Right Minded Online

Conservative Commentary from Mark A. Rose

Archive for May 2007

This guy is NOT a fiscal conservative

without comments

Any notion that Governor Phil Bredesen is a fiscal conservative is dispelled with a headline in today’s Nashville City Paper, “Bredesen wants to expand budget by $500M.”

It’s infuriating that the state government is awash in surplus money for the fourth consecutive year and Governor Bredesenquist wants to use it all to grow government even more, and wants to raise taxes on top of all that. Meanwhile, the taxpayers are set to get screwed once again unless Republicans in the Senate can assert themselves and force through a compromise budget that cuts the sales tax on groceries.

For additional reading, Bill Hobbs has a slew of recent posts related to Tennessee fiscal politics, which has always been his specialty.

At any rate, if the Democrats continue to have their way with the state budget, they will grow government unrestrained so that the next time the economy hits a rut and tax revenues flatten out, we’ll find ourselves in a “budget crisis” where the Tennessee General Assembly tries to keep the fatted calf afloat. You don’t need me to tell you what that will lead to.

Written by Mark

May 30, 2007 at 8:04 AM

Posted in Tennessee Politics

Funny to watch

without comments

Pro-evolutionists are up in arms over the newly-opened Creation Museum near Cincinnati, which is the brainchild of Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis. I’m amazed that there are people who are taking the time to actually protest the museum, like that’s going to do any good. These are people who pretend to be at war with Ken Ham and Christian “fundamentalists.” In reality, I must argue, their war is not with man, but with God.

Written by Mark

May 30, 2007 at 8:03 AM

Posted in Creation/Evolution

A few random thoughts

without comments

Since self-appointed global warming prophets can make weather predictions a hundred years in advance and have them accepted as fact by their faithful global warming religionists, I have a pontification of my own to make. Global warming is real, and we are so deep into it that there is nothing we can do about it anymore. No amount of emissions reductions or carbon offsets can reverse the effects of global warming. It’s like terminal cancer. That being the case, there is no need to make any economic sacrifice on behalf of the planet, so party on and enjoy life to the fullest during the few years we have left.

I have come to the realization that the broadcasters who announce sporting events on television don’t know any more about sports than I do or any other avid sports fan. They get paid to do what they do simply because they have good voices and are able to keep the decibel meter moving between plays. Likewise, the sports analysts who make predictions don’t know anymore about outcomes than my nine-year-old. After all, words don’t win games. It’s all decided on the field of play, and not in television studios.

The NBA draft lottery is a sham, and must be scrapped immediately.

I recently finished reading Michael Crichton’s novel State of Fear, which proved to be an excellent portrayal of the political machinations behind global warming alarmism. Although the plot can be somewhat dull at times, the scientific facts are rock-solid, and the bibliography section is extensive. Plus, Crichton illustrates the dangers of politicizing science in an addendum on eugenics that is eerily similar to global warming as a political issue.

Written by Mark

May 30, 2007 at 8:02 AM

Posted in Random Thoughts

Nailed

without comments

David Limbaugh, the brilliant brother of the Maha Rushie, dedicates his latest column to the United States Prime Minister Nancy Pelosi (who is, by the way, the most powerful woman in America other than my wife), and her recent trip to Greenland to observe global warming, which is even less eventful than watching grass grow.

Anyway, Limbaugh has several killer quotes in his column:

“Whether or not blind faith in man-made, catastrophic global warming has become a new religion, many of its adherents, ironically, embrace it with the same type of unquestioning zeal they sloppily attribute to and summarily condemn in Christians.”

“In the Jimmy Carter spirit of bashing the president and the United States on foreign soil in front of foreign leaders who are emboldened by American self-flagellation, Pelosi subtly criticized President Bush for failing to endorse Kyoto. Once again, she sided with a foreign government over her own.”

“Those who are willing to give up so much in pursuit of so little can’t possibly be accused of an affinity for the glorious uniqueness of America. We must keep a sharp eye on them.”

Written by Mark

May 30, 2007 at 8:01 AM

Posted in Global Warming

A column I won’t be writing

without comments

I was all set to do an op/ed for the Lebanon Democrat on the Knoxville murders and use that grisly crime to point out the hypocrisy of the media and the Democrats’ hate-crimes legislation, but at the last minute, I couldn’t pull the trigger. I had to ask myself that if one of my family members suffered such a fate, how would I feel if some numb-skull columnist who had never met the victim used the opportunity to advance a political idea. I was forced to conclude that I probably wouldn’t like it very much. There are some things that, for me, are simply above politics, and one of my many, many, many criticisms of liberals and the media is that they politicize EVERYTHING (even the weather). So I just decided to bury the idea.

