Nuts On Parade (No Pun Intended)

This morning I caught a part of Fox 2's morning show and saw this report on an upcoming event in Tower Grove Park.  It seems that some local, liberal, 1960's wannabes have decided to ride bicycles naked through the Tower Grove neighborhood Saturday night to - get this - protest our dependence on oil.

I don't get it.  How on earth does bicycling in the buff make connect with oil?  Is it just that they're bicycling instead of driving?  Wouldn't getting thousands of people to bike to work one day have more of an effect?  Or boycotting gas stations for a day?  Something, almost anything, would have more of a connection to dependence on oil than this.  

I suspect the nudity is meant to draw attention - and it is working.  Fox 2 did their story and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote about it.  Even I am blogging about it.  But, the more that I think about it, why would anybody want to see a bunch of naked people riding bicycles.  No doubt they'll come in all shapes and sizes.  Ever been to a beach in Europe?  Sometimes it's not pretty.

But any attention that these folks are getting is for their nakedness - not their cause.  They're not getting their point across.

The protesters mentality is something to marvel at too.  They're going to all feel so good about themselves for participating in this event.  They're out there, "making a difference."  But naked cycling won't lead to the discovery of a viable alternative fuel or save a single gallon of gasoline.  It won't save the planet - even if it needed saving. 

In reality, these protesters aren't accomplishing anything but giving strangers a chance to gander at their privates.

A biofuel that I can support . . .

As a regular reader of this blog would know, I think that it is insanity to be burning food in our gas tanks in order to prevent the myth of global warming.  But I'm not against local energy production to wean America from foreign oil.  Those local sources of energy include domestic drilling for oil, nuclear power, hydroelectric, wind, solar, and other renewables - if they're economically feasible and privately funded.

And now I've found a way to support biofuels too . . . turning algae into a fuel to run diesel engines.  Monday's South Side Journal ran a story about Cindy Duhigg, a local resident who "makes her own biodiesel as a hobby."  She makes it out of algae that she cultures from samples taken from the River Des Peres.

Have you seen the River Des Peres?  If we can turn that muck into fuel, I'm all for it.

Who needs foreign oil when we've got nasty sewage and storm water run-off!

Read My Lips Update

Sunday, John McCain said, "I don't want tax increases.  But that doesn't mean anything is off the table."

Since then, he has been back on track.  At a town hall meeting in Nevada yesterday, a girl asked him if he would ever raise taxes.  His answer was "No."  Today, on the campaign trail in Colorado, McCain didn't exactly say "read my lips" but he came close . . . "I want to look you in the eye:  I will not raise taxes or support a tax increase."

Can we trust McCain not to raise taxes?  I doubt it but we don't have much choice.  We can certainly trust Barack Obama to raise them.

The Victimization of America

What has happened to personal responsibility?  Is anything bad that happens to someone these days the mere result of their own mistakes?

It seems like the answer is, more and more, no.  Everyone is a victim of something.  Nothing is ever anybody's own fault anymore.

Here's the latest example . . . In 2005, the very popular ABC television program Extreme Makeover:  Home Edition demolished an old home and build a sparkling new one (seen above) for the Harper family in Georgia.  This new home was given to the Harpers, free of charge.  And contributions of about $250,000.00, including scholarships and a home maintenance fund, were raised and given to them as well.  

But the Harpers didn't rest in their new house.  No, they mortgaged it.  They put the gift home up as collateral for a $450,000.00 loan and sank the money into a construction business.  The business failed, the Harpers defaulted on the loan, the bank foreclosed, and now the "four-bedroom house with decorative rock walls and a three-car garage" with "a lobby that featured four fireplaces, a solarium, a music room and a plush new office" will be auctioned at the county courthouse next week to pay off the mortgage.

Did the Harper's make a mistake when they mortgaged the family home to start a business?  Did that mistake and failing to operate their business profitably lead to this sad result?  

Heck, no.  It's not their fault.  According to the Associated Press story, these folks have "become the latest victim of the foreclosure crisis."

This is a sad story.  Sure.  And I do feel sorry for the Harpers.  But they aren't victims of anything but their own bad judgment.

L.A. Food Police Update

Last week a committee of the Los Angeles City Council approved a ban on new fast food restaurants.  Now comes word that the entire Council has approved the ban.  Again, the vote was unanimous.  Still not one voice for freedom out out in California.

I feel compelled to ask again . . . is this America?

