Saturday, December 13, 2008

Democrats are richer and smarter? I don't think so.

Slate has an article that breaks down the demographics of voters in the recent U.S. election. The article focuses on two factors: income and education. The headline for the article reads: "Places that went for Obama are richer and smarter than places that went for McCain." The rich comment may or may not be true but the smarter comment is highly doubtful. (Click here for the article.)

On income the article has the following stats (as an aside, I don't usually quote statistics as they are useless in my opinion. I can take the same data and draw the exact opposite conclusion as the article but we'll go with it for now):

Just more than 600 counties (of more than 3,100 nationally) voted Republican more heavily in this year's presidential contest than in 2004. The average per capita yearly income in those counties was about $18,800, according to county income tallies issued each year by the Internal Revenue Service. By contrast, those living in the 500-plus counties that voted more heavily Democratic this year than in 2004 had average personal incomes of $28,000—nearly 50 percent higher than the communities trending Republican. The most Democratic counties (those where Barack Obama won by more than 20 percentage points) had average per capita incomes of $28,207. Those counties where John McCain won by similar margins had average personal incomes of just $21,308."

What does this mean? It means that the ultra rich and ultra poor are more likely to vote Democrat but we already know this. The ultra poor don't pay taxes and are highly dependent on the government and vote Democrat. The ultra rich have more money than they need and are able to pay high priced tax lawyers and avoid paying taxes that the middle class must pay. So the middle class tend to vote Republican as they are the part of society that goes to work and grinds away all day to provide for their family. The middle class understand that government has no money but what they take from the people in the first place.

The confusing part is that it is the Republican voter that is labeled as the rich and greedy. According to the stats in the article it is the Democrats that are the rich and greedy.

"Places divided by income are also separated by education. In landslide Democratic counties, 32.7 percent of the adult population had a bachelor's degree or better. In Republican counties where McCain won by 20 points or better, 20.4 percent of adults had finished college or graduate school."

The highly laughable part of the story is the comment that because more people with college or graduate school education voted Democrat the author concludes that Democrats are smarter. What a joke. Intelligence is not dependent on education. You can be uneducated (in the school sense) and highly intelligent. As someone with a graduate degree, I can attest that higher education does not equate to higher intelligence. I have gained more intelligence outside of the classroom than I did in the classroom and I was an honors student. The stats on education do not surprise me as universities train people to have homogeneous thinking. If you disagree with the professor you fail, very few people express their disagreements in their papers. The highly educated tend to be unwise. Therefore, it is no surprise that they tend to vote Democrat.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

The backlash against the mass hysteria of man made global warming continues to grow. The U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works has an article on its website discussing the growing objections by credible scientists to the theory of man made global warming. I guess Al gore and his followers ignore these scientists when they refer to a "consensus". (Click here for the article.)

"The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears."

The great piano industry bailout that wasn't

Jeffrey Tucker at the Mises Institute has a good article comparing the auto industry today to the piano industry of the early twentieth century. (Click here for the article.) You can't bailout companies that are inefficient and incapable of competing. If the auto industry was to go bankrupt the economy would adapt and move forward. And at a much faster and efficient pace not having the burden of the high costs of the current system.

"Today the highest-price good that people buy besides their houses is their car, and this reality leads people to believe that we can't possibly let the American car industry die. We couldn't possibly be a real country and a powerful nation without our beloved auto industry, which is so essential to our national well-being. In any case, this is what spokesmen for the big three say.

What about the time before the car? Look at the years between 1870 and 1930. As surprising as this may sound today, the biggest-ticket item on every household budget besides the house itself was its piano. Everyone had to have one. Those who didn't have one aspired to have one. It was a prize, an essential part of life, and they sold by the millions and millions."

"Let's say that FDR had initiated a bailout of the piano industry and then even taken it over and nationalized it. The same firms would have made the same pianos for decades and decades. But that wouldn't have stopped the Japanese industry from taking off in the 1960s and '70s. Americans would have far preferred them because they would have been cheaper. American pianos, because they would be state owned, would fall in quality, lower and lower to the point that they would become like a Soviet car in the 1960s. Of course you could set up tariff barriers. That would have forced American pianos on us. Except for one thing: demand would still have collapsed. The pianos still have to have a market. But let's say you find a workaround for that problem by requiring everyone to own a piano. You still can't make people play them and value them.

In the end you have to ask, is it really worth trillions in subsidies, vast tariffs, impositions all around, just to keep what you declare to be an essential industry alive? Well, eventually, as we have learned in the case of pianos, this is not essential. Things come and things go. Such is the world. Such is the course of events. Such is the forward motion of history in a world of relentless progress generated by the free market. Thank goodness that FDR didn't bother saving the US piano industry! As a result, Americans can get a huge range of instruments from all countries in the world at any price they are willing to pay."

Monday, December 08, 2008

Day without a gay

I am not sure I follow the logic of the linked story.

"Some same-sex marriage supporters are urging people to "call in gay" Wednesday to show how much the country relies on gays and lesbians, but others question whether it's wise to encourage skipping work given the nation's economic distress." (Click here for the article.)

How will this show reliance on gays? In a time where unemployment is increasing monthly there are multiple workers for each job. If you are gay or straight and don't show up your company will hire one of the unemployed to do your job. If you are a gay retail employee then you can be easily replaced by one of thousands looking for work. The only way this works is if the gay person has unique skills that can not be easily replaced. Point being, the country does NOT rely on gays anymore (or less) than it relies on straight workers.

The scary part of this story is towards the bottom.

"Scott Craig, a fifth-grade teacher at Independence Charter School in Philadelphia, had no problem requesting and being granted the day off. So many of the school's 60 teachers were eager to show support for gay rights they had to make sure enough stayed behind to staff classrooms."

"About 25 teachers plan to take Wednesday off and to have their work covered by substitutes while they discuss ways to introduce gay issues to their students and volunteer at the local branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, Craig said. A letter telling parents why so many teachers would be out went home Monday."

"While they discuss ways to introduce gay issues to their students"??? Their job is to teach basic skills and knowledge not gay issues. Perhaps if teachers spent more time teaching basic skills and less time on "gay issues" and sex ed. students performance on standardized tests would not be so abysmal.

It's the thought that counts right?

I hope that this does not come as a surprise to anyone but it seems as though celebrity charities might not be all that helpful.

"Welcome to a world in which it's not uncommon for a celebrity's pet foundation to have greater administrative costs than the amount of money it grants. Tax records from Tyra Banks' TZone Foundation, for instance, show that in 2006 it paid US$35,000 in salaries, while distributing only US$32,000 in grants. A spokesperson for Tyra Banks said that the tax form was filled out incorrectly and that the foundation did not pay board members salaries.

The Justin Timberlake Foundation, meanwhile, spent US$146,000 on operating costs in 2006, according to tax records. This included US$10,000 on travel, and US$40,000 on loosely defined "other services." At the same time, it distributed US$32,500, with US$30,000 of that going to the Jane Goodall Institute. No one at the foundation returned calls for comment despite multiple attempts."
(Click here for the article.)

Friday, December 05, 2008

Deepak Chopra the foreign affairs expert?

