It's been a long, hard, slog.
Manufacturing output rose 0.5 percent in July, the same rate of increase as was recorded for June. In July, the output of mines increased 1.2 percent, and the output of utilities rose 1.3 percent. At 98.0 percent of its 2007 average, total industrial production in July was 4.4 percent above its year-earlier level. Capacity utilization for total industry moved up 0.4 percentage point to 79.3 percent, a rate 1.0 percentage point below its long-run (1972--2011) average.
That's good. But with demand dropping like a rock in Europe and PRChina, and automotive-sales forecasts heading downward, it may not last very long.
HT: CalcRisk
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Green Card "Geniuses"? Not Really
The erstwhile Prof Matloff blows apart Big Cheap-Labor's mantra.
...only about 35% of [Cal State's] master's degrees are earned by foreign students. But anecdotal information indicates that the [Cal State East Bay] program is typical among schools of that level. This jibes with the old NSF study cited by David North, which found that among PhD programs, the lower the ranking, the higher the proportion of international students.
This of course flies in the face of the "best and brightest" claims made by the industry lobbyists concerning the H-1Bs hired off U.S. university campuses. It thus also has implications for the "staple a green card to
their diplomas" bills. I must once again make the disclaimer that every school, regardless of reputational ranking has a few extremely bright students, but nevertheless the average quality of the students at CSUEB
is far below that of Stanford, across the bay. Proponents of the "staple" bills paint a picture of granting green cards to tens of thousands of geniuses, and it just ain't so.
But they're a helluvalot cheaper than US citizens, ya' know.
...only about 35% of [Cal State's] master's degrees are earned by foreign students. But anecdotal information indicates that the [Cal State East Bay] program is typical among schools of that level. This jibes with the old NSF study cited by David North, which found that among PhD programs, the lower the ranking, the higher the proportion of international students.
This of course flies in the face of the "best and brightest" claims made by the industry lobbyists concerning the H-1Bs hired off U.S. university campuses. It thus also has implications for the "staple a green card to
their diplomas" bills. I must once again make the disclaimer that every school, regardless of reputational ranking has a few extremely bright students, but nevertheless the average quality of the students at CSUEB
is far below that of Stanford, across the bay. Proponents of the "staple" bills paint a picture of granting green cards to tens of thousands of geniuses, and it just ain't so.
But they're a helluvalot cheaper than US citizens, ya' know.
Obozo Channels Biden
No dead grannies?
Um… Paul Ryan and House Republicans passed the farm bill two weeks ago.
But, since when did facts matter?
No teleprompter, no "lightworker."
HT: Gateway
Obama blasted Paul Ryan for not passing a farm bill to help suffering farmers in Iowa.
Um… Paul Ryan and House Republicans passed the farm bill two weeks ago.
But, since when did facts matter?
No teleprompter, no "lightworker."
HT: Gateway
Not Really a Cartoon
HT: MoonBattery
Bailout Hole Gets Deeper
Another Big Gummint Fail.
The government still holds 500 million shares of GM stock and needs to sell them for about $53 each to recover its entire $49.5 billion bailout.
(Now some bozo "anonymous" will tell me in the combox that Ryan voted FOR the bailout and that means that Ryan is Lenin's great-grandchild's bastard son so how could ANYONE possibly vote for him....)
I've always had doubts about the auto bailout; a packaged BK would have preserved most of GM and most likely would have produced a better outcome for all the players. But it is what it is.
Further, $25Bn is pocket-change in the Waste & Corruption FedGov racket.
The Treasury Department says in a new report the government expects to lose more than $25 billion on the $85 billion auto bailout. That's 15 percent higher than its previous forecast.
In a monthly report sent to Congress on Friday, the Obama administration boosted its forecast of expected losses by more than $3.3 billion to almost $25.1 billion, up from $21.7 billion in the last quarterly update.
The report may still underestimate the losses. The report covers predicted losses through May 31, when GM's stock price was $22.20 a share.
On Monday, GM stock fell $0.07, or 0.3 percent, to $20.47. At that price, the government would lose another $850 million on its GM bailout.
(Now some bozo "anonymous" will tell me in the combox that Ryan voted FOR the bailout and that means that Ryan is Lenin's great-grandchild's bastard son so how could ANYONE possibly vote for him....)