Hate Crimes and Punishment

Saint Louis Conservative's favorite newspaper employee strikes again . . . Alex Mayer is right on the money again today with a piece at The Platform titled, "Murder is murder, no matter what the motive."

Well said Mr. Mayer.

Clean Energy in Missouri

With all the talk about biofuels and alternative energy sources and renewing efforts to drill for American oil, nuclear energy has been on the back burner.  No more.  Today, as reported in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, AmerenUE filed an application for a construction and operating license for a proposed 1,600 megawatt nuclear plant in Callaway County.

Nuclear power is a realistic alternative source of homegrown power and should be part of the country's long-term energy plan.  Missourians should rally behind Ameren's efforts to get this plant built.

Read our lips Senator McCain - "NO NEW TAXES"

John McCain is not my favorite candidate for president, not by a long shot.  He's no conservative but compared to Barack Obama, he's Barry Goldwater.

But in McCain's continuing effort to "move to the middle" and appeal to "moderates," he's throwing another conservative principle under the bus.  Throughout the primary season, McCain has pledged not to raise taxes.  Now, he's hedging.  An Associated Press story today quotes the nominee as saying, "I don't want tax increases.  But that doesn't mean that anything is off the table."

When politicians tell you that tax increases are not off the table, keep a tight grip on your wallet.

Senator McCain, I don't think that Barry would approve.

Surprise . . . McCain leading Obama

In a hopeful sign for the GOP contender, John McCain now leads Barack Obama 49%-45% among "likely voters" in the latest USA Today/Gallup Poll.  Obama still leads among registered voters 47%-44% but that three-point lead is down from a six-point lead a month ago.  The margin of error here is 4% so the presidential race is now a statistical dead heat.

The race is on.  Gentlemen, start your engines.

Presidential candidate has hip problems . . . but it's not the old guy!

John McCain is 71.

Barack Obama is 46.

Who would you expect to have hip problems?

 Senior citizen McCain?

Guess again.  According to the Associated Press, Obama's the one who visited a Chicago hospital this evening with a sore hip.

Finally, Schwarzenegger does something right.

I've been bashing California over the past week for expanding the powers of the food police and chipping away at people's freedom.  Even Governor Arnold Schwarzen-egger got into the act signing a trans-fat ban into law taking away the rights of Californians to eat what they want to eat.  But the govinator deserves kudos for vetoing a bill that would have mandated school's science textbooks to include "climate change" as a subject.  (Link to story.)

Arnold, unfortunately, is not a convert from the religion of global warming and believes that it should be taught in schools.  Nonetheless, he believes "the state should refrain from being overly prescriptive in specific school curriculum, beyond establishing rigorous academic standards."

Governor Schwarzenegger, I couldn't agree with that statement more.  Three cheers to you for finally getting one right.

I thought this was America? Nope. It's California. Part II

The food police are spreading and freedom is on the run in California.  Wednesday, we had the report L.A.'s City Council moving to ban new fast food restaurants in the city.  Today, the insanity has spread statewide.  Sort-of-Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today signed a bill banning trans-fats anywhere in California.  (Link to ABC News story.)

Maybe trans-fats are unhealthy.  Maybe everyone should be trying to eat better and healthier food.  But shouldn't we all have the right to eat what we want to eat?  It is out of line for the government to mandate people's diets.

Liberals are always screaming that government needs to stay out of their bedrooms.  I think we should all be screaming to keep government out of our dining rooms, kitchens, and pantries.

NEWSFLASH!!!!

Summertime in St. Louis is usually hot and humid.  Sometimes it rains.

And in other shocking news, campaign contributions from members of the press favor Democrats 100 to 1.

But, of course, they're all fair and impartial and would never allow their personal preferences to get in the way of honest journalism.  (Yeah, right.)

Even Howard Stern has figured out the Democrats

It took a while but even satellite radio host Howard Stern has learned the truth about Democrats.  Even better, according to a story posted by the Business & Media Institute, Stern "vowed" to his agent and repeated on the air that he "will never vote for a Democrat again.  I don't give a [bleep] - no matter who they are.  I don't care of God becomes a Democrat . . . I backed Hillary Clinton.  I backed Al Gore.  I backed John Kerry.  I am done with them."

Stern was reacting to the opposition of Democrats on an FCC panel who opposed the merger of Sirius Satellite Radio (Stern's network) with rival XM.  By voting to oppose the merger, the Democrats on the panel showed their true colors and Stern figured out, "the fact that these Democrats in the FCC are communists . . . They're for communism."

