than the general population. In fact, any given individual from that group may have a lower than average IQ, average IQ, or above average IQ compared to the general population.

My Take - This is worth exploring as it is used by the greenies...and the left as a whole...  all the time. RK

The Trayvon Martin Saga, Part 1


African-American Lynch Mob
Is anybody else out there as sick and tired as I am of lynch mob racists like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (vide: Tawana Brawley, the Duke Lacrosse kids) who don the mantel of the “civil rights” movement to indict non-blacks in advance of the facts, and incite racial rage against them? Yet that is exactly what they – and scores of black leaders — are doing to an Hispanic individual named George Zimmerman. Along with a cast of thousands, they are holding him guilty of racism before the fact, justifying a hatred, as inflammatory as the hatred once spewed by southern crackers against blacks.

Trayvon Martin and the Politics of Racial Guilt
When at the beginning of March, Allen Coon, a thirteen-year-old boy, was set on fire by two black teenagers who told him, “You get what you deserve, white boy,” this did not prove to be an occasion for national soul-searching. But the shooting death of Trayvon Martin by a Hispanic neighborhood watch captain after a scuffle between the two men has led to hysterical media coverage, state and federal investigations, civil rights marches, lynching threats from the Black Panthers and a statement from Obama urging Americans to search their souls for some unspecified reason…..The Trayvon Martin case was far from the worst shooting death this year. Or even the worst shooting death involving an African-American victim. That honor might belong to Delric Waymon Miller IV, a nine-month-old boy killed in Detroit when his house was peppered with an AK-47 assault rifle just last month. The investigation on that one is still ongoing and could presumably benefit from federal assistance, which it won’t receive because there is no political payday from highlighting black on black violence. Or from helping to solve a crime instead of stirring up racial hate.

Black Panthers: $10,000 to 'capture' Trayvon's killer
'If the government won't do the job, we'll do it - The new Black Panther Party offered a bounty of $10,000 Saturday for the “capture” of a Florida neighborhood watch captain who killed unarmed teen Trayvon Martin. “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” leader Mikhail Muhammad said after announcing the reward for George Zimmerman at a protest in Sanford, Fla. Muhammad called on 5,000 black men to mobilize and capture the neighborhood watch volunteer. “If the government won’t do the job, we’ll do it,” Muhammad said, leading chants that included “freedom or death” and “justice for Trayvon.”

Spike Lee: Hollywood hatemonger
Jason Mattera
CommentsRace hustler Spike Lee is at it again, this time stoking the flames of racial tension in the tragic death of the Florida teenager, Trayvon Martin. Lee took to Twitter on Friday urging his followers to repost George Zimmerman’s address, the community watch volunteer who shot Martin last month after a struggle where Zimmerman was allegedly attacked by the 17-year-old.

Death of Trayvon Martin: Is There Nothing Progressives Won’t Exploit?
Derek Hunter
A 17-year-old kid is shot dead. Police are investigating…and progressives see an opportunity. The Trayvon Martin case, in addition to being a tragedy, is a case study in political exploitation and progressive tactics. The shooting death of a 17-year-old is horrible, whatever the circumstances and no matter their race. But progressives seem to care about this case only because of the race of the victim. There are thousands of murders that don’t “fit the bill” for exploitation and thus are ignored by these self-appointed “justice seekers.” What happened that night? I don’t know. But neither do any of the race hustlers, such as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, who speak of it as if they are clairvoyant. They care deeply about Trayvon’s family… as long as there are cameras around. This lack of actual knowledge doesn’t stop progressives – many of whom call for due process rights and the presumption of innocence for terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay – from demanding the head of George Zimmerman, the shooter in this case.

The hypocrisy runs deep.

