Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Random Thoughts
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Random thoughts on the passing scene:

Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, has anyone calculated how much pollution is created by electric cars, even though none of that pollution comes out of their tailpipes?

You may scoff at the Tooth Fairy if you like. But the Tooth Fairy's approach has gotten more politicians elected than any economist's analysis.

Is there anyone so willing to suffer as to watch all the political "debates" of both parties?

Now that Congress has violated the First Amendment by restricting free speech with "campaign finance reform" laws, in the name of getting the influence of money out of politics, have you noticed any less influence of money in politics?

The next time somebody in the media denies that there is media bias, ask how they explain the fact that there are at least a hundred stories about the shrinking arctic ice cap for every one about the expanding antarctic ice cap, which has now grown to record size.

Those who are looking forward to a second Clinton administration should remember what they say about movies -- the sequel is seldom as good as the original. And the original Clinton administration was not all that great.

Being murdered is not painless, so why all the hand-wringing about trying to make the execution of murderers painless?

Maybe the reason Senator John McCain's campaign has failed to get any traction is that the debates show him to be the kind of arrogant and condescending know-it-all who would be the most dangerous kind of president.

The more I learn about "ethics" programs and ethics "experts," the more I think ethics has become a pious word for imposing the arbitrary notions of third parties on others, who are forced to pay the price for whatever has caught the fancy of self-congratulatory elites.

Teaching is very easy if you don't care about doing it right and very hard if you do.

Hillary Clinton's main claim to the Democratic nomination is that she is invincible. But that claim cannot survive the first primary in which she gets vinced.

Whenever I buy some expensive photographic equipment, I assure my wife that it costs less than a Hasselblad digital camera. So do a lot of things, including some well-known models of automobiles.

The culture of this nation is being dismantled, brick by brick, but so gradually that many will not notice until the walls start to sag -- just before they cave in.

When there are people with multiple convictions for child molestation, what does that say about what wimps we have become that we cannot bring ourselves to put people away, even when they are a continuing danger to children?

The way our current presidential "debates" are conducted, both Lincoln and Douglas must be turning over in their graves.

I believe in libertarian principles but not in libertarian fetishes. In any context, the difference between principles and fetishes can be the difference between night and day.

Now that the British television documentary, "The Great Global Warming Swindle" is available on DVD, will those schools that forced their students to watch Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" also show them the other side? Ask them.

Of all the presidential candidates in both parties, Barack Obama is the best performer on stage. He has the most presence, the most command of his words, the most quietly dramatic style. What he actually says, however, is mostly warmed-over 1960s ideas that have been failing ever since the 1960s.

When people have to resort to words like "greed" or "exploitation," it is hopeless to try to have a rational discussion with them.

Why does Fred Thompson go around with his collar open, as if he were Harry Belafonte? It doesn't make him look younger. It makes him look like an old man trying to look young. It is as if Hillary Clinton tried to look young by wearing a mini-skirt. A bad image can overshadow good ideas.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Great thoughts
TOO BAD you left me with HRC in a miniskirt!

I should downgrade you to 4 stars for that nasty!

painless death penalties
TS writes: "Being murdered is not painless, so why all the hand-wringing about trying to make the execution of murderers painless?"

In general we need to be more creative about punishing crime. Mostly we have 2 alternatives: (1) fines & (2) prison. And now our prisons are overflowing.

We've overreacted to abuses in the past. Fastidious insistence on painless death penalties may be one such overreaction. But there are others.

What about restitution to victims? The US history (& constitution) makes us hesitate to make criminals work off their debt to victims. Indentured servitude or prison labor???

I recall a recent story about a shoplifter who was forced to wear a sandwichboard proclaiming his crime in front of the store he robbed. We need more such creative punishment. But the 14th ammendment - for which I am nevertheless grateful - hits us there, too. Equal protection rights pushes us toward uniform punishment and away from creativity.

I don't know the answer.

"Random Thought" always please
"I believe in libertarian principles but not in libertarian fetishes. In any context, the difference between principles and fetishes can be the difference between night and day."

This would be a great topic for a series of articles! Does anyone else have strong libertarian leanings, but wince in embarrassment watching Libertarian Party conventions?

I won't take up arms to abolish public transportation-- I ride it. Ask LP members and they'll say public transit is cause for revolution.

Dr. Sowell, please expand on your libertarian fetish thought. It's sorely needed.



The Cat and Rat Farm?

I liked Dr Sowell's initial comment about the under reported pollution electic cars produce via the coal fired generation of the electricity for the cars.

I'd like a similar report on the strange idea of the use corn to produce fuel! Isn't corn needed for the world's underfed masses, not to mention it raises the price of our corn flakes, pork and many other food products?

All this stuff about "alternate" fuel production reminds me of the old Cat and Rat Farm idea. Get the fur to sell off of the cats and feed the cat remains to the rats. And, in full circle, feed the rats to the cats.

Marcus

A Small Note on Clinton "Invincibility"
Hugo Chavez thought he was invincible, too!

Prodigy
Having attended some LP conventions and watched others on C-span over the years, I know what you mean. At least they used to be potentially fun, and as libertarians we shouldn't be taking politics all that seriously.

Random answers
Yes, even the enviro-loons have said that automobiles are not a significant source of greenhouse gasses and with catalytic converters they are not a significant source of pollution either. Of course, to me neither one of those issues is significant anyway.

Hillary is rapidly becoming “vinced” and Obama is an empty suit. People need more from a president than being “articulate and black”. What does that leave the Lamocrats?…..Edwards, Richardson, Kucinich, Biden, Giullaini, and Huckabee. Now I know that those last two have an “R” after their name but their still Lamocrats. And we think the Republicans have a problem?

Nos Nevets,
I think you'll like this one: A young punk in San Francisco was caught spraying graffiti on a city bus. The judge sentenced him to spend every weekend for six months cleaning city buses. A San Francisco judge! Can you believe that? Never have I heard of a punishment that more perfectly fit the crime!

Global Warming is a good idea
With the price of oil and gas where it is I would not mind milder winters. :-) Seriously even solar cells take a significant amount of energy to manufacture. Renewable resources do also. The true measure is what they cost. Pound per pound oil/gas still gives the most energy per dollar if it didnt most of us would use something else. Until such time that we (Americans) take a serious look at reestablishing out lead in atomic power we are just blowing hot air. Even a hydrogen fuel cell takes electricity to manufacture the hydrogen.
BTW good article

Bring back shame
I think the old idea of the stocks should be returned to favour, although today I would put the perp in a glass display cabinet in front of the store she stole from, with a comfortable chair and a water bottle but no cell phone or reading material. I would put the items she shoplifted on a shelf in front of her with a sign under the shelf that says SHOPLIFTING IS THEFT. I STOLE THESE ITEMS FROM [STORE NAME]. I am debating about whether or not to make her sign her name to the sign. Perhaps on a second offence.