I’m glad I did.

Reading Michael Silence’s blog yesterday, I came across a quote he pulled from a Knoxville News Sentinel story on Sunday:

In the blogosphere, Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom are an indictment of mainstream media.

On the Internet, they are a Wikipedia entry. Among white separatists, they are a tool. Within a racially divided America, they are a cause.

That they are murder victims in a horrific Knoxville crime has gotten lost in all that noise.

“There are people out there that just want to make something even worse than what it already is,” Christian’s father, Gary Christian, said in a recent interview.

For once, my intuition has served me well. May they rest in peace.

Written by Mark

May 30, 2007 at 8:00 AM

Posted in Right Minded

Today’s Lebanon Democrat column: “Edwards: Do as I say, not as I do”

without comments

I’ve been sitting on a stack of John Edwards stories for a while, nearly all of which illustrate his hypocrisy as a rich liberal who tells the rest of us how we are supposed to live. With the former senator and vice-presidential candidate, it’s strictly do as I say, not as I do.

For example, on January 9 last year, the wealthy trial lawyer gave a speech at the taxpayer-funded University of California at Davis. He charged $55,000 to speak to an audience of 1,787, or nearly $31 per member. It was the highest speaking fee he charged of the nine speeches he made last year at colleges and universities. The topic of his speech? Poverty.

Last year, Mr. Edwards was paid $479,512 as an adviser to a New York-based hedge fund, Fortress Investment Group. Normally this would not be a problem except, as the Washington Post pointed out on May 17, “Fortress owned offshore funds that served as tax havens for investors and … the firm’s portfolio included subprime lenders, which provide high-risk loans that often target minorities. As a candidate, Edwards has railed against both practices.”

Indeed, John Edwards, who is running for president, held more than $7.5 million in investments with Fortress in addition to his salary.

Publicly, John Edwards is not a big fan of Wal-Mart. In fact, last August 4, the presidential candidate delivered a speech during which he complained “We want every single consumer in America, every person in America, to know that if they walk into a Wal-Mart, that first of all their tax dollars are subsidizing Wal-Mart employees. Their tax dollars are helping provide health care for Wal-Mart employees, because Wal-Mart’s not doing it. Their tax dollars are going to provide housing and food stamps for Wal-Mart employees. What is wrong with this picture?”

A little over three months later, on November 15, a staff person attempted to obtain a Sony PlayStation3 on behalf of John Edwards’ family – from a Wal-Mart in Raleigh, North Carolina.

That same evening, Edwards reportedly told a homespun story to participants of a United Food and Commercial Workers gathering about how his son had chided a fellow student for purchasing shoes at Wal-Mart.

Now, John Edwards is perhaps most famous about his lamentation over the existence of “Two Americas” — the privileged and the non-privileged.

But we were informed just last month by the Charlotte Observer that Elizabeth Edwards, wife of the presidential candidate, is “scared of the ‘rabid, rabid Republican’ who owns property across the street from her Orange County home — and she doesn’t want her kids going near the gun-toting neighbor.”

The neighbor, Monty Johnson, remarked “I thought he was supposed to be for the poor people. But does he ever socialize with any poor people? He doesn’t speak to me.”

Just the month before, the perfectly-coiffed John Edwards invoked the name of Jesus in denouncing American greed, noting that “I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs. I think he would be appalled, actually.”

While I agree completely with his words, John Edwards isn’t one to talk. You see, in January, the Carolina Journal disclosed the particulars of the Edwards’ new home, describing it as “28,200 square feet of connected space. The main house is 10,400 square feet and has two garages. The recreation building, a red, barn-like building containing 15,600 square feet, is connected to the house by a closed-in and roofed structure of varying widths and elevations that totals 2,200 square feet.”

John Edwards, who denounces our own selfish short-term needs, will enjoy a recreation room that “contains a basketball court, a squash court, two stages, a bedroom, kitchen, bathrooms, swimming pool, a four-story tower, and a room designated ‘John’s Lounge.’”

