O Beautiful for Subsidies, For Amber Waves of Grain

K-Lo on The Corner provides more criticism of the More Subsidies-for-Millionaires farm bill here.

National Review Editors: Pork Farm

I was going to blog about the new and unimproved $300 billion farm bill, but the editors at National Review did it for me. Good grief!

Nevada Jet Setters

Check out this investigative post on Chuck Muth's blog re: our NV legislators' jet-setting ways on the Taxpayer dime. What gives?!

Reader Question re: Yucca Mountain Nuclear Power Plant: "wouldn't the plant's cooling water be radioactive?"

I don't know much about the inner workings of nuclear power plant cooling systems, so I started with a patent search and found U.S. Patent 4894202. It is a "method of inhibiting radioactive substances from eluting into cooling water in a nuclear plant and an apparatus" issued on January 16, 1990. One would assume that a patented method/product that's been in existence for 18 years is in use, but I will continue to research this - and anyone who passes this way should feel free to Comment with what they know or learn.

I Will Love Him and Hug Him and Call Him George

Question recently posed by a Friend: What will you do when you get a Reader on Shoe blog?
Me: You mean, someone who isn't you, my husband, or my mom?
She: Yeah.
Me: And whaddaya mean, "A" reader? You think there will only be one...?

The first Reader has since appeared, followed by another. One emailed from Austrailia; the other commented Anonymously. Sincere Thanks to both for visiting and making my day. Many blessings and come back soon!

OMG

Well…I may not be ready for full-fledged Libertarianism, but I truly don’t know if I can remain a registered Republican very much longer. Two nights ago I said to a Very green sounding McCain fundraiser: “Tell the Bosses that when the GOP stops sliding to the Left, gets back to Goldwater-Reagan values, and helps nominate a decent Conservative candidate, I’ll gladly give more money. And tell them to stop sending out these stupid pretend surveys that a tree monkey could complete just so they can ask for more money for their lame campaign.” She was silent for a moment, and then laughed and said “ok,” and hung up. I respected her for that; I really did.

I guess I was still grouchy from McCain’s interview with O’Reilly late last week. Big Mac says he refuses to consider drilling in ANWR, nor will he crack down on sanctuary cities…because he is a Teddy Roosevelt conservative. (?!) Um, try not to abuse TR’s legacy like that, “my friend.” TR was tough, wise, and knew the difference between good policy and pandering. He cared about conservation – but was wise with it. And he wanted measured, well-managed immigration. I very much doubt he would have approved of McCain’s tedious thirty-nine part illegal immigration “program.” I ask you: why must McNoodle appear on my television screen and conjure up the dead spirit of past conservatives as if it says something about HIM? Can he not entertain and convey these ideas on his own? Where is the principled and pure conservatism of the Now?

And please don’t feed me any lines about John’s commitment to appointing conservative judges. That’s a no-brainer, so no Brownie Points will be awarded. And anyway McCain has more demerits than he can hope to overcome. He has, after all, failed to complete assignments again and again. Like when, you ask? Well, let us count the ways. He pulled some pretty dirty campaign tricks on Bush in 2000 but now haughtily insists he will run a “respectful” campain against Obama. I guess he only plays nasty with members of his own party, but against the man who may well be the downfall of our nation he will be Oh So Nice. I mean, He’ll be Lovey Dovey.

To continue… McCain slandered the Swift Boat veterans against John Kerry without the basis of evidence, which I found just astounding. He also echoed the lies of the Left by deriding the Bush tax cuts as being only “for the rich.” He has flip-flopped on immigration policy numerous times. He favors constitutional rights for terrorists. He helped legitimize the filibustering of judicial nominees in the Senate. He championed bad campaign-finance reform. He has participated in the demonization of the big, bad oil and drug companies. He co-sponsored the McCain-Kennedy illegal immigrant Forgive, Forget and Let’s-all-have-a-Scotch bill. He also voted for Specter’s hare-brained Let’s-politely-ask-for-Mexico’s-permission-to-build-a-fence-on-our-own-freaking-border Bill. He has sold out on global warming and talks about Green living like he invented it. His pro-life credentials are questionable. (Shall I continue…?)