As for the graffiti artists, now that cameras are so ubiquitous, why not round the artists up and put them on display, scrubbing off their handiwork and repainting the place where it appeared? Prominently displayed both on their backs (on t-shirts) and above the location you could write VANDALISM IS NOT ART. I AM A VANDAL. Having made one of my kids scrub a swastika off his bedroom wall with Comet and a toothbrush, then read and report to me on Schindlers List, before he got a single one of his privileges back, I can attest to the value of this exercise.

Oh, incidentally, perhaps when you do your column on libertarianism, could you explain the difference between liberty and license for those who may not know?

Uncle Alby wrote
"A Small Note on Clinton "Invincibility", Hugo Chavez thought he was invincible, too!"

How many of his generals are loyal, or paid for? Chavez wouldn't be the first to hold power by force.

Random Returns
Bearing in mind Dr. Sowell's point that we should not proven child molesters near children: ere are any number of child molestation trials that bear more resemblance to the Salem witch trials or a Kafka novel than to ordered fact finding and legal process.

You can't beat the laws of thermodynamics which is what most of the alt-fuels folks try to do (ethanol being only the most egregious).

The death penalty is a deterent to murder if it is administred close in time to the actual offense. Maybe the prisons should broadcast on big screen TV the life stories of the victims at all the midnight protest vigils.

Hillary - miniskirt-yech!!

Run for office
Based on their integrety & knowledge, Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams would leave any (100% Democrats, 99% Republicans) of the existing presidential candidiates "in the dust".

(Interesting debat would be Drs Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams vs. Revs(?) Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton.)

Speaking of alternative fuels....
Ethanol added to fossil fuels is a no-win way to save. Another poster has already mentioned the ripple, unintended consequences effect of using corn to produce ethanol.

Two more points I have rarely heard mentioned:

- The energy it takes to produce ethanol. It takes fuel for the farmer to plow the land, fertilizer to get reasonable yields, fuel to harvest and transport the corn, electricity to dry the corn in elevators to prevent spoilage, and energy to distil the alcohol from the fermented mash. A good part of the energy produced has already been spent producing the "miracle" fuel.
- Gasahol is not as efficient as straight gasoline, so the miles per gallon produced is denegrated. The loss in efficiency varies by vehicle, of course. Lots of vehicles now on the road cannot used gasahol.

So the net reduction of carbon footprint is not nearly what the global warming crowd claims. In fact, there may be a net increase of the carbon footprint. Another demonstration of the, "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."

I would like for the U. S., the whole world, actually, reduce the reliance on fossil fuels. There are lots of ways to do that. Wind power, solar power, geothermal and biodesiel are a few. BTW, biodesiel can be made from used cooking oil from restaurants and fast food places and animal fats, both of which are mostly discarded as worthless now. And most importantly, nuclear power. Wonder why we don't shoot nuclear waste into the sun?

Prodigy
:-D

I always say that I'm a philosophical independent with libertarian inclinations who tends to vote Republican because so many Libertarians are nutcases.

anti-socialist more interesting debate
would be Drs Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams vs all the other presidential contenders. Wouldnt that be a great debate! They would ask the questions of BOTH parties. Then finally we could get a real feel for their positions.

Another Dandy Set of Comments
Yes, electric cars run on electricity mostly produced by burning something and I have never found a decent talk of the the electric car from start to finish. It is always, just plug it in and it will run on magically derived power. Just how much did it cost in dollars and "pollution" to get those electrons from Texas through the power lines into my golf cart so I can diddle it away on Mondays and Thursdays at the courses?

Electric power corollary...
"Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal..."



Wrong perspective, frankly. The question to ponder really should be: why is petroleum being used to generate electricity? Petroleum is a unique energy source in the sense that it is the most best and most efficient energy source to use for transportation. Electric power plants are in a fixed location and thus coal, nuclear, and hydropower can be used to generate it. Yet a significant portion of U.S. power plants use oil as their energy source. How significant a portion? If all U.S. oil-fired power plants were converted to an alternate energy source, the U.S. would not have to import any petroleum. That's ZERO, ZIP, NADA. Just another case of an idiotic society shooting itself in the foot, paying for it and complaining about it.

genius
I have been reading Sowell since I first discovered him on the pages of Forbes in high school in the early 90s. He is truly a genius, the rightful heir of Milton Friedman.

Why can this man not get more of a national platform? A free thinking, American of African descent -- if he got 1/10 the exposure of Jesse and Al, this country would be a much better place. Talk about role models for troubled youths - look no farther.

hagar...
"..They would ask the questions of BOTH parties..."

As I keyed.......Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams would leave any (100% Democrats, 99% Republicans) of the existing presidential candidiates "in the dust"...

Another home run
Of course the vision of Hillary in a miniskirt about lost my breakfast.
The problem with those who would change the world, whether they be libertarians or environmentalists, they are long on talk and forcing others to submit to their rule and short on doing anything themselves.
I laugh everytime I see another world conference on defeating global warming, always in a beautiful resort location, have these so called leaders never heard of teleconferencing? I mean if they are REALLY concerned.
I would love to see the fetish thing expanded, not only for libertarians, but other do gooders.

anti-socialist more interesting debate
Continued. That was exactly my point but wouldnt it be fun if they were all together and instead of shooting at the other guy have to answer the question.

anti-socialist
Sowel and Williams v. Sharpton and Jackson would be like...

...The New England Patriots v. MacMurray College

...The San Antonio Spurs v. Canasius University

...Ronald Reagan v. Nancy Pelosi

...Mike Tyson v. Me

...a Mack Truck v. a Bigwheel

Such a debate would resemble sandblasting a soda cracker.

Saying that Sowell and Williams would slightly outclass Sharpton and Jackson is like saying the Sun is slightly larger than a ball bearing.

'Course it would still be fun to watch.

HJG

buzzkat a correction
Coal still generates more electricity than oil but your point about dependence is valid. My point about atomic power is that it could also be used in transportation. Example for hydrogen fuel cell's creating the hydrogen takes plenty of electricity. Atomic if you could satisfy the environmentalist is much cheaper and way less polluting. Yes there is heat and water vapor pollution and the waste has to go to the waste disposal location but the fuel is self generating. Trains and trucks could run on electricity also. The technology exists its a matter of will and cost.

Fun Reading
Sowell never dissappoints. Always a great read. Thanks!

Thomas Sowell's
Randon Thoughts are clearer, more concise and more FOCUSED than 100% of teachers/professors.