This just goes to show you that truth can win out in the end.  If even a buffoon like Howard Stern can figure out the truth about Democrats, maybe there is hope for the country.  At the very least, here's one swing vote to John McCain in New York.  If Stern's vows are more trustworthy than Alec Baldwin's that is.

I thought this was America? Nope. It's California.

Watch out America, the nanny state approaches.  And it is starting (surprise, surprise) on the left coast.  Los Angeles is poised to impose a one-year ban new "fast-food" restaurants in a big chunk of the city.  According to the L.A. Times, a city council committee unanimously approved the moratorium yesterday.

Can you believe that not one voice of reason voted against this imposition on the rights of people to eat what they want to eat, when and where they want to eat it?  

Well, it is California.

Red Storm Rising?

Russia is considering regular flights of long range nuclear-capable bombers to Cuba and possibly basing such bombers there.  (Breitbart story.)  This, according to American General Norton Schwartz would cross "a red line for the United States of America."

The bear is still in the woods.  And now it is growling at us.

Who do you want answering the White House phone at 3:00 a.m.?  Barack Obama or John McCain?

The media has turned against McCain - Who couldn't see that one coming?

John McCain was the darling of big media during the Republican primaries.  He was the maverick, the man who could reach across the aisle to appeal to "mainstream" voters.  He was the man hand-picked by the press to be the G.O.P. nominee for president.  Now they've turned on him.  

Wow!  What a shocker.  Who could have predicted that?

Well, Saint Louis Conservative for one.  In my very first post on this site, back in February, I wrote, that the Democrats and "independents" voting for McCain in Super Tuesday primaries weren't "likely to vote for him in the general election, just like his friends in the media aren't going to support him over Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama."  This was no great insight.  It was as obvious as a Bill Clinton lying about his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky.

But at least McCain is fighting back.  Take a look at the new video that his campaign has put together splicing clips of media-types gushing over Obama and setting them to music (your choice of song).  Chris Matthews seems particularly excited.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Endorses Hulshof Over Steelman - But is that a good thing?

Normally I would be wary of any candidate chosen by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch for endorsement in any election.  But I read with interest the Post's editorial endorsing Kenny Hulshof in the Republican gubernatorial primary against Sarah Steelman.  As the editors point out, both Hulshof and Steelman are conservative.

The Post picked Hulshof apparently because he knew what he was talking about and Steelman didn't seem to when interviewed by the editorial board.  As the editors wrote, "We admire Ms. Steelman's words but doubt their substance . . . Kenny Hulshof is better prepared and better qualified overall."

Anyone still undecided can check out the candidates answers to questions posed by STLtoday.com at this link or listen to a debate tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. on KMOX.  

The New York Times - All The News That's Fit To Print - with an asterisk

Since 1897, the New York Times has used the slogan "All The News That's Fit To Print."

In 2008, however, the slogan clearly needs an asterisk and a footnote:

We at the NYT don't really intend to print all the news, just the news that makes our liberal friends, especially those who happen to be running for office, look good.  And we've got such brilliant writers here (if we do say so ourselves) that we can make any puff piece about a Democrat fit enough to print.  It goes without saying, that positive news about a Republican or the success of conservative policies is not considered fit to print.  Likewise, negative stories about liberals and Democrats shall not be seen in our pages.

The latest story of bias was reported on the Drudge Report today.  Democrat presidential nominee-to-be Barack Obama wrote a piece called "My Plan for Iraq" which the Times published on July 14, 2008.  GOP contender John McCain wrote a rebuttal, shredding Obama's "Plan."  But the Times has rejected it, suggesting that McCain submit another draft - one that "mirrors" Obama's piece.  The McCain camp knows what that means . . . change your position to agree with us and we'll print what you have to say.  Thankfully, Drudge has printed McCain's piece in its entirety.  And Drudge very likely has more readers than the Times does anyway.  So all's well that ends well.

The New York Times is a private entity.  As such, it has the freedom to take whatever editorial position it chooses.  The Times is welcome to print only liberal opinion pieces if it chooses to do so.  But if that's the position taken, the rag needs to come down from its disingenuous high horse of purported independence and and admit its liberal bias.

Ron Paul - I can't disagree.

Back in May, I promised a friend that I would read Ron Paul's latest book, a "manifesto" entitled The Revolution.  I was a Paul skeptic and had figured that this guy was just the latest wacko contrarian from Texas - see H. Ross Perot - a fringe player in the political game.  I really thought that listening to Ron Paul or trying to find out what he stood for was a waste of time.  After all, my "friends" in the media told me that he was irrelevant.