“So, what do you WANT?” a friend inquires nervously as I finish the rant. Great question, and SO glad you asked. I want a conservative candidate who is…a Conservative. I want a president who talks sincerely and intelligently about reducing government. I want a POTUS who genuinely wants government transparency at every level. I want a strict adherence to ethics and a swift cutting off the offending hand when violations occur. I want our $3.1 trillion dollar federal budget slashed. I want balanced budgets at all levels of government. I want major tax reform with lower taxes for all. I want an end to the welfare state and an end to taxpayer dollars being doled out to entitlements and special interests of all kinds. I want an end to subsidies. Let us all live and die in the free market, and let people give to the causes they believe are worthy because they choose to do so.

I do not want the government giving money to anyone who bought a home they can’t afford, or saving any mortgage company who loaned too much money to too many high risk borrowers. Let everyone learn their lesson, and lick their wounds, and proceed. No one will die because they have to give up their house and go rent for awhile, so let’s stop behaving as if this “crisis” is on the level of a personal tragedy. I want things to happen because the economy makes them necessary or because individuals and private organized groups gather up and make it so. I want an end to union dues being used for political purposes without member permission. I want an end to earmarks forever. In general, I want less Bureaucracy in the Universe.

I want a better, stronger, faster, meaner military, and I want to use it to frighten the world into behaving properly where American interests are concerned. I want everyone in this country to get real about the dark soullessness of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism. I want a swift cooling of relationship with all nations who claim they are for peace but either whistle and look the other way or are in bed with these nuts on the sly. Including and starting with Saudi Arabia and Egypt. I want Israel to bomb anyone who breathes in their direction, and I want to throw a parade for them every time they do. I want the NRA to thrive, and I want to keep my guns and be free to buy more, and I want our kids to learn how to use them properly, and I want to be free to shoot intruders and trespassers or anyone who tries to harm me or my family.

I want the CIA to organize an infiltration of the organization of every sick, murderous despot in the world so they can summarily shoot he and all his drooling cronies in the head. (I realize this is where the Libertarians and I part ways. I also realize it separates me from many of my Christian friends. However, I am an unapologetic Interventionist when it is called for, and I believe it is called for whenever and wherever diabolically inclined dicators are responsible for grave human rights violations. I believe there is such a thing as right and wrong, and I believe we have a moral obligation to say so, and to do something about it. If someone summarily and systematically murders those who they are supposed to lead and care for, let them be shot, and let God judge their souls, and let their people go free.)

I want an end to the “drug war” which is costing us billions, filling up our prisons, and accomplishing little. Many companies have drug testing policies, and many other companies don’t care, so let’s just let everyone make their choices and let the market do what it does. If private organizations want to battle the sale and use of drugs, and help people who are addicted through education and counseling, let them do so, with our thanks. I want prison system reform including the establishment of work camps and compounds where all prisoners will pay their debt to society by laboring 40 to 50 hours per week (just like the rest of us!) both to maintain the prison and to produce something useful. I want these prison workplaces to be managed like a business: efficiently and for profit.

I want us to abolish or considerably reduce the scope and influence of the failed Department of Education. I want more charter schools and more encouragement and resources for home schoolers. I want education reform and better public education for fewer billions of dollars. I want more intelligent educational and career tracking for kids based on their skills, interests, and goals. I want to encourage more kids to go to vocational and/or trade and/or tech schools and for everyone to stop pretending that every kid needs a four to nine year college education for our country to be great. I want an end to affirmative action in academics. The smartest and best and most hard working ought to be accepted to our universities, no matter their gender, class, or race. Less talented students can attend community college and transfer in later if they are able, which they should be if they have any ability at all.