Back to Wal-Mart, John Edwards spent an hour at a Barnes & Noble in Manchester, Iowa last November 27 to promote his new book. Having previously noted that “Wal-Mart makes plenty of money. They need to pay their people well,” it is odd that the presidential candidate would choose Barnes & Noble to promote his book. According to the Union Leader, “The Barnes & Noble where Edwards will hawk his book pays $7 an hour to start. The Wal-Mart that sits just yards away pays $7.50 an hour.”

And we didn’t even get to the $400 haircut John Edwards recently sat through, but by now, you get the full picture of John Edwards’ hypocrisy.

John Edwards claims to feel bad about the existence of two Americas, and says he cares deeply for those in poverty. Perhaps he does, but John Edwards is as far removed from poverty as I am from liberalism.

There is nothing wrong with getting rich and living rich. However, it is the height of hypocrisy to live rich while lecturing the rest of us on our focus on selfish short-term needs. But John Edwards is a liberal who is more interested in attaining political power than setting a good example.

Whether it is rich liberals with exorbitant lifestyles lecturing the rest of us on saving the planet by trimming our energy use, or lecturing us about the immorality of greed as they greedily pursue wealth, liberals have two sets of rules for society: one for them and one for the masses. Liberals love telling the rest of us how to live, but it’s not enough to listen to what they say. You also have to watch what they do.

Written by Mark

May 29, 2007 at 9:34 PM

A lesson in conservatism

without comments

Saturday night, Mrs. Right Minded and I watched the movie The Pursuit of Happyness on DVD, a movie that is based on the story of Chris Gardner. The movie character of the same name was played by Will Smith. I don’t follow movie awards, but if Will Smith didn’t pull down any awards for this portrayal, then movie awards don’t mean much.

For those who haven’t seen TPOH, I don’t want to give too much away. I’ll just say that Gardner’s pursuit of his dream as a stock broker is inspiring, made all the more so since his marriage falls apart, he is left to care for his young son, gets evicted twice, ends up homeless, and has to accept an internship without pay that also provides a poor prospect of full-time employment.

Just as you think Gardner can’t get knocked any lower, he keeps getting knocked lower. Yet he gets up every time, presses on, and ends up rewarded for his effort. I ended up with great admiration for the character for his unbreakable determination in pursuing his dream and for maintaining a close relationship with his son during his hard times.

The story of Chris Gardner illustrates the conservative belief that every individual is of equal and inestimable value and possesses unlimited potential (which most of us do not tap into fully). Gardner never looks to the government for public assistance, and even turns down an offer for social services to look after his son when he has to spend a night in jail (over parking tickets, mind you).

When he becomes homeless, Gardner still doesn’t turn to the government, but to a local church that provides these services. He even becomes furious at the IRS when that august and esteemed agency nearly cleans out his bank account over past due taxes (which, in the film, more or less drives him to his temporary homelessness).

Now that I’ve given away more information than I intended, I must recommend The Pursuit of Happyness to my readers who might be looking for a good DVD to rent.

Written by Mark

May 29, 2007 at 8:19 AM

Posted in Endorsements

Back at it again

without comments

Once again, the California legislature is considering legislation that would require schools to teach about homosexuality only in a positive light.

Ron Prentice, executive director of the California Family Council, said Kuehl is relentless in her pursuit to infiltrate California’s laws with definitions and protections for homosexuality.

“This bill would re-engineer the curricula and culture of publicly funded schools,” he said.

Teaching material would have to be amended: “male and female” would be replaced by “gender defined as either real or imagined, and not limited to a person’s assigned sex at birth.”

Traditional, school-sponsored social activities, such as a king and queen elected by the student body, would be forced to either become gender-neutral or cease.

“This bill claims to eliminate bias in education. Instead, it is intolerant of opposing beliefs and perspectives,” Prentice said. “It threatens an accurate portrayal of history and social science, in order for homosexuals to achieve a legislated sense of ‘normalcy.’”

Remember, the American public school system has become the largest repository of gay activism in this nation.

Written by Mark

May 29, 2007 at 8:18 AM

Posted in Education

Abstinence education needed more now than ever

without comments

But that doesn’t appear to be stopping Democrats from dropping federal funding of abstinence education.

Linda Klepacki, analyst for sexual health at Focus on the Family Action, said liberals want to protect Planned Parenthood’s monopoly on federal sex-education funding. She cited a study by Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation, that showed for every dollar abstinence education receives, Planned Parenthood receives $12.

Depriving children of an abstinence message “puts their dreams at risk,” Klepacki said. “We’ve proven this over and over and over again.”