Isn't Deepak Chopra the guy selling self-help books? Then why the heck is he spouting off on foreign affairs? What makes him qualified to speak on foreign affairs? I guess the folks at CNN read his book and paid particular attention to the fourth law "the law of least effort" and decided it took too much effort to find someone qualified to speak on the attacks in Mumbai.

Deepak blames Washington for the attacks and says "Washington funds both sides of the fight through petro dollars" and that "ultimately the message is always towards Washington". Really? These terrorists were way off if they thought Mumbai was close to Washington.

He contradicts himself when he says "it's not Washington's fault, it's everyone's problem".

Please Deepak stick to the silent meditation and incense sniffing. Leave the foreign affairs to the knowledgeable.

Peer pressure

Nothing like good old peer pressure to coerce people in to doing what you want them to do. Just like the tactics used in communist society, the Union Count public school district is using peer pressure to coerce parents into not bringing peanut butter into the schools. If your kid does not have a certificate on the wall they will be shamed and abused until they cave in and stop bringing peanut butter to school. Ignoring the many health benefits of peanut butter, it is a sad reflection of society that such a small minority (less than 1% of kids have peanut allergies) can control the majority. Peer pressure works every time.

"Take Union County Public Schools, the fastest-growing school district in the Tar Heel state. Officials there recently sent letters home to parents asking that they no longer pack peanut-butter sandwiches or cookies in their kids' lunches.

If they abide by the restriction, a certificate with their child's name will be placed on display at their school "in acknowledgment of the voluntary commitment to safety your family has made."

The district's also shaming parents into washing their kids' hands in the morning before they go on the bus, lest they transfer the dangerous peanut molecule and endanger a seat mate." (Click here for the article.)

Obama flip-flopping already?

Obama has not even been sworn in as President and he has already begun to flip-flop on his election promises. I wonder if his voters will be pleased with the flip-flopping?

"US President-elect Barack Obama is not planning to implement a windfall profit tax on oil companies because prices have dropped below $80 a barrel according to an aide."

"President-elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel," an aide on Obama's transition team said. "They are currently below that now and expected to stay below that." (Click here for the article.)

They are currently below $80 and EXPECTED to stay below that? Expected by whom? The same people that expected prices to stay above $80 and therefore require a windfall profits tax? If he is serious about the windfall profits tax he should put it in place. He could set it up to kick in when prices are above $80. The fact that he killed it all together suggests that he never intended to actually go through with the tax but rather it was simply an election ploy. Well done, it worked.

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

The Opportunist, the Socialist, and the Separtist

What is the coalition contemplated by the Liberals, NDP and Bloc really about? I don't believe it has anything to do with the economy. The Conservatives have presented the best plan possible, do nothing. I don't believe it has to do with cutting taxpayer funds supporting political parties. A coalition government simply in response to cutting this funding is overkill as the threat of voting this down would have caused the Conservatives to budge.

I believe that the idea of a coalition was in the works since possibly before the previous election. We know for a fact that the NDP and Bloc have had some sort of agreement in the works for sometime now (Click here for audio clip.) If this is the case then there was nothing that Harper could have done to avoid this mess. The three loser parties wanted a coalition from the day they lost the last election and no matter what Harper had included in this current budget a coalition was going to be formed.

If conservatives are truly concerned about restoring political stability to Canada the in-fighting and blaming of Harper must end. If not, the coalition will have won on multiple fronts. Not only will they usurp governing power they will have divided and conquered the strongest party in Canada, setting the Conservatives back a couple decades. If that happens the only people to blame will be the conservatives that chose to focus their fighting on their leader rather than the true source of contention, the coalition parties.

No to Coalition Government Canada

Click on the link below to show your support for the Conservative government or to show your opposition for the political ploy being attempted by the three loser parties.

Monday, December 01, 2008

How did Obama get elected? Easy, the media. Filmmaker John Ziegler is in the process of completing a documentary that will explore the significant role the MSM played in electing Barack Obama. At his website,, Ziegler has a video showing interviews with Obama voters showcasing their lack of knowledge on basic issues. While on the other hand showcasing their profound knowledge of unimportant facts and outright lies about the Republicans. This should be a good movie when complete.

Zogby Poll Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

Sucks to be a white male

White males get no respect these days. In a case of pure prejudice the students association at Carelton university, located in Ottawa, Ontario, has voted to cancel its annual shinerama fundraiser for cystic fibrosis. The reason give? Cystic Fibrosis is a white man's disease. Apparently diseases affecting mostly white men aren't worth fighting. (Click here for the article.)

"The proposal to abandon Shinerama was put forward after it was “recently revealed to only affect white people, and primarily men,” according to the motion."

“We have a diverse community,” CUSA vice-president (finance) Kweku Winful said. “We need something that is more representative of the greater student [body] than just one small group . . . we need to appeal to a larger demographic.”

World Diarrhea day?

Despite what many celebrities may say a reasonable case can be made that too much money is being wasted on the cause of AIDS. The Associated Press has an interesting article found here on this topic. The unfortunate part is millions of needless deaths occur because scarce resources are diverted from high impact causes towards the celebrity friendly AIDS issue. If celebrities really cared about doing the most good for the most people they would focus on causes such as diarrhea, pneumonia, and malaria. Unfortunately for the millions that die from these curable diseases they are not cool enough for celebrity endorsements.

"Diarrhea kills five times as many kids as AIDS," said John Oldfield, executive vice president of Water Advocates, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that promotes clean water and sanitation.

"Everybody talks about AIDS at cocktail parties," Oldfield said. "But nobody wants to hear about diarrhea," he said.

""The global HIV industry is too big and out of control. We have created a monster with too many vested interests and reputations at stake, ... too many relatively well paid HIV staff in affected countries, and too many rock stars with AIDS support as a fashion accessory" (Roger England)

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Elton John puts the gay marriage debate to rest

I knew that Elton John was more than just a brilliant musician. At a New York City charity event Elton weighed in on the gay marriage debate with his perspective, as a gay man with a civil partner.

"We’re not married, let’s get that straight. We have a civil partnership…I don’t want to be married! I’m very happy with a civil partnership. The word ‘marriage,’ I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."

Government run monopolies are ineffecient and expensive? No duh.

The Fraser Institute has concluded a study that shows what anyone with common sense knows already; government run business is inefficient and inferior compared to private run business. (Click here for the article.)

"Government-run auto insurance monopolies in British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are charging some of the highest average premiums in Canada, concludes a new report released today by the independent research organization the Fraser Institute.

The peer-reviewed report found that drivers in BC pay the highest average premium at $1,304 annually. At $1,229, Ontario has the second highest average premium and is the only province with private, competitive auto insurance that has an average insurance premium exceeding $1,000. Saskatchewan has the third highest average premium at $1,063 followed by Manitoba at $1,029."

"The report concludes that the profit motive does not lead to higher auto insurance costs for consumers. When the private sector insurance industry is open to competition and consumer choice is protected, the portion of auto insurance premiums earned as profits will not result from excessive prices, but instead come from cost efficiencies achieved by successful claims management, pricing strategies, customer service, and good business management. Private sector insurers are also able to use the returns on invested surpluses that accrue during profitable years to subsidize premium rates in years where losses exceed the premiums paid by drivers. Such efficiencies are lost in government auto insurance monopolies where there tends to be a higher frequency of claims and suppression of rates for high-risk drivers below the actuarial cost of insuring them."