MSNBC’s Karen Finney Says the Koch Brothers Killed Trayvon Martin
Trayvon Martin’s death in Florida is a terrible tragedy made even worse by a police department that seemingly bungled the investigation. There are multiple eyewitnesses, some who saw the shooter, George Zimmerman, yelling for help. Others saw Trayvon Martin yelling for help. It shouldn’t be a partisan issue. But MSNBC decided to make it one. According to Karen Finney on MSNBC, the Koch Brothers, NRA, and other conservatives are responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death. They have blood on their hands because they apparently built a time machine with their billions and went back to 1789 and inserted the second amendment into the Bill of Rights. Idiot.


Observations From the Back Row

In 1900 “government spending at all levels (local, state, and federal) represented 7.5 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Out of that amount 66 percent occurred at the local and state levels. Local government spent 55 percent, state government spent 11 percent, and the federal government spent the remaining 34 percent.” Did it occur to anyone to ask; do we really need all these rules and regulations? Did it occur to anyone to ask; what would happen if these bureaucracies were eliminated and these people were fired? - Rich Kozlovich

Share This “Food for Thought” – The Death of Common Sense
Just For Fun, Popular Articles Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

A UN Handbook for World Domination: Agenda 21
In 1992, the United Nations’ Kyoto Agreement set up Agenda 21. It is a project for the removal of national sovereignty. It is comprehensive. The UN has issued a series of guidelines to implement it. The latest is the International Covenant on Environment and Development (4th ed.). It is 200 pages long. The key section is Chapter 39, on Agenda 21. If you want to know what the New World Order would like to implement, it is here. The UN has been working on this since its founding in 1945. The UN is well into the design phase of its final push, and has been ever since 1992.

German Eco-Czars Threaten To Force Home Owners To Make Costly Energy-Saving Rennovations
German daily Die Welt here reported last month how the transition to renewable energy development in Europe, particularly Germany, has not been progressing well lately.... people are realizing that the energy the sun sends for free is actually awfully expensive and inefficient.

The regulatory system designed to steer society through an energy efficiency revolution isn’t working. As a result bureaucrats are getting frustrated as their targets look less attainable than ever. Failure of their grand project is something they refuse to allow. Rather than admitting that the whole idea is unworkable, they instead think that the measures haven’t been drastic enough. Die Welt writes:

"It’s no wonder that environmental politicians are considering forcing people rather than waiting for them to volunteer. That’s why the EU Commission has proposed a directive that threatens power utilities with fines in order to get them to finance the energy saving measures of their customers. Also homeowners are once again in the cross-hairs of politicians. After all, homes are the biggest consumers of energy . Too few homeowners are thinking about replacing their heating systems or insulating their walls and attics.”

Scientists get to the bottom of what wiped out Australia's ancient gentle giants
HUMAN hunters were mainly responsible for wiping out Australia's megafauna, a study has concluded. The reasons behind the demise of the giant animals that once roamed the continent – such as rhinoceros-sized diprotodons, towering kangaroos, marsupial lions and birds twice the size of emus – have long been hotly debated, with hunting, the human use of fire, and climate change blamed……[Climate change was eliminated] The giant herbivore population crashed soon after humans arrived, with the number of spores in the sediment virtually disappearing. "So it seems that people did it."

My Take So let me see if I understand this properly. The utopian primitives the greenies are always harping about were responsible for the elimination of a number of species; is that correct? Well, I think this certainly puts a different light on this issue, doesn’t it.

Apparently being “one with nature” made survival the driving force for their actions, and concerns for conservation took the hind most.

Let’s try and get this right….just this once….ok? The worst environmental records exist in the poorest countries. Why? Because they can’t afford the expanded environmental regulations of wealthier countries! For them survival comes first; the environment comes last.

Irrespective of the ravings of the green movement; returning to primitivism isn’t the answer. The answer is capitalism and the development it engenders. That creates the wealth that allows societies to be environmentally aware and environmentally sensitive. But let’s face it, the greenies only use this as their solution because people foolishly buy into it. The green movement hates humanity and would do anything to reduce the human population by at least four billion people, preferably more… and that is the thinking of the moderates within the movement. The rest consider humanity a planetary virus that must be wiped out. Now I ask you; does that in any way sound sane to you? If it sounds sane to you then I hope you will consider leading the way into extinction. If it doesn't sound sane to you I have to ask; why do we listen to these people?