Sex education that encourages premarital sexual activity has proven effective in helping to spread disease, Klepacki said, including:

* 18.9 million new cases of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) each year.

* 15- to 24-year-olds representing nearly half of all new STD cases in 2000.

* 822,000 pregnancies among 15- to 19-year-olds in 2000.

“These numbers haven’t changed since I began teaching abstinence in 1979,” Klepacki said. “How many government studies do we have to have to know that being sexually active in your teen years is not safe?”

To be honest, sex education belongs in the home, not in school. However, if we absolutely must have sex education in school, it may as well be abstinence education. After all, abstinence works every single time it’s tried. There’s no other approach that’s 100% effective in preventing STD’s and unwanted pregnancies as simply abstaining from sexual activity until marriage (to a member of the opposite sex, since you have to clarify such things these days), and then remaining monogamous thereafter.

Written by Mark

May 29, 2007 at 8:17 AM

Posted in Abstinence

Life is good

without comments

There hasn’t been much positive to blog about as a Phillies fan so far this season, with our 4-11 start and MVP Ryan Howard being off his game due to an injury. However, the big guy came off the disabled list on Friday as the Phillies cranked up a three-game series in Atlanta. Yesterday, the mighty Phils climbed above .500 for the first time this season, and today we completed a glorious three-game sweep of the Braves. The icing on the cake came when Ryan Howard went 3-4 in today’s 13-6 demolition, belting two home runs and driving in four as our pitching ace Cole Hamels improved his record to 7-2. Bobby Cox got thrown out of the first two games to add even more pleasure as the Philles outscored the Braves 27-13 during their first sweep in Atlanta since 1995.

Written by Mark

May 27, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Posted in Sports

Tagged with

STATE CHAMPS!

without comments

Congratulations to the Friendship Christian School Commanders for winning the TSSAA Class A baseball championship today by defeating Jackson Christian School 13-3 on the campus of Middle Tennessee State University. Ironically, JCS is the same school that defeated us for the state football championship back in December, also played at MTSU. Today, however, the state championship trophy belongs to the FCS baseball team.

Written by Mark

May 25, 2007 at 10:22 PM

Posted in Sports

The next time I’m in Cincinnati

without comments

Ken Ham discusses all the media attention his new Creation Museum is generating. Naturally, not all the attention is positive.

Far-Left DefCon America has launched a campaign against a northern Kentucky museum dedicated to a biblical presentation of science and world history. The Creation Museum, a project of Answers in Genesis, will open its 76,000-square-foot facility May 28.

DefCon is telling people the project would “undermine” science and “confuse” children. On its Web site, DefCon is described as “an online grassroots movement combating the growing power of the religious right” and fighting for “the separation of church and state…while respecting people of faith and their right to express their beliefs.”

According to Ken Ham, president and co-founder of Answers in Genesis (AiG), DefCon is demanding tolerance of all beliefs, but will not tolerate anyone who believes the Bible.

It’s perfectly understandable that evolutionists would feel threatened by something that generates so much interest in the Biblical Creation. After all, when you subscribe to an explanation of our origins that is built upon a mountain of lies, it is only natural that you would greet the truth with great hostility. I’m sure Ken Ham is used to it.

Related links:
Archaeologists Dig for Truth in Biblical Debate
Creation rules over evolution at museum
Neighbors dread Bible Park

Written by Mark

May 23, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Posted in Creation/Evolution

Today’s Lebanon Democrat column: “Democrats divided over Iraq war”

without comments

Last Wednesday, the U.S. Senate failed to pass legislation that would have cut off funds for the war in Iraq, the final vote being a lopsided 67-29. Republicans were unanimous in their opposition. The Democrat vote was 29 for, 18 against, meaning that there are still divisions within the Democrat Party over whether or not to surrender to the terrorists in Iraq. This comes after the Democrats claimed to have won the election because the American people wanted “a new direction.”

Senator Hillary Clinton voted for the measure, whereas she had before adamantly opposed setting a date for troop withdrawal (hereafter referred to as “surrender”). So I guess you could say that Hillary Clinton was against surrender before she was for it.

Senator Joe Biden, a Democrat who voted for surrender, asked “How many more soldiers do we have to bury? How many more do we have to bring into our military and veterans hospitals? How many more thousands of innocent Iraqis have to die before we finally accept our responsibility to bring this war to an end?”