Monday, November 24, 2008

Barack is pro-choice but only for the rich

One of the key outstanding questions surrounding Barack Obama has been answered. No, we don't know what breed their new dog will be but we do know which school Malia and Sasha will attend. Shock of all shocks the Obama girls will be attending a private school. It must be nice to be able to choose which school your children go to. It is too bad Barack won't extend the same choice to all families.

""A number of great schools were considered," said Katie McCormick Lelyveld, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Obama. "In the end, the Obamas selected the school that was the best fit for what their daughters need right now."

Note the word "selected," as in made a choice. The Obamas are fortunate to have the means to send their daughters to private school, and no one begrudges them that choice given that Washington's public schools are among the worst in America.

Most D.C. parents would also love to be able to choose a better school for their child, but they lack the financial means to do so. The Washington Opportunity Scholarship Program each year offers up to $7,500 to some 1,900 kids to attend private schools, but Democrats in Congress want to kill it. Average family income for kids in the voucher program is about $22,000.

Mr. Obama says he opposes such vouchers, because "although it might benefit some kids at the top, what you're going to do is leave a lot of kids at the bottom." The example of his own children refutes that: The current system offers plenty of choice to kids "at the top" while abandoning those at the bottom." (Click here for the article.)

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Airlines as free service providers

The Supreme Court of Canada has decided that airlines should now be in the business of providing free care giving services to passengers.

"The Supreme Court of Canada has put its stamp of approval on a regulatory order forcing major airlines to provide an extra seat for free to disabled or obese passengers who need the room." (Click here for article.)

If you have specific circumstances that require special care who should pay for this? Why should the airline be responsible to pay for your special needs? If you can't afford the extra airfare then take the train.

What's next, forcing restaurants to provide unlimited meals to customers because they are obese?

The will of the minority controls the majority

California continues to show that democratic elections are meaningless as the Supreme court of California has agreed to hear challenges to the same sex marriage ban. (Click here for article.)

Twice now the majority of Californians have voted to keep the definition of marriage as one man and one woman. The first time was in 2000 when 61% of Californians voted in favor of proposition 22. The second time was more recently when over 52% of Californians voted in favor of proposition 8.

Despite Californians expressing their views clearly on this issue the state supreme court voted 4-3 to allow same sex marriage on May 15, 2008. To be clear, 4 supreme court judges decided that 61% of Californians were wrong and should be over ruled. What a disgrace to democracy that the voice of the people is overruled by a small handful of ideological individuals.

Not Evil Just Wrong

A potentially interesting movie is in the works. "Not Evil Just Wrong" is a film being put together by Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer that aims to take on the myth of global warming and will highlight the harm that is being done by the hysteria of global warming.

"A new Irish film claims that climate change guru Al Gore is an alarmist and that those who think they are saving the planet are only hurting the poor. If the advance publicity is anything to go by, Not Evil Just Wrong will do for Al Gore what Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 did for George W Bush." (Click here for article.)

I wonder if this movie will receive an Academy Award as An inconvenient truth did. I won't hold my breath on that.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

How to save the Auto industry? Let them go bankrupt.

Mitt Romney has had some free time the last few months and it appears he has spent that time thinking up a solution to the auto industry situation. I agree completely with Mitt, the best way to fix Detroit is to let it go bankrupt.

"Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course — the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check."

"The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk." (Click here for the article.)

I have heard many say that the government bailed out the banks so they should bail out the auto makers. My response is that two wrongs don't make a right. The bank bailout was a mistake and the auto bailout will be an even bigger mistake. Unfortunately the government has started down a slippery slope that may be too difficult to get off before nationalizing the entire economy.

The honeymoon is over

It appears that the honeymoon between Barack Obama and the rest of the world may be coming to an end. Al-Qaida's #2 (who prides himself on his impersonation of Dr. Evil's #2) had some rather unkind things to say to Barack and to America.

"In al-Qaida's first response to Obama's victory, al-Zawahri also called the president-elect—along with secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice—"house negroes. Speaking in Arabic, al-Zawahri uses the term "abeed al-beit," which literally translates as "house slaves." But al-Qaida supplied English subtitles of his speech that included the translation as "house negroes.""

"America has put on a new face, but its heart full of hate, mind drowning in greed, and spirit which spreads evil, murder, repression and despotism continue to be the same as always," the deputy of al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden said." (Click here for the article.)

I can't wait for Barack to stick it to this guy by sitting down and chatting with him over coffee, without preconditions of course. I am sure that once Barack has a chance to talk to #2 he will understand that we just want to be friends and all get along. I will feel much safer then.

Friday, November 14, 2008

The Left thinks the Right is evil, while the Right thinks the Left is wrong.

When will the Left practice what they preach and stop with their bigoted, intolerant behaviour towards those they differ with? The reason the Left is so intolerant is that their positions are based on emotion and feelings and they therefore feel justified in hating those that disagree with them. For instance, the gay marriage issue. If you differ with their views it is OK to slander, threaten and attack you. You rarely, if ever, see the Right react so emotionally when confronted with those of differing views. When was the last time the Right took to protesting in front of cafes, hollywood studios or gay bars because of the support for gay marriage? The Left doesn't get that it is OK to differ in opinions and it doesn't make you bad. The Left thinks the Right is evil, while the Right thinks the Left is wrong. You don't protest something that is wrong but you do protest something that is evil.

"Catherine Vogt, 14, is an Illinois 8th grader, the daughter of a liberal mom and a conservative dad. She wanted to conduct an experiment in political tolerance and diversity of opinion at her school in the liberal suburb of Oak Park."
"So just before the election, Catherine consulted with her history teacher, then bravely wore a unique T-shirt to school and recorded the comments of teachers and students in her journal. The T-shirt bore the simple yet quite subversive words drawn with a red marker:"McCain Girl.""
"One person told me to go die. It was a lot of dying. A lot of comments about how I should be killed," Catherine said, of the tolerance in Oak Park. But students weren't the only ones surprised that she wore a shirt supporting McCain. "In one class, I had one teacher say she will not judge me for my choice, but that she was surprised that I supported McCain," Catherine said." (Click here for the article.)

Thursday, November 13, 2008

President Bush on the Financial Markets

President Bush gave a great speech on Thursday Nov. 13, 2008 in New York. President Bush defends free markets and suggests that free markets are the solution to our problems and not the cause of the problems. I wish that he had given more speeches like this over the past 8 years. When he speaks he is usually bang on the mark and highly intelligent on economic and foreign affairs issues. Go here to read the entire speech, I highly recommend you do; it is well worth the time.

"History has shown that the greater threat to economic prosperity is not too little government involvement in the market, it is too much government involvement in the market. (Applause.) We saw this in the case of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Because these firms were chartered by the United States Congress, many believed they were backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. Investors put huge amounts of money into Fannie and Freddie, which they used to build up irresponsibly large portfolios of mortgage-backed securities. And when the housing market declined, these securities, of course, plummeted in value. It took a taxpayer-funded rescue to keep Fannie and Freddie from collapsing in a way that would have devastated the global financial system. And there is a clear lesson: Our aim should not be more government -- it should be smarter government.

