From Powerline Blog.
Hannan has released a new book, “The New Road to Serfdom.” The clip below is an interview from the Hoover Institution as part of its promotion.
Oct 31, 2010
Oct 28, 2010
Most of us have those moments when we let out the clutch on our mouths without dropping the brain into gear first. Everyone gets a good laugh and its soon forgotten unless you are George Bush, in which case it will go on forever. This one from Chris Mathews is however, priceless:
Its difficult to know whether he was distracted by the thrill running up his leg, or has committed to the thought of, "A second term for Jimmy Carter."
Oct 27, 2010
H/t Libertarian Republican.
The way Christine O’Donnell is treated in the media generally portrays her as some sort of really weird dithering idiot. The following clip should dispel this notion, and give a fairly good idea of the reason the Dems are concentrating on the past rather than try to deal with her on policy issues. She is smarter than them.
Over the last couple of weeks we have seen the Democrats go completely negative in their advertising in a desperate attempt to move the minds of voters away from the real issues.
This is why the electorate is bombarded with rot about what she said in a comedy show ten years ago, positions she has held in the past and so on. It is also the reason Conway has tried to get the minds of Kentucky voters onto what Rand Paul did at school. Today some hysteric congresswoman has been protesting over Allen West having a column in a bikers magazine, Allen having a handy lead in the race.
Democrats are losing, and losing big over their policies and the damage those policies have done and their failure to make New Deal on steroids work. The last thing they want is a debate on the issues.
This race can still be won and I doubt that O’Donnell will give up. The most debilitating drag on the effort has been the reaction of the establishment Republicans to her primary win where Rove spat the dummy and made uncalled for derogatory remarks that hurt the campaign more than anything the Democrats could have done.
Mike Castle was a bad choice for the party chiefs to put up at any time, being more liberal than the worst of the blue dogs, but to do so in a year where the grass roots are calling the shots has to amount to crass stupidity. While it is generally assumed that Castle could have had a better chance of winning, with the economy in the danger that it is at present there is little point in winning with someone who is to the left of Arlen Specter and less reliable.
The GOP will need to have a serious rethink of who they place in positions of influence in future.
Oct 25, 2010
Siberian Swans arrive early in England for Climate Fools Day. Source:
The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on Australians and Americans to join the world in celebrating Climate Fools Day on October 27th.
The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that Climate Fools Day was named by protestors outside the British House of Commons on 27th October 2008 when the house was debating the Climate Bill.
“As the first October snow in 70 years blanketed the House (and a big swathe of Europe), MP’s droned on about the need to fight global warming.
“For six hours MP’s reassured one another about the desperate need to be the first government in the world to saddle its unfortunate people with a burden estimated at £15 billion a year. As snow continued to blanket Westminster, only two MP’s questioned the huge cost and dubious benefits from the energy taxes and green energy rorts they were imposing.
“Christopher Booker of the Daily Telegraph noted gloomily: “If the Bill's intent is taken seriously, the cost of cutting our CO2 emissions by 80 per cent would cripple our economy, closing down much of what remains of our industry and rendering most motorised transport impossible.”
“Nigel Lawson said in the House of Lords at the time: “The Bill will go down in history, and future generations will see it, as the most absurd Bill that this House and Parliament has ever had to examine".
“The weather gods were the first to draw attention to the stupidity of the Climate Fools in Westminster. Weeks of icy weather froze the whole of Britain, wind turbines froze, solar panels were covered in snow, but coal, gas and nuclear power stations running at full power for 24/7 averted calamity. Power lines broke, stopping electric trains - on one line in Scotland the only train running was an old steam train burning coal.
"And ignoring the consensus predictions of global warming, a Snowy Owl, native of the Arctic Circle, arrived in Cornwall in December 2009, heralding another cold winter in which the sea froze on the Dorset coast.
“Luckily, the appalling foolishness which started at Westminster has not spread far, but sceptics world-wide will be celebrating Climate Fools Day to ensure the suicidal example of once-great Britain is not followed anywhere else.
