Energy - Why we won't have enough

Daniel Greenfield's article on our lack of planning for our energy needs. Superb, but depressing. It covers all the bases and explains why America is in a decline. A country such as ours cannot run with insufficient energy.

Solar and wind are useful though expensive alternatives for individual homes and small businesses, but are not viable for general energy production. Wind machines are too expensive to make and maintain, and their output is limited by the vagaries of the wind. No steady output, no reliable production. Hydro is too limited by location, as is geothermal - only more so. New Zealand gets a useful amount of energy from geothermal activity, but America's geothermal sites are too few and far between.

Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant was old technology, with safeguards inadequate for the severe earthquake it suffered. Today's technology, including thorium reactor technology that does not produce the long-term radioactive waste that uranium-based reactors do, is much safer. Nothing can be made fail-safe, however, which is why we don't use nuclear reactors to power America cheaply and reliably. Our "leaders" refuse to permit technology which isn't 100% safe. Daniel explains it much better than I could. Read this now.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2011/03/little-energy-is-dangerous-thing.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+%28from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News%29

Why Libya? Why now?

In other posts, I have mentioned that I believe Pres_ent Obama is interfering in Libya's internal politics because he is sucking up to the Saudis and the Arab League. It is also quite conceivable that he is aware the Muslim Brother Hoods are in position to direct the "rebels" in Libya, and end up controlling whatever new government comes to power there.

Monica Crowley makes some excellent points in her article "Some Simple Questions". Here is #8:

8. There are brutal dictators all over the world who are detaining and killing their own people: in Iran, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Russia, and China, to name but a few. If Obama’s standard for intervention is the “responsibility to protect,” then is he prepared to intervene in those countries to protect those peoples? Is he prepared to demand the removal of those governments? Is he ready to call for and then actively support regime change in those capitals as well?

We all know the answer to that one: of course not. That being the case, the only other reasoning that makes any sense to me whatsoever is Pres_ent Obama's need to not appear powerless in front of the European response to the Arab League's desire for a no-fly zone over Libya, and to bow (literally) to the wishes of Riyadh.

Read the rest of Monica's article: http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2011/03/21/some-simple-questions/

But, what is even more frightening than a Commander-in-Chief who is out of control is this possibility: that this could establish a precedent to be used against Israel. Read Frank Gaffney's terrifying look at one possible outcome:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney032211.php3cols/gaffney032211.php3

Three massacred children

Caroline Glick writes about the pervasiveness of Anti-Semitism today, not only in the Middle East and Europe, but here in America as well. It isn't a sobering thought for me, an American gentile who was raised Roman Catholic in New England and then New York - among the Jews of New York. No, the realization is not sobering, it is enraging. Not only that so many people feel comfortable parading their anti-Semitism but that there is no outcry amongst the public about it. That is seems acceptable to many, or barely worth a moment's thought about how wrong it is to hate in such a fashion.

Speak of discomfort being on an airplane with muslims - who are responsible for over 90% of all airline terrorism - and you get fired, pilloried in the Mainstream Media, told to seek psychiatric help. Speak about the horrific slaughter of a Jewish family in Israel and there is silence in the Mainstream Media. Speak of the rejoicing in the street of the "Palestinians" living in Gaza and other parts of Israel and you get silence. No condemnation. And those political figures who tepidly, weakly condemn the act do nothing to respond to the fact that muslims, Palestinians in particular, are responsible. That they believe it their duty to slaughter Jews, including infants and small children.

I am not religious, but if I were, I would be expecting another apocalypse from G-d. If not flood, then fire. For the people living upon this earth who cannot see the incredible foulness of their thoughts and behavior need to be expunged from the face of this earth. That the human race can hold within itself so many unspeakably foul individuals and groups is a travesty that demands such an apocalypse.

http://jewishworldreview.com/0311/glick031511.php3

Bits and Pieces

In trying to keep this site active, I am going to start posting snippets of information from blogs, political commentary sites, and whatever else catches my eye. Here are a few posts from Thomas Sowell, an incredibly brilliant economist and political commentator:

When political commentators from the Fox News Channel had books whose sales would normally make the New York Times' non-fiction best-seller list, the New York Times changed the rules for putting books on that list. Thus best-selling political books by Mike Huckabee and Dick Morris appeared last Sunday on a more obscure list of miscellaneous personal advice and how-to books, such as "Weight Watchers New Complete Cookbook."

An e-mail from a perceptive reader points out that, although Congressional "earmarks" represent a very small part of federal spending, they can be used as bribes to buy the votes of members of Congress on bills involving the spending of vastly larger sums of the taxpayers' money.

When the Federal Reserve cites statistics to claim that there is not much evidence of inflation, we need to keep in mind that the statistics they rely on exclude food and energy prices. The cost of living is no sweat if you can do without electricity and food. (I'm sure Bernanke can.)

The Obama administration seems to be following what might be called "the Detroit pattern"-- increasing taxes, harassing businesses, and pandering to unions. In the short run, it got mayors re-elected. In the long-run, it reduced Detroit from a thriving city to an economic disaster area, whose population was cut in half, as its most productive citizens fled.