All this leads to the most important principle that should guide our work: While reforms in the financial sector are essential, the long-term solution to today's problems is sustained economic growth. And the surest path to that growth is free markets and free people."

"Like any other system designed by man, capitalism is not perfect. It can be subject to excesses and abuse. But it is by far the most efficient and just way of structuring an economy. At its most basic level, capitalism offers people the freedom to choose where they work and what they do, the opportunity to buy or sell products they want, and the dignity that comes with profiting from their talent and hard work. The free market system provides the incentives that lead to prosperity -- the incentive to work, to innovate, to save, to invest wisely, and to create jobs for others. And as millions of people pursue these incentives together, whole societies benefit.

Free market capitalism is far more than economic theory. It is the engine of social mobility -- the highway to the American Dream. It's what makes it possible for a husband and wife to start their own business, or a new immigrant to open a restaurant, or a single mom to go back to college and to build a better career. It is what allowed entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley to change the way the world sells products and searches for information. It's what transformed America from a rugged frontier to the greatest economic power in history -- a nation that gave the world the steamboat and the airplane, the computer and the CAT scan, the Internet and the iPod.

Ultimately, the best evidence for free market capitalism is its performance compared to other economic systems. Free markets allowed Japan, an island with few natural resources, to recover from war and grow into the world's second-largest economy. Free markets allowed South Korea to make itself into one of the most technologically advanced societies in the world. Free markets turned small areas like Singapore and Hong Kong and Taiwan into global economic players. Today, the success of the world's largest economies comes from their embrace of free markets.

Meanwhile, nations that have pursued other models have experienced devastating results. Soviet communism starved millions, bankrupted an empire, and collapsed as decisively as the Berlin Wall. Cuba, once known for its vast fields of cane, is now forced to ration sugar. And while Iran sits atop giant oil reserves, its people cannot put enough gasoline in its -- in their cars.

The record is unmistakable: If you seek economic growth, if you seek opportunity, if you seek social justice and human dignity, the free market system is the way to go. (Applause.) And it would be a terrible mistake to allow a few months of crisis to undermine 60 years of success."

Intellectual does not equal intelligent

"How have intellectuals managed to be so wrong, so often? By thinking that because they are knowledgeable-- or even expert-- within some narrow band out of the vast spectrum of human concerns, that makes them wise guides to the masses and to the rulers of the nation.

But the ignorance of Ph.D.s is still ignorance and high-IQ groupthink is still groupthink, which is the antithesis of real thinking." - Thomas Sowell (Click here for the article.)

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

The Left are the bigoted, prejudiced, discriminating haters. Not the right. - Still.

The bigoted left continue to show their disgusting true colors of hate and prejudice.

"A radical gay rights group is claiming responsibility for a protest Sunday at Mount Hope Church in Delta Township. Protesters who entered the Creyts Road church along with worshippers surprised the congregation when they stood up during the service, threw fliers at churchgoers and shouted slogans such as "It's OK to be gay," and "Jesus was a homo," according to David Williams, communications director at the church." (Click here for article.)

Isn't the Left calling for "unity"? The U.S. is more divided than ever and it is mainly because of disgusting groups like this.

Villains and Heroes

"The reason so many people misunderstand so many issues is not that these issues are so complex, but that people do not want a factual or analytical explanation that leaves them emotionally unsatisfied. They want villains to hate and heroes to cheer-- and they don't want explanations that do not give them that." - Thomas Sowell,

This quote applies to so much that is happening right now. The factual explanation for the current economic crises is emotionally unsatisfying. People want a villain to hate (greedy bankers, free market, President Bush) and a hero to cheer (Barack Obama, government bailouts, regulation).

"Show me the money"

Thomas Friedman wrote an article directed to all of the Obama lovers around the globe. You claim to love Obama right now but how conditional is that love?

"President Bush, because he was so easily demonized, made being a free-rider on American power easy for everyone — and Americans paid the price. Obama will not make it so easy. So to everyone overseas I say: thanks for your applause for our new president. I’m glad you all feel that America “is back.” If you want Obama to succeed, though, don’t just show us the love, show us the money. Show us the troops. Show us the diplomatic effort. Show us the economic partnership. Show us something more than a fresh smile. Because freedom is not free and your excuse for doing less than you could is leaving town in January."

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Update - Bullying in the schools

In follow-up to my previous post "Bullying in the schools" the video of the exchange can be found at the following link.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Two wrongs don't make a right

Should we bail out big automotive? No way. The government screwed up once by bailing out big banks but they don't need to make matters worse by sending good money after bad in the automotive industry. It is pretty clear why "the big 3" can't compete, see Carpe Diem post here. The government should NOT support the inefficient bad business practices of big automotive.

"Punitive Taxation Of Profitable Oil Industry Won't Break Dependence On Foreign Crude"

In a previous post of mine titled "Barack "the tax man" Obama" I made the case against imposing a windfall profits tax on oil companies as this will increase the U.S. demand on foreign oil. The Investors Business Daily has an editorial making the case against the windfall profits tax on an economic basis. (Click here for the article.)

The real cause of the credit crises

Fingers are being pointed in every direction to blame all sides for the current economic crises. The Washington Times has a good article that outlines the major contributing factors to the crises. I am sure many readers will be disappointed at the lack of focus on Bush. In fact, it is over regulation, not deregulation, that was the key contributing factor to the crises.

"Once again, it is assumed that government bureaucrats can plan the direction of the economy better than millions of consumers and investors can. Bailout proponents also rest on a misread of recent history in viewing the current mess as the result of "unfettered" markets. In truth, numerous government interventions from housing subsidies to directed lending have been big factors in this crisis."

"In the early '90s, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston wrote a manual for mortgage lenders stating that "discrimination may be observed when a lender's underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants." As Stan Liebowitz, a professor of economics at the University of Texas at Dallas Business School, noted recently in the New York Post, "some of these 'outdated' criteria included the size of the mortgage payment relative to income, credit history, savings history and income verification." In other words, the Boston Fed and other agencies were discouraging the very criteria that would have protected lower-income families from overextending their indebtedness and could have prevented the subprime meltdown."

"Among the crucial factors that helped make this crisis a global financial "contagion" were new accounting rules going into effect in the U.S. and Europe just as foreclosures were spiking and real estate was losing value. So-called mark-to-market accounting forces financial institutions to take losses in their regulatory capital - which determines how much they can lend - if another bank sells similar loans at a fire-sale price, even if the loans at the bank in question are still performing and are being held to maturity."

You think you are poor? You don't know what poor is.

Robert Rector at the Heritage Foundation has an interesting article that puts into perspective how most in North America have no idea what it means to be poor.

Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrig­erator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had suf­ficient funds in the past year to meet his family's essential needs. While this individual's life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians."

What does Obama have to hide?