Forbes said that word on Climate Fools Day had already reached Siberia because Siberian swans, which usually reach Britain in November, flew into Gloucestershire on 18th October, 2010.
“Winter usually follows the swans, and Westminster is again likely to be blanketed in snow when Climate Fools Day protestors again gather outside the British Parliament.
“Maybe our politicians should abandon their computerised climate models and take up bird watching?”
US publisher, Stairway Press, have chosen the Climate Fools Day gathering in Westminster to make the inaugural presentation of the "Ernst-Georg Beck Award for Scientific Integrity and Competence" (BASIC). Piers Corbyn gets the US$10,000 award for “his untiring efforts both as a climate skeptic and for his outstanding success in long-range weather forecasting”.
For more information on Climate Fools Day see here.
By, Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition
A prominent and well respected Australian scientist has been honoured by Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, in an article in “The Spectator.”
Vaclav Klaus explains:
Let me declare from the outset that I consider global warming dogma (and its widespread acceptance) to be one of the most costly and undemocratic mistakes in generations, and try, therefore, to contribute to its demolition.
As someone who spent most of his life under a repressive and highly inefficient regime, I can hopefully afford to say that the previous most costly and undemocratic ‘experiment’ was Communism. That too started quite innocently, and its supporters — probably — also believed that they fought for a noble cause. When I listen to the views and arguments of the global warming alarmists, and there are many of them in Australia (I guess your country scores very highly on the worldwide ‘warmists per capita’ scale), they sound very similar to the arguments of the former politicians, journalists and public intellectuals in Communist Czechoslovakia.
Of course, the polemic about global warming has a very respectable scientific dimension. But in its substance and consequences, the debate is not part of the scientific discourse about factors influencing swings in global temperature. It is part of the public policy debate about man and society, about our political, economic and social systems, about our freedom or its possible loss. This difference should be made explicit.
In his book Climate: The Counter Consensus, Bob Carter, the well-known Australian paleoclimatologist and professor at the James Cook University, clarifies this point when he says: ‘The global warming issue long ago ceased being a scientific problem.’ It is evident that science plays no part in the current public policy debate, neither in Kyoto, nor in Copenhagen, nor at the United Nations General Assembly or the EU summits. There is just the pretence of science and the wishful thinking that there exists an undeniable scientific consensus.
The Australian professor deserves thanks and praise for repudiating the heretic-hunting climate orthodoxy.
Oct 21, 2010
Sam Walsh, the CEO of Rio Tinto Iron Ore is apparently one of those old fashioned businessmen who long for the good old days when politicians had that sort of integrity. As result he is my nominee for the Gerald Starnes medal for the silliest statement by a business leader this year.
“If you can’t trust the government, who can you trust?” Yeah, right. (About 1:10 in.)
After the mining companies had the Rudd government on the ropes prior to the last election, CRA along with BHP Billiton and Xstrata sold out to Gillard in a sweetheart deal for lower rates of taxes to themselves.
Now that the election is over there now seems to be some confusion between these companies and the government as to what the wording really means. Did these sellouts seriously expect Gillard to stick to the agreement when they are no longer needed?
Oct 16, 2010
Here is a guy who is displaying at an early age a remarkable talent in that area, and while he didn’t make the grade this time he is definitely on the right track.
Sonia W is not alone in thinking her brother is an idiot.
He himself agreed and for that reason, Adrian, 18, was too ashamed to face his father, whose shed he burned down on Wednesday night. …
Glaring at Adrian from across the property yesterday, Tony W told The Gympie Times “idiot” was not a strong enough word for his son. …
Admittedly, it was “not the brightest thing” Adrian had ever done. He had been draining fuel from an old car inside the shed to light a bonfire and while doing so, he flicked a lighter to see what he was doing.
Full story here.
