Previous 11 - 20 Next
You're citing Thinkprogress as a source? Really?!
By the fact you have posted your little screed, you demonstrate you are participating in our energy-powered technological society and not going without as your champions advocate we do. Turn off your computer and bang rocks together like a good little eco-Luddite. Show us one death certificate listing the cause as "climate change". Bee ess. WHO is another UN stooge telling us why the UN should become the totalitarian government of the world. Even if we accept the premise, it ignores the fact FAR MORE definitely would freeze, starve, etc, if we limited CO2=energy to the extent real science says would be required. One-World totalitarianism and artificially restricted energy would be a FAR greater catastrophe than any plausible anthropogenic scenario the warmies dream up. Everyone who advocates giving power to the world's ruling class to decide who gets what energy is a co-conspirator in mass murder. If you're serious, quit wasting effort ragging the "skeptics" and DEMAND INTENSIVE NUCLEAR POWER development as they've failed to so in the quarter century this dogma has been the official line. Denounce stupid futile gestures like carbon taxes and "cap-&-trade" rationing schemes that grow government without doing any 'good' reducing CO2. Quit diverting resources into piddling with windmills and solar panels and ethanol and crony "capitalism." Demand embargoes and punitive tariffs on imported goods manufactured with unrestricted coal in competition with domestic industry subject to CO2 limits.
Keynsianism provided a sophistry to give a "scientific" gloss to the ruling class confiscating the peoples' output and then deciding who gets what according to their own interests and whims. The extreme examples help illustrate that much of what is done in Keynes' name runs afoul of the "broken window" fallacy; the effect of opportunity cost and disincentive when capital is forcibly diverted, is underestimated if not ignored. They're more prone to practice what I call pseudo-Keynesianism in that instead of following the Keynesian prescription as stated, they just $pend big bux when it suits them, and claim that based on Keynesianism it will stimulate the economy!
Bravo! That's the real explanation of the durability of Keynesianism: it rationalizes letting pols do what they want to do anyway!
In response to:

Using the Law to Stop the IRS

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Dec 22, 2014 9:57 AM
You're describing a VAT. Point taken anyway. Consumption taxes require tracking our purchases rather than income. We don't need more function creep. Consumption taxes are regressive, therefore they'll want to complicate them with exemptions and exceptions aimed at "the poor" and soon we're back where we started. If the Federal government taxes sales, it will encroach on traditional state revenue sources, though they could go to income taxes if the federal government abandons it.
How many of these sweet generous students volunteered to be deported themselves?
In response to:

There They Go Again

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Dec 19, 2014 4:33 PM
Good point. The Epistles talk of the shame of the Cross, and for good reason. 2 of the earliest inscriptions found that refer to Christianity were graffiti mocking Christians for worshipping a crucified rebel (They also pretty well documented the technique of crucifixion and the fact it generally followed scourging). The best known one specifically mocks a particular Christian; the crucified Y'eshua is provided with a donkey's head to further drive home the point, and a caption "Alexamenos Worships His God".
In response to:

Global Warming, Empty Gestures

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Dec 18, 2014 12:00 PM
This kind of "science" disregards empirical proof and logic when it comes to proposing and advocating remedies. The warmies will advocate government subsidies for well-connected wind/solar/ethanol purveyors, useless and discredited measures like "cap & trade" (i.e. rationing) schemes and carbon taxes, and the ridiculous proposals for worldwide wealth redistribution. In other words, in response to an ostensibly existential threat to mankind's existence, they're content to piddle with corrupt, self-serving, and ineffective policies, and we're not supposed to notice. On the other hand, with supposedly our survival at stake mind you, they haven't and won't develop nuclear power with any urgency, nor satellite solar or fusion. They blithely allow socialist countries to export goods manufactured with uncontrolled coal power to us freely with no penalty, in competition with our industries hamstrung by "climate change" restrictions and confiscations. They fret over the prospect of generating "too much energy" and staying with the standard utility "baseline model." They pretend not to notice the failures of solar and wind generation. They want to treat biomass the same as coal. The bottom line is they only seem interested in micromanagement, restrictions, confiscatory taxation, rationing, wealth redistribution, and getting to decide who gets what, NONE of which even addresses supposed anthropogenic "climate change" except insomuch as suppressing the economy slows down emissions of CO2. You want to be taken seriously? Shut up about taxes, rationing, and bigger government, and instead lets see some Manhattan projects for nuclear, satellite solar, fusion, etc, and stiff tariffs or embargoes on imported goods manufactured with coal power not regulated as we propose to regulate ours!
Unfortunately, Obama's illegal order does not rely on action, which could perhaps be blocked, but on inaction to function as he desires. There is little Congress can do to force him to act when he should have, given that impeachment is off the table.
In response to:

Why Benghazi Still Matters

Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Dec 17, 2014 11:52 AM
These "hearings" were distractions. They do not change one iota the facts that: 1. Obama was & is President, and the feckless Libya policy was his baby, and all the consequences are on him. 2. We still don't know where Pres. Obama was or what he was doing that night as the event happened. It appears probable he was in the family quarters, and he made a phone call to Israeli PM Netanyahu. If so, why? Why wasn't he in the situation room or somewhere else operational at his post? HE'S RESPONSIBLE. 3. Hillary was Secretary of State, responsible for the diplomatic installations, the Ambassadors, and their security. Did she in any way impede requested security upgrades for the consulate, passively or actively? How could she be ignorant or out of this loop? Under Pres. Obama, SHE'S RESPONSIBLE. 4. The "spontaneous protest of offensive video" explanation has been discredited; it is known the attack was carried out by an arm of "decimated" Al Quaeda. So Al Quaeda wasn't really "decimated" and the video had nothing to do with anything. Is the White House admitting it now? Why did they make up this video tale instead of relying on military and CIA intel available to them?
True. But, the GOP can be counted on to flush that gift down the toilet by nominating J Bush, or Romney or some other big-gov amnesty-monger. Heck, Hillary ought to be a gift, (Obama should have been a gift in 2012!) but the spineless Republicans can't take advantage of it. Here's a clue, guys: take that $$$ you're spending on consultants who tell you to flip off the base and pander to phantom "moderate independents" and instead buy ads where you'll explain how you'll dismantle Obamacare, and secure the border and put American workers first for lo and hi skilled jobs, and American families first for taxpayer-funded services. You're welcome.
Previous 11 - 20 Next