Thanks to Jen for pointing out for me that Obama has quickly changed his website. I previously linked to his "agenda" in a few of my posts but the "agenda" has been removed. In place of the previously detailed outline the "agenda" page now reads:

"The Obama Administration has a comprehensive and detailed agenda to carry out its policies. The principal priorities of the Obama Administration include: a plan to revive the economy, to fix our health care, education, and social security systems, to define a clear path to energy independence, to end the war in Iraq responsibly and finish our mission in Afghanistan, and to work with our allies to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, among many other domestic and foreign policy objectives." (click here for link, at least until they move it again)

I guess Obama is hedging his bets and does not want to offer transparency and honesty.

Saturday, November 08, 2008

"Obama fools us"

Michael Coren has a good article in the Sun regarding the Obama victory.

"A victory for those who believe the state is better qualified to raise children than the family, for those who prefer teachers' unions to teaching and for those who are naively convinced that if the West is sufficiently weak towards its enemies, war and terror will dissolve as quickly as the tears on the face of a leftist celebrity."

Bullying in the schools

Fifth grade teacher Diatha Harris decided it was appropriate to bully some of her young students because they supported John McCain.

"And by the way the person that you’re picking for president said that our troops could stay in Iraq for another hundred years if they need to. So that means that your daddy could stay in the military for another hundred years." (Click here for story.)

I wonder if she felt tough and superior as she belittled her young students. Completely shameful.

The Left are the bigoted, prejudiced, discriminating haters. Not the right.

The Left are so quick to throw out names such as "bigot", "xenophobe", "homophobe", and "close minded" to those on the Right they disagree with. But if you judge people by their actions I would contend that the Left are the true bigots, xenophobes, and closeminded haters. Anyone that was in favor of proposition 8 was labeled as such. As reported by the L.A. times the Left showed their complete lack of class. (Click here for article.)

Do the Left not understand that the majority of Californians want to keep the definition of marriage as heterosexual as it has been since the beginning of time? The protesters should realize that they are in the minority on this issue and get over themselves.

Government in Everything

As the U.S. government has decided to stick its nose in the financial sector it will be difficult to stop there. What's next? GM, Ford, and Chrysler.

“Additional support from the U.S. government to aid the auto industry during this industry downturn is essential” GM said (Click here for the article.)

I will not be surprised (especially since Obama has said he is in favor of giving failing businesses money) to see the U.S. government doling money out to the American auto manufacturers. Where does this cycle end? What about all of the other sectors that are hard hit? Soon the U.S. government will be involved in all sectors of the economy. Now there's a scary thought.

Barack "I love seniors" Obama

"Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year." (click here) Are seniors really the group that needs tax relief the most? Typically, seniors have no mortgage, no dependents to pay for, and have had a life time to accumulate wealth. If we are going to eliminate income tax for any group I would expect it to be for single income earners with dependents or young families that are just starting out and trying to cope with financial turmoil.

Sounds like Obama is trying to pander to the ever increasing "senior" population.

Barack "the job killer" Obama

In an effort to reduce jobs for Americans Obama proposes to have the IRS complete your tax filing for you and have you simply verify and sign the forms. I guess if you are a blue collar assembly worker your job is important to get back from China but if you are a white collar tax accountant your job should be outsourced to the IRS.

Barack "the tax man" Obama

According to Obama's website he will "Enact a windfall profits tax on excessive oil company profits".

Economics 101 says if you tax something you get less of it. By implementing a windfall tax oil producers will have less incentive to produce oil in the United States. Which will lower the domestic supply of oil leading to an INCREASED dependence on foreign oil. The opposite of what needs to happen. If he is serious about reducing the U.S. dependence on foreign oil he would provide tax cuts to big oil but that isn't politically correct is it?

Friday, November 07, 2008

Barack "the low life thug" Obama

Obama is a low life thug. As you would expect from a low life thug he picks on people he feels are not able to fight back. In a show of complete lack of class Obama picks on Nancy Reagan saying "I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any seances." Nancy Reagan has never engaged in seances you idiot! Show some class and respect.

The ironic thing is Hillary Clinton was the one who has channeled the dead for advice. "In his book "The Choice," Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward described how Clinton consulted with a spiritual adviser who led her through imaginary conversations with her personal hero, Eleanor Roosevelt. Newsweek magazine, which was promoting the book, characterized the visits as "seances," a term that White House officials quickly tried to squelch." (Click here for article.)

Barack "the protectionist" Obama

Barack Obama has a fancy new website where he has outlined the agenda for his presidency. If you care to see his plan you can check it our here.

One of the major themes that comes through in his agenda is protectionism. Here are a few of his ideas:
  • Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement
  • End Tax Breaks for Companies that Send Jobs Overseas
  • Reward Companies that Support American Workers

Other common themes are: increased government spending, higher taxes, and anti-business measures. Just what the economy needs at this time. Obama is a recipe for prolonged pain.

Discrimination vs. Distinction

"The argument that current marriage laws "discriminate" against homosexuals confuses discrimination against people with making distinctions among different kinds of behavior.

All laws distinguish among different kinds of behavior. What other purpose does law have?

While people may be treated the same, all their behaviors are not. Laws that forbid bicycles from being ridden on freeways obviously have a different effect on people who have bicycles but no cars." - Thomas Sowell

President Ronald Reagan

Another of the greatest presidents of all time is Ronald Reagan. He was bold, decisive, and not afraid to stand for truth and right against evil.

Global warming is now global cooling

I have noticed the rhetoric regarding climate change has almost died off, thank goodness. It is unfortunate that it has taken such an extreme crises, such as the economy, for people to move past the silliness of climate change.

"It's been a bad year for global warming alarmists. Record cold periods and snowfalls are occurring around the globe. The hell that the radicals have promised is freezing over." Click here for more.

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Prop 8 does not mean hate

"You don’t have the right to get married . . . not even under California law. You cannot, for example, marry a plant, a comic book character, or your mother. We (rightly) discriminate regarding the privilege of marriage."

See here for a good explanation of why proposition 8 does not discriminate.

The existing laws regarding marriage (one man, one woman) do not discriminate against gays. As the law stands gays are free to marry, they must marry someone of the opposite sex. But they are nevertheless free to marry.

Show President Obama the respect and loyalty he deserves

"For now, we have a new president-elect. In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president." - Ann Coulter

"The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace"

President Bush has been given no respect despite being one of the greatest presidents of all time. Jeffery Shapiro has a good article in the WSJ regarding the treatment of Bush. Click here for link.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Laffer wins again

Shockingly I found a great article in the Globe and Mail (I suppose it is not too shocking since it was an opinion piece and not journalistic news that is totally biased).

Neil Reynolds uses Iceland as the model that Canada needs to follow if it wishes to achieve economic (and therefore social) prosperity. Iceland cut corporate, investment, and income taxes over the past decade and as a result has seen tax revenues sky rocket. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy seeing supply-side economics in action! Arthur Laffer had it right a long time ago with his ascertion that lower taxes increase tax revenues. Unfortunately this profound idea is counter-intuitive and most Canadians are not capable of understanding and trusting this concept.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Toyota Prius does more harm than good

It appears that the Toyota Prius isn't all that it is cracked up to be.

"Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius."
When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis."

For the full article click here.

As a concerned citizen for the environment (notice extreme sarcasm) I demand that we boycott Toyota, stone and key all Prius on the road, and demand that more people drive Hummers!

Friday, June 08, 2007

Stephen Harper puts Bono in his place.

