Tabatha Hale assaulted by union thug.

Several days ago Obama, in an unprecedented move threw the weight of the Administration behind the unions against the states. Calling out his astroturf group, Organizing for America to help mobilize unions in Wisconsin and other states, he accused Governor Scott Walker of “Assaulting” unions. This is apparently his idea of toning down the rhetoric.

As a follow up Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a rally, “I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.”

One result was that a rowdy group descended on the offices of Freedom Works for a demonstration in which Tabatha Hale, the Media Coordinator for FW was assaulted while filming:


This Administration has to learn, “If you lie down with dogs you will get fleas.”

Her account is here:

Basically, it’s ridiculous. I’m a 5’1 female in a dress, and he was standing up on a garden wall above me in the courtyard. He hardly felt threatened. I was stunned, because generally protesters are there to, you know, get their message out. They don’t normally shy away from the camera.

I’m very much okay, and very appreciative of the support from my fellow bloggers and activists today. I am, however, shaken up by the level of sheer hatred I experienced today. The look of fury on his face in the close up is appalling. I had not exchanged a word with him. He didn’t know who I was. He didn’t even know my name, what I do. He had probably surmised that I was with FreedomWorks and that was enough.

This just can’t be tolerated anymore. It’s one thing to be called a violent teabagger. It’s another to be called a violent teabagger while you’re being assaulted. They’ve been comparing themselves to the Egyptians ousting Mubarak. Looks like they’re not too far off, given that they share the tendency to assault women with cameras.

In addition, it’s disgusting to me that the first response I received from the Left was rationalization. “You were too close, respect personal space” and “well he obviously didn’t want to be filmed!” – essentially, it’s the “her skirt was too short” defense. No one deserves to be hit. The concern from a bystander was that “You’ll get on the news, stop it!” Unfortunately for him, he did not know who he was dealing with. I will ensure that this happens.

Newspapers keep advertising monopoly.

Cartoon: by Horsey.

Sudden jumps in sitemeter is usually a sign that the latest post has hit the mark or been linked by a big site. It is relatively unusual for an old story to be the cause, especially when it is from the middle of last year. Virginians though, apparently couldn’t get enough of “Saving newspapers, Cobb & Co, and the whaling industry,” over the last day or so.

That post deals with studies into ways to assist the struggling newspaper industry to avoid ruin caused by a decline in advertising revenue, and less people buying them. Studies however usually conclude that newspapers are vital to the population who don’t buy them and propose rafts of new taxes and government action to save them.

This is probably a contributing factor to the upsurge in the number of people who confuse the Onion with MSNBC.

The interest was sparked by an item in the Sun Gazette on a dispute over local authorities attempting to eliminate the requirement for them to advertise in “newspapers of record:”

The Virginia Press Association beat back two legislative proposals to reduce or eliminate the amount of legal advertising required of local and state governments in Virginia, despite efforts by localities to loosen the grip that newspapers currently have on legal notices. …

Local governments say that with the advent of the Internet and other communications options, localities should not be forced to place legal notices in the print editions of newspapers. Supporters of the status quo say that newspapers remain the most broad-based communications tool available to disseminate such information.

It all boils down to finances, too: Newspapers, which have seen other forms of advertising plummet in recent years, count on legal ads to help pay the bills. Local governments, also facing their own financial problems, are eager to cut costs. …

Newspapers are in their current state because of the rise of new technology and their failure to adapt to it. It is ridiculous to suggest that cash strapped local authorities should increase taxes and charges to the public to continue what is effectively an unnecessary compulsory monopoly granted to a favored section of the media.

Destroying their own argument that these notices are vital for the public the article mentions that, “Arlington County government’s legal advertising is placed in the Washington Times, which has a small circulation in the county but also offers rates well below what other newspapers accept.” In other words, the County is meeting its legal obligation by advertising at a better rate in a paper that few locals read. This rule is pointless.

The Climate Elite want you dead.

Cartoon: by Zapiro.

Probably the most chilling aspect to the submission from the Carbon Sense Coalition, referred to in the post below is the couple of pages of quotes by the people who believe they know what’s best for us. Well, not exactly for us, but for their idea of the welfare of the planet. Their ideal planet would of course give them a great deal of satisfaction, but it appears they don’t want many of us around to see it.

They are apparently in most cases anyway, prepared to let some of us remain, as there will be a need for some plebs to grow food for them, with some of the more presentable, serving them.