I've always had doubts about the auto bailout; a packaged BK would have preserved most of GM and most likely would have produced a better outcome for all the players. But it is what it is.
Further, $25Bn is pocket-change in the Waste & Corruption FedGov racket.
Monday, August 13, 2012
What the Obozoids Ignore
Interesting factoid.
...As Jim Capretta and Yuval Levin point out in an important new article, research from three liberal Harvard researchers indicates that the privately-run Medicare Advantage program can deliver the traditional Medicare benefit package 10 percent more cheaply, on average, than can government-run Medicare. And Medicare Advantage is tied down with all sorts of restrictions that make it less efficient. A Romney/Wyden-Ryan style approach, combining competitive bidding with premium support, is almost certain to generate even greater efficiencies and savings.
Gee. I didn't see that research mentioned in the MFM.
...As Jim Capretta and Yuval Levin point out in an important new article, research from three liberal Harvard researchers indicates that the privately-run Medicare Advantage program can deliver the traditional Medicare benefit package 10 percent more cheaply, on average, than can government-run Medicare. And Medicare Advantage is tied down with all sorts of restrictions that make it less efficient. A Romney/Wyden-Ryan style approach, combining competitive bidding with premium support, is almost certain to generate even greater efficiencies and savings.
Gee. I didn't see that research mentioned in the MFM.
What the Bishops Forgot
The US Bishops infamously scolded Paul Ryan for his "Roadmap". Following that, Ryan spent some time with Cdl. Dolan. After that visit, the US Bishops shut their collective traps.
There's a reason they shut up, and it's right here:
Ryan should hammer that message home every single day. It should go to the top of his stump-speech, not the middle. That 'from God and [of/by] nature' is the core of Conservatism's political philosophy. And by the way, it's known and understood by the vast majority of people in this country, even those who resent it.
It's been noted that Ryan's statement is a quotation from John Locke.
Deneen has a few words to say about Locke:
Locke is widely regarded in the academy as the great originator of liberal secularism. Yet, it was Locke - in a less-read work called The Reasonableness of Christianity - who argued that reason alone was insufficient to arrive at certain moral precepts held to be true by modern man, above all the belief in the inherent dignity of all human beings. What Locke knew - that reason provided insufficient basis for a belief in human dignity - many of Locke's epigones have forgotten.
But Deneen is no fool; Locke's philosophy has its problems, too.
...At the most fundamental level, as modern Americans and intuitive Lockeans, we begin with the assumption that we are naturally free and only secondarily and artificially constrained. Beginning with that assumption, all morality must be understood to be legislated, since in our natural condition there is no legislation and no "morality," only freedom. We understand societies to exist to preserve maximal amount of individual freedom and provide only the minimal amount of constraint in order to provide some security and stability.
That assumption is a fallacy, of course, even though it's adopted by both the Left and Right.
...For the political Left, these libertarian assumptions are thought to apply to our personal and especially sexual lives. An example of this assumption can be seen in the argument that is typically used against conservative advocates of teenage sexual abstinence (evinced in the visceral hostility to Sarah Palin): "teenagers are going to do it anyway, so we should teach them about birth control." It underlies the contemporary insistence that the innate, genetic sources of homosexuality should be regarded as despositive in any further arguments regarding sexual behavior: if it's natural, it will and needs to be acted upon.
...This basic assumption underlies many of the economic assumptions of the Right, as well: the free market is populated with homo economicus, countless self-seeking, risk-taking, profit-seeking self-maximizers. To the extent that our market system is arranged to prevent obstacles to those behaviors, we can expect a dynamic and prosperous economic system. Legislation that restricts self-maximizing activities are abhorrent, curtailing growth and dampening the spirit of entrepreneurialism. These assumptions underlie arguments against regulations that potentially damage the bottom line, or efforts to soften the harsher aspects of the free market system - such as welfare - that undermine our natural economic incentives.
What you see is the shadow of "positive law."
...The truth is, you really can't "legislate morality" - either of the sort that would seek to force us to restrain our hedonistic personal pleasures or the sort that would seek to force us to be socially responsible in the economic realm
...Seeking to "legislate morality" is to acknowledge that the base presuppositions of a culture have made it resistant to any such imposition. A culture that has robust forms of learned or habituated restraint as a matter of cultural transmission does not need to "legislate" such morality, or - if it does - it serves as a punctuating norm, not an external imposition.