I want our courts to honor and uphold our Constitution. I do not want it revised. I want all judges to do their jobs, by the book. I want to stop the slow erosion of personal property rights. I do not want national, socialized health care. (I’ll take McCain’s tax credit for health care, but let’s remember that if our taxes weren’t so high in the first place we wouldn’t need a freaking credit in order to afford our doctor’s bills. Am I supposed to feel like McCain is “doing” something for me when really I’m just getting some of my own damn money back…?) I don’t want any cap-and-crap energy policy. I don’t want corporations trading or selling carbon emission credits like baseball cards. Can we please stop introducing abstract ideas into our economy as if they can actually serve as real currency and support the market? Good grief!

I want us to accept that there is nothing Hillary Clinton or anyone else can do about the OPEC oil cartel and their inflation of prices…except to drill for oil and refine here at home where and when we needed and even if it means running an ugly pipeline or two over the freaking tundra and ruining the scenic view of some Arctic terns.. I want us to get the per gallon gas prices back down at least in the $2.00s while we figure out what the next generation of cars is going to run on. (And it is NOT bio fuel. Even though plants are a quasi-“renewable resource,” the earth cannot sustain enough plants for both food and the world’s rising fuel demand. Hyrdogen fuel cells make a lot more sense, or how about that new proto-type car that is primarily motored by air pressure?)

I also want to tell the Middle East and half of Africa to feed their own damn starving citizens and neighbors since they are raking in trillions from oil sales. I want everyone here at home to stop treating nuclear power like it’s the Devil and get real about the tremendous benefits - when it’s managed correctly. It’s powerful; efficient; reliable; and opens up high tech jobs in the community. We can deal with the waste intelligently, by extracting and refining the Uranium (a huge boon to any state’s economy).

(sigh)

I am aware that I want what apparently cannot be had, at least not this year. And I know I will vote for McCain, as the best of the undesirables. But I will not be happy about it. And I will hope for something better next time. And I will probably have an “I” rather than an "R" on my voter card by 2012, if for no other reason than to let the GOP know how disgusted with them I really am.

Proverbs 1:7: "The Fear of the Lord"

Certain scriptures and phrases in the Bible have yet to be explained to me to my satisfaction. I therefore spend a fair amount of time reading, studying, cross-referencing, thinking, praying, and otherwise seeking plausible explanations. God says, "Seek, and ye shall find" and so I do, very glad to have His blessing. One such scripture is the first half of Proverbs 1:7, which says, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge." What was Solomon really saying there at the end of his Prologue? How does "fear of the Lord" line up in the same parade with the flag-bearers of an all-loving, all-forgiving God? Is Solomon talking about the fear of disappointing a loving father - as in a healthy and wholesome dread of displeasing him? Or is he talking about sheer and unadulterated let's-all-hide-under-the-bed Terror? Or something else, or something in between?

My VINES reference lists a few Greek words for "fear" but none of them cross-ref back to this verse in Proverbs, so let's quickly look at each. "Phobos" is equivalent to "flight" and has connotations of both "dread" and "fright." The word "deilia" comes from "deos" and literally means fearfulness, but it primarily denotes timidity and/or cowardice which (the notes say) is not given us of/by God (see 2 Timothy 1:7). And "eulabelia" means caution, reverence, or godly fear: "a mingling of fear and love which constitute the piety of men toward God."

This last Word seems something like what we'd expect from a Proverb. It refers to a reverential respect for God as a controlling motive in life and spiritual matters. Rather than causing terror and flight, it influences and inspires the seeking of the indwelling of the Spirit of God...causing carefulness of word and deed. (Is it not true that once we discover we are Sheep, we are wise to tread carefully and to fear straying too far from the Shepherd?)

Hi Ho the Derrio, A-Voting We Shall Go

Reuters reported that despite the devastation of the cyclone on May 2nd, Myanmar's military government still proceeded with elections for a military-drafted "constitution" legitimizing its rule. Voters in areas not affected by the cyclone were under government pressure to show up and vote "yes" while their dead fellow citizens floated in the rivers and deltas and the survivors waited in vain for aid. The government's propaganda blitz featured state-run TV adds warning of "foreign interference" and cheerful actresses singing "Let's go voting" and "Come along for voting" to a snappy disco beat.