For Bono to expect world leaders to make him a priority is asinine. I am proud to be a Canadian today as Stephen Harper puts Bono in his place.

"I've got to say that meeting celebrities isn't my kind of shtick, that was the shtick of the previous guy," said Harper in a dig at his Liberal predecessor Paul Martin, who met Bono regularly. (source: reuters)

Bono is a rockstar, not a politician or a world leader. It is amazing to me that world leaders give Bono any of their time, but I guess they are star struck just like most of society today. I am happy to see that our Prime Minister is in Germany to work, not get autographs.

Keep up the good work Mr. Harper.

Saturday, June 02, 2007

Haven't We Seen This Before?

Did someone say bubble? I am not an alarmist nor am I bearish on the markets and the economy. However, I am skeptical about housing prices. The headlines I read in the paper and comments I hear from everyone around me are almost word for word the same comments I heard in the run up to the tech bubble bursting. As far as I can see there is no fundamental economic basis for the current housing prices. Here is a fancy chart I found over at

High Gas Prices My Butt.

There has been a lot of media attention on the "record gas prices" of late. The price of gas must be kept in perspective with all other prices. Everyone around me drones on about how much their house has increased in value and how brilliant of an investor they are. Prices of most goods are increasing rapidly so what do you expect to happen to gas prices? Decrease when everything else is increasing?

Check out the Cato Institute article here for a great breakdown of comparative prices.

And stop with the "record gas price" talk, inflation adjusted prices are not at a record. You can take solace in knowing we have a ways to go before we get there. (see here for a chart on historical gas prices)

Another thing that gets on my nerves is hearing the shouts of rage against the big evil oil companies making record profits at the expense of the little guy. The reality is that the government is making more money than the big bad oil companies. If you are upset about high oil prices then get upset at the government and demand that they lower the gas taxes. While you are at it demand that they lower income taxes and capital gains taxes.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Ahhh, you shouldn't have!!!

What gift do you give someone that has everything? Marines. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that he will return the 15 hostages he took as a "gift" to Britain. A gift? Can it be a gift if you stole it in the first place? For my bosses next birthday I am going to steal his coffee mug then wrap in a bow and give it to him. Happy Birthday!! I hope you enjoy the "gift".

What a joke Ahmadinejad is does anyone in the world take this guy seriously?

Sunday, April 01, 2007

An Exercise in Futility

How can people be so misguided?

Robert Taylor, of Barrie, Ont. wants to stick it to the big bad oil companies. His suggestion is that no body buys gas on Saturday. Wow, that is clever. This will send a profound message to the gas companies, staff down on Saturday but make sure and staff up on Friday as everyone fills up on Friday to ensure they have enough gas to make it through the boycott day. This idea is so ridiculous. The gas companies don't care when you buy gas as long as you buy it.

It appears that Taylor is not alone. has a similar idea but slightly different approach. Their idea is for nobody to buy gas from certain gas stations for 30 consecutive days. But only a couple gas stations are selected each month. The hope is that the targeted gas stations will be so squeezed that they will realize the power of the consumer.

What these people don't realize is that gas prices are set based on supply and demand. The ONLY way to drive gas prices lower is to reduce the demand, not simply shift it. Rather than not buying gas on certain days or from certain companies simply reduce your consumption and don't drive. The trouble with this solution is it requires personal sacrifice, sacrifice that people will not make. What Taylor and his ilk do not realize is that consumers are fine paying high prices for gas because it means that they can maintain their lifestyle. Until people are willing to sacrifice their lifestyle gas prices will continue to rise.

My suggestion, buy shares in the oil companies, drive an SUV then cheer every time gas prices go up!!!

The Second Coming of Christ???

No surprise, this is how the left views Barrack Obama.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Once a tax raiser, always a tax raiser

Here is a shocker, the Democrats in the US are proposing the largest tax increase in the US history. What do you expect from the Left. Nearly $400 billion in new spending over the next 5 years. Sounds to me like the Dems are looking to buy the next election. Unfortunately for them they aren't in Canada where that actually works!

Friday, March 23, 2007

My dream team

Most people have an idea of the hockey players or basketball players that they would want all on their "dream" team, a team that would be unstoppable. Well, here is my dream team.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

"One of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism"

Further to my previous posts on the religion of global warming, I found this excellent speech from Michael Crichton (now of course I find it excellent because he is saying exactly what I have been saying but it is well worth reading). Please follow the link to read the entire speech, what follows are excerpts only.

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.

There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe."

"And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them.

Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not. Because we know a lot more about the world than we did forty or fifty years ago. And what we know now is not so supportive of certain core environmental myths, yet the myths do not die."

"Because in the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don't know any better. That's not a good future for the human race. That's our past. So it's time to abandon the religion of environmentalism, and return to the science of environmentalism, and base our public policy decisions firmly on that."

"Lawmakers Propose Ultrasounds Before Abortions"

Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester and York Counties), said, "I'm just trying to save lives and protect people from regret and inform women with the most accurate non-judgemental information that can be provided."

I think this is a great idea. Too many girls have an abortion because they are naive to the realities of the consequences of that decision. Abortion is final and therefore should require full and complete disclosure of all of the facts before it is allowed.

Of course, the left will not like this idea. They want to keep the emotions that go along with being a mother out of the discussion because they know that once the mother sees the child they will be more likely to keep it.

Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life what is wrong with making decisions based on all prudent facts. What is wrong with providing mothers with all of the facts and details of their decision and the ramifications? If abortion is sound policy then pro-choicers should have nothing to worry about. They should support this proposal to ensure that when abortions do occur they are just and warranted.

What is wrong with fact based decisions?

"There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period."

One thing I hear over and over again that irks me to no end is the word "consensus" relating to global warming science. YOU CAN NOT HAVE CONSENSUS IN SCIENCE!!! Science is not open to votes and science is not based on majority rules. Science is based on facts. When I hear the word "consensus" (like I did over and over again during Al Gore's speech to the U.S. House Committee today) it tells me that the accompanying argument is weak and can not stand on its own.

Michael Crichton had this to say:
"Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period."

"US CD sales plummet"

CD sales are down 20 percent over the first 3 months this year. This comes as no surprise to me, I stopped buying CDs years ago.

There are three main reasons why CD sales are down:
1) No good music. There are no new artists that have come out in years. And all of the existing good artists seem to just release "greatest hits" CDs with the same songs only in a different order.
2) Music industry has taught the youth improper morals. Lyrics in todays music teach that wrong is right and right is wrong. When your product teaches dishonesty don't be shocked when the listeners are dishonest.
3) Music industry did it to themselves by attacking and not embracing the new technology. How many years and millions of dollars have been spent trying to fight downloading? The music industry should have embraced it right from the beginning as a way to increase sales. Instead they chose to fight it and in the process alienate their entire customer base. I know of no one that feels any sort of loyalty to record labels, they have painted themselves as the bad guys.

The reality is CD sales are going to continue to drop. Downloading is the preferred choice today. It is cheaper, more convenient and I only buy the songs I want and don't pay for the filler songs.

As an aside, for anyone that may be confused it is perfectly LEGAL to download music in Canada. You are charged a tax for every CD, video, blank CD, blank DVD that you buy. They expect you to steal the music so they charge a tax. The judges in Canada ruled that since you are paying this tax you have a right to download. So download away!