Summarily:
...The sad irony is that our false liberal view of human nature - that one advanced by Hobbes and Locke (Bertrand de Jouvenel waggishly commented that such a philosophy was obviously imagined by "childless men who had forgotten their childhoods") - in turn engendered further false views of human nature (in which we could altogether overcome our alienation from one another), such as that advanced by Marx. BOTH are species of an impoverished and false modern understanding of humankind. To move beyond the tired and (what has now stood to be revealed to be) false debate between the Lockeians and the Marxists, we need to re-discover Aristotelian and Thomistic understandings of humanity's true nature. It will not be easy, since Aristotle himself argues that habituation is a powerful shaper of men's mores, and we must acknowledge that most of our contemporary habituation - in the form of popular culture, deep philosophic presuppositions, national mythology, and ubiquitous advertising - instruct us that we are monadic bundles of appetite seeking satiation. We have a highly successful culture of anti-culture, and it is difficult to see how it can be assailed, short of the slow drip-dripping of arguments and practices against it...
So. While it is useful to recall Locke, there is far more to "nature and nature's God" than the cramped and utilitarian vision(s) of the "Left" and "Right."
Let's hope that Ryan remembers that, too.
There's a reason they shut up, and it's right here:
Ryan said the idea of America -- that our rights come from nature and God, not government and we promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes
Ryan should hammer that message home every single day. It should go to the top of his stump-speech, not the middle. That 'from God and [of/by] nature' is the core of Conservatism's political philosophy. And by the way, it's known and understood by the vast majority of people in this country, even those who resent it.
It's been noted that Ryan's statement is a quotation from John Locke.
Deneen has a few words to say about Locke:
Locke is widely regarded in the academy as the great originator of liberal secularism. Yet, it was Locke - in a less-read work called The Reasonableness of Christianity - who argued that reason alone was insufficient to arrive at certain moral precepts held to be true by modern man, above all the belief in the inherent dignity of all human beings. What Locke knew - that reason provided insufficient basis for a belief in human dignity - many of Locke's epigones have forgotten.
But Deneen is no fool; Locke's philosophy has its problems, too.
...At the most fundamental level, as modern Americans and intuitive Lockeans, we begin with the assumption that we are naturally free and only secondarily and artificially constrained. Beginning with that assumption, all morality must be understood to be legislated, since in our natural condition there is no legislation and no "morality," only freedom. We understand societies to exist to preserve maximal amount of individual freedom and provide only the minimal amount of constraint in order to provide some security and stability.
That assumption is a fallacy, of course, even though it's adopted by both the Left and Right.
...For the political Left, these libertarian assumptions are thought to apply to our personal and especially sexual lives. An example of this assumption can be seen in the argument that is typically used against conservative advocates of teenage sexual abstinence (evinced in the visceral hostility to Sarah Palin): "teenagers are going to do it anyway, so we should teach them about birth control." It underlies the contemporary insistence that the innate, genetic sources of homosexuality should be regarded as despositive in any further arguments regarding sexual behavior: if it's natural, it will and needs to be acted upon.
What you see is the shadow of "positive law."
...The truth is, you really can't "legislate morality" - either of the sort that would seek to force us to restrain our hedonistic personal pleasures or the sort that would seek to force us to be socially responsible in the economic realm
Summarily:
...The sad irony is that our false liberal view of human nature - that one advanced by Hobbes and Locke (Bertrand de Jouvenel waggishly commented that such a philosophy was obviously imagined by "childless men who had forgotten their childhoods") - in turn engendered further false views of human nature (in which we could altogether overcome our alienation from one another), such as that advanced by Marx. BOTH are species of an impoverished and false modern understanding of humankind. To move beyond the tired and (what has now stood to be revealed to be) false debate between the Lockeians and the Marxists, we need to re-discover Aristotelian and Thomistic understandings of humanity's true nature. It will not be easy, since Aristotle himself argues that habituation is a powerful shaper of men's mores, and we must acknowledge that most of our contemporary habituation - in the form of popular culture, deep philosophic presuppositions, national mythology, and ubiquitous advertising - instruct us that we are monadic bundles of appetite seeking satiation. We have a highly successful culture of anti-culture, and it is difficult to see how it can be assailed, short of the slow drip-dripping of arguments and practices against it...