We Are A Nuclear Averse Society
Buzzkat offers, "If all U.S. oil-fired power plants were converted to an alternate energy source, the U.S. would not have to import any petroleum."

Unfortunately, we are a nuclear averse society. Boiling water with plutonium scares us beyond its very limited application. We have nightmares of Chernobal and 3 Mile Island. So, we boil water by burning otherwise useful things like coal, wood and oil.

Of course, our military seems to be a little more reasonable, driving their battleships and other aquatic behemoths with nuclear materials that allow them to go without stopping for ten to twenty years. Not bad.

It's easier to measure and control
Dr. Sowell writes:
Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, has anyone calculated how much pollution is created by electric cars, even though none of that pollution comes out of their tailpipes?

Is it easier to measure pollution coming from a smokestack versus 1/2 million cars? Since the smokestack is regulated by the EPA it can be measured and cleaned up using technology. Autos on the other hand have to rely on individual owners to keep their autos in perfect operating condition. Now for the kicker we don't import coal from unstable places in the world.

Mac Moore
Well Chernobal was built by and run by socialists (government) then they tried to cover it up and the long term effects are horrible so yes atomic can be dangerous. But three mile island was more a scare than anything else and I do not believe there were any long term effects. People need to understand the long term effects of the alternative. Take coal for instance I have read studies that say a coal burning plant that exists for 20 years will cause 10000 deaths due to cancer. Now take Indian Point in NY it has been generating electricity for over 40 years with no REAL effects. Oh yeah the safe at any cost crowd cringes over it but what else is new.
You are absolutely correct re military usage. The Nautilus was build in 1954 and our Navy has been using it since. Wish someone would find out how much oil that has saved.

Ah Thomas
Yet another 5 stars for your musings!!! As far as child molesters, why don’t we just experiment on how to make death more painless by inflicting as much pain on them, as they did the children and go from there, slowly……

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!


Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!

Alternative fuels
The most cogent argument for using alternative fuels is about National Security. If we didn't need Venezuala's oil then we could simply ignore Hugo Chavez as a lunatic. The same could be said about the middle east. Not to mention the positive effect not importing oil would have on our trade deficit, and the value of the dollar. We need to find a stable, renewable, energy source that can be produced domestically.

Electric vehicles
Electric vehicles would most likely be charged during the evening and night times when power plants are essentially loafing, otherwise being very in-efficient. Also, things like no oil changes for all electric vehicles come into the picture. Many studies on this indeed have been done, with generally positive effects on the environment when looking at the total energy usage and pollution picture. Nothing is perfect, but I feel that electric propulsion is truly worth pursuing.

The Magical Electric Fairies.....
Many GW-friendly Americans believe they are "doing my part" to save the environment by buying fluorescent light bulbs. Well, next time you’re at the grocery store or the hardware store, take a look at the back of the packages. All, I repeat, ALL of them are made in China. As many of you already know, these Chinese factories are powered by coal...in fact, on average, China is opening a new coal burning power plant every week! (Care to guess what country is also exempt from the Kyoto agreement?)

I guess actual results don’t really matter....as long as it “feels good”.

Nos Nevets
the prisons are over populated .... not by accident. Behavorial control and maintenance is going to be an investment that yields ever expanding returns for the saavy investor.
Watch the laws change and the prison populations expand once the system is capitalized.
First handicap for the nacent investors to overcome is public opposition. This will be accomplished as the government institutions become a severe financial burden and as is the way with any government organization, management skills are obviously deficient.

5 stars even with the Hillary "vision"
What is more disgusting is a vision of Hillary taking the oath of office, UGH!

I have asked about the cost of producing electricity for cars for a long time. It is great to have company finally. Same with ethanol, it is not an answer, it creates a greater problem in no time and I think that that is the ultimate goal of those pushing it. They know that it will be worse than jumping out of the kettle and into the fire, but hope that the "short attention span theater" that is the mass public won't be able to connect the dots.

That's another 5-star, as always
But the Hillary mini-skirt comment at the end almost made me throw my cookies.

I hate to disagree....
...but Hillary in a miniskirt is still better than Madeleine Albright in a miniskirt.

Five stars!!

KurtPo writes:
Electric vehicles would most likely be charged during the evening and night times when power plants are essentially loafing

How can that be true? No one uses TV’s, computers and all the electric gizmos that are found in every household in the US, anymore in the evening?

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!

Mongo writes:
But the Hillary mini-skirt comment at the end almost made me throw my cookies.

Do what I did, write 500 X I did not read that, I did not read that, I did not read that, I did not read that, I did not read that, I did not read that, WELL, YOU GET THE POINT! LoL

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!

Where are Sowell's detractors?
They are silent because Sowell's "Random Thoughts" are basically indisputable. Anyone trying to argue against him would look like a fool.

Five stars!

YLG
MY GOD IN HEAVEN WOMAN! What did we do to deserve that picture? HuH? HuH?

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!



Anyone know~
Q-Anyone know the difference between Madeleine Albright and a pit bull?
A- The pit bull does not wear lip stick

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!

Sowell the moron.
Ok, let's make some hamburger out of this sacred cow.

" Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, has anyone calculated how much pollution is created by electric cars, even though none of that pollution comes out of their tailpipes?"

This is what's known as a red herring, or changing the subject. The environmentalists already know this and have long moved on to hybrid cars like the Prius and searching for solutions like hydrogen fuel. Toyota is on the record as saying that all cars by Toyota will be hybrid by the year 2020. Even Al Gore said in an inconvienant truth that the answer isn't electric cars but better CAFE standards. China has a standard of 35MPG and is ahead of the US in this regard. California just passed a law enforcing higher CAFE standards.

So way to go, Sowell. Way to change the subject to a dead topic. For that you get the "Red Herring" award as well as the moniker of "moron".

Nuclear Power
Chernobyl was a disaster precicely and solely BECAUSE it was 70's era Soviet technology and 80's era Soviet management. The likelihood of such a disaster happening here is so remote as to be not worth consideration. There is a far greater liklihood of sabotage (which can be (and is) guarded against).

Exactly 0 people died from radiation at 3MI. Only about 50 died in Chernobyl and they were all in the immediate vicinity of the explosion, where the Radiation was well above survivable limits. The long-term effects actually didn't affect many people at all, as the radiation was much lower. Radiation is not universally bad, as some would have you believe, and low doses are not particularly harmful at all. If we want to get rid of greenhouse gasses, build nuclear and hydroelectric plants. We KNOW those work as well as (sometimes better than) "Fossil Fuels."

Sowell the moron, II
" Now that Congress has violated the First Amendment by restricting free speech with "campaign finance reform" laws, in the name of getting the influence of money out of politics, have you noticed any less influence of money in politics?"