Iraq is a war zone, and an unfortunate reality of war is that people get killed. But let’s put these deaths into perspective. Fellow Internet blogger Bob Krumm recently compared the annual per capita rate of wrongful deaths in Iraq with those in New Orleans. He points out that when one considers the number of wrongful deaths among civilians, Iraq Security Forces, American and other coalition forces since the war began, there has been an average of 70.2 wrongful deaths per 100,000 Iraqi residents per year. Last year, the murder rate in New Orleans came out to 71.6 per 100,000 residents. So I guess a more appropriate question isn’t when we’re going to pull out of Iraq, but when we’re going to pull out of New Orleans.

Folks, innocent Iraqis aren’t dying because American servicemen are there, but because the insurgents (hereafter referred to as “terrorists”) are killing them. This notion that the killing is going to stop the moment the last American troop leaves the country is preposterous. The killing will stop when the terrorists are defeated and eliminated. Terrorists don’t stop killing when left to their own devices. They increase it.

For example, on the same day that the surrender bill failed in the Senate, we learned that a van bomb was detonated in a crowded market in Iraq, killing a least 32 civilians. Who detonated the bomb? American servicemen? No, they were terrorists.

Likewise, last Saturday, four U.S. servicemen were killed when al Qaeda ambushed their patrol, and three more of our men were captured. (And I’m sure they are being treated just as well as the prisoners at Gitmo.)

The United States of America is not responsible for the deaths of innocent Iraqis. The terrorists are. The United States of America is responsible for overthrowing a murderous dictator, who was later captured, tried, convicted, and executed by his own people, and for making it possible for the Iraqi people to conduct free elections and choose a government of their own. The Democrats call this a “loss.”

Democrats don’t want us to pull out of Iraq because we are losing servicemen, nor because innocent Iraqis are being killed by terrorists. Democrats want us to pull out of Iraq prematurely because they cannot politically afford for the United States to stand victorious in Iraq. They have opposed this war for so long, downplaying every milestone and highlighting every setback, that the Democrats have nothing to gain by our defeating the terrorists in Iraq.

The war in Iraq isn’t about winning elections. It’s about defeating terrorists in order to facilitate democracy in a region of the world that has never known it — a region which has previously only known dictatorship, fear, oppression, and terrorism.

But the Democrats would throw all that away in order to benefit politically. They would bring the troops home in order to prevent them from eradicating terrorists, and would therefore damage the ability of Iraq’s new democracy of cementing itself. Surrendering to the terrorists would only embolden them to strike at our interests again, just as not standing up to them during the 1990’s emboldened them to ultimately carry out 9/11.

None of this matters, of course, because the Democrats have elections to win, and that, to them, is more important than any American interest.

But you dare not question their patriotism.

Written by Mark

May 22, 2007 at 4:31 PM

Something you may not have heard about the immigration bill

without comments

The Maha Rushie gave extensive coverage Friday to the immigration bill being rushed through the U.S. Congress.

Do you know that the Democrats had La Raza and other activist organizations in the negotiations with Republican senators to put this bill together? In other words, they let activist illegal immigration organizations craft the legislation. Can you imagine if Dick Cheney…? Well, he wasn’t in the Senate. Pick a senator. Let’s say Mitch McConnell, putting together a new energy bill, and in there writing it is Big Oil, the CEOs of ExxonMobil and Shell, wherever. Can you imagine? That’s exactly what happened here. So Kennedy knows what’s up here. The ethnic groups that had veto power, if they didn’t like something that they heard, they had the right to veto it, in the negotiations between House and Republican senators. In addition, they plan to allow 400,000 new aliens to come to this country every year who will be on a fast track to legalization. We are not just talking here about legalizing the 12 million or 15 million or whatever the number is. We’re going to now add 400,000 more per year on a fast track, in addition to that number — and each one of them, the 12 million, 15 million who are here, the 400,000 who come each year legally can bring certain members of the family with them, on average at least four.

It’s predictable that Democrats and moderate Republicans would claim to be doing the will of the American people by pushing their amnesty bill through Congress, but it telling that, as The Washington Times points out, “The president’s ratings have tumbled each time immigration reform dominates the news.”

Mr. Rasmussen said that his polling last year, after Mr. Bush gave an Oval Office address laying out his plans for more border enforcement and giving illegal aliens a path to citizenship, found only 39 percent supported the president’s position.

