One of the many reasons that John Huntsman should not be the Republican nominee:
Huntsman says he opposes cap-and-trade proposals because “this isn’t the moment,” but he buys the climate change argument because “90% of the scientists” say it’s happening.
Leave aside that the climate is always changing, I have no idea where he comes up with that number, or why he thinks that science is a democracy. And cap and tax is OK in general, just not now?
Sheesh.
We need a better class of enemy:
…after ten years, what was the new plan of Osama bin Laden, the great terrorist mastermind? Orchestrate another attack on U.S. soil to get America to leave the Middle East. Yeah, because 9/11 totally made America say to itself, “Let’s leave the Middle East alone.” Didn’t Osama pay even the slightest attention to the outcomes of his previous schemes, or was he just non-stop preening himself for new videos and watching pornos? He had all this time, and the plan never evolved past:
PHASE 1: Randomly blow stuff up.
PHASE 2: ???
PHASE 3: Islamic domination of the world.
And I think that’s because they don’t even really care about their stated end goals. I think all they really care about in life is porn. Look at how the 9/11 terrorists went drinking at strip clubs the night before the attacks. And their idea of heaven? Seventy-two virgins. They’re not really trying to take over the world — they’re just horny idiots who have no greater goal than wallowing in their base desires. And you just want to slap them and say, “Hey, dummies, you can do that in Vegas — no blowing yourself up required.”
Also, they’re schizophrenic horny idiots in that they’re willing to kill themselves to achieve their debauchery while at the same time they throw burkas on their own women and watch Western porn. They don’t even begin to make coherent sense. Even the Soviets, as horrible as they were, had some sort of philosophical message about social justice so they could attract dim-witted college kids to their cause. The best Islamic terrorists can get from the faux-intellectual class today is to be treated like violent little animals who don’t know any better — like how they blame the guy burning a Koran instead of the people who murder and riot over the Koran burning. So Islamic terrorists are horny idiots with no real plan who can occasionally get sympathy from gullible people in the same way one might pity a rabid squirrel. And that is America’s big external threat right now.
Well, the good thing is that most of them are too incompetent to do serious damage, for now. But evolving technology is going to change that.
…like taxes, is for the little people:
Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers.
Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments. But Pelosi’s district’s waivers are the first major examples of luxurious, gourmet restaurants and hotels getting a year-long pass from Obamacare.
Some have been pointing out that all these waivers illustrate just what an awful, unworkable law this is, but it’s worse than that. It is an arbitrary and intrinsically corrupt process.
You know what I say? Waivers for none, or waivers for all. Why doesn’t everyone else have a basis for a class-action suit under the equal protection clause? It might be one more way to knock down this legislative atrocity.
Thoughts on death threats from the left.
It’s who they are. It’s what they do. And then, like all their other pathologies, they project it on their political opponents.
It’s time for affirmative action to stop. Long past time, really.
And while it’s been disastrous for many of those it has purported to help, in November of 2008 it ended up being disastrous for the country.
At least if you work for the government:
Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment. The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.
If you weren’t an administration/Democrat crony, not so stimulating at all. A net loss of half a million jobs.
Forced @n@l sex?
I’ll bet if we release him on bail, he’ll pull a Polanski and run to France, never to be extradited.
[Afternoon update]
Well, that didn’t take long — the reenactment from Taiwan:
Thoughts on the cost ineffectiveness:
As we say on the shopping channels, “But wait. There’s more.” How much would it cost, I wondered, to forestall 1 Celsius degree of warming, if all measures to make “global warming” go away were as hilariously cost-ineffective as the Sandwell Sparrow-Slicer?
We economists call this the “mitigation cost-effectiveness.” You get the mitigation cost-effectiveness by dividing the total warming forestalled by the total lifetime cost of the project. And the answer? Well, it’s a very affordable $13 quadrillion per Celsius degree of warming forestalled.
And remember, this is an underestimate, because our methodology will have tended to overstate the warming forestalled — and that’s before we politicians ask any questions about whether IPeCaC’s estimates of climate sensitivity are wanton, flagrant exaggerations. (Cries of “No!” “Shame!” “Resign!” “What did I do with my expenses claim form?”)
Suppose it was just as cost-ineffective to make “global warming” from other causes go away as it is to make “global warming” from CO2 go away. In that event, assuming — as the World Bank does — that global annual GDP is $60 trillion, what percentage of this century’s global output of all that we make and do and sell would be gobbled up in climate mitigation? The answer is an entirely reasonable 736%, or, to put it another way, 736 years’ global GDP.
But won’t someone think of the children?
Predictions from Barry Rubin:
How would the U.S. government respond?
A. President Barack Obama warns Egypt that breaking the U.S.-guaranteed Egypt-Israel peace treaty would bring a strong military response from America, an immediate aid cut-off, sanctions on Egypt, full U.S. aid to Israel, and possible U.S. military action against Egypt.
What? Oh, sorry, I was daydreaming for a moment. Let’s start that section over again….
How would the U.S. government respond?
President Obama would make a speech, call for a solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue, express his admiration for Islam, stress the need for further study, play golf.
Have I left out anything?
More thoughts from VDH:
If one had, for two and a half years, made it clear to the world that the Middle East’s problems were attributable not to the rising Hamas-Syria-Iran nexus, not to the corruption and intransigence of the Palestinian Authority, and not to the general misery that accrues from tribalism, fundamentalism, gender apartheid, lack of constitutional government, and statist economic practices, but to democratic Israel’s building apartments in Jerusalem and general unwillingness to trust its assorted neighbors — then one might have anticipated the current aggression against Israel. The more the Obama administration talked up the Israel “problem” in the midst of Middle East unrest that had nothing to do with Israel, and promised to lean on it, the more it became a self-fulfilling prophecy that an Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, or Hamas would try to deflect popular dissatisfaction with their own ruthless autocracy onto the constitutional state of Israel.
Indeed, it’s already started to happen.
Like many such things, easier said than done.
One bonus, though, is that we wouldn’t have to listen to Barack Obama say Pahk-ee-stahn any more