Apparently voting in cyclone-devastated areas has been postponed for two weeks. I'm sure the despondent, starving family members of Myanmar's 100,000+ dead are deeply appreciative of the government-issued rain check.

Newest Addition to Carbon Emissions Hit List: America's Homeless

Check out this new report from MIT. It's a study of the carbon emissions of Americans living a variety of lifestyles. Though Americans were found to emit a higher quantity of carbon per capita than the rest of the world, you might be interested to know that even our homeless people are emitting twice as much carbon dioxide as the average Citizen of Earth. Apparently an American living in homeless shelters and eating all his meals in soup kitchens is responsible for 8.5 tons of carbon emissions per year. Compare that with Steve Hayward's estimates in his WSJ piece that in order to reduce U.S. emissions by 80% by the year 2050, carbon emissions need to be reduced to only 2.5 tons per person.

Voters should note that the "80 by 50" target has been endorsed by both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. McCain is only slightly more reasonable, calling for a 65% reduction. My question: which of them is going to tell all the Homeless people how their irresponsible lifestyle is ruining the world?

Don't Start Building Those Igloos Just Yet

If worries about climate change are keeping you awake at night, don't miss this Investor's Business Daily piece that reminds us of some of the dire predictions made on (or soon after) the first Earth Day in 1969. We'd do well to remember that 1970s environmentalists were predicting the next Ice Age and were screaming for preventative government policy before millions of American families starved to death in their igloos...which they said would happen within the next 30 years. Yet here we all are, in 2008: snug as a bug in a rug. I ask you: Why are weird Al Gorivich and the environmental Doomsdayers of today any more correct than they were back then?

Here's what they said:

At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind."

C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed."

In 1968, professor Paul Ehrlich, former Vice President Al Gore's hero and mentor, predicted that there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the 1970s . . . hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." Ehrlich forecast that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989, and that by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Ehrlich's predictions about England were gloomier: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000."

In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning that the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992.

Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans were using 50% of the world's resources and "by 2000 they (Americans) will, if permitted, be using all of them." In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000."

Harvard biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look magazine, that by 1995 "somewhere between 75% and 85% of all the species of living animals will be extinct."

And how about this one, from 1885:

In 1885, the U.S. Geological Survey announced that there was "little or no chance" of oil being discovered in California, and a few years later they said the same about Kansas and Texas. In 1939, the U.S. Department of the Interior said American oil supplies would last only another 13 years. In 1949, the secretary of the interior said the end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight. Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous claims, in 1974 the U.S. Geological Survey advised us that the U.S. had only a 10-year supply of natural gas. The fact of the matter, according to the American Gas Association: There's a 1,000- to 2,500- year supply.

The Right Stuff

In re: to the debate on what now ought to happen in the GOP, check out Victor Davis Hanson's Corner post on the conservative principles that ought to be embraced and communicated going into November - and in my opinion, Forevermore. Gingrich was saying much the same this morning in his Human Events op-ed.

The GOP needs to dig in and stop the slide towards the Center, which every Republican president since Reagan has contributed to in his own special way. As Hanson rightly says, we ought to frame and present conservative principles in a more articulate way rather than cater to the perceived advantages of straddling the fence. We need a smarter, more pragmatic energy policy; a curbing or elimination of taxes of all kinds; strict fiscal discipline; constitutionalist federal judges; secure and/or closed borders; a careful and principled approach to national security and military efforts around the globe; and a strong commitment to ethics and transparency in all governmental corners. We should also eliminate the Dept of Education and leave it to the states, who ought to offer/allow quality public and private education according the demands of its residents.