And uh, this makes Sowell smarter then the Supreme Court? Yeah right. Pardon me, but I think I'll take the Supreme Court's legal opinion over Sowell's any day. Hey Sowell, what about a bribe? We outlawed bribes many years ago? Isn't an illegal bribe influencing politics with money? Isn't that a violation of the Constitution and restricting free speech? Oh yeah, that's right, the Founders had laws on the book making taking bribes illegal. There goes your specious argument about taking all laws taking the "money out of politics" limiting free speech. Maybe you need to think a little harder Sowell. Or a little longer between naps.

I particularly like this one "have you noticed any less influence of money in politics?" Given no one has effectively been able to measure the influence of money in politics, then the answer is no. However it is not because of the efficacy of the law, but because no one has been able to measure this unquantifiable thing.

To wit, Sowell gets an 'F' for making specious and silly arguments and again earns the moniker "moron".

Eternity
Please; Please,… let Thomas Sowell live forever.




drivebyposting
How is it possible that you missed every point Sowell was making? You somehow manage to focus on a tree, but miss the entire forest.

You calling Dr. Sowell a moron is hillarious....I'd bet his laundry list contains more insight and wisdom than the total of everything you've ever scribbled on this site.

Electric autos
So everyone drives electric autos, gets home from work in the evening rush hour and plugs into house current to recharge the car. At the same time, we try to turn on the den lights and can't understand why they produce outages so frequently. Duh.

drivebyposting
So enviros have moved on from electricity to hydrogen. How do we get hydrogen? Don't we have to burn copius amounts of natural gas or electricity to get hydrogen?

Yeah, we have a moron here, but it's not Dr. Sowewll...

drivebyposting
So, the enviros have moved on from electric cars to hydrogen. How do we get hydrogen? Don't we have to burn copious amounts of naturtal gas or electricity?

Yeah, we have a moron here, but it's not Dr. Sowell.

buzzcat
I don’t know where you get your numbers from but the Edison Electric Institute puts fuel oil at near the bottom as a source of generation. Just 3% of the mix. The only thing lower is the so-called “green” energy. I don’t think that if we converted all of the oil to coal or other that it would cause us to not need to import oil. In addition, most of these plants that use oil are what are called “peaking units”. They only run during hours of peak demand when all other sources have been loaded out. They are simply too expensive to operate.

http://www.eei.org/industry_issues/industry_overview_and_st atistics/industry_statistics#fuelmix


autos
No matter what fuel you use to power your car,it would take about fifty years to get it done.Most people cannot afford new cars so they couldn't buy one.Which means there would be a long waiting list to buy one.If you go with hydrogen just think of the massive job it would take to have enough places to fuel them.As of now and for the near future electric vehicles do not have the power to replace the diesel fired trains and trucks.However we should continue discussing all of these.

driveby
You call Dr. Sowell a moron, the cite Algore's fallacy to bolster your inane argument.

Pardon me for LMAO.

Chernobyl
Actually Chernobyl was an example of how safe nuclear power actually is. Chernobyl was the worst, by far, of any possible nuclear accident. The same kind of accident is not possible in any U.S. designed plant and even if it were it would not be as bad as Chernobyl. This design of Russian reactors is much much larger physically than U.S. reactors, it uses charcoal for a moderator instead of water (I will not try to explain why this is bad, just assume that it makes the reactor more difficult to control and creates the possibility of a runaway reaction). On top of that they did not use containment domes to prevent the release of fission products in the event of an accident.

What happened was that the government ordered a test to be performed that was not safe. The reactor went into a rapid startup rate reaction (runaway) which resulted in a steam explosion in the core area. This physically blew the head off the vessel containing the core and blew all the water out. The fuel overheated and this caught the charcoal on fire. Now we have a melting core combined with a fire which created a radioactive smoke plume from a huge source and no containment dome. With all of this only 31 people died, all within the plant. Long term the community had expected a large increase in incidence of cancer, but so far that has not happened, even though it has been 21 years since the event.

U.S. design does not have charcoal, does have containment domes, and the people running the plants are not the same ones who are the final arbiters of safety. The no-nuke crowd has predicted that if we had a meltdown here there would be hundreds of thousands of people killed and the land ruined for habitation for an eternity.

Well, Chernobyl pretty much puts false to that myth.

drivebymoron
" " Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, has anyone calculated how much pollution is created by electric cars, even though none of that pollution comes out of their tailpipes?"

This is what's known as a red herring, or changing the subject. The environmentalists already know this and have long moved on to hybrid cars like the Prius and searching for solutions like hydrogen fuel. "

Sowell's point was that generating electricity ALSO causes pollution, therefore electric cars are not the panacea that treehuggers would have us believe. Do you even know what a hybrid car is? It is a car that uses both gasoline (or diesel) and electric power as energy sources. (duh)

As with all your other posts you have just proven (again) that you are a moron.

"China has a standard of 35MPG and is ahead of the US in this regard. "

Environmentalism is a luxury that only advanced, productive, capitalist societies can afford. The environmental movement is an American invention. The U.S., followed by the rest of the Western world, has made enormous strides over the past half century in combatting pollution, cleaning up the environment, becoming orders of magnitude more efficient, etc, and REMAINS the world's leader in environmental technology. Yet you would compare this advanced society to one of the most polluted, corrupt, and inefficient societies in the world. This makes you officially, again, a certified moron.


drivebyimbecile
"" Now that Congress has violated the First Amendment by restricting free speech with "campaign finance reform" laws, in the name of getting the influence of money out of politics, have you noticed any less influence of money in politics?"

And uh, this makes Sowell smarter then the Supreme Court? Yeah right. Pardon me, but I think I'll take the Supreme Court's legal opinion over Sowell's any day. Hey Sowell, what about a bribe? We outlawed bribes many years ago? Isn't an illegal bribe influencing politics with money? Isn't that a violation of the Constitution and restricting free speech? "

uh, what makes a liberal Supreme Court an omniscient God all of a sudden? The Supreme Court has made plenty of wrong decisions, as it consists of human beings driven by politics. McCain-Feingold IS an infringement of the First Amendment. If you want to count the bars on the window of your jail cell, try to air a TV ad against an incumbent politician 60 days before an election. Your drooling drivel on bribes is unintelligible. What do bribes (to whom???) have to do with the First Amendment? Supporting a candidate financially (money) is a form of free speech. McCain-Feingold is fascism/totalitarianism BY DEFINITION, because in practical terms it not only favors an incumbent but PROHIBITS a challenger from having the same advantages an incumbent politician does. McCain-Feingold is rightfully called the Incumbent Protection Act. Idiots such as yourself are SOOOOO concerned about the Patriot Act, which has some effective measures to protect ALL innocent Americans, yet you have no objection to curtailing free political speech, abuse of eminent domain, the fascist tactics of the BATF in its "war" on drugs, or the limitless power of the IRS to destroy any American's life. Morons such as yourself are truly pitiable.