One that Viv missed is this one; "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as killer virus to lower human population levels." - Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

It is unknown what it is, that makes him feel so authoritative, - his crowning achievement, (pardon the pun) was screwing the heiress to the British throne and subsequently being able to remember the right number of paces to walk behind her. He is however loved in America as his frequent gaffes allow them to feel better about their VP. Phil makes crazy uncle Joe look quite the intellectual.

As I recall, his No. 1 son has expressed the wish to return as a tampon, (seriously, I’m not making this up), so perhaps if they both get their wishes, Charlie might be able to help his old dad to spread himself around. I am not totally negative about the royal family as I am convinced that they could become normal after a few generations of not marrying their relos.

This seems appropriate though:
No, no. Nasty person. – Don Chipp, on Prince Philip.

Here are some of the gems these climate gurus have for us:

"Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it." - Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute

"Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control." - Professor Maurice King

"I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems." - John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal

"Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing." - David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club

"My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world." - Dave Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!

Environmentalism is definitely one of those referred to by Patrick here:

I'm becoming more convinced every day that socialism (and Nazism, Fascism, militant Muslimism and all other isms) appeal to manipulative people who hunger for power and dread losing control. It's a character flaw turned into an ideology. – Patrick Joubert Conlon

Why Wind Won't Work? -It's Weaker than Water.

Image: Your new horizon in the brave new world.

A Submission from the Carbon Sense Coalition to the Australian Senate Enquiry into Wind Farms.
February 2011.

Viv Forbes is probably one of the hardest working people I know in the effort to introduce some rationality into the climate change nonsense that pervades the chambers of every parliament in the nation. This is a reference to a very thorough submission into wind power, a particularly inefficient use of resources which has to rely for its survival on government mandates and subsidies to those rich enough to afford to build them.

For a pdf of the full report with pictures and all the gory and depressing details see here.

Image: Your day at the beach with Greens leader, Bob Brown.

Why are governments still mollycoddling wind power?

There is no proof that wind farms reduce carbon dioxide emissions and it is ludicrous to believe that a few windmills in Australia are going to improve global climate.

Such wondrous expressions of green faith put our politicians on par with those who believe in the tooth fairy.

The wind is free but wind power is far from it. Its cost is far above all conventional methods of generating electricity.

Tax payers funding this "Wind Welfare" and consumers paying the escalating power bills are entitled to demand proof.

Not only is there no climate justification for wind farms, but they are also incapable of supplying reliable or economical power.

It is also surprising those who claim to be defenders of the environment can support this monstrous desecration of the environment.

Wind power is so dilute that to collect a significant quantity of wind energy will always require thousands of gigantic towers each with a massive concrete base and a network of interconnecting heavy duty roads and transmission lines. It has a huge land footprint.

Then the operating characteristics of turbine and generator mean that only a small part of the wind's energy can be captured.

Finally, when they go into production, wind turbines slice up bats and eagles, disturb neighbours, reduce property values and start bushfires.

Wind power is intermittent, unreliable and hard to predict. To cover the total loss of power when the wind drops or blows too hard, every wind farm needs a conventional back-up power station (commonly gas-fired) with capacity of twice the design capacity of the wind farm to even out the sudden fluctuations in the electricity grid. This adds to the capital and operating costs and increases the instability of the network.

Why bother with the wind farm – just build the backup and achieve lower costs and better reliability?

There is no justification for continuing the complex network of state and federal subsidies, mandates and tax breaks that currently underpin construction of wind farms in Australia. If wind power is sustainable it will be developed without these financial crutches.

Wind power should compete on an equal basis with all other electricity generation options.

ORP interview on traffic laws.

David Leyonhjelm from the Outdoor Recreation Party makes good points in this interview at Summernats:


The ORP are contesting the New South Wales state election and deserve the support of anyone with a taste for freedom.

YAF fire Ron Paul.

Shortly after the news that once again Ron Paul had won the CPAC straw poll, came the more negative news, that Young Americans for Freedom, (YAF) had fired him from their board of advisers, on which he has served for more than twenty years. On the surface it appears that there is a disagreement over his anti war stance, although indications are that it goes much deeper than that.

If it were really just a policy difference I doubt that the degree of vitriol involved in the announcements on the act would have happened. The language YAF have employed indicates that they do not simply wish for a parting of the ways, they want to ridicule and destroy him.

Senior National Director Jordan Marks said:

"It's a sad day in American history when a one-time conservative/libertarian stalwart has fallen more out of touch with America's needs for national security then our current socialist presidential regime." "Rep. Paul is clearly off his meds and must be purged from public office. YAF is starting the process by removing him from our national advisory board. Good riddance and he won't be missed," added Marks.