Intolerance may not promote progress but it can promote survival. An intolerant Islamic world may outlast the Western world that seems ready to tolerate anything, including the undermining of its own fundamental values and threats to its continued existence.

You can read the archives of articles by Thomas Sowell at: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp and: http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/

Another excellent writer - also an economist widely respected in conservative circles - is Walter Williams. He responds here to liberals talking about a "silver lining" to the devastation in Japan, claiming it will "stimulate their economy" to rebuild all that has been destroyed. These fools refuse to look at the fact that it requires diverting resources that could have been used to do something other than replace what was destroyed. This is called "The Broken Window Fallacy", written by the philosopher Frederic Bastiat. Williams says:

"After the 2001 terrorist attack, economist and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman wrote in his New York Times column "After the Horror," "Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could do some economic good." He explained that rebuilding the destruction would stimulate the economy through business investment and job creation.

Do a simple smell test on these examples of economic lunacy. Would the Japanese economy face even greater opportunities for economic growth had the earthquake and tsunami also struck Tokyo, Hiroshima, Yokohama and other major cities? Would the 9-11 terrorists have done us an even bigger economic favor had they destroyed buildings in other cities? The belief that society benefits from destruction is lunacy."

Read the whole article here: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williamns032311.php3

Caroline Glick is another terrific commentator who writes frequently about issues affecting Israel and the Middle East. Here is the beginning of an article on the current intervention in Libya by our military:

"The US's new war against Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi is the latest sign of its steady regional decline. In media interviews over the weekend, US military chief Adm. Michael Mullen was hard-pressed to explain either the goal of the military strikes in Libya or their strategic rationale.

Mullen's difficulty explaining the purpose of this new war was indicative of the increasing irrationality of US foreign policy.

Traditionally, states have crafted their foreign policy to expand their wealth and bolster their national security. In this context, US foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally been directed towards advancing three goals: Guaranteeing the free flow of inexpensive petroleum products from the Middle East to global market; strengthening regimes and governments that are in a position to advance this core US goal at the expense of US enemies; and fighting against regional forces like the pan-Arabists and the jihadists that advance a political program inherently hostile to US power.

Other competing interests have periodically interfered with US Middle East policy. And these have to greater or lesser degrees impaired the US's ability to formulate and implement rational policies in the region.

These competing interests have included the desire to placate somewhat friendly Arab regimes that are stressed by or dominated by anti-US forces; a desire to foster good relations with Europe; and a desire to win the support of the US media.

Under the Obama administration, these competing interests have not merely influenced US policy in the Middle East. They have dominated it. Core American interests have been thrown to the wayside."

http://jewishworldreview.com/0311/glick032211.php3

Allow me to suggest making JWR (Jewish World Review) an every day stop. Excellent articles there not just on politics, but world news, humor, medical and financial columns too. If you go there and like it, consider a small donation to them, or - as I do - a small monthly amount can be donated as well. Three dollars a month (or a $36 donation) will get you a limited edition JWR bar-mitzvah yamulke :-)

Objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear

Read a great article today on the Bonnie Blue Blog dealing with the topic of racism, especially the accusation thereof. Here it is at: http://thebonnieblueblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/on-racism-and-human-nature.html#comments

At one point, the blogger has this to say:

'The mere association of an individual with the label is enough to taint the person in the eyes of many, quite separate from the truth or accuracy of the label. With such a label- damaged reputation, the person's or institution's influence will wane. Such is the power of using public labels--the accuser is elevated, the accused is diminished.

In fact, this is a commonly used courtroom tactic: say something outrageous about the accused, or a potentially powerful witness, then withdraw the statement to avoid the objection, and the damage is done. The jury has heard the words. Their opinion is tainted, despite the judge's instruction: "The Jury will disregard..." As a lawyer friend of mine is fond of saying: "Just ignore the big pink elephant in the back of the room…" '

What is really great about this post is the way the writer describes our visceral reaction to differences in culture as being the delineator, not concerns about race, nationality, or gender. Ethnicity, yes, in the cultural differences that signal that ethnicity. Language, dress (costume), etc. While liberals attempt to define conservatives and libertarians with the racist label (and divert attention from their inability to argue logically) he explains the motivators that are fairly universal within the human race: the sense of "strangeness" that causes discomfort or distrust. Yet he speaks clearly of his attempt to censor these feelings when they occur, to try to judge individuals for who they are rather than categorizing them by their differences.

It is well written and worth the time. I didn't see anything in his post that I disagree with. Read it when you can.

Making this blog more active

I have been spending a lot of time and energy on a list in which I am fond of participating . The members of said list are quite a cross-section of America based on location and occupation, but share a commonality of interest in firearms, the Second Amendment (it isn't about hunting), conservatism, and hoping for better times. A fair amount of discussion takes place there, and - being who I am - I was often in the thick of it, or even instigated the topic of discussion.