Peace of Mind
is HRC in a maxi-skirt.

Phileo wrote:
" Where are Sowell's detractors?
They are silent because Sowell's "Random Thoughts" are basically indisputable. Anyone trying to argue against him would look like a fool.
Five stars! "

And then drivebyposting proves him right. Not once, but twice in quick succession!

Adolescent males lack any normal sense of caution.

drivebyposting we have a consensus
By unanimous decree you are hereby elected the resident moron (or to use a Billary term the village idiot :-) )

drivebyposting we have a consensus
By unanimous decree you are hereby elected the resident moron (or to use a Billary term the village idiot :-) )

Hagar re: DriveByDimwit
It wasn't a consensus, it was UNANIMOUS!

Not Just Child Molestors
"When there are people with multiple convictions for child molestation, what does that say about what wimps we have become that we cannot bring ourselves to put people away, even when they are a continuing danger to children?"

Heck with the children. We need to put people away with multiple convictions of ANY violent crime.

We have people walking the street who have robbed repeatedly, raped repeatedly, murdered repeatedly. These people are a continuing danger to *everybody.* How come the only time anybody ever actually gets upset is when children are involved?

hagar & Georgetwin: I think driveby...

needs to share that 'honor' with hal doofus!


Hillary in a mini? *ralph*
C'mon, Thomas, we're not gonna be able to get that image out of our heads!

Don't say things like that! We've got kids eatin' lunch over here!

Hillary delenda est.

Dr. Sowell,
Doesn't your wife read your column? Or is she the one who finally came up with the rebuttal to your photographic purchases you appear to have given her?

And RSP, you're slightly off base: Piece of mind would be HRC in striped pajamas- courtesy of the federal corrections system.

Anne
I disagree, calling Thomas Sowell a moron is so IDIOTIC that it deserves to be in a clss BY ITSELF!

Bill's Angels?
Uhmmm, we now have mental images of Hillary and Albright in mini skirts...we just need to add Janet Reno for a truly sickening image.

Georgetwin: Yeah, I think you're right.

I stand corrected!

But, halD should be a very close second if only because of the number of his inane posts.


Geeze Icedog, now THERE'S a nightmare!
.

Icedog writes:
Bill's Angels?
Uhmmm, we now have mental images of Hillary and Albright in mini skirts...we just need to add Janet Reno for a truly sickening image.

Throw in Helen Thomas, and the image becomes totally disgusting.

A Classic.....
I'm sure some of you have seen this....but it's still a classic.

http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/01/republican-women- versus-democratic-women/

Mac Moore
The problem with nuclear power is that those chicken littles refuse to recognize that the absolutely nothing happened at Three Mile Island -- except that the safety systems were proved to work. (One would have to assume that a newly built nuclear power plant would have even better safety systems).

And, of course, the "liberals" who are always bragging about the subtle distinctions in their reasoning and their superior grasp of nuance are utterly incapable of grasping the clear and obvious differences between the poor design and appalling quality control of a Soviet reactor -- Chernobyl -- and a modern, western reactor system.

true cost of electric cars
You wonder if anyone has done a study about the true cost in pollution of manufacturing electric cars. As a matter of fact, someone has. CNW Marketing Research of Bandon, Oregon, has a very thorough report, labeled: "Dust to Dust; The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal."

Check it all out at:
http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/

Lumberjack7392: Not that it wasn't

already bad enough.... Now we won't be able to sleep for weeks. Thanks a lot! LOL

Glad to see you back. You were in our thoughts and prayers...

And, did you see my post about nanna's great grandson. He's doing well.




When HRC ordered the 'suicide' of Vince
Foster, was she wearing a pant-suit? Was she sitting or standing?

Random Thoughts

Libs and Nuclear Power
While stuck in a waiting room, I flipped though Al Bore’s GW book. In the section on “alternative energy” he doesn’t even mention nuclear power....yet he includes an extremely ominous full page photo of three reactor towers dwarfing a small family house. The picture was taken on an extremely dark and gloomy day to further emphasize the unspoken message.

Our people are brainwashed....even our extremely liberal French predominately use nuclear power.

hagar
Please tell me she (billary) is not right about it taking a TH village to raise an idiot!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Hunter/Tancredo 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)
To libs there is no lie, it is expedient exaggeration!

Anne writes:
Lumberjack7392: Not that it wasn't

already bad enough.... Now we won't be able to sleep for weeks. Thanks a lot! LOL

Glad to see you back. You were in our thoughts and prayers...

And, did you see my post about nanna's great grandson. He's doing well.

Glad to be back. It's good news about nanna's great grandson.

Just a random thought a new all girl group in hotpants, Hillary, Janet, Madeline, Helen, and Nancy Pelosi. Boy would sight that empty the combined sell out crowds in Rose Bowl, Michigan Stadium, Royal-Memorial Stadium, and Kyle Field in heartbeat.

vic
"I don’t know where you get your numbers from but the Edison Electric Institute puts fuel oil at near the bottom as a source of generation. Just 3% of the mix. The only thing lower is the so-called “green” energy. I don’t think that if we converted all of the oil to coal or other that it would cause us to not need to import oil."


You may be right. I got the information from a guest lecturer from NASA in a class I took. You are correct in that 3% of electric generation in the U.S. is powered by petroleum. It is also true that the U.S. imports 13,000,000 barrels per day. I don't know how that 3% figure translates into barrels per day.

Wonderful reading
Sowell has a habit of being very entertaining at by expressing the facts and truths that the MSM and/or Politicians will never tell. If these Liberal dimwits wanted to learn anything at all, Sowell would be required READING. Noticing some above comments from Liberals has just reminded me, it would be a waste of time. Can't teach a Liberal anything if it goes against his ideology, even if it is supported by facts and truths and just plain common sense. I have never met nor heard of a Liberal who can sit down and debate the issues with a learned and knowledgeable conservative. They just can't debate their ideas and support them with factual information.

Doc Actually
It takes a Village Idiot to raise a Dumbocrat

Hybrids, not Electrics, are the rage
Hybrid cars burn gasoline and are selling by the hundreds of thousands. They're simply a way of getting more miles per gallon of gasoline. Unless I'm overlooking something, that's all they REALLY are--a way to stretch gasoline. They may give people good feelings about themselves and delusions about the perfectability of mankind.