In the main I have few disagreements with Paul on domestic issues, but on foreign policy he really sucks. He is inclined to be totally in the grip of the antiwar crowd, and some of his statements have been bizarre. His reference to Wiki leaks; that it wouldn’t have happened if the government hadn’t gone around spying on people is a prime example. Intelligence is an important defense function whether at war or at peace.

More from Marks:

“Rep. Paul's refusal to support our nation’s military and national security interests border on treason, aside from his failure to uphold his oath to the United States Constitution and defend our country and citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Marks continued.

“Rep. Paul has strayed to the left of Obama and allied himself with the radical anti-war left by laying the blame on America for the unprovoked attacks of Sept. 11th. Additionally, Rep. Paul has not condemned the 9/11 "Truther" conspiracy theorists that support him.

Some of Ron’s young and exuberant supporters have earned the ire of many CPAC delegates owing to their tendency towards rowdy heckling of speakers they disagreed with during the conference and there is considerable sentiment against him on that score. Many feel that he should ask them to tone it down and respect the right of others to express their opinions.

This is however no excuse to make these sort of attacks on him’ which are patently untrue and have no basis in reality.

There is no reason to believe that Paul is anything other than a patriotic American, and I hold him in the greatest respect even though on some issues I feel he is misguided or wrong. The very idea of accusing him of treason is at best intemperate, and more likely, malicious.

Truthers tend to gain some comfort from his statements that he does not tend to take government statements on face value. I doubt that many of those here are inclined to do so anyway, but that does not make us conspiracy nuts. Paul has said on the record on a number of occasions that he does not think 9/11 was an inside job.

YAF appear to be following some sort of agenda they are not stating.

Atlas Shrugged trailer released.

Wow, Atlas, the movie has long been the myth of the Holy Grail to the average libertarian or Ayn Rand reader. Now it is imminent enough for the producers to release the trailer for it and it is apparently in the can ready to go.

By the look of the trailer itself and a couple of ‘behind the scenes’ clips I have seen I am reasonably optimistic that it is an honest effort and makes a serious attempt to capture the essence of the book. The idea of making a movie to be frequented by objectivists is a scary thought, they are rather prickly, but John Aglialoro, the man responsible is one himself, so he knows the risks.



From what I have seen the actors seem to be credible in their roles, and Taylor Schilling and Grant Bowler are pretty much the image I had of Dagney Taggart, and Hank Reardon. This is the realization of a lifelong ambition for Aglialoro who says:

Over the years there were some great names in the industry who were interested in the project. But year after year passed, and it got to the point where I had to make a decision to finance it myself — and to arrange for the casting and get it done — or lose the movie rights altogether.

One thing that kept me going was that many years back I had made a kind of commitment to Ayn Rand herself. I didn’t make it to her one-on-one personally, although I had actually seen her once, when she gave her last talk at the Ford Hall Forum in 1981. But making the movie was something that I felt as an Objectivist I could carry out one way or another. I wanted to be able to visit Ayn Rand’s grave in New York and say, “We got it done.”

In April of this year I had to make a decision about whether to pursue the project and get filming going by the middle of June or to let my lease on the movie expire.

My wife pointed out that if I didn’t do it, it would haunt me for the rest of my life.

Tony Abbott, Shit happens, and seven screws up big time.

Laurie Oaks is one of the most respected and feared political journalists in Australia today. He is relatively bipartisan in his approach, and gives me the impression that he detests hypocrisy and loves exposing it. His technique is sometimes referred to as dropping bombs although it is more like an ambush.

Seeing Laurie get to his feet to ask a question gives politicians that feeling a right leaning blogger would have on opening the paper after getting a tip that he was going to see his name linked romantically with Arianna Huffington, Chris Mathews, or both. This is his ‘gotcha’ moment with Gillard.

Others attempt to emulate this including Mark Riley from the 7 Network, the problem for him being that he was totally dishonest in his attempt to prove that Tony Abbott trivialized the death of Australian soldier, Jarred MacKinney:



After listening to the US officer explain that the troops were well supported by all the firepower he was shown and more, Mr. Abbott remarked, “Nah it’s pretty obvious that um … well sometimes shit happens doesn’t it?”

7s, attempt at claiming to be honest in this is negated by the fact that they excised the following remark by the commander of Australia's Middle East forces, Major-General John Cantwell, who nodded agreement and added, "It certainly does, yeah.”

They have also claimed that the footage was obtained over the objections of Abbott, which is wrong. Abbott had asked that footage of him firing weapons not be released, but when a FOI request was made he did not object to it.