So. While it is useful to recall Locke, there is far more to "nature and nature's God" than the cramped and utilitarian vision(s) of the "Left" and "Right."
Let's hope that Ryan remembers that, too.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
The REAL Story Behind Grover Norquist
Back a few years ago, I saw Grover Norquist. He's a very funny guy--and I don't mean 'wierd.' He has a great sense of humor.
He also has a major flaw: his "no-tax pledge." Hovde 'splains it:
...Hovde argued, as have many liberals, that Norquist’s pledge simply protects the status quo, in which politically connected corporations carve out giant loopholes in the tax code. When anybody attempts to close those loopholes, Norquist brands them as “tax hikers.”
“Behind the story with Grover Norquist is he’s funded by giant corporations that have created loopholes in our tax system,” said Hovde. “We need to lower the rates, but we also have to get rid of the corporate welfare....
Frankly, I've had problems with "no tax increase" pledges. We elect someone to do the right thing. If that means dumping a tax loophole (or a Solyndra-like "credit"), then they DO it. If we don't like that, we dis-elect the slob.
HT Playground
He also has a major flaw: his "no-tax pledge." Hovde 'splains it:
...Hovde argued, as have many liberals, that Norquist’s pledge simply protects the status quo, in which politically connected corporations carve out giant loopholes in the tax code. When anybody attempts to close those loopholes, Norquist brands them as “tax hikers.”
“Behind the story with Grover Norquist is he’s funded by giant corporations that have created loopholes in our tax system,” said Hovde. “We need to lower the rates, but we also have to get rid of the corporate welfare....
Frankly, I've had problems with "no tax increase" pledges. We elect someone to do the right thing. If that means dumping a tax loophole (or a Solyndra-like "credit"), then they DO it. If we don't like that, we dis-elect the slob.
HT Playground
Granny to Debtor's Prison, Illegals to Bank!
First graf:
It's no secret that falling behind on student loan payments can squash a borrower's hopes of building savings, buying a home or even finding work. Now, thousands of retirees are learning that defaulting on student debt can threaten something that used to be untouchable: their Social Security benefits.
The 'student loans' here are really loans taken out for their chilluns' or grandchilluns' college expenses.
Meantime, IRS pumped $4Bn or so into the pockets of illegal aliens.
What a Country!!
HT: Grim
It's no secret that falling behind on student loan payments can squash a borrower's hopes of building savings, buying a home or even finding work. Now, thousands of retirees are learning that defaulting on student debt can threaten something that used to be untouchable: their Social Security benefits.
The 'student loans' here are really loans taken out for their chilluns' or grandchilluns' college expenses.
Meantime, IRS pumped $4Bn or so into the pockets of illegal aliens.
What a Country!!
HT: Grim
It's Worse Than Ryan Says.
Somebody has to tell the truth, so USAToday (!!) did it.
The typical American household would have paid nearly all of its income in taxes last year to balance the budget if the government used standard accounting [GAAP] rules to compute the deficit, a USA TODAY analysis finds.
The typical American household would have paid nearly all of its income in taxes last year to balance the budget if the government used standard accounting [GAAP] rules to compute the deficit, a USA TODAY analysis finds.
Under those accounting practices, the government ran red ink last year equal to $42,054 per household — nearly four times the official number reported under unique rules set by Congress.
A U.S. household's median income is $49,445, the Census reports.
Lovely.
And of course, the cooked books lying is "Bi-Partisan":
Deficits are a major issue in this year's presidential campaign, but USA TODAY has calculated federal finances under accounting rules since 2004 and found no correlation between fluctuations in the deficit and which party ran Congress or the White House.
Grim is pessimistic about all this.
Umnnhhh....Ryan's smart enough to know that the Feds are lying. His problem is that--despite 14 years up there--he's still a "junior" MC. There's a certain noblesse oblige which overhangs both Houses of Whores Congress. Ryan sorta had to keep his mouth shut in order to obtain Chair/Budget.
