Skip to Content

September 2010

Your tax dollars at work: New cookstoves for everyone! In other countries!

I am all for helping out the less fortunate, but I believe it should be a voluntary action of the individual.  Since taxes are mandatory, this type of thing falls under the definition of coercion.  $50 million is being spent on the first program, nearly $1 million on the second.  And these are just two of the most recent.  But do we get a say in how this money gets spent?  How about oversight?  Nope, sorry sucka.

NEW YORK, Sept 21 (Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will announce on Tuesday a U.S. contribution of more than $50 million toward providing clean cooking stoves in developing countries to reduce deaths from smoke inhalation and fight climate change.

The U.S. funding, which will be spread over five years, is part of a Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves being started to combat a problem officials equate with malaria and unclean water in terms of their health impact worldwide.

Some 1.9 million premature deaths, mostly among women and young children, occur every year due to smoke inhalation from rudimentary stoves, which in many cases consist of a few stones and an open fire inside or outside a shelter, officials said.

Smoke from such cooking methods can lead to childhood pneumonia, lung cancer, bronchitis and cardiovascular disease while contributing to climate change through emissions of carbon dioxide and methane -- two major greenhouse gases -- and black carbon.

of those who use the cookstoves?  On that note, this tangent on global warming, climate change, climate shift, , or whatever the term of the day is, .  In the meantime, here's :

Doing all they can: Oregon State paints practice field blue

An anonymous donor has given Oregon State the means to practice on a blue field in preparation for Saturday's game. Gotta give them credit for doing all they can.

OSU paints field blue


Unalienable rights no longer endowed by our Creator

I read the following today.

President Obama removed the reference to the "Creator" from the Declaration of Independence when he quoted a portion at a meeting of the Congressional Hispanic Congress.

Obama said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

But the the actual quotation is:

"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."

I wondered to myself, "Self?  Why did he say that?"  I can't figure out if it was because he has something against the Creator, or perhaps he anyone in the audience.  That seems plausible.

Perhaps he doesn't believe that those rights are given by the Creator.  He left the inalienable in there, which would mean those rights still can't be taken away.  But if they didn't come from God but rather from some other source (the government, society, etc.), then maybe they are not as set in stone.  Can rights given to someone be taken away by the giver?

Maybe he just forgot and misquoted it.  Yeah, I'll bet that's it.

LA at 12% unemployment but the stimulus saves the day! Or not.

Los Angeles was alotted $111 million of the $800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  You'd think they'd be able to do something spectacular with that amount of money.  Unfortunately it has created or saved a whopping 55 jobs.  For those who don't want to take out the calculator, that means each of those jobs has cost the taxpayer $2,018,000.  via :

The Los Angeles City Controller said on Thursday the city's use of its share of the $800 billion federal stimulus fund has been disappointing.

The city received $111 million in stimulus under American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) approved by the Congress more than year ago.

"I'm disappointed that we've only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million," says Wendy Greuel, the city's controller, while releasing an audit report.

Blood Money: Exposing The Evil That Is The Abortion Industry

Reposting at RedState.  Long but worth reading.  Gets me all worked up...

In 1984, the documentary opened the eyes of many to the absolute horror of abortion. 26 years later, the documentary now strives to help hammer the final nail into the coffin of the state-sanctioned killing of our unborn children. This documentary uncovers the pro-abortion industry for what it is: a killing machine for profit, based on an agenda filled with outright lies and an utter lack of humanity.  Finally, the voices of those lost lives, who have died at the hands of an industry devoted solely to killing, can be heard. Blood Money also exposes something frequently overlooked; the harm that abortion does to women. Often, there are two lives lost in an abortion. The life of the unborn baby is literally, and unmercilessly, snuffed out. The woman’s life is often figuratively lost; her life from then on is one full of guilt, regret and deep pain.

Narrated by Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, this film exposes the truth behind an industry that has harmed untold numbers of people and taken the lives of 50 million innocent children. In the film Dr. King speaks not only from the perspective of a post abortive woman, but as a civil rights leader about the injustice of abortion.

“Bloodmoney brings startling revelation to the forefront of the pro-life battle and exposes the true agenda behind the abortion industry. This film is truly part of the plan to set the captives free,” - Dr. Alveda King, director of African American Outreach, Priests for Life.

For too long, the pro-abortion regime has been able to use strawmen arguments, lies and fear tactics. No more. With medical advancements and with more and more people once enshrined in the pro-abortion industry speaking out, the truth is coming forth. The truth will set us free. And will save the lives of countless babies and the women who bear them. The mantra of safe, legal and rare is now known for the lie it has always been. Firstly, safe? There is not one whit of concern for safety. This has been proven time and time again, most recently by the outrageous outrage over the Attorney General of Virginia fighting for at least some . Why the outrage? Because some would have to close. It dips too far into their profits to actually, you know, meet the same safety standards that are afforded animals at a veterinary clinic. It’s just women and their “punishing” babies, right? No big whoop.