In essence they have used their tech support to decipher an inaudible conversation, which was an aside to the images they wished to portray, then tried to misrepresent the facts and have been caught out at it. 7 has to face the facts that Australians are just not as PC as they would wish them to be to the point that even the government has declined to take a free hit at Tony over this. They have tried to make themselves the story, and have. Its just not the one they expected.

Keith Payne, the Victoria Cross winner from Vietnam Commented:

… Mr Payne told The Australian the Opposition Leader's words were not offensive and were understood on the frontline.

The same could not be said for Network Seven's Mark Riley, who had brought journalism to a new low, said the war hero, who was awarded the VC for "conspicuous bravery" in Vietnam in 1969.

"This reporter (Riley) did a very, very bad job," Mr Payne said. "He wasn't on the spot (in Afghanistan) and you have to realise what the mood was like (there). His (Abbott's) comments were not derogatory towards the family. In actual fact, he was expressing grief -- this shit happens!"

He queried why Seven edited out the former commander of Australian forces, Major General John Cantwell, agreeing with Mr Abbott's comments.

And Mr Payne issued his own dire warning to Riley. "Should that reporter ever come near me for an interview, I will tell him: this shit can happen to you."

There is some conjecture about Abbotts reaction and the silence which I take to involve, “ Left hook, or right uppercut, … no I’d better not hit the bastard, … although he richly deserves it, … no it won't look good on prime time tele, but shit, no one could blame me for it, … no, I‘d better not.”

Perhaps Laurie Oaks is right, “Tony and Julia are both lightweights.”

Sam Kekovich at LDP National Convention.

We had a successful national convention a couple of weeks ago with a number of great speakers. The keynote addresses were given by Professor Sinclair Davidson, and Sam Kekovich.

Sam was a leading AFL player for a number of years and since then has made a successful transition to media. For those overseas readers, you may have seen Sam in the Australian lamb ads. I would love to see him as a guest on “Top Gear,” but I fear he might be a little too politically incorrect for them:

Are we owned by the state?

Julia apparently thinks so.

“If, from the more wretched parts of the old world, we look at those which are in an advanced stage of improvement, we still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised, to furnish new pretenses for revenues and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without tribute.” – Thomas Paine


In today’s Australian there is a short article on the tendency of the government to label tax increases as savings:

Here are some examples of what Gillard includes in her list of so-called savings. A one-off dividend of $150 million the government demanded from Australia Post, $555m from luxury-car tax rises, $402m from higher visa application charges and, in the most recent budget, $275m from more fuel taxes as a result of amending ethanol arrangements.

Added to that are billions of dollars from alcopops and tobacco tax rises. Even the yet-to-be-collected mining tax is included in the $80bn in so-called savings.

While the author correctly regards this action as misleading which is a nice way of saying blatantly deceitful, there is a growing tendency both here and overseas to see tax collections as other than impositions on the public. In fact they are almost seen by the state as a benevolence they bestow on us, but lets look at the term savings.

Savings are that part of income that is put away for the future benefit of the saver. Essentially it involves keeping back from expenditure some of the fruits of your labor in order to meet future expenses, invest in an asset, or whatever other reason is out there. The reason is however irrelevant, the term means putting away a proportion of income.

This is clearly not what the government is doing, in fact since it came to office it has blown most of the savings of the previous government and has embarked in a debt fuelled extravaganza. For the government to make savings it would have to cut back on expenditures, something it is loath to do.

Clearly, Gillard’s ‘savings’ are not savings at all by any standard use of the term. So is she being dishonest, or has she got herself a new progressive definition of the word?

Recently in the US a debate raged over the incredible proposal by the Democrats to increase taxes by allowing the ‘Bush’ tax scales expire, and go back to Clinton’s higher rates. It was never a debate about tax cuts but the Administration promoted tax increases as denying tax cuts to the rich. Was this spin, or was it a genuine belief? Perhaps we should examine the possibility that the state and the creatures of it have a different belief system to the rest of us.

A landlord, who increases his rents by, say 5%, has not made a saving. He may have boosted his take on assets that he places at the disposal of his tenants, who then have the right if they feel they are not getting value for money, to look for something more reasonably priced. This is the free market at work. This is in no way consistent with the government increasing taxes or creating new ones.

For Gillard to refer to increased taxes, as savings seems to assume that she genuinely has a sense of entitlement to the fruits of our labor to whatever degree she chooses to apply it. To argue that taking more of what is ours is a saving, she obviously believes that the whole economy is hers for the taking. To save by taking more, means that in her opinion, what is ours is in reality hers, and it is only by her benevolence that we are allowed to retain any of it.