The fact that hybrids use an electric battery to store recovered or unused energy is largely irrelevant. They draw no energy from the electrical grid. It's inaccurate at best, deceptive at worst, to call hybrids "electric cars", just as it would be to call a diesel-electric locomotive an electric locomotive. The former is powered by diesel fuel (running on-board electric generators); the latter is powered by electricity coming from the tracks and overhead wires.

Truly electric cars are presently an insignificant fraction of cars on the road. But Dr. Sowell is right that truly electrics would be predominately coal-powered, so long as electricity remained predominately coal-generated.

I think if I had a truly electric car, I would proudly tell envirotryants that it was 20% nuclear-powered.

'VINCIBLE HILLARY
Remember Maggie Thatcher slugging it out with the opposition during the weekly Answer periods in Parliament? Now there was an invincible in action. Ever wonder how Hillary would hold up under similar pressure?

My opinion of Hillary is that she is much like Paris Hilton, famous for being famous.

Anne
Hal has terminal BDS which makes him irrational. However, Van, MLD, TR, Left Angle, Phylo and of course Robert/Roberta/Rocky/Jetpilot round out The Top 10 Libdiots, IMHO.

Hybrids
I read an article the other day that compared hybrids to other non-hybrid fuel efficient cars and the hybrids are not that much better.

What they are is a whole lot more expensive. Look at the list of the top 10 and the best is not a hybrid.

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/108467/article.ht ml

Drivebyposting

You couldn't qualify to hand wash Sowell's jockstrap.

Doc: This IS off topic... but,

Glenn Beck... tonight!

"... perverted justice is what's happening to jailed border agents Compean and Ramos, who shot a drug smuggler trying to cross the border. There have been some new developments in the case that have provided a ray of hope that actual justice will be served: setting the agents free. Today Glenn hosted a special hour of radio featuring several guests familiar and/or close to the case to bring you up to speed"

Also

"Appeal Heard in Border Agents' Shooting"

"NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Federal prosecutors appear to have ''overreacted'' in their pursuit of a case against two Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a fleeing drug suspect and hiding evidence, one of three judges considering an appeal said Monday."

Thank God!



Georgetwin: Agreed 100% :-)
.

Anne
THANK YOU! There is no particular order. AT ANY MOMENT, a burst of Libinsanity could SKYROCKET one of them to the top :)!

Hybrid Car Commercial
Since most posts seem to be about hybrid cars, here's my random thought:

There's a Ford hybrid car commercial about a girl who asks her father to drop her off at the movies, except a block away, because the people in that area ride bikes or drive hybrid cars. The father tells her the minivan is actually a hybrid.

That commercial always reminds me of the South Park episode where South Park residents all buy hybrids and become smug and enjoy the smell of their own farts.

I think the girl and the people at Ford are enjoying the smell of their own farts.

If I ever become financially secure enough to afford a hydrogen fuel cell car, I'll get one, but on my terms, and not to enjoy the smell of my own farts.

Also, HRC's cleavage was bad enough without the miniskirt imagery.

RedEyeRex
You are FOS. After 300 years nuclear fuel waste is less radioactive than the original Uranium that was mined. If we reprocessed the spent fuel instead of storing it, as was originally intended, it would be even less of a problem. It was your idiot boy Jimmy who stopped the reprocessing.

And I'll bet that I drive less miles per year than you do.

Sowell vs. Krugman - the debate ..
.. of the century!

There hasn't been anything like this since 1925, when Jennings and Darrow clashed in Dayton, TN - in the trial that came to be called the Scopes Monkey Trial.

Now, coming soon to a television screen near you - brought to you by the Fox(N) and CSPAN(Z) faux networks - a debate that will provide definitive answers to a divided nation on crucial economic questions of the century such as "What is the correct role of Government in American Economics".

A clash of Titans - panel leader Krugman (for the Left) and panel leader Sowell (for the Right).

http://voice.townhall.com/g/3956455a-0c4a-493a-a3ff-3cc03ca 78418

hybrid energy requirements
Although technology will ultimately come up with new cures for current physical problems, short-circuiting the market is a bad idea. Hybrids need a lot of nickel for their rechargable batteries. Nickel is hard to extract and smelt, therefore it is expensive. Therefore much more energy is used to make a hybrid car than a regular one.

Oh, and my two favorite means of disposing of nuclear waste are to either run a maglev up the side of a mountain, jacket the waste in iron and shoot it into space (choose a site on the moon so we can re-use it later, or aim for the sun, or pick a trajectory for a common space shot) or to jacket it in a temporary (100year) casing and drop it into subduction zones in the deep ocean.

redeye
"The first amendment campaign finance issue can be solved by government funding of elections. That way everyone gets an equal chance running for office. Make corporate media give free airtime to our candidates for the privilege of using our airwaves."

What a fantastic idea. I think I'll run for President then, make my wife my campaign chairwoman and pay her a big fat government dole check. I suspect thousands of others will be doing the same thing.

be careful, apoplectic
In my university days they had a rule for campus elections: expenses, up to $150 per candidate, would be refunded by the university if the candidate received over 200 votes. There were 7 or 8 positions available to run for. And thus was the Radical Beer Faction formed. They ran a beer garden for their friends every Friday night until the election, with one of them running for each of the positions, and the kegs to be reimbursed as their electioneering expenses.

They came in second, only narrowly losing each of the seats to a slate of one of the serious parties. They kicked the crap out of the campus socialists (who thought they were a serious party). It seems that there were a lot of people who just liked the idea of fun-lovers running the school.

So be careful, Apoplectic, or you might get a job you really didn't expect....

Fuel cells...without govt help
All the major auto manufacturers have been working for decades to produce a completely electric car driven by chemical fuel cells. Also, perhaps a dozen large companies in energy-related industry have been working to develop commercially-ready generators driven by fuel cells.

There are already small-scale fuel cell generators on the market that are appropriate for businesses and small cities to bring on-line.

In the past month, I've seen two TV ads by major auto-makers about fuel cell autos. We should see them on the market within the next 5 years or so.

To my knowledge, the only involvement the government has with any of this is the tax write-off for R&D that the companies have surely taken over the years. And even that was not necessary, as no company is willing to bank its future on a dwindling long-term supply of oil.

Any effort by government to produce alternative energy will HALT this effective development, and redirect money into whatever insane scheme the government decides to back. Whatever that scheme will be (biofuels? ridiculous!) it will be a less viable form of energy than what the market is already producing.

"We" don't have an alternative yet because petroleum and coal are still, by far, the cheapest, most plentiful sources of energy available to us. When that changes, our supply of energy will also change -- so long as we don't get nervous and empower the government to wreck things.

(Please read my blog, Squaring the Culture, at http://www.plumbbobblog.com. Thank you.)