I was wrong.  

I wish that every American would take the time to listen to Ron Paul and find out what he stands for.  What he does stand for is presented concisely in The Revolution.  

Before reading the book, I thought that I would be able to rip it to shreds.  After all, I thought it was written by a wacko, remember.  But as I read, I began to look for something, anything, that I disagreed with . . . after 167 pages of searching, I never found it.

The principles contained in The Revolution are the principles that will (if anything can) lead America back to a position of prominence and respect on the world stage.  They can place our economy back on firm footing and protect our freedom for generations to come.  There may be room for disagreement on the steps needed to get us back on track but Ron Paul is right about where we need to be.  And there's no time like the present to start heading in that direction.

Ron Paul may or may not be the right man to lead the country where it needs to go but I certainly hope that whoever want takes the reigns reads The Revolution first.

Abortion in the News

Abortion was on my mind as I read the front page section of today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch.  A cover story by Blythe Bernhard (links below) brought news of hope.  It should have been a positive story, one that people on either side of the abortion debate could have been happy to read.  The basic facts of the story are these . . . chemotherapy for pregnant women diagnosed with cancer seems not to be harmful for their babies.  That's great news and definitely newsworthy.  Kudos to the Post for reporting it.

Unfortunately, the story bore a misguided headline . . . "There was no hope.  But now . . . Birth is a viable choice."

Of course it is a viable choice!  It is the only viable choice.

According to Bernhard, "terminating the pregnancy was once seen as the only option to save the mother."  Thank God that that is no longer the case.  In fact, Bernhard also writes, "there's no evidence that terminating a pregnancy improves the outcome [of cancer treatment] for the mother."

Again, this story contains good news and I'm glad to have read it.  I hope that all women who are diagnosed with cancer during a pregnancy will be told this news.  But I'm still pained at the assumptions made . . . namely that it is anyone's choice or option, other than God's, to create or destroy a baby. 

Another abortion story was found on page A6 of today's Post.  It told a growing trend in "stem cell tourism."  Desperate Americans are traveling the globe - to places like Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and China - and paying up to $75,000.00 to be injected (or to have their children injected) with stem cells from the blood of aborted babies in the hopes of being "miraculously" cured of their afflictions.  The practice has been derided as "unethical and dangerous, if not fraudulent."  "There is no evidence that a shot of blood stem cells can magically fix any problem in every organ system, experts ays, but that's what stem-cell tourists are led to believe."

I'll not judge anybody who suffers from any horrendous disease, or whose loved one so suffers.  Many of us might be tempted in similar situations to grasp at any available straw.  However, one straw that must remain off-limits is destroying the life of another human being (born or unborn) to improve our own lives or the lives of a loved one.  Aborting babies to use their bodies as raw material for "miracle" cures should be unacceptable to any moral society.

(Here are two links from stltoday.com for the Bernhard story referenced above:   the first link contains the entire story as printed in today's newspaper - but does not include the second part of the headline, "Birth is a viable choice."  The second link omits the first paragraph of the story itself and the first part of the newspaper's headline but does use the misguided headline.  I included both links in an effort to allow you to see all of what I saw in the paper today.)

Help Stop Global Warming . . . Pollute the Air!

European scientists have published a study explaining the root cause of Europe's rising temperatures over the past twenty years. 

 

Al Gore's carbon emissions?  Good guess but no.

The cause, it seems, is CLEAN AIR.  Warming temperatures, scientists found, correspond with a decrease in atmospheric pollution.  Fewer particles of pollution floating around in the air means that less sunlight is blocked from reaching the planet's surface.  More sunlight getting to the ground means higher temperatures.

Now I'm not really calling for more air pollution but I do love the irony . . . the global warming nuts are fighting so hard to stop rising temperatures and they might actually be helping to speed up the process.  Awesome.

I stumbled across this post from Michael Asher, blogging at dailytech.com.  I noticed it when reading the Drudge-linked item noting that the American Physical Society has backed out of the so-called scientific consensus on global warming and now publicly proclaims that lots of its members do not believe in man-made global warming.  In a return to scientific principles, the APS is opening the door for debate.

A Toast to the Irish People

I must admit that I missed the news last month that Ireland voted down the Treaty of Lisbon and have, for now, blocked "reform" of the European Union.  (That "reform" actually, among other amazing usurpations, takes away individual nation-states' rights to conduct their own foreign policies instead replacing it with "a single foreign-policy chief to speak for Europe.")  