I have seen some stupid things over the years. One family I knew used to light the fire with kerosene, not explaining to their young son that there were dangers involved. When the fire was nearly out he put more wood on it and did what he had seen dad doing and nearly burnt the house down. Fortunately he was not injured. On another occasion I saw another guy in the heat of middle of the Northern Territory summer pouring petrol into a motor with a cigarette in his mouth and the fumes spreading around him.
Oct 7, 2010
Image: Lochiel, source, The Courier Mail.
Some of the older homes tend to be somewhat eye catching as you drive around the town. They are like an oasis of the past in a modern world and thankfully quite a number of people love them enough to buy and restore them to their former glory. I hope this trend will continue long into the future. A great many people who don’t own them love them also, enough to want to see them preserved, and that’s where the trouble starts.
In the modern busybody state property rights have been devalued to the point where property owners are becoming more and more mere custodians of their investment whose rights are subject to the approval of every neurotic with an axe to grind. There are vegetation laws, planning laws, building permits, land use controls, restrictions on numbers and types of animals allowed, right down to the types of light bulbs that can be used.
One of the worst of these is “heritage laws.” After a building reaches a certain age especially if surrounded by more modern buildings there is a real risk to owners that the National Trust or the ‘heritage’ zealots will start to consider it a “unique example of” some era of the past. At such a point it becomes part of a “do not change under any circumstances” list.
Today’s paper gives a great example of this obsession: Owners of historic residence Lochiel at up-market Hamilton in Brisbane have copped a record $350,000 fine and been ordered to pay $20,000 costs for working on the heritage-listed property without Queensland Heritage Council approval.
Apparently they made alterations to the foundations and some walls in order to extend the cellar. The building was put up in 1868 but has not been a static or unchanging thing since. Extensions were done in 1908, including a new wing, gatehouse, and museum, which was apparently a fad at the time.
An upper story was added in 1927.
It was turned into six flats from after WW2 until 1998. The previous owner restored it in 2001 after what was described as “a battle with the Heritage Council over several issues, including its color.” That’s right, they even feel that the owner cannot choose the pigments in the paint, after all the old drab colors of yesteryear were so much more appealing.
The question is, that if the building has been in a constant state of change right up until less than ten years ago, just what is so wrong with modern changes, especially when they are made under the ground? At what point in time did change become bad? It is after all a private residence so what the inside is like is only the concern of those who live in it.
Sustainability Minister Kate Jones, (yes we even have a minister for ‘sustaining’) said, "It is very disappointing that anyone would flout the law in this way and allow the heritage values of such an incredible home to be compromised," she said yesterday. "The works carried out on this majestic property clearly required the owners to apply . . . for approval. If a development application for these refurbishments had been submitted, they would not have been approved."
For some reason I keep thinking of the lines from the Mikado:
All centuries but this, and every country but his own;”
Oct 5, 2010
If Queensland’s politicians were really concerned about food security they would not have sterilised millions of acres of grazing land under scrub clearing bans, conservation zones, heritage areas, wild rivers, national parks and other anti-farming bans.
Nor would they have encouraged the diversion of cropping land from producing food for humans to producing ethanol for cars; or used false global warming dogma to justify covering food producing land with feral forests of carbon credit trees.
It seems that the Queensland government has a secret plan to destroy Queensland’s primary industries, all motivated by suicidal Green hostility to the production of carbon fuels and foods, mainly coal, cattle and sheep.
Queensland has always relied on both mining and farming. To undermine mining on the pretence of helping food production is false and destructive.
This is not about crops or food – it is just another chapter in the Green war on carbon fuels whose goal is to prevent development of new coal mines and power stations.
The hidden tragedy of this silly policy is that we will never know which protected paddock is underlain by a treasure house of coal or minerals.
With modern machinery and knowledge of soils and plants it would be very easy to replace the food lost in the tiny area of crop land likely to be disturbed by coal mining.
The choice is not “Coal or Crops”.
A sensible policy is “Coal AND Crops”.