That mini skirt thing
is disgusting but, y'all forgot Janet Reno. Now that is a scary thought.

RedEyeRex wrote:

"Get out of your SUV and walk your fat asses down to the store to buy your smokes."

We need more nukes and we need to drill for more oil. It's still a free country, I'm getting a six pack to go with'em.

Keep your electric car out of my way. It would only be a speed bump to my SUV.

Hay REX, you know the first practical use of nuclear energy was August 6, 1945.



Voice of Reason
Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams expertly debated and thoroughly defeated a gang of leading liberals on PBS some time during the mid 70s, as I recall. They had great help, including a famous Nobel laureate in economics, and a number of illuminating, very well done film segments.

Wealthy conservatives should do our nation an unforgettable service by joining forces to publish a DVD of that entire event with added up-to-date issues also expertly explained by Sowell and Williams. These DVDs would be given away to all comers and particularly to all high profile liberals and liberal media types. That program was devastating to the entire liberal cause then and would be again--even more so, actually--if well promoted and distributed over the coming year. How often do we come across a golden opportunity to expertly destroy many of liberalism's favorite lunacies with all the vibrant impact of a great movie?

Consider its effect on the coming presidential election. If millions of registered Dumbocratic voters were to view it, the Dumbocrats would find the climb to victory much steeper than it is today—and probably impossible.

Thank you, Thomas Sowell; your magnificent legacy will live on forever.

ColinCody -- Excellent Suggestion!
Another suggestion -- email *every* columnist on Townhall with the idea, and see if you can get any takers!

Great Column (as usual)
They keep using Brazil as an example of ethanol. Unfortunately, Brazil does not use corn. They use sugar cane. Much higher yield of alcohol. Of course we tariff that ethanol to the tune of 54 cents per gallon and at the same time we subsidize corn ethanol at 51 cents per gallon. All the time the price of food dependent on corn keeps going up. And you would be amazed at what is dependent on corn. Packaging for instance.

Oh, by the way....as someone mentioned ethanol does not work very well anyway because the BTU yield is much higher with gasoline, so it will never, ever replace gasoline as a fuel.

Don't say never, Don
After all, no-one would have believed that that filthy black muck out of the ground could ever replace high-grade whale oil, but here we are. Just because it's not as efficient and powerful in today's engines doesn't mean that we won't be using it as a fuel in the future.

Although we won't be using it with the same engines we have now, on that I agree with you.

Short-Circuiting the Market
through subsidies & privileges: It's what governments do best, always with the best of stated intentions.

libertarians
"Does anyone else have strong libertarian leanings, but wince in embarrassment watching Libertarian Party conventions?"

i do. to me, conservatives with strong libertarian bent appear much wiser than those libertarian purists that go third party. the latter seem a way too willing to start building proper society from scratch.

Thomas for President
hey Prof
why aren't you running for President?
maybe because the political system and population at large do not tolerate people who think straight and talk straight - so unfortunately we get the govt we deserve - one that tells voters what tehy want to hear (flattery, promises, pork, lobbyist cartels etc)

Right wing nuts
Apoplectic wants to run for office no problem. Just raise 15 million and the govt will match it. That's all you get to run for Prez. Now get going. If you don't finance their campaigns who do you think they represent? You or their corporate donors? Get a clue.

Vic writes that nuclear waste are OK after just a few years. That's BS. Where did you get your degree? Are you a nuclear engineer? Jimmy Carter was while in the Navy.

Final disposal of high-level waste is delayed for 40-50 years to allow its radioactivity to decay, after which less than one thousandth of its initial radioactivity remains, and it is much easier to handle. Hence canisters of vitrified waste, or used fuel assemblies, are stored under water in special ponds, or in dry concrete structures or casks for at least this length of time.

I was commenting on the possible leaks of the nuclear waste. It is the chemical risk, rather than the radiation risk, that may be the bigger danger.

Ingested, uranium can cause kidney damage. And chemical reactions that occur when leaked uranium hexafluoride breaks down in the environment can release hydrogen fluoride, which can kill in high concentrations.

And Finally: G.I. Joe writes: We need more nukes and we need to drill for more oil.
What good will come from for more oil if you are going to just burn it up in your low mileage SUV. Without conservation more oil will only delay the time that we get off our addiction to oil.
Can we store the nuclear waste from those additional nuke plants in your back yard?
Can we at least elect a president who can actually say Nuclear correctly?





Of course the the American People
get the government we deserve.

Since, ultimately, we ARE the government (granted, government twice removed).

Apparently, someone once told us to go screw ourselves and we replied, "Okay!"

RedEyeRex
As a matter of fact, more so of an Engineer than your hero idiot Jimmy since he dropped out before he finished. Nuclear Navy and 30 years in the civilian nuclear power. Also license SRO.

You know NOTHING about nuclear power and I am an expert.

New Ideas
I recently saw on televison a talk Newt Gingrich gave at Vanderbilt University. He was talking about creating a new paradigm of government action. One example he used fits this discussion of new or alternative fuels.

Let's say for for the sake of example that the Federal government will spend 50 billion dollars over the next 20 years for grants and subsidies related to the search for new energy sources. Newt's idea is instead to offer a one time reward of say 1 billion dollars to whoever comes up with the solution. Every engineer and entrpreneur in the world would jump on this. Open things up to the private sector and amazing things happen.
This is what we need. People willing to think outside the box, and not depend only on how we have done it in the past. This idea of Grinrich's is not new by the way. When Charles Lindburgh flew from New York to Paris in the 30's he didn't do it just to say he did. There was a $25,000 prize for the 1st person to accomplish the feat.

Redeye
"Apoplectic wants to run for office no problem. Just raise 15 million and the govt will match it. That's all you get to run for Prez. Now get going. If you don't finance their campaigns who do you think they represent? You or their corporate donors? Get a clue."

That is not what you said. We have gov't matching of funds available now. Are you proposing what already exists? I was simply pointing out the fallacy of government funded campaigns. If the government provides funds then anyone eligible under the Constitution could run and receive that funding. If there is some kind of additional requirement that must be met to receive those funds, then other funding will most certainly be needed to meet those requirements.

Redeyerex and govt funding of elections
Apoplectic has already pointed out just one of the problems with your proposal that the Federal Government fund election campaigns. Other problems obtain depending on how you structure it. You need to think it through a little more carefully and come back with specifics.

Beyond that, can we agree that the fundamental problem with large amounts of uncontrolled funding going into election campaigns is the prospects for corruption? Isn’t the issue that those who may contribute considerably to a politicians election campaign may expect to receive special consideration through government policies and practices once and if that politician wins election?