So, I decided to call my two senators and congressman this morning to voice my disapproval of the immigration bill. I don’t do this often, but this bill is so important that our elected representatives deserve to hear from their constituents. Senator Corker’s office told me that he has such great reservations about this bill that he is considering voting against even allowing it to proceed. Perhaps the GOP can muster 41 votes to block this thing in the Senate.

Related links:
Terry Frank
Michelle Malkin
Redstate

Written by Mark

May 21, 2007 at 4:42 PM

At least it made a national blog

without comments

The mainstream press has ignored the murders of Channon Christian and Chris Newsom in Knoxville, but Michelle Malkin is covering it. Some things just don’t fit the MSM’s template. However, had the victims been black and the accused been white, the media would have given the crime as much airplay as the Matthew Shepherd murder, and liberals would have used it to advance their hate-crimes legislation.

Written by Mark

May 18, 2007 at 2:12 PM

Posted in Crime, Media

I thought Democrats were going to end the war

without comments

The U.S. Senate yesterday failed to pass legislation that would cut off funds for the war in Iraq, the final vote being a lopsided 67-29. Republicans were unanimous in their opposition. The Democrat vote was 29 for, 18 against, meaning that there are still divisions within the Democrat Party over whether or not to surrender to the terrorists in Iraq. That’s funny. I thought the Democrats were united in doing the will of the American people by surrendering. But I guess not.

Senator Hillary Clinton voted for the measure, whereas before she adamantly opposed setting a date for troop withdrawal (i.e., surrender). So I guess you could say that Hillary Clinton was against surrender before she was for it.

Senator Joe Biden, who voted for surrender, asked “How many more soldiers do we have to bury? How many more do we have to bring into our military and veterans hospitals? How many more thousands of innocent Iraqis have to die before we finally accept our responsibility to bring this war to an end?”

Folks, innocent Iraqis aren’t dying because American servicemen are there, but because the insurgents, hereafter referred to as “terrorists,” are killing them. This notion that the killing is going to stop the moment the last American troop leaves the country is preposterous. The killing will stop when the terrorists are defeated and eliminated.

For example, just yesterday we learned that a van bomb was detonated in a crowded market, killing a least 32 civilians. Who detonated the bomb? American servicemen? No, they were terrorists.

Likewise, on Saturday, four U.S. servicemen were killed when al Qaeda ambushed their patrol, and three more of our men were captured. (And I’m sure they’re being treated just as well as the prisoners at Gitmo.)

The United States of America is not responsible for the deaths of innocent Iraqis. The terrorists are. The United States of America is responsible for overthrowing a murderous dictator, who was later captured, tried, convicted, and executed by his own people, and for making it possible for the Iraqi people to conduct free elections and choose a government of their own.

Democrats don’t want us to pull out of Iraq because we are losing servicemen, nor because innocent Iraqis are being killed by terrorists. Democrats want us to pull out of Iraq prematurely because they cannot politically afford for the United States to stand victorious in Iraq. They have opposed this war for so long, downplaying every milestone and highlighting every setback, that the Democrats have nothing to gain by our defeating the terrorists in Iraq.

Likewise, the linked Associated Press news story notes that “A group of 11 moderate House Republicans met with Bush and several top advisers at the White House recently, bluntly telling him that the party’s political prospects in 2008 were in jeopardy as a result of the war.”

First of all, they’re moderates, so I can’t take them seriously. But even it that is true, deal with it.

The war in Iraq isn’t about winning elections for either party. It’s about defeating terrorists in order to facilitate democracy in a region of the world that has never known it — a region which has previously only known dictatorship, fear, oppression, and terrorism.

But the Democrats would throw all that away in order to benefit politically. They would bring the troops home in order to ensure that we can’t finish the job of defeating the terrorists, which would damage the ability of Iraq’s new democracy of cementing itself. And surrendering to the terrorists would only embolden them to strike at our interests again, just as not standing up to them during the 1990’s emboldened them to ultimately carry out 9/11.

None of this matters, of course, because the Democrats have elections to win, and that, to them, is more important than any American interest.

But you dare not question their patriotism.

Written by Mark

May 17, 2007 at 8:48 AM

No surprise: Tennessean editorializes on behalf of bigger government

without comments

Once again, my axiom rings true. Democrats may care about the poor, but when given the choice of siding with the poor or siding with government, they will side with government EVERY time.

And with that, the Tennessean editorial board advocates that the state’s revenue surplus be used “for the children.”