Not being shy about offering my opinion, this sometimes generated a little heat and disagreement. Secondary to my passion, my zeal, along with my inability to suffer what I felt was BS, my comments were judged by some to be excessively rough, or unfair. Now, I can stand criticism and don't mind being disliked by some members of any group I am in. I don't expect I will ever please the majority of the folks I come in contact with in my life. If pleasing the majority required compromising my principles, I certainly wouldn't want to please them.

This list, however, is an important venue for most of the members who populate it. That includes me. Sharing thoughts, sharing information, being a resource available to all and sundry on a wide variety of disciplines , the list serves a valuable function in our lives. That social interaction fulfills a need for us that is difficult to meet in our everyday contacts at home and at work.

An attempt to discuss various aspects of the Gifford/Tucson shooting debacle led to a heated exchange between myself and another list member. It got nasty at one point, and the other fellow stopped posting, although I don't feel it was just because of my response to his comments. I do feel certain, however, that several others on the list felt I was too hard on this fellow. Having been a member of the list not long after it was started, but having been away from the list for a couple of years, there might have been the perception with some that my recent return was not necessarily a good thing.

Here in the past few days, another discussion which began in a reasonably gentle fashion heated up. Comments were made by both of us that we each felt were a bit "snarky", although only one of us voiced that particular complaint. When my fellow lister decided to suggest I was in favor of returning to a racist venue that was known as "Jim Crow" laws - which were by definition laws used to discriminate against blacks specifically - I accused him of thereby calling me a racist, and reminded him that making such an implication is a common liberal technique in avoiding the real discussion. Three other list members who I like and respect decided I was out of line and said so, one of them stating that he would leave the list if this continued, to which the other two agreed. I didn't feel my arguments or the heat of my rhetoric warranted this, but their perceptions obviously differed from mine.

Well, I have no desire to feel as if I have chased another three members off of this list, which is important to all of us who dwell there. Consequently, I have decided to take a hiatus. As several other members of the list asked me not to leave it, saying that they valued my commentary, I thought that returning to this blog and putting some effort into keeping it more current might serve as well for commenting and posting information I believe is useful to know. This won't be quite as good as interacting directly with the folks on that list, unless they respond here as well. I learned much from discussion there, and was able to change my own thinking when it became obvious there were things I didn't know, hadn't thought through, or was simply wrong about.

Hopefully I will be able to entice a few people to read my posts here and comment upon them, enabling me to consider their viewpoints, their perception of the validity of my thoughts. I benefit greatly from having my thoughts and opinions questioned or at least discussed. Writing them and casting them out into the void is not only unsatisfying, it doesn't help at all with the process of clarifying the concepts or beliefs I try to formulate and distill. I am opinionated enough that I don't necessarily need someone else to validate my thoughts, but discussing them does help to develop them, even if only because the need to explain demands further examination of these concepts in an attempt to find the words required to make them more clear.

So. Visit, please. Comment at will. Take me to task, certainly, if my logic is flabby or you feel I am mistaken about something. If you truly think I am using improper techniques such as strawmen or refusing to answer direct questions, skirting issues instead of responding to them, tell me so. I don't like these methods of argument when they are used upon me, so I would like to be called on them if you feel I am truly doing it myself. If you only wish to read and don't have the time or inclination to comment, that is fine also. As I read things on the Web that interest me, that please me or anger me, that strike a chord in my heart because they agree with my worldview or open my eyes to things I was not already aware of, I will post them here for you to share. Feel free to pass them on if you wish, crediting only whatever source they came from to do honor to those that originated them. Feel free to share whatever I write that takes your fancy as well.

Good luck to you and those you care about during the next few years. Let us hope they don't become the nightmare I fear they could become.

The Saga Continues

I did get a response from jlevyyellow on Gates of Vienna:

jlevyellow said...

Reg T wrote, "While visions of sugarplums dance in your head, you might consider the fact that A) a lot of us older folks have skills you younger folks don't have that enable survival when normal economies and modes of exchange fail. Grown a garden lately, young man?"

Thanks for the compliment. I am 67 and yes I have been growing a garden since my retirement. No goats yet, however, I am looking at the possibility of 2-3 Boers! Very pretty!

By the way, you should have known that I was older, since I can write a coherent sentence.

To which I replied:

"jlevyyellow,

True you do write with fair eloquence, but your judgment argues against experience. That is why I knew you are younger. We older folk don't write of ourselves as surplus, non-productive people. So, I question your veracity as well as your judgment. I seriously doubt you are over thirty, young man, no matter what you pretend in your post. You display youth's mistaken equivalence of education with intelligence and maturity.

Nice try. Massive fail."

I should have added the part from his original post where he states:

older people will die off quickly, as will children and all non-productive people. These are the expensive populations that are dragging us down.

Obviously, using the “us” pronoun indicates he does not belong to the “non-productive”, “expensive” population. So, he isn’t older, isn’t a child, and doesn’t consider himself non-productive. My guess is under thirty, but he could be a bit older than that. Young people are maturing much later these days than they did just a generation or two ago.