So Obama has “clarified” his comments about the ’67 borders in Israel as being a reference to a starting point to be negotiated from. Um, pardon me, but that really doesn’t make his comment any less offensive or ridiculous. In fact, that he was trying to take away Israel’s bargaining position ahead of negotiations was the entire reason his statements were so wrong in the first place. By “framing” the issue that way, though, he insures that the end result would be closer to those borders than the status quo, the more logical starting point for negotiations. So his defense of his previous stupidity is to make a distinction between cutting the rug out from under the Israelis and…cutting the rug out from under them. I’m sorry but what? That’s just…stupid.
Category Archives: Common Sense
Remember my TSA experience? I just thought it was useful to bring it up, given recent increasing asininity from the TSA (“for our own good” you know) which is now aggressively violating people’s fundamental right to not be sexually assaulted. But they can do it, and say it isn’t what it is, because they are the Government and they’re here to help.
I also never commented on our elections here in Florida, or the great results nationwide. Needless to say, there is a lot I would like to say, but won’t right now. About other things, too, not just the elections. See you later folks, and around Christmas time I’ll post “regularly” again.
There has been quite a lot to write about lately but…two things: The end of the summer semester was a big ramp up, so I was busy with that, and then, well, I’ve been on vacation for the past week. Unlike the President I only get the one vacation, and the Gulf (Naples, Fort Myers, and Sanibel, so not very far) was the first choice. Not to be to hard on the President, it’s just that you’d think he’d be working harder. Then again, given what happens when he does work, maybe it’s for the best. Still, if he is gonna take several vacations (his wife too) he could at least choose locations entirely in the US and particularly in the Gulf region. Well, whatever.
What other issues are there to talk about? Since the fall semester starts Monday, I won’t be posting much in the near future, either. Okay, um…Oh, the Federal Prosecutors really messed up that Blago case. I believe that he is definitely a pathological liar and probably guilty of most of the charges, although I confess this is not a carefully considered judgment. Well, they want to give it another go. You could, make the argument that continuing to pursue this case is a waste of money…You could, if your a Communist maybe! 😉
The JetBlue flight attendant (or as they might have said, um, steward..?) is a criminal, not a hero. I call um as I see um, and I’m sure many will disagree with me, but that matters not to me. If I worried about what people thought of my opinions, well, I would probably be too spineless to have any. Hey, I might be President some day if I do though! He liked to vote present you see…Okay, enough of the cheap shots at the Demander in Chief…there I go again…
The Mosque near Ground Zero has become a hot button issue. Many make the mistake of focusing on whether the argument centers on the right of private citizens to construct houses of worship on private property. Given that the Left, doesn’t care about property rights in almost any other context, that they are screaming about those rights in this context ought to give you some pause. Heck, Bobby Glibbs sounded like a son of the Confederacy, in the White House’s initial comments, [paraphrase] “It’s a local issue” (nothing else is, though….). The issue really is why people would want to build that house of worship there. The Imam behind the project (which had been called the Cordoba Initiative-back to that in a minute) has made statements which seriously make one question why anyone would consider him “moderate”. Actually, he just sounds like a typical Democrat politician. Of course, then again, as Bret Stephens pointed out, the media doesn’t seem to judge this issue well. However, I concede that there appears to be no legal recourse for those troubled by this. And I join others in wondering who Nancy Pelosi is talking about when she says that she and others want people opposed to the mosque to have their funding investigated. Of course, as usual, when people disagree with her, they must have been paid to do it (“astroturf” anyone?). Harry Reid and Governor Patterson are the most high profile Democrat opponents, but don’t be too impressed with Harry “My Son Won’t Use His Last Name and Obama has No N**** Dialect, Unless He Wants To” Reid…in the same press conference, we see the real reason…to help give him credibility to bash Republicans for opposing “benefits” for illegals who served on 9-11. Oh, I almost forgot, Cordoba was a city in Spain taken by the Moors, who built a mosque where the Church was, to show their conquest. Nice. I add to Ann Coulter’s famous suggestion “We should invade their countries, fill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity” a gem of my own “and after we’ve bombed Mecca, let’s have a “Grenada Initiative” and build an enormous Gay Bar where Abraham’s space rock was. It’s “outreach”. In case you can’t tell, I don’t care whose cage I rattle today.
The Fourteenth Amendment has come up in discussions lately. Lindsey Graham of all people thinks that we need to reconsider the birthright citizenship clause. As always, when The Southern Belle tries to do the right thing, he still manages to foul it up. No, we shouldn’t try and change the Fourteenth Amendment. We should need to. You see, in point of fact, the Republicans who created the Amendment anticipated the idea that birthright citizenship would be misapplied and given illegal aliens…well, actually, the main concern then was the Natives. Both in the language of the Amendment, and more explicitly in their statements, which convey intent, they made it so that, properly understood The Amendment would not be construed as applying to the Natives, to Aliens (legal too), and representatives of Foreign Governments. In terms of the text the full clause is:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
The key, in the text, is the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. Those who have entered into the country in violation of our immigration laws who are not “documented” cannot be subject to the jurisdiction of the US, they are still, legally, nationals of their country of origin. Senator Jacob Howard of Ohio authored the clause, and had this to say “Indians born within the limits of the United States, and who maintain their tribal relations, are not, in the sense of this amendment, born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”, and Senator Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee added that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was to be understood to mean “not owing allegiance to anybody else…subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States. So the the clause “will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States”. There is quite a lot more that could be said about this, but at the moment I will let those words speak for themselves, only adding that an Originalist interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment clearly does not support the notion of automatic citizenship for the children of illegal aliens. Unfortunately, this is not the practice of the current Federal government. But a lot of current Government policies are just totally wrong, so this is not shocking.