A good part of the editorial is your typical gloom-and-doom liberal tripe about an impending economic slowdown where the paper tries to downplay the growth in tax collections by noting that “…the boost in tax collections in the past few years came from growth in the construction sector. In the past few months, however, that sector has dropped off substantially, yet another indicator that a slowdown may be coming.”

At any rate, the Tennessean opines:

No one likes having to pay taxes, and taxing food is not the most even-handed burden on citizens. But this is not the time to cut taxes, with uncertainty in the economy, and it is not the place, with Tennessee lagging so many other states in areas such as education and fighting crime.

My first question is, if now is not the time to cut taxes, then when is a good time? Of course, with liberals, there’s NEVER a good time to cut taxes. My second question is, just how do we lag behind other states in education and fighting crime. The Tennessean doesn’t get specific, and so we don’t really know how we lag behind, how such things are measured, and who does the measuring.

Tennessean: “As for a one-time sales-tax refund, that would be a drop in the bucket once it was split among millions of citizens. It makes more sense to apply that money to a real investment in our future: education.”

I really need to store these quotes in the event of a future income tax push. There was once a time, when guys such as Sundquist and Rochelle were running state government, that we absolutely had to have tax reform because our regressive form of taxation, where we rely heavily upon the sales tax, was simply immoral because it hit the poor the hardest. Now we are told that “Well, a one-time sales-tax refund is really just a drop in the bucket.” Well, it wasn’t a drop in the bucket back in 2002. Back then it was make-or-break for Tennessee’s poor.

Tennessean: “Even if the cigarette tax increase passes, more still needs to be done for education. We must cut the dropout rate, improve student-teacher ratios, raise test scores, and provide learning that better prepares students for college and an ever-more-competitive world.”

So not only do Tennessee’s taxpayers not deserve to get any kind of break for overpaying our taxes for the fourth year in a row, but we need a tax increase on top of that. For the children. What I want to know is, how is more money going to directly translate into all those things the Tennessean mentions? It seems to me that we have been paying hand-over-foot for education during the past 30 years or so, and test scores have steadily fallen. It has gotten so bad that rather than try and improve education, we simply lower standards to make it appear as though we’re doing a better job.

The editorial concludes with the line “Better education equals better jobs, and better public safety equals a better place to live. What more could Tennessee want from its tax dollars?”

In other words, we Tennesseans benefit more when government spends our money for us than when we spend our own money. Remember, folks, with liberals it’s all about control. We average folks are too darn stupid to be able to spend our own money in trustworthy fashion. We’ve got to have government do the spending for us in order for us to really benefit.

Written by Mark

May 17, 2007 at 8:47 AM

Two of every kind

without comments

You’re not going to believe this, but when I was writing my post a few minutes ago on the World Wide Fund for Nature and its crackpot prediction that we’ve only got five years left to “do something” about global warming, I thought to myself “There’s got to be some connection out there between global warming and Noah’s ark.” You see, I’m always looking for equivalents between global warming and religion, but didn’t yet have any connection to Noah’s ark. And I’ll be darned if I didn’t just come across the headline on Yahoo! “Greenpeace builds replica of Noah’s Ark.”

Written by Mark

May 16, 2007 at 10:17 AM

Posted in Global Warming

So tonight I’m going to party like it’s…2011

without comments

Because, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature, it’s going to all be over in 2012.

Written by Mark

May 16, 2007 at 9:47 AM

Posted in Global Warming

Shocking news: the sun causes global warming

without comments

Newsmax cites a research paper in the Geophysical Research Letters that describes global warming…on Neptune.

Those measurements indicate that Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980. And infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that Neptune has been warming steadily as well.

The researchers plotted on a graph the changes in visible light from Neptune over the past half-century, changes in temperatures on Earth during that period, and changes in total solar irradiance.

The results: The correlation between solar irradiance and Neptune’s brightness was nearly perfect; so was the correlation between changes on Earth and solar output, according to a report on the research appearing on World Climate Report, a climate change blog.

“When the sun is more energetic and putting out more energy, the Earth tends to warm up, and when the sun cools down, so does the Earth,” World Climate Report notes. “The Hammel and Lockwood article reveals that the same is true out at Neptune, when the sun’s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up and get brighter….

“How is it possible that the Earth’s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well.

“If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least.”

But, hey, go ahead and use that one sheet of toilet paper if you think it will keep the planets from warming.

Written by Mark

May 16, 2007 at 9:36 AM

Posted in Global Warming