But today comes news that French president Nicolas Sarkozy may not be willing to let the Irish vote stand.  He's calling for Ireland to vote again on the treaty because he didn't like the result this time.

Europe's leaders and elites seem 100% behind the E.U. but freedom and national sovereignty are powerful forces with the people.  

Here's hoping that the Irish vote is a signal of things to come and that some day men and women of all the sovereign nations of Europe will be free to manage their own affairs without kowtowing to Brussels.

Sweet Home Chicago or Occupied Territory?

Today, Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich offered to send the National Guard into Chicago to help stop violent crime.  (Link to story.)  

I don't doubt the need.  But I wonder what has happened to civil society?  Is America destined to turn into an armed compound?  Is violence that far out of control in our cities?

Alex Mayer - A pleasant surprise at the P-D

Kudos to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch for employing Alex Mayer, who is posting regularly on "The Platform."  I've read several of his pieces and found them, much to my surprise given his employer, to be fair and balanced.  (Note that I haven't read everything he's written so he may well be as liberal as his employers.)  Take for example, his notes on interviews the P-D did with Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman . . .

"I liked a lot of what Hulshof had to say," Mayer wrote.  "He was articulate, clearly very knowledgeable about the issues important to Missouri, and gave off an authentic down-to-earth charm."

Mayer found Steelman less knowledgeable on specific issues but wrote that she "had several strengths of her own," including positioning herself as the choice of "change" instead of the "status quo."  Mayer was also "impressed by Steelman's account of her work as treasurer on divestment from companies that do business with state sponsors of terrorism."

I'm not sure the P-D carefully interviewed this guy before hiring him.  He seems much too willing to listen to Republicans and give them a fair shake.

But alas, he's just an undergraduate fellow - destined to return to college, I assume, this fall.  So by the time that the general election rolls around in November, Mayer will be out of the way.

All-Star Break

My apologies to regular readers (and irregular readers) who were hoping for something new to be posted last night.  The Saint Louis Conservative, unfortunately, got caught up watching the National League lose - again - in Major League Baseball's All-Star Game.

What's Next? Baldness?

Everything bad that happened in the world used to be "Reagan's fault."  Then, it became "Bush's fault."  Now, there's something new to blame for all our woes . . . global warming.

Today, there's a study reporting (with a straight face) that global warming will cause an additional 1.6 million to 2.2 million additional Americans to get kidney stones - yes, kidney stones - by 2050.  (See report.)  The theory seems to be that the hotter it gets, the more people will become dehydrated and get kidney stones as a result.

Balderdash!

Mark my words, by 2050, some environmental scientist will blame global warming for baldness . . . The sun is getting hotter and hotter, it is literally burning the hair off of men's scalps at an ever increasing rate . . . You can see it now, can't you.  I know that some scientist making that laughable claim before 2050 is much more likely than 1.6 million more kidney stones.

Unfair Attack on McLaughlin by the pro-Obama P.C. Police

John McLaughlin a curmudgeon rapidly approaching "old codger" status.  During the eighties his The McLaughlin Group on PBS was popular and iconic enough to be spoofed by Saturday Night Live.  With the proliferation of cable talk shows, in 2008 I'm not sure that anybody still watches the program.  

But the world seems up-in-arms about McLaughlin calling Barack Obama an "Oreo."  When referring to a person instead of a cookie, that's racist and derogatory.  And if McLaughlin actually did call Obama and Oreo, the heat he's taking would be justified.

But he didn't.

What he actually said is this:  "Question:  Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that someone like Obama, who fits the sterotype blacks once labeled as an Oreo, a black on the outside - a white on the inside, that an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle, which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?"

McLaughlin did not say, "Obama is an Oreo," or "I think that Obama is an Oreo."  He essentially asked his panelists a question:  does Jesse Jackson think of Obama in that crude, racist, derogatory way?  And then he elicited discussion on the subject from his panelists.

For those of you who have never watched the The McLaughlin Group, that's the show.  The host presents items for discussion in the form of questions to his panelists and raucous interplay, hopefully, ensues.  Reading every item of discussion as a presentation of the host's own viewpoint shows an ignorance of the program's format?

Here's another problem with the attacks on McLaughlin . . . he's not being quoted in context.  Take a look at CNN's politicalticker blog (to which Drudge linked).  Instead of quoting McLaughlin in one block, they have split what he actually said into two pieces to make it look more like he's simply referring to Obama as an Oreo.