This means that the attitude of the Australian government is that we and all we have is at their disposal and we are effectively vassals of the state.

Happy birthday Ronnie.

My first thoughts on doing this were to put up the clip of, “A Time for Choosing,” however it is a long one and time restricts many from seeing it right through.

One of the great ironies of our times is that his staunchest critic is his liberal piece of shit son Ron, while his most loyal defender is his adopted son Michael.

Ron, contrary to the way he was portrayed in the media had a ready wit, as seen here:


For a truly touching indication of the humanity of the man himself you can do no better than to read the post on the personal recollection of Dr. Sanity.

Cyclone Yasi; government and press stupidity.

Cartoon: by Nicholson.

As I post this Tropical Cyclone Yasi is drawing close to the North Queensland coast, unfortunately in some heavily populated areas. Queenslanders meet these events with the sort of grim determination of those who are not strangers to this phenomenon. Most of them know from previous experience what to do, and what action to take.

This one is a big one, although it has been downgraded from the biggest in history, to the biggest in the last hundred years. It is a category five, and about 500 kilometers across, which makes it something along the lines of Katrina. This is going to be really bad, but it is a time for cool heads and decisive action. There will be a hell of a lot of damage and some deaths; that is unavoidable.

The problem I have with the situation at the moment is that the government, and particularly the Premier Anna Bligh seem to be determined with the aid of the press to hog the limelight and spread panic. For the last couple of days the message has been the premier in front of the cameras giving the message, “Run for your lives, you are all going to die,” or words to that effect.

Today she has admitted that she used strident language to ensure that the crisis was not underestimated. People like this should drop their feelings of self-importance and let the people coordinating the issue deal with it in a sensible and balanced way without the drama queen act. The people on the ground with the experience in this arena should be the ones getting the message across.

It is reasonable to worry about complacency, however the actions of the press and authorities in the recent floods are probably one of the major exacerbating factors towards complacency. In very much a case of the boy who cried wolf the sort of coverage in that case has to be a worry.

In that case flood heights tended to be overestimated by at least two meters and up to four in some cases, which tends to make the public take some of the warnings with a grain of salt. After the massive flash flood in the Lockyer Valley a report appeared of a massive wall of water rushing toward the heart of Brisbane. As I expected when I saw it, shortly afterward I had to spend an hour on the phone explaining to my daughter that it wasn’t going to be like that and she didn’t need to flee the city.

The ultimate irony is tonight’s ABC report, which referred to Bligh, a thousand miles from where it is all happening as carrying the weight of Queensland on her shoulders. Well, what about the poor bastards who are up there who are going through this on the ground?

To all of you people up there, I hope you get through it OK.

Some AFL comedy.

This cartoon by Kudelka relates to a bit of an embarrassment where naked images of a couple of star players were sent by Mobile phone by a young chick. There still doesn’t seem to be any resolution to it, although some reports suggest that unknown persons took them in the change room.

Anyway it reminded me of a joke about Eddie Maguire and Collingwood AFL Club that was doing the rounds a while ago:

80,000 Collingwood Fans meet at the MCG for a "Collingwood Fans Are Not Stupid" Convention.


Eddie Maguire, the club president says, "We are all here today to prove to the world that Collingwood fans are not stupid. Can I have a volunteer?"
Allan Didak, a player gingerly works his way through the crowd and steps up to the stage. Eddie asks him, "What is fifteen plus fifteen?"

After 15 or 20 seconds Didak says, "Eighteen!"


Obviously everyone is a little disappointed. Then all 80,000 Collingwood Fans start chanting, "GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE! GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE!"

Eddie says, "Well since we've gone to the trouble of getting 80,000 of you in one place and we have the world wide press and global broadcast media here, I think we can give him another chance."

So he asks, "What is seven plus seven?"

After nearly 30 seconds he eventually says, "Ninety!"

Eddie is quite perplexed, looks down and just lets out a dejected sigh - everyone is disheartened. Didak starts crying and the 80,000 Collingwood fans begin to yell and wave their hands shouting, "GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE! GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE!"

Eddie, unsure whether or not he is doing more harm than good, eventually says, "OK! OK! Just one more chance ... What is two plus two?"

Didak closes his eyes, and after a whole minute eventually says, "Four!"

Eddie just starts a sigh of relief when throughout the stadium pandemonium breaks out as all 80,000 Collingwood fans jump to their feet, wave their arms, stamp their feet and scream...

"GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE! GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE!"