And that's not likely to change until Romney/Ryan win. One can only hope and pray that Romney then takes the lead, institutes GAAP (at least as a side-by-side comparison to prior lies) and pushes, hard, for its adoption in Fed budgeting.
Of course, that exposes him to the possibility of assassination by Members of Congress. He'll have to triple the Secret Service budget before he pulls the blankets off the scam.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
What Paul Ryan Must Overcome
K'hammer (with whom I sometimes disagree...)
What program? Obama laid it out boldly early in his presidency. The roots of the nation’s crisis, he declared, were systemic. Fundamental change was required. He had come to deliver it.
No need to recite the specifics--but every one of them is a failure.
...given that there’s no good reason whatever for Obama to be leading, one can only presume that Romney’s strategy in July and now in August is not working.
So here’s why he should be talking about other things, releasing plans, giving speeches on big topics—-because it’s the only way he can control the discussion. If he says the same thing about the economy every single day, he bores. He provides nothing new for anyone to fix on. He has to feed the beast. And it can’t just be that he puts his toe gingerly in the welfare-reform pool one day and then defend himself for three days after. It all has to keep moving.
IOW, Romney either does a "man up" to his campaign--talking about the ideology--or he slowly becomes another John McPain.
Well.
I quibble with K-hammer's worry about the election; Romney's behind because nobody's paying attention to the election now. They never have. The focus begins in early October. Secondly, Obozo has inertia on his side--for the time being. He IS the President, he seems to be a nice guy, and yes, the MFM has done their kneepad-best.
Nonetheless, Ryan has a lot to do here--and maybe Romney realizes that "the economy" ain't gonna make it; that there is a real, tangible, and very meaningful cultural/ideological divide which must be addressed. Romney can win that battle, and Ryan will be his C-in-C in that effort.
HT: ColdFury
There are two ways to run against Barack Obama: stewardship or ideology. You can run against his record, or you can run against his ideas.
The ideological case, on the other hand, is not just appealing to a center-right country with twice as many conservatives as liberals; it is also explanatory. It underpins the stewardship argument. Obama’s ideology — and the program that followed — explains the failure of these four years.
No need to recite the specifics--but every one of them is a failure.
...given that there’s no good reason whatever for Obama to be leading, one can only presume that Romney’s strategy in July and now in August is not working.
Which is why the “we only talk about the economy” line, while superficially clever, was and is so foolish—stupid, even. Of course Romney wants to focus on that one issue. It’s the one that hurts Obama the most, and the one on which he seems to score the best. He and his team have an idea about the campaign. They need to win independents to win. Independents are less ideological. So don’t press the ideological buttons. Keep it simple. Keep it plain. Obama has hurt you. I’ll help you. Fine.
But that’s not the only reason they’re doing it this way.
Romney and his people prefer this strategy because it’s what is most comfortable to them. He is not, at root, an ideological person. Neither, at root, are they. And the data suggest this is not a time for a sharply ideological campaign. The data suggest Romney needs to run as Mr. Fix-It. That is how Romney prefers to view himself. So the two match perfectly.
Alas for him, that’s not how it works. If conservative ideology is a problem with some independents, it also has the virtue of providing those who use it to discuss the nation’s problems with a pulse. Romney has just learned over the past few weeks that he cannot limit the discussion to the topics he wishes to talk about, especially when his rival is spending $100 million trying to destroy him in the swing states and when the media are largely serving his purposes by acting as though an increase in the unemployment rate and utterly unimpressive jobs-creation numbers are somehow good news.
IOW, Romney either does a "man up" to his campaign--talking about the ideology--or he slowly becomes another John McPain.
Well.
I quibble with K-hammer's worry about the election; Romney's behind because nobody's paying attention to the election now. They never have. The focus begins in early October. Secondly, Obozo has inertia on his side--for the time being. He IS the President, he seems to be a nice guy, and yes, the MFM has done their kneepad-best.
Nonetheless, Ryan has a lot to do here--and maybe Romney realizes that "the economy" ain't gonna make it; that there is a real, tangible, and very meaningful cultural/ideological divide which must be addressed. Romney can win that battle, and Ryan will be his C-in-C in that effort.
HT: ColdFury
Liar-in-Chief
Obozo deliberately obfuscates.