But, what do you expect from CNN?  Honest reporting?  Ha.

Does Claire McCaskill read my blog?

Scanning Drudge today, I saw this item linked from Breitbart . . . the headline reads:  "US senator blames weak dollar for Anheuser-Busch takeover."  The article happens to be about Missouri's own Claire McCaskill who is quoted saying that InBev could not have afforded to buy this American company if not for the weak dollar.  

As a Democrat, she, of course, sees only President George W. Bush to blame for these circumstances but at least she sees the problem.  The dollar is weak and that's the problem.  One that I happened to point out yesterday.

What has a weak dollar done for St. Louis?

American icons are losing their "American" status at a rapid rate.  The latest example is right here at home . . . Anheuser-Busch, which today agreed to Belgian brewer InBev's $49.9 billion offer for the company.  (St. Louis Post-Dispatch story here.)

So much for Budweiser being "The Great American Lager."  InBev should stop that marketing campaign in its track or at least require a footnote.

Whoever we elect to lead our nation this November had better have a clue on strengthening the value of the dollar worldwide.

If that isn't done, what's the sequel to Belgian Budweiser?

Brazilian Big-Mac's?  

Indian iPods?  

Chinese Chevrolets?  

Korean Coca-Cola?

Money Matters

Conventional wisdom is telling us that Barack Obama is the odds-on favorite to win the presidency this fall.  But history also tells us that campaign money matters in presidential elections.  

So what can be learned by counting the money available to Obama and GOP rival John McCain?  The election this fall may not be a fait accompli.

Alex Mayer writing on The Platform at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch this afternoon analyzed the numbers.  According to Mayer, McCain had a stellar fundraising month in June and, combined with the Republican National Committee, has more than $95 million in cash on hand.  Obama and the Democratic National Committee are estimated to have just $47 million on hand.  

Plus, Obama's fundraising is declining and McCain's is on the rise.  And McCain will be getting over $84 million in federal campaign funds but Obama won't - since he flip-flopped and decided not to participate in the system.

I'm not on the McCain bandwagon by any means - after all, I'm conservative and he's not - but McCain is certainly better than Obama.  And these numbers give the country the audacity to hope Obama will fail in November.

Jackson-Obama Conspiracy?

At lunch today with a friend (one known in the blogosphere as The Tim Man), he surmised that Jesse Jackson's recent obnoxious and vulgar remarks about Barack Obama may have been made on purpose.  Credit to him for thinking of the possibility.  I hadn't.  But it does make a lot of sense.

A contrived fight between Jackson and Obama is unlikely to affect Obama's standing with black voters.  On the other hand, some percentage of those white voters whose ignorance (rather than an assessment of the particular man's liberal views) would prevent them from voting for a black man might be more likely to consider backing Obama if Jesse Jackson doesn't like him.

It turns out that The Tim Man thinking that these remarks could be beneficial to the Obama campaign.  Jonathan Salant, writing at Bloomberg.com, pushed the thought.  These comments, Salant wrote, could give Obama "an opportunity to win over some voters who have been skeptical of his candidacy."  

Salant quotes three professors in his piece.  One of them suggests that this controversy emphasizes Obama's call for personal responsibility since that's what Jackson seemed to be peeved about.  Another said that Jackson's comments could help show that Obama "is not a 'black' leader but just a Democrat running for president."  And the third, David Schultz, either smelled a conspiracy or dumb luck for Obama suggesting that "Obama should give Jackson and [Bill] O'Reilly an award for helping his campaign with white voters."

Is there a conspiracy?  Or is it just an honest gaffe that has given Obama an opportunity?  Anything is possible.

Jay Nixon Scandal?

It seems that Jay Nixon's cakewalk to the Governor's Mansion might be getting a little more difficult - not because Republican candidates Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman have stopped their counterproductive bickering - but because a scandal may be brewing.

It seems that a political consultant closely linked with Nixon may be involved in laundering campaign cash for Democrat Attorney General candidate Chris Koster.  In addition, there are hints of cash from Ameren being funneled to Nixon's own campaign coffers when Ameren was the target of a criminal investigation by Nixon's office.

Check out these two posts (one and two) on Missouri Political News Service for the details.

Global Warming Delusions in Australia

Today it was reported that a 17-year-old Australian has been diagnosed with "climate change delusion."  This unfortunate young man believes that drinking water will cause the deaths of millions by depleting the world's water supply.