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

"I just wish occasionally they would show the same passion for Canadian soldiers"

“I can understand the passion that the Leader of the Opposition and members of his party feel for Taliban prisoners. I just wish occasionally they would show the same passion for Canadian soldiers,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the House of Commons.

Based on the above statement the Opposition is demanding an apology. For what? Do they really expect Canadians to believe that they care about Canadian soldiers? Under the Liberals spending to support our troops was drastically reduced, and since losing power the Liberals have done nothing but demand that the troops be removed from Afghanistan, the place that they put them in.

Stephen Harper is just telling it like it is. Dion, if you don't like these statements then spend more time in support of the troops than in support of Taliban extremists.

"Liberal Comuzzi expelled from caucus"

In typical Liberal style Dion has kicked Joe Comuzzi out of the Liberal caucus for saying that he would support the Conservatives budget. Joe, how dare you stand up for what you believe, you are a Liberal you should know better than to do that.

“If they can find that in the budget — which I suspect very much (they can) — it would be silly of me to vote against that. I'd be voting against my constituents.”

I commend Joe for actually doing what I believe politicians are elected to do, which is to act for the constituents.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Must see T.V. - "The great global warming swindle"

I may be a little behind most of you but I finally saw "The great global warming swindle" last night. I recommend that everyone watch it, if for nothing else to get a different point of view than is spewed daily from the media. The video can be viewed here.

A few things that stood out to me were:
  • it was based on scientific data, provided by actual scientists
  • it covered a wide array of topics including: debunking the myth that CO2 causes GW, why the ice caps melt, the motivation for scientists to develop wild views on GW, and the flaws of models
  • it dealt with the myth that 'even if the science is wrong making changes to help the environment will not hurt us'
  • it contained interviews from scientists that do not have a political or self promoting agenda
If you have seen "An inconvenient truth" then you must see "the great global warming swindle" to gain balance and perspective.

Friday, March 16, 2007

Dion doesn't have a leg to stand on

Does anyone at all give Stephane Dion even an ounce of credibility when it comes to the environment? He preaches Kyoto as the answer to all our environmental problems yet when he was in the position to make changes, he chose to do NOTHING. Now he expects Canadians to believe that he is serious about the environment, give me a break. The only thing he has ever done for Kyoto is pick up his crap and scratch his belly.

Dion unveiled his latest plan for the climate: the answer it appears is to tax businesses. Sounds like a Liberal plan to me.

What he and many Canadians seem to not understand is that any additional costs as a result of regulations will simply be passed on to consumers. So if you support his plan to tax corporations then you may never again complain about the price of gas. Liberals claim that their plan will only cost $1.17 extra per barrel of oil produced from the oil sands (keep in mind that is a Liberal number so take it with a grain of salt). The reality is that $1.17 will be passed on to the consumer, as it should. Also, the increased cost will make projects in the oil sands and other areas of Canada less profitable which will drive new investments out of Canada. Resulting in fewer jobs and lower economic stability. When you fill up your car and see $1.50 or $2.00/litre don't blame the oil companies, blame Dion because he is the source of the increased costs.

Increasing taxes is NEVER the solution to ANY problems. In fact, increasing taxes is often the problem in the first place.

There is at least one sensible Democrat alive (most likely the only one)

Senator Joe Lieberman is right on with his comments earlier this week:

"There is something profoundly wrong when opposition to the war in Iraq seems to inspire greater passion than opposition to Islamist extremism. There is something profoundly wrong when there is so much distrust of our intelligence community that some Americans doubt the plain and ominous facts about the threat to us posed by Iran. And there is something profoundly wrong when, in the face of attacks by radical Islam, we think we can find safety and stability by pulling back, by talking to and accommodating our enemies, and abandoning our friends and allies. Some of this wrong-headed thinking about the world is happening because we're in a political climate where, for many people, when George Bush says "yes," their reflex reaction is to say "no." That is unacceptable."

What a sad state our society is in when it is considered evil to stand for truth and right, when defending evil is preferred over defeating evil. What a pathetic lot our society is becoming.

Michael Moore Exposed (thankfully he remains fully clothed at all times)

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Michael Moore is uncomfortable with his own tactics being used on him. Debbie Melnyk and Rick Caine, Canadian filmmakers, decided to do a documentary on Michael Moore. As you would expect Michael wasn't very eager to comply.

"The film shows Melnyk repeatedly approaching Moore for an interview and being rejected; members of Moore's team also kick the couple out of the audience at one of his speeches, saying they weren't allowed to be shooting there."

What is wrong Michael does it make you uncomfortable to have people distort the truth about you? I guess you would know what it's like since you are the epitome of distorting the truth.

Melnyk sums it up best with:
"We're a bit disappointed and disillusioned with Michael"

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Welcome to my new home

I recently changed the name of my blog to better suit the content. Thanks to those of you who read this blog regularly and take the time to post comments. I hope you come back often!

The religion of global warming

I came across this excellent op/ed piece in the Washington Times. As I have stated in previous posts global warming is nothing more than the Left's new religion. Humans have an innate desire for religion; the Left doesn't have religion so they make it up.

"And while I have my own religious thoughts, I will not disdain any man's search for the transcendent. But a religion should be understood by both its adherents and others for what it is — a religion. The trouble with global-warming believers is that probably most of them delude themselves into thinking they are practicing science — not religion. And yet, the signs of religiousness are readily to be seen. Al Gore and his Hollywood coterie have almost comically manifested one aspect of their new religion in the last few weeks — the sense of sin and the search for remission of such sin. In the animistic church any using or changing of the physical world (such as burning carbon) is a sin against the sacred, holistic, living world (the Gaia hypothesis). But as everyone uses energy (just as every Christian sins), the neo-animist church, too, must provide for a remission of sin (and also, a handy source of profit for the carbon-offset company owners — such as Al Gore who, according to news reports, pays his indulgences to Generation Investment Management, of which he is the chairman." - well said!

There is no scientific backing for global warming theories, only religious zealots trying to convert the world by way of death threats, exclusion, and mockery.

Says Zell: Military shortages, Social Security crisis, and illegal immigration all linked to abortion

Zell raises some interesting questions. I don't know, and am not willing to say for certain, that without abortion there would be no military shortages and no illegal immigration problems. But to believe that we can kill off a certain portion of society and not expect any negative repercussions is completely naive and asinine.

One point that I agree 100% with Zell is social security. Today, we have a massive demographic that is just entering retirement and old age: the baby boomers. Who is going to support this generation? They managed to kill off 45 million (in the U.S. only) people through abortion. Those 45 million people would be in a position to contribute to social programs and provide support for the aging population. But in true baby boomer fashion they don't care about anyone but themselves (I am generalizing here but the baby boomer generation as a whole does have selfish tendencies). That is the main driver behind abortion: selfishness. So it comes as no surprise to me that we find our society in this mess.

“How could this great land of plenty produce too few people in the last 30 years? Here is the brutal truth that no one dares to mention: We’re too few because too many of our babies have been killed,” Miller said. "Over 45 million since Roe v. Wade in 1973. If those 45 million children had lived, today they would be defending our country, they would be filling our jobs, they would be paying into Social Security,” the former Georgia governor said. “Still, we watch as 3,700 babies are killed every single day in America. It is unbelievable that a nation under God would allow this.”