Of all the freedoms we cherish as Americans, of all the rights that we hold sacred, foremost among them is freedom of religion, the right to worship as we choose. It’s enshrined in the First Amendment of our Constitution — the law of the land, always and forever.
Ummnnnhhhh.....no. In relevant part, we have Amendment Number One:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
In Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), the Supreme Court required states to meet the "strict scrutiny" standard when refusing to accommodate religiously motivated conduct. This meant that a government needed to have a "compelling interest" regarding such a refusal.
"Free exercise" has never been limited to "worship." Religion, by definition, encompasses not only the worldview of its adherents, but the 'exercise' thereof includes acting on moral teachings.
Obozo, the Liar-in-Chief, doesn't like that "acting on moral teachings" part--so he re-defines the First Amendment extremely narrowly: "worship."
He's wrong; he KNOWS he's wrong; and he plays his card anyway.
'S OK. He's a very bad memory as of January 2013.
Of all the freedoms we cherish as Americans, of all the rights that we hold sacred, foremost among them is freedom of religion, the right to worship as we choose. It’s enshrined in the First Amendment of our Constitution — the law of the land, always and forever.
Ummnnnhhhh.....no. In relevant part, we have Amendment Number One:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
In Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), the Supreme Court required states to meet the "strict scrutiny" standard when refusing to accommodate religiously motivated conduct. This meant that a government needed to have a "compelling interest" regarding such a refusal.
"Free exercise" has never been limited to "worship." Religion, by definition, encompasses not only the worldview of its adherents, but the 'exercise' thereof includes acting on moral teachings.
Obozo, the Liar-in-Chief, doesn't like that "acting on moral teachings" part--so he re-defines the First Amendment extremely narrowly: "worship."
He's wrong; he KNOWS he's wrong; and he plays his card anyway.
'S OK. He's a very bad memory as of January 2013.
"Environomental Justice" = No 45/94 Improvements!
Other than Goofy Gaylor (see below) this has to be the wacky-of-the-week story. (Caution: this is a JSOnline link)
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Madison, argues the project will "have the likely effect of exacerbating regional racial segregation, and it will have adverse environmental effects on air quality and water resources. . . . If the project proceeds, it will have major and significant impacts on the most racially segregated region in the United States."
Yup. It's the Usual Suspects.
Lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and Midwest Environmental Advocates filed suit earlier this week against the state and federal transportation departments on behalf of Milwaukee Innercity Congregations Allied for Hope and the Black Health Coalition of Wisconsin....
Here's the "claim":
The lawsuit claims that pattern violated the terms of the 2000 settlement of a federal civil rights complaint that alleged state officials discriminated by favoring highway projects that benefited white suburbanites while opposing a light-rail system that could have benefited urban minorities. In that agreement, state officials agreed to help improve area transit, including cooperation with what later became the Milwaukee streetcar plan.
And there's more!!
Another concern is that the Zoo Interchange is being built with the capacity to expand if six-lane freeways are later widened to eight lanes, the lawsuit says.
Boosting the amount of pavement also would increase concerns about storm water runoff, the suit says...
"Environmental Justice", of course, is un-definable. That's why it's in the settlement which Diamond Jim Doyle authorized.
Lawyers like Jimbo Doyle need work, ya' know.
Milwaukee community organizations are suing to block reconstruction of the Zoo Interchange, accusing state and federal transportation officials of discriminating against urban minorities by not including public transit improvements in the $1.7 billion freeway project.
Yup. It's the Usual Suspects.
Lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and Midwest Environmental Advocates filed suit earlier this week against the state and federal transportation departments on behalf of Milwaukee Innercity Congregations Allied for Hope and the Black Health Coalition of Wisconsin....
Here's the "claim":
The lawsuit claims that pattern violated the terms of the 2000 settlement of a federal civil rights complaint that alleged state officials discriminated by favoring highway projects that benefited white suburbanites while opposing a light-rail system that could have benefited urban minorities. In that agreement, state officials agreed to help improve area transit, including cooperation with what later became the Milwaukee streetcar plan.
And there's more!!
Another concern is that the Zoo Interchange is being built with the capacity to expand if six-lane freeways are later widened to eight lanes, the lawsuit says.