Government now looking at retirement funds

Ha ha!  You thought you only needed to worry about market conditions (which are volatile enough on their own) where it comes to your 401K, right?  No longer.  Peter Raymond at that $7.8 trillion in private assets such as IRAs, 401Ks, 457s, and 403Bs are being ogled by the Administration.

Is the government making plans to confiscate your retirement money? The Obama administration is certainly the idea.

This question no longer seems far-fetched when the group-thinkers in Washington unabashedly promote a doctrine of wealth redistribution and central planning. These Keynesian socialists know they will need vast new sources of revenues to fund their relentless spending binges to "transform" this nation. A logical next step would be to legitimize the confiscation of private retirement assets -- an idea that was in the recent past by the Clinton administration.

According to the , there was $7.835 trillion in IRA, 401K, 457, and 403b accounts in 2009. That is certainly too large a sum to be ignored by the big spending social engineers in Washington. Bureaucrats and politicians have been hard at work formulating a social justice excuse to legislate an historic seizure of private assets. This would not be the the statists extorted wealth from U.S. citizens on a massive scale.

The public shakedown always employs a two-step tactic to repeatedly dupe the malleable electorate. First, the statists fabricate and incessantly excoriate a contrived crisis of social injustice that is victimizing helpless and unknowing Americans. Next, they "" -- a term Pelosi uses and -- insidious legislation disguised as a necessary and compassionate solution that makes participation and universal funding compulsory by force of the law. 

Is this scene in France the future of the U.S.?

'Islamization' of Paris a Warning to the West. Read the whole story at .


PARIS - Friday in Paris. A hidden camera shows streets blocked by huge crowds of Muslim worshippers and enforced by a private security force.

This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security. But the police have been ordered not to intervene.

Liberal Supreme Court Justice: Burning the Koran is not protected by the First Amendment

Over at , there is the following tidbit.  There are two things that concern me about this.  One, that the 1st Amendment is somehow different now that we have the internet, and two, that the world has become America's "crowded theater."  This suggests to me that the interpretation of the Constitution is ok to change based on circumstance; that laws can be bent to fit.  It also suggests that there is more worry over the reaction of the act than there is over the right of expression.  Do book burnings cross the line?  Is it because they are considered holy books?  Or is it because in this politically correct age it is not acceptable to rub anyone the wrong way?

Last week we saw a – with 30 members in his church – threaten to burn Korans which lead to riots and killings in Afghanistan. We also saw Democrats and Republicans alike assume that Pastor Jones had a Constitutional right to burn those Korans.  But Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer told me on "" that he's not prepared to conclude that -- in the internet age -- the First Amendment condones Koran burning.

“Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theater,” Breyer told me. “Well, what is it?  Why?  Because people will be trampled to death.  And what is the crowded theater today?  What is the being trampled to death?”

Last week could be cited for public burning – but that was “the extent of the laws that we have available to us.”  said on that “

For Breyer, that right is not a foregone conclusion.

“It will be answered over time in a series of cases which force people to think carefully.  That’s the virtue of cases,” Breyer told me. “And not just cases. Cases produce briefs, briefs produce thought. Arguments are made. The judges sit back and think. And most importantly, when they decide, they have to write an opinion, and that opinion has to be based on reason.  It isn’t a fake.”

Breyer, the author of “Making Our Democracy Work,” told me it’s a “rickety system” -- but it’s worked “fairly well” for a long time.

If you can't beat 'em, add the legislation into a sure-bet defense policy bill

I hate when politicians to this.  Because he knows he can't get the DREAM Act to pass on its own, Harry Reid has tacked it onto a bill that almost always passes with support on both sides of the isle.  I find it underhanded, and that tactic is one of the reasons that I support Downsize DC's "," among other campaigns they have sponsored.  From :

Washington (CNN) - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday he will add the DREAM Act, a controversial immigration measure, to a defense policy bill the Senate will take up next week.

The decision means the defense bill, which often passes with bipartisan support, will be home to two major, thorny political issues – the other being the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Reid called the DREAM Act "really important" and said it should be passed because it provides a path to citizenship for young illegal immigrants who go to college or serve in the military. DREAM is an acronym for Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act.

"I know we can't do comprehensive immigration reform," Reid said at a news conference. "But those Republicans we had in the last Congress have left us."


Many Hispanic voters are angry with Democratic leaders for not doing more to pass an immigration overhaul. The decision by Reid to add the DREAM Act now could help soothe that anger.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell called Reid's decision "needlessly controversial."
The Senate will need 60 votes to take up the bill next week, and Reid said Tuesday he doesn't know if he has enough votes.

Boise State - Virginia Tech video recap goodness

This is a really well done video showcasing highlights of the BSU VT game.  It makes me want to watch the game all over again.



by Dr. Radut