If so, then have you thought about how many parties it takes to execute a corrupt transaction? It takes two; the corruptor and the corruptee. Seen that way, McCain/Fiengold is nothing more than our politicians telling us that they are so corruptible that the only way for them to protects us from themselves is to limit our involvement in the election process. Ridicules! Having accepted that corruptibility in regards to the millions of dollars involved in getting elected we are then to trust them not to be corrupted by the billions/trillions of our dollars they will control once in office.

Incorruptible politicians as evidenced, among other things, by total transparency of campaign contributions seems a better approach to me. Who is to decide who is and is not corruptible? You and me with our contributions and our votes.

Here's what I'm proposing
apoplectic:

All candidates must take matching funds and all candidates can't accept money other than the individual limit. No bundles, no corporations, no party funds.

Once in office no gifts, no free rides on jets, no contact with lobbyists outside of their office.

Once out of office no lobbying period. No jobs in working for lobbyists.
Is that clear now?
Ray:

Not that transparency crap again. Let's see we create one shell corporation and then another. It's so easy to hide the money that transparency won't work. England uses public funding and the election doesn't start until 90 days prior to the election. The Limies got that one right.
Vic:

Big claim on the internet, sure you are an expert. So can we move the Yucca mountain site to your town. It will take 25 years of 24/7 deliveries to fill it up and thats without any new waste being added. Any college or just the Navy education? Thats what I thought. Besides I didn't say that Jimmy Carter was my hero you did, I did vote for him but what was my choice Gerald Ford? Sorry Jerry had to many tackles without his helmet.





Rex you sure are a snivelling
liberal type. What are you going to replace oil with?

Lets burn more coal so rex can recharge his electric go-go mobile.

Redeyerex...
‘transparency crap’ is not a substantive argument anymore than is ‘campaign finance reform crap’ and you do not address that you are accepting corruptable politicians only by removing temptation from them on the way in.

Would you match funds for any candidate that raises the initial 15 million so that our tax liability gets bigger the more candidates quailify. ‘unfunded mandate crap’? Limit it to a specified fund amount so that the more/sooner Republicans run the more matching funds Republicans get?

Not yet the time for Alternatives
Besides...I love the smell of mogas fumes in the morning!

Electric Cars - The trade offs
Dr. Sowell is right to question the trade-offs with the switch to electric cars, and it is true that such a change would shift the polution production from cars to power plants.

So why do it? First of all, an electric motor of equal power is much smaller than a gasoline burning engine. There are no radiators or transmissions in an electric car. There is no polution controls or mufflers to add weight. An electric cars is much lighter and therefore more efficient.

That said, there are real reasons to be concerned about wide spread use of electric cars. First of all, our grid is not prepared to handle the additional power. Where would all those car batteries come from and how would they be disposed? Lighter cars have been less safe in the past. Would highway fatalities go up if we switched to electric cars?

A big concern is government control. Our elites in government are always searching for ways limit us. A large increase in gasoline tax is political suicide. It is easy for even the most detached voter to feel the consequence of the gasoline tax. Will that same voter see the harm in ever more strict pollution controls imposed on electric generation? It leaves open the door for politicians to pass the buck and to blame "greedy" power companies for ever increasing electric pricing?

Electric Car Pollution
"Since electricity is generated mostly by burning coal, has anyone calculated how much pollution is created by electric cars, even though none of that pollution comes out of their tailpipes?"

Yes, one of my engineers did the calculation.

The short answer is, that both cars pollute about the same amount for each 100 miles traveled.

A gasoline-powered car creates roughly 65 pounds of carbon dioxide for each 100 miles it travels.

A coal-fired power plant that recharges an electric car, such as the EV-1, creates roughly 61 pounds of carbon dioxide for each 100 miles the EV-1 travels.

The EV-1 travels 100 miles for 34 kwh of electricity consumed. This is based on published data for the EV-1, found at

http://www.evchargernews.com/CD-A/gm_ev1_web_site/specs/spe cs_specs.htm

Also, we used a car that achieves 30 miles to the gallon.

The coal-fired power plant was assumed to use mid-grade coal, and have a thermal efficiency of 35 percent.

Note that the answer depends very much on the efficiency of the coal plant, the efficiency of the electric car, and the miles per gallon achieved by the gasoline-powered vehicle.

Pollution Qualified
that is, assuming one considers carbon dioxide a pollutant.

The amount of sulfur compounds and nitrogen oxides are complicated to calculate. I suspect that the gasoline is much cleaner than the coal, so that a gasoline car emits less of these pollutants than does the coal-fired power plant.

On the other hand, an oil refinery emits quite a bit of pollution to produce the gasoline. This includes air pollutants, water pollutants, and some solid sludges.

This gets fairly complex, when one considers the type of the refinery, the type and quality of the crude oil, the transportation required to move the crude oil to the refinery, and similar issues for the coal before it arrives at the power plant.

Perhaps someone else has the data to perform those calculations.

Ray trusting politicians
Ray says lets just be transparent and let everyone give what they want to our politicians.

How about you have to get a certain number of signitures to get on the ballot. Then you can raise funds from individuals only, no bundling or soft money from the parties and finally we match the funds up to 15 million for primaries and 30 million for the general election.

Ray I'm assuming all politicians are corruptible just like all of us are corruptible. By removing the money raised from lobbyist on K Street and the job opportunities available after they leave office they won't be beholden to the Lobbyist.

GI Joe: Already name calling how 4th grade of you. I'll bet my dad could beat your dad up kind of puts down the mentality of the military service you claim to represent.

And to answer you question I'll simply plug my car into the electric plug in my garage and let my solar cells on the garage roof recharge the battery. Renewable energy = no ongoing pollution.

Representative government?
34,000 Washington Lobbyists and 80% of Congress composed of lawyers. You have got to be kidding if anyone thinks we still have a representative form of government. I also wouldn't call it "a level playing field".

Topper
For the benefit of all those "turned off" by envisioning those "liberal ladies" in mini-skirts, I offer the worst vision imaginable, Michael Moore in a Speedo!

wbheff
Well, sir, I must say, this vision is SEARED in my memory...

Excuse me while I rinse my eyes out with Clorox...

CHECK OUT YOUTUBE SPOOF OF THE DEBATE
Check out this youtube video Tom Tancredo posted today. It's hilarious making fun of the Univision Republican Debate tonight. He's urging people to boycott the Spanish language Presidential debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5GUCQAdlxg&feature=user

Enjoy!

Not on Netflix
The Great Global Warming Swindle isn't available on Netflix. Shocker! Any Blockbuster at home subscribers please post if its available through them and I will switch my service.

Great Global Warming Swindle
it is available at Amazon...
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.