It is a sad story and I don't doubt it.  I do, however, quarrel with the authors claim to have discovered  a new disorder.  They called it "a previously unreported phenomenon."

It seems clear to me that Al Gore and many other liberals have been suffering from "climate change delusion" for years.  

Jesse Jackson Supports Obama . . . for Eunuch

What a difference between Jesse Jackson's public support of Barack Obama's presidential bid and his private thoughts . . . 

On Sunday Jackson's true feelings were caught by a live television microphone while waiting to be interviewed.  It seems that Jackson is upset because Obama is "talking down to black people" about faith-based initiatives.  So Jackson wants to geld his fellow Chicago Democrat.  He's heard saying that he wants to "cut his [acorns] out."  Check out the video here.

So much for Barack Obama as a uniting force.  He can't even get Jesse Jackson's support.

Congressional Approval Rating Drops - It is FAR Below Bush's

President George W. Bush, we all know and we're reminded constantly by the press, is not a popular president.  According to Rasmussen Reports, his job approval rating fell to a record low in June.  Just 32% of Americans approve of the way President Bush is doing his job.

That's not great, but surprise . . . President Bush is more than three times as popular as the Democrat-controlled Congress!  The same polling organization, Rasmussen Reports, announced today that just 9% of voters rate Congress as doing a good or excellent job.  52% of the country believes that Congress is doing a poor job.

Why doesn't this get banner headlines across the country?  That's easy.  Big media is trying to throw this election to the Democrats, just like it threw the Republican primary to John McCain.  But nobody intelligent enough to read this blog needed me to tell them that.

Why aren't the American people champing at the bit to throw the Democrats out of Congress?  That one I need help with.

G8 Proposal to Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions In Half . . . But Wait . . . Doing So Could Starve the Planet

The Group of Eight industrial nations meeting in Japan issued a statement setting a goal of cutting worldwide greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050.  (See AP story here.)  It appears that even George W. Bush has caved to the environmentalists and their fear mongering.

But will cutting CO2 emissions actually be harmful?

Maybe so, scientists in Germany have been studying the effects of CO2 on plants.  Much to the environmentalists' chagrin, increased CO2 actually INCREASES crop yields.  Barley, beet and wheat output actually increased 10% when those crops were subjected to increases in the greenhouse gas.  (See the Breitbart story here.)

So, do we really want to reduce CO2?

In all seriousness, the global warming crowd is all about hype and hysteria.  They can't predict future but there is attention and money in a steady drumbeat of doom.  Take what any of them say with a grain of salt.

Ways Out of Iraq on the Horizon?

In 2003, a coalition of forces led by American troops invaded Iraq and successfully ousted the regime of Saddam Hussein.  Since then, the coalition, with dwindling inclusion from other nations, has occupied Iraq.  Our troops are there now fighting insurgents and supporting the democratically elected government led by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

For months if not years, President George W. Bush has endured calls from the American left to withdraw or to set a date for withdrawal of our troops.  He has steadfastly opposed those calls because setting a departure date would likely embolden America's enemies and tell them how long they had to hold out before they could claim victory by outlasting the invaders.  I think Bush was right.

  

Once we got into Iraq, short of defeat, there were only two ways out . . . total victory or at the request of the Iraqi people through their elected government.  It seems now that one or both of those ways out of Iraq might be opening up.

First, see this story from the London Times:  joint forces of the U.S. and Iraq are driving toward "one of the most spectacular victories of the war on terror."  Al-Qaeda in Iraq has taken a "last stand" in Mosul and appears to be on the verge of annihilation. 

Second, the Iraqi government seems on the verge of asking foreign troops to leave.  According to this Reuters story, Prime Minister al-Maliki is "looking at the necessity of terminating foreign presence on Iraqi lands."  He wants an understanding on withdrawal of troops or a timetable for withdrawal.

If the Iraqi government truly wants foreign troops out and can handle things on their own, then by all means, bring the troops home.  Americans should not be fighting or dying for Iraqi security if their own people are capable of doing the job.

BBC Tracks Candidates Flip-Flops

Is anybody surprised that John McCain and Barack Obama are flip-flopping more than a fish out of water?  

Didn't think so.

Check out the BBC's flip-flop report at this link.

McCain to Balance Budget in Four Years

It sounds to me like wishful thinking but Republican presidential candidate John McCain is set to announce his plan to balance the federal budget in his first term in office.  So says The Politico.