Simple Deconstruction

Having taken a class on Literary Theory & Criticism @ UNLV, nearly three weeks of which was spent on the Decontructionists, I find the below post on a WSJ story by Mark Hemingway over on The Corner pretty funny. (It was heady stuff, to be sure, and we did have a number of students who were either so (a) lost or (b) hostile to the subject (and to the poor teaching assistant), that I believe they were politely invited to drop the class. A few of them did…)

Deconstruct This [Mark Hemingway]

I imagine our esteemed Dartmouth alum Peter Robinson will have some thoughts on this later, but this story from today's WSJ is most amusing:

Often it seems as though American higher education exists only to provide gag material for the outside world. The latest spectacle is an Ivy League professor threatening to sue her students because, she claims, their "anti-intellectualism" violated her civil rights. Priya Venkatesan taught English at Dartmouth College. She maintains that some of her students were so unreceptive of "French narrative theory" that it amounted to a hostile working environment. She is also readying lawsuits against her superiors, who she says papered over the harassment, as well as a confessional exposé, which she promises will "name names."

Kids can be so cruel. I mean you work hard to explain something simple like how in Baudrillardist simulation, one is faced with a choice: either reject subdialectic patriarchialist theory or conclude that society, somewhat paradoxically, has objective value, but only if language is equal to culture; if that is not the case, Sartre’s model of Baudrillardist simulation is one of "neodialectic narrative", and therefore a legal fiction — and they just refuse to respect you as a teacher.

Patriot Post: Polar Bears or Political Pawns?

Interesting op-ed in the Patriot Post on the Left's use of endangered species to block various economic initiatives. Among other things, there is now a push to put the Polar Bear on the list of endangered species. Some proponents of opening ANWR to oil drilling say it is simply a political ploy designed to continue to block their efforts.

The Center for Biological Diversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Greenpeace are suing the USFWS (of Spotted Owl fame) for delaying action to declare polar bears "threatened" and provide them protection. A 2007 U.S. Geological Survey report speculates that 60 percent of polar bears might perish by 2050 - IF global warming continues to melt Arctic sea ice.

Ex-terrorist Mesage to UCol Students: "Wake up and smell the hummus"

See this story re: two ex-terrorists who have caused controversy with their criticisms of Islam. The two recently told a University of Colorado crowd to "Wake up and smell the hummus." Walid Shoebat and Kamal Saleem, whose talk was titled "Why We Want to Kill You," spent 90 minutes detailing their terrorist experiences and explaining flaws in American terrorist policy.

I Won't Say I Told You So

Well, the polls are finally catching up with what I've been saying for months (to anyone who asked and a few who didn't). Hillary is a stronger candidate and much greater threat to the GOP chances in November than Obama. As of Friday, Gallup had McCain up six points over Obama, but up only one over Clinton. And Rasmussen had the McCain v. Obama lead at five points with Hillary leading McCain by one.

For the Dem nomination, Gallup has the candidates tied and Rasmussen has Clinton up by three. However, the buzz on the Dem street is that black voters will blow a group gasket and go AWOL (or vote for McCain) if Hillary gets the nomination. I don't claim to understand what would cause a voter to switch to the other party's candidate (and ditch their chosen party platform) if Their Man doesn't win the nomination, even when polls show that man CAN'T win the Big Race. I suppose it's another example of Ideology trumping Reason. As Nicholas Wapschott (of the New York Sun) said in his recent op-ed “The Limits of Idealism:”

"Yet Mr. Obama has one thing in his favor: the predilection of ideologically driven supporters to fall in love with a losing candidate. The Democratic party’s virgin foot soldiers put more value on intention than achievement and prefer purity to pragmatism. They consider idealistic perfection more important than tainted electability. They are often natural oppositionists who prefer to complain from a position of self-righteous impotence than make the grubby compromises needed to win and to govern."

Some situations do call for a staunch commitment to Ideology over pragmatism, but these instances rarely arise in politics. Our primary process and two-party system is what it is; our electoral choice often boils down to which candidate we hope will mess up the least amount of stuff for the least amount of money; and petulance, pouting, and spurning the voting booth helps nothing and no one.