It is unfortunate that society chooses to shove its head in the sand rather than faces reality. The fact is there are negative repercussions to abortion. I fear that the full negative impact is yet to be felt.

Thank you Zell Miller for having the courage to speak up on an inconvenient truth that society chooses to ignore.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Meat is killing the earth!

I am so glad that we have organizations like PETA to clear the air (no pun intended) on global warming. It appears, contrary to popular myths, that the oil industry and the auto industry are not the leading culprit in global warming; the main culprit is the big bad MEAT INDUSTRY!

"In a groundbreaking 2006 report, the United Nations (U.N.) said that raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined."

I expect that Al Gore and his ilk are now converted vegans. Come on Al don't let me down now, I would be devastated to find out you were a hypocrite. No meat for you, Al!

" The most powerful step that we can take as individuals to avert global warming is to stop eating meat, eggs, and dairy products."

Sounds simple enough, why didn't I think of that?

Thursday, March 08, 2007

'cause Sports Illustrated said so

You know that the global warming craze is about to peak when even Sports Illustrated is reporting on it.

"Global warming is not coming; it is here." says Alexander Wolff in his article. Really Alex, are you sure about that? May I suggest you stick to reporting on important matters, like whether Barry Bonds is on steroids.

Monday, March 05, 2007

China about to pass U.S. as world's top generator of greenhouse gases

Both China and the U.S. are exempt from Kyoto but people still believe that Kyoto is the magic bullet to stopping global warming. Until China is put in check there is NO point in countries the size of Canada making any changes to GHG emissions.

China's emissions dwarf anything that Canada can do, "The magnitude of what's happening in China threatens to wipe out what's happening internationally"

data from the International Energy Agency, the Paris-based alliance of oil importing nations, also revealed that China's greenhouse gas emissions have recently been growing by a total amount much greater than that of all industrialized nations put together." That's right China's GHG emissions are growing faster than ALL INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS COMBINED!!! But we here in Canada are still naive enough to believe that we can make a difference. Dream on.

"The new data show that many local officials are more concerned about economic development, about increasing gross domestic product, and see energy efficiency and environmental protection as a lower priority," said Yang, of the Energy Foundation." I give China credit they have their priorities much better aligned than most in Canada.

Another convert

Claude Allegre, a leading scientist and socialist from France, has converted to the deniers side of the global warming debate. Once a leading proponent of linking human activity to global warming, after seeing all the data available Allegre now does not support his previous views. He said:
"The cause of this climate change is unknown, there is no basis for saying, as most do, that the science is settled."

"In the 1980s and early 1990s, when concern about global warming was in its infancy, little was known about the mechanics of how it could occur, or the consequences that could befall us. Since then, governments throughout the western world and bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have commissioned billions of dollars worth of research by thousands of scientists. With a wealth of data now in, Dr. Allegre has recanted his views. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank." (source: national post)

This is what I have been talking about for some time now. We need to make fact based decisions. Allegre is a prime example of a scientist who was willing to look objectively at the data and make fact based decisions, not decisions based on theory or conjecture. As the evidence piles up I believe that more and more scientists will change their views, as Allegre did, because the data will show that humans are not responsible for the changes.

The line that is the most revealing in the article is "governments throughout the western world and bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have commissioned billions of dollars worth of research by thousands of scientists". Of course the scientists' views support global warming, they are being paid to say so. If they come out and say that humans are not to blame then the governments will cancel funding to the research as there will be nothing more to research. As long as they can blame humans then governments will pour billions more into the research, feeding the scientists and their families for years to come.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Humans are destroying the universe!

The effects that humans have on the environment is much worse than we first thought. Not only are we destroying earth we are also destroying Mars. Who knows which other planets we are killing. When will the madness end?

Seriously though, this article makes a very good observation. If earth is not alone in experiencing warming then perhaps the culprit is solar energy and hot humans. If that is the case there is little to nothing that we can do to stop the warming so let's get real and stop the madness.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

Did someone say flip-flop

The Liberals are consistently inconsistent when it comes to the parties stance on issues.

Liberal MP, Tom Wappel, is coming under attack from Stephan Dion for voting to keep the Liberal imposed anti-terrorism laws intact. Tom had this to say:

"Given that it was Liberal legislation, given that our own Liberal ministers told us that there was nothing that they could suggest to us to fix in the act, I'm flabbergasted that I now find myself the only person supporting the Liberal legislation that the Liberal ministers supported,"

I guess you didn't receive the memo Tom. That legislation was last years stance, you gotta do a better job of keeping up with the party Tom.

Now you must face the wrath of Stephan!

"D.C. Madame to Sell 10,000 Phone Records of High-End Washington Clients"

This is why I only use curb-side paper trail!

"Her attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley, said that prices have yet to be set for the data. “We don’t actually know that yet,” he said, “because we haven’t finished mining the data to identify the individuals. Obviously if Bill Clinton’s on the list that’s a different matter than you know, somebody nobody’s ever heard of before.”

Sounds like this good get very interesting although my guess is nothing comes of it.

A must read

I came across this article on global warming a while back and found it highly enlightening. I recommend that everyone read it to gain clarity on the crap coming from the Left. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the outgoing Chairman of Environment & Public Works Committee, helped put together the published booklet entitled “A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism. Hot & Cold Media Spin Cycle: A Challenge To Journalists who Cover Global Warming.”

It's the aliens stupid!

Why didn't I think of that, it makes perfect sense. Apparently, aliens hold the key to combating global warming. Paul Hellyer, a former Canadian defense minister, is demanding that governments turn over all of their data on aliens so that we can use the alien intelligence to eliminate our emissions. It makes perfect sense. Aliens would have to have superior technology given the great distances that they must travel to get to earth.

Come on all you governments hand over the aliens so we can get to the bottom of this global warming thing, before it kills us all!

In his defense (because he definitely needs one) he is 83 so this could be dimmensia speaking.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Greed is Good!

I remember watching the movie "Wall Street" many years ago. Even though I was a teenager when I first watched it I was deeply moved by Gordon Gekko's speech regarding greed. His words struck me as being true. Since that time I have seen the great effects that greed has on humanity. In 2001, Professor Walter Williams wrote an article that provides great examples of the wonderful power of greed. Personal interest, greed, makes me get out of bed each day and go to work. Whether I am a factory worker, janitor, or teacher, my motivation to work is to make money in order to provide for me and my family. In the process of me achieving my personal interests others benefit. The factory worker produces a product that other people want and benefit from. The motivation of the factory worker is not to build a product to make your life easier but that is a byproduct.

John Stossel wrote an interesting article that has a great example of eating steak in New York. In order for him to be able to eat a steak in New York the labor of thousands of people from all over the United States was necessary. Not a single person in the process is motivated by the good feeling they receive by being able to feed New Yorkers, they are all motivated by greed.

When I am greedy I make more money and am better able to buy goods which provides more jobs, I am better able to give more to charities, and I pay more taxes so the society as a whole is better off.

Greed is good, greed is right, greed works!