The devil, of course, and the smoke and mirrors could be in the details of the plan, which is supposed to be announced Monday.  McCain's plan hinges on spending less on the Iraq war after winning it and on economic growth.  Hopefully both of those things happen but can we count on either?

Some of the specifics in the McCain plan should definitely be implemented.  McCain is proposing a one-year spending "pause" on all non-defense/veterans discretionary spending.  Great idea!  We don't have the money, don't spend any more.  During the year-long pause, McCain proposes evaluation of all those spending programs and then setting out a plan to "modernize, streamline, consolidate, reprioritize and, where needed TERMINATE individual programs."  That's music to conservative ears.

McCain also wants to increase domestic exploration for oil and natural gas, and lift the current moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.  He also wants to get us started on the path toward 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030.  For gas consumers, he's proposing a summer holiday from the federal gasoline tax.  McCain's on track on these energy proposals.  Our country must end - or at least significantly lower - its dependence on foreign oil and I've yet to see a tax cut I didn't like.

Like I said, I doubt that McCain can pull this off - especially if the Democrats hold Congress.  But at least on budget matters, he's pointing in the right direction.

Is this enough reason to vote for this guy?  Is it at least enough reason to vote for him when failing to do so counts as a vote for Barack Obama?

Happy Independence Day!

Take some time today to enjoy your freedoms.  While our country has its problems, there is no better place to live on earth.  

Be thankful for all that you have been given as an American, today and every day.  And be thankful for those who fought and died to protect your freedom and for all of those who are still fighting and dying to do the same.

This July 4, we every one of us would be well served to read the document that gave birth to our nation.

Copied below is the text of the Declaration of Independence.  Thanks to ushistory.org. 

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer,James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Torn on Corn

As a regular reader of the blog would know, I really want the Missouri Republican Party to lock in behind a single candidate for governor.  The endless fighting between Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman is making the election of Democrat Jay Nixon a virtual certainty.  And, in fairness to Hulshof, Steelman always seems to be starting it.  She's the one who has most often and most vociferously violated Ronald Reagan's "Eleventh Commandment" that "Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican."  (Ryan Cooper at the Springfield News-Leader called her on the carpet for that violation last week.)

But a regular reader of this blog would also know that I think it mad that we're mandating ethanol when food prices are going through the roof.  (Link)  Steelman, Hulshof and Nixon were all supporters of mandatory ethanol in Missouri but Steelman has now seen reason.  She changed her position and, yesterday, called for a repeal of that mandate because of escalating food prices and a worsening economic outlook.  Good for her.

Now I'm torn on corn.  Steelman is right on this issue but I still believe that she's destined to lose to Hulshof in the primary.  One by one, the state's Republicans are lining up behind him.  Monday the popular Blunt - Congressman Roy - endorsed him while unpopular Governor Matt has remained silent.

Could Hulshof see the light on this issue?  Is it too much to ask for?  Probably.

Midwest Flooding Blamed on Global Warming

I suppose it had to happen . . . since the predicted mega-hurricanes haven't born out since 2005, the environmentalists have moved on to blame the latest weather incident - flooding here in the Midwest - on global warming.  The National Wildlife Federation has trotted out its own "climate scientist" who is quoted in this Reuters article as saying that "a warming climate is supplying the very conditions that fuel these kinds of weather events."  This "climate scientist," Amanda Staudt, claims that since warmer air can carry more water than cooler air, more rain will come from global warming.

Did I miss something?  Have we been having a heat wave?  Have we been hotter than ever?  No to all three.  Staudt's theory holds less water than cool air would.

Reuters also quotes Nicholas Pinter from Southern Illinois University.  He is critical of the assumptions made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers when predicting that the Mississippi River and its tributaries will flood in certain places only once every 100 or 500 years.  He is critical with good reason . . . in the last 35 years, there have been four 100-year floods.  The Corps of Engineers doesn't account for global warming BUT, Pinter points out, the Corps also fails to account for the effects of land use and navigation construction.

Pinter and the Reuters article also fail to account for the most important factor in all of this . . . we human beings don't control the weather!  We can't predict rain (see any local newscast for proof of that) let alone control when it falls.

And we can't control rivers either, no matter how many levees we build.  Eventually rivers go where they want to go.  Mark Twain put it best many years ago when he said, "The Mississippi River will always have its own way; no engineering skill can persuade it to do otherwise."

Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, cyclones, tsunamis, droughts and earthquakes will come whether the earth is warming or not.