That would bring more traffic and boost air pollution, at a time when "persons of color in the region, especially African-Americans, have higher rates of air-quality-related respiratory disease, such as asthma, than white persons."
"Environmental Justice", of course, is un-definable. That's why it's in the settlement which Diamond Jim Doyle authorized.
Lawyers like Jimbo Doyle need work, ya' know.
"Goofy" Gaylor Hits Roadblock
A. L. Gaylor ("Goofy" to normal people) has been told to buzz off in Steubenville.
...the logo was blasted by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation as implying Steubenville is a “theocracy” because the distinctive cross atop the Catholic university’s Christ the King Chapel was included alongside several architectural silhouettes, including Historic Fort Steuben and the Veterans Memorial Bridge...
Goofy is the pestilence from Madistan.
The city of Steubenville’s decision last month to remove the Franciscan University of Steubenville’s chapel silhouette from its logo based on an anti-religion group’s legal threat is now on hold after the move triggered a deluge of opposition...
Goofy is the pestilence from Madistan.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Reason v. Teh Gay Marriage Bunch
Just because some need a reminder.
...the broader population thinks opposition to gay marriage is a matter of religion alone. And as such, it can be marginalized. Indeed, it must be marginalized, for our culture assumes a fundamental split between faith and reason. The roots of this split reach back to the medieval period in William of Occam’s nominalist and voluntarist theology, which conceived of God not as reason but as raw arbitrary will. Religion became regarded as irrational. And most modern Christians—whether Protestant or Catholic—accept that split, having absorbed it from the ambient culture.
There’s a reason Occam was never sainted. The broader Christian tradition has claimed God is rational. First, the intelligibility of creation suggests a rational intellect as creator. Second, the first verses of the Gospel of John claim that the logos—the second person of the Trinity, the Son of God—was God and the agent of creation. Most translations render logos as “Word,” but it can also be rendered as “Reason”: “In the beginning was Reason . . . and Reason was God.” The split between faith and reason (and thus religion and the public square) is not a necessary given of Christian theology. Rather, the broader Christian tradition has seen faith and reason operating in harmony.
Another problem with Occam was his innerlekshul progeny of the converse: Nietzsche. It is his 'theology' from which springs abortion and the idea that gay 'marriage' is fine and dandy. See:
But--as is made plain by the Obozo Regime--"reason" has little to do with their opus.
...the broader population thinks opposition to gay marriage is a matter of religion alone. And as such, it can be marginalized. Indeed, it must be marginalized, for our culture assumes a fundamental split between faith and reason. The roots of this split reach back to the medieval period in William of Occam’s nominalist and voluntarist theology, which conceived of God not as reason but as raw arbitrary will. Religion became regarded as irrational. And most modern Christians—whether Protestant or Catholic—accept that split, having absorbed it from the ambient culture.
There’s a reason Occam was never sainted. The broader Christian tradition has claimed God is rational. First, the intelligibility of creation suggests a rational intellect as creator. Second, the first verses of the Gospel of John claim that the logos—the second person of the Trinity, the Son of God—was God and the agent of creation. Most translations render logos as “Word,” but it can also be rendered as “Reason”: “In the beginning was Reason . . . and Reason was God.” The split between faith and reason (and thus religion and the public square) is not a necessary given of Christian theology. Rather, the broader Christian tradition has seen faith and reason operating in harmony.
Another problem with Occam was his innerlekshul progeny of the converse: Nietzsche. It is his 'theology' from which springs abortion and the idea that gay 'marriage' is fine and dandy. See:
It’s a common postmodern maneuver to claim that all appeals to the objectivity of nature and reason are merely masquerades instantiating culture by the will to power. We need to continue having that discussion. But for now, in simpler terms, consider this: Is “Thou shalt not kill” a truth of faith, or a truth of reason? Shall we repeal our laws forbidding murder because its prohibition is found in a religious text?
But--as is made plain by the Obozo Regime--"reason" has little to do with their opus.
The La-La-Land of EPA Bureaucrats
The Other Planet's inhabitants dictate, and you will bow before Zod.
The EPA revealed the requirement to the American Motorcyclist Association in a letter dated Aug. 1, responding to AMA concerns that E15 — a gasoline formulation that contains up to 15 percent ethanol by volume — could be put in motorcycle and ATV gas tanks inadvertently when consumers use blender pumps.