This proposal is quietly slipping beneath the radar. Have a look at the enormous area covered. When this blanket or bans is added to the Wild Rivers sterilisation, development and industry will be excluded from a huge area of Queensland. Future generations will be far poorer if this proposal succeeds, but few people will understand why.
Green extremists have for years been scaring our kids with stories of doom and despair. Now they are threatening any kids who do not swallow their stories. Have a look at the intolerant and threatening stuff they are spreading. Those of us who remember Mao’s Red Guards imagine where this sort of propaganda leads.
A hard working law abiding young family in WA has fallen foul of Green Aggression.
These people did all the right things, obeyed the law, worked hard and invested their savings. Now last week it was all taken from them. Read their story here, here, and here, and help if you can.
Over a year ago, Carbon Sense had a headline “Wong horse knackered, but “Carbon Tax” is saddled and ready”. Our forecast was that the Ration-N-Tax Scheme was dead in the water, but big business would suddenly discover the advantages of a carbon tax. See here.
Marius Kloppers of BHP suddenly announced recently that it would improve business certainty if the rest of us all paid a carbon tax.
Let’s have a carbon tax of ZERO. Very certain, easy to calculate, no administration costs, no compliance costs.
While parliament is sitting there can be no certainty. If this tax becomes a reality, those who vote for it will become marked men and women. The TEA Party movement in USA (Taxed Enough Already) shows that if pushed enough, the worm turns. Watch the congressional elections. Anyone who supported carbon Ration-N-Tax Schemes from either party will find they are in a battle for political survival. Many have already lost pre-selections.
It is a mirage to believe that introduction of a carbon tax will bring certainty. It will provoke hostility and such political opposition as has never been seen before. What can be introduced by one Parliament can be repealed by the next. Directors who commit shareholders funds on the assumption of a permanent carbon tax need to be warned – shareholders also will not forget.
See also how the ABC has slandered Professor Bob Carter on the “Science” show.
“Carbon Sense” is a newsletter produced by the Carbon Sense Coalition, an Australian based organisation which opposes waste of resources, opposes pollution, and promotes the rational and sustainable use of carbon energy and carbon food. Please spread “Carbon Sense” around.
Oct 4, 2010
The Australian today publishes a rather odd piece on the latest paper on climate change from Britain’s science academy, the Royal Society, claiming it as an acknowledgement of the limits of the science. Funny, but I thought they were using a new expression to describe global warming now, but it is a bit difficult to keep up with the terms used.
The ragged intersection between science and politics is the point at which much of the climate debate has been derailed. Politics demands certainty to make a convincing case for co-ordinate action. Science, on the other hand, is driven by scepticism. Each hypothesis formulated from empirical evidence needs to be challenged and tested to within an inch of its life before its veracity can be assumed. The 43 society members now believe the societies previous position was too strident and implied a greater degree of certainty than was justified.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's reports should have been seen for what they were, political documents. They were designed, quite reasonably, as a basis on which to build a political solution.
It has to be questioned as to why designing scientific reports in order to form a basis for political action is in the view of the author, “quite reasonable.” Designing reports in such a way is nothing short of fraud and deserves to be denounced as such.
The report is in fact an effort to reconcile the fact that some of the bodies involved have been caught out tampering with the evidence and in fact have been prepared to accept anecdotal evidence, such as “the glaciers will disappear,” over the facts that it was a widely exaggerated claim. While insisting that much of the science is settled it merely pays lip service to the chances that some areas are open to debate, and there are matters where simply enough is not known in order to reach conclusions.
It still advocates going ahead and committing economic suicide with GW action.
The Australian has given itself a shameless political plug with, ”The Royal Society sets out a strong case for pursuing the cautionary, responsible approach long advocated by The Weekend Australian”
This is of course not the responsible course of holding off action until a consensus is reached, in fact they still want to implement ration and tax or a carbon tax. The Weekend Australian has tended to advocate the Vogon position of, “Resistance is futile,” for some time, and this is what is recommended in the report.
The only difference is that they now want us to forget some of the more hysterical positions that they have been caught out on.