KNIGHT: Taming the EPA monster
Supreme Court ruling strikes a blow in ongoing battle - Slowly, inexorably, the monster is being driven back to its lair. Its days of terrorizing villagers may soon be over. I wish I were talking about the federal government, but it’s the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), better known as the Environmental Protection-or-else Agency. At one time, it was a harmless little back-alley operation that stumbled upon a secret growth formula, downed the whole vat and began wreaking havoc. You won’t find this account on the EPA’s official website, but you will find ample evidence of the monster’s ambitions to control the world, such as its quest for “environmental justice.” On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court slapped the monster right across the chops in Sackett v. EPA. An Idaho couple, Chantell and Mike Sackett, were building a home but fell victim to an EPA compliance order in 2005. Their building permit was revoked after the EPA charged that they had violated the Clean Water Act by filling in their lot with rocks and dirt.

Salazar Refutes GOP Claim That Interior Dept. Favors Only Green Energy
By Christopher Goins
Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar hosted an oil containment summit in Washington. … he chided congressional lawmakers about passing legislation that would make his agency increase production of domestic oil and natural gas resources… [He]dismissed allegations by Capitol Hill Republicans that the Interior Department is making it difficult for any kind of energy production in the U.S. other than for alternative energy. “The attacks we are getting are in my view being spread by the prophets of falsehood,” Salazar said… “They simply are not true. The reality of it is that we have an all of the above energy strategy that the president has spoken often about that.”…..

However, according to the Government Accountability Office, green energy projects account for 55.5 percent of federal subsidies for electricity production -- only 5 percent went to oil and gas projects…. oil production on federally owned lands has actually declined since 2010….meanwhile, that statistics from Salazar’s own department directly contradict the secretary’s comments. “The administration is trying every way they can to deny the truth and deceive the American public,” said Benjamin Cole, Director of Communications for the Institute for Energy Research. “According to the production numbers put out by Ken Salazar's own department, oil production was down 13 percent on federal lands. Offshore production alone down 104 million barrels, owing largely to the Obama administration's drilling moratorium,” Cole said.

Back to the future?
Thomas Sowell
CommentsWhen a 1942 Supreme Court decision that most people never heard of makes the front page of the New York Times in 2012, you know that something unusual is going on.  What makes that 1942 case -- Wickard v. Filburn -- important today is that it stretched the federal government's power so far that the Obama administration is using it as an argument to claim before today's Supreme Court that it has the legal authority to impose ObamaCare mandates on individuals.  Roscoe Filburn was an Ohio farmer who grew some wheat to feed his family and some farm animals. But the U.S. Department of Agriculture fined him for growing more wheat than he was allowed to grow under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, which was passed under Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce.  Filburn pointed out that his wheat wasn't sold, so that it didn't enter any commerce, interstate or otherwise. Therefore the federal government had no right to tell him how much wheat he grew on his own farm, and which never left his farm.   But the Supreme Court said otherwise. Even though the wheat on Filburn's farm never entered the market, just the fact that "it supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market" meant that it affected interstate commerce. So did the fact that the home-grown wheat could potentially enter the market.

My Take - When insane reasoning such as this is rendered by supposedly well educated intelligent people you have to wonder just how intelligent, how well educated and how insane they are. RK

Green is Taking Us for a Ride
Marita Noon
The environmental movement has used “green schemes”—campaigns that changed an industry or damaged the economy for naught. Three specific schemes, with a long history available, offer a glimpse of the environmentalist’s modus operandi.   It is hard to imagine a bigger failure—or a greater success. If you strive for open and honest government policy that is straight forward about its goals, the twenty-year spotted owl experiment failed. If you believe the end justifies the means, regardless of the cost in life or livelihood, then it represents a great success....The public perception is that too much green is never enough. Green is the driver for American energy policy—and we’re being taken for a ride.