There is a lot else I could mention, but I have spoken about that which truly makes me want to speak up. A lot of other stuff is just not that interesting right now. See you all, um, at some later date…
It has always been my position that the Federal government’s assertion of broad authority in various areas leads to inhibition of the ability of the private sector and state and local governments to solve problems in a manner more effective and efficient than the Feds ever could. The proof of this is sometimes more visible than others, though. I hardly even need, I hope, to say that the obstacles that keep getting thrown at Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal by the bureaucracy and the authority of the federal government in his efforts to save his state from being completely devastated by the oil spill are a prime example of this. The Coast Guard, for mysterious reasons, stopped oil sucking barges for over a day, when they could have sucked up very large amounts of oil. Last time I checked, all that is standing in the way of international help in dealing with this mess, is a Wilsonian protectionist piece of paper, that could be waived easily. The Administration has waited a long time to even claim to think 0f doing so-doubtless because Obama is very beholden to Unions, who don’t it lifted even temporarily. The solution of the Federal Government so far seems to be, get in everyone’s way, while telling them we are going to not do any drilling until we sort this out (all the while taking your sweet time trying to do so), take the opportunity to spew invective against oil companies and capitalism in general, do some more getting in people’s way, then tell them this is why we need to pass Capn’ Trade.
I haven’t even said all the bad things the Federal government has done to make a bad situation, an impossibly bad situation. I didn’t mention that they didn’t let people drill in shallow water were disasters like this would be much less likely and easier to fix. I didn’t mention how they wouldn’t let Jindal construct barriers to protect his State’s coasts.
But in other crazy news that proves that the world is going to hell in a hand-basket: People are obsessed with Soccer all of a sudden. But soccer is stupid. You can officially tie in soccer. Lame. Putin says he has a better fighter jet than us-are we gonna take that laying down?
The good news? El Presidente has never been less popular.
I have to say I’m getting pretty annoyed as I watch national political pundits on the Newz explain why they think that their preferred outcome of a Republican primary race should happen, when they are not residents of the state in question. It’s pretty friggin’ obnoxious. Here’s a thought for the GOP pundits in particular-shut up and support the nominee when the primary is over. And if you really can’t bring yourself to do so, maybe you should re-evaluate your status as a pundit, because it seems like your just pissy that you can’t get your way.
And I say this to be infuriated both at people who support the Pauls and Hayworths, and the supporters of the McCains and what’s-his-names. If you don’t live in, say, Arizona or Kentucky, those primary races are none of your business. If you don’t like the kind of Republicans that the GOP of those states want, perhaps you should focus on getting the kind of Republicans you like in your state. And perhaps you should think about engaging the people of those states in a respectful manner that doesn’t imply that you just know better than they do.
The Democrat controlled House of Reps is getting set to do Capn’ Trade. This is a bad idea.
There are several reasons why. First of all-projections of Catastrophic Global Warming that are the basis for the “danger” of not acting on Climate are failing miserably. There has been no warming of the lower atmosphere for over twelve years now:
Even supposing the model scenarios do by some miracle turn out to be correct, the bill in question would avert only a tiny fraction of future warming-on the order of .1 degrees Celsius. Making a dent would require much more effort-especially on the part of other countries and in particular those who seem keen to refuse such restrictions. What’s more, because of the possibility of “leakage” the authors of the bill seem prepared to risk (trade) war.
Waxman-Markey is just a really bad policy move. For all the lack of benefits, it will have enormous costs. What is the point of diverting such enormous resources from other things to make a tiny impact on a non existant problem? If AGW really is a problem, then the only sensible course should be obvious-get rich now, adapt, and maybe do this crap later. It certainly doesn’t make any sense to due it now, when the economy is flirting with stabilization but still really hurting. We sure as hell shouldn’t take away people’s freedom to use whatever energy source they wish anyway.
UPDATE: It’s even worse than I thought.
I’ve been to Yosemite National Park. It’s beautiful. And now there is discussion that this Federal ecological preserve has seen better days, tree-wise (okay, in appropriate value judgement here-are a lot of old trees really “better”? Not necessarily). There is of course speculation that Klimacht Khange is to blame-why not?-but there is no basis, as the BBC(!) explains, on which to favor such an explanation. May I humbly suggest that government management of nature sucks? I, mean, may I suggest that people read Playing God In Yellowstone or perhaps a distillation of said thesis (say, here?) to understand that Centrally Planned Forests work about as well as any other kind of central planning? I mean, could it possibly be that the “problems” in Yosemite are the fault of the environmentalists in charge?
How about we divy it up privately to people with incentives to preserve the forests?
(Oh, and by the way, I’m back in Florida).