Huh? REQUIRE a minimum of 4 gallons? Won't that.....ahhh....
...Another problem with the new EPA policy, ['cycle ass'n guy] Allard said, is that not all motorcycle and ATV gas tanks hold four or more gallons.
“Not only do we find it unacceptable for the EPA to mandate that everyone — including our members — buy minimum amounts of gas, but the EPA answer simply won’t work because of the sizes of many motorcycle and ATV gas tanks and the fact that off-highway riders take containers of gas with them on their trips, and most times those containers are much smaller than four gallons,” Allard said.
Like, for example, the fuel tank you fill up for your lawnmower or snowblower.
But EPA'crats don't cut their lawns, nor worry about clearing their driveways.
Not on THEIR planet.
HT: Grim
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will require all consumers to buy at least four gallons of gasoline from certain gas pumps after the new E15 ethanol-gasoline blend is introduced into the market.
Huh? REQUIRE a minimum of 4 gallons? Won't that.....ahhh....
...Another problem with the new EPA policy, ['cycle ass'n guy] Allard said, is that not all motorcycle and ATV gas tanks hold four or more gallons.
“Not only do we find it unacceptable for the EPA to mandate that everyone — including our members — buy minimum amounts of gas, but the EPA answer simply won’t work because of the sizes of many motorcycle and ATV gas tanks and the fact that off-highway riders take containers of gas with them on their trips, and most times those containers are much smaller than four gallons,” Allard said.
Like, for example, the fuel tank you fill up for your lawnmower or snowblower.
But EPA'crats don't cut their lawns, nor worry about clearing their driveways.
Not on THEIR planet.
HT: Grim
Holder Will Not Prosecute GoldmanSachs
In another "not news" release today:
... The investigative report by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Levin, found that Goldman Sachs “used net short positions to benefit from the downturn in the mortgage market, and designed, marketed, and sold CDOs in ways that created conflicts of interest with the firm’s clients and at times led to the bank’s profiting from the same products that caused substantial losses for its clients.”
IOW, Goldie screwed its own clients. However, they should have laid back and enjoyed it, right?
A statement from the Justice Department issued late on Thursday evening noted, “Based on the law and evidence as they exist at this time, there is not a viable basis to bring a criminal prosecution with respect to Goldman Sachs or its employees in regard to the allegations set forth in the report.”
There's a pattern here!
...This most recent decision follows other high-profile investigations that Justice decided not to prosecute: There was the collapse of AIG and the role of the top executive at AIG Financial Products division, Joseph Cassano, and former Countrywide CEO Anthony Mozillo, who was fined by the SEC in an insider trading case. Citibank and JP Morgan both had multi-million-dollar settlements with the SEC over collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, tied to the U.S. housing market, but Justice has not brought any criminal cases. Freddie Mac was subpoenaed in a grand jury investigation in 2008 but the firm disclosed in an Aug. 8, 2011, SEC filing that the Justice investigation was closed.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
The Justice Department has decided it will not prosecute Goldman Sachs or its employees for their role in the financial crisis, following an investigation by senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and Tom Coburn (R-OK).
IOW, Goldie screwed its own clients. However, they should have laid back and enjoyed it, right?
A statement from the Justice Department issued late on Thursday evening noted, “Based on the law and evidence as they exist at this time, there is not a viable basis to bring a criminal prosecution with respect to Goldman Sachs or its employees in regard to the allegations set forth in the report.”
There's a pattern here!
...This most recent decision follows other high-profile investigations that Justice decided not to prosecute: There was the collapse of AIG and the role of the top executive at AIG Financial Products division, Joseph Cassano, and former Countrywide CEO Anthony Mozillo, who was fined by the SEC in an insider trading case. Citibank and JP Morgan both had multi-million-dollar settlements with the SEC over collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, tied to the U.S. housing market, but Justice has not brought any criminal cases. Freddie Mac was subpoenaed in a grand jury investigation in 2008 but the firm disclosed in an Aug. 8, 2011, SEC filing that the Justice investigation was closed.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
Totalitarian "Mandate" Takes Another Hit
Seems as though the Federal courts don't cotton to totalitarianism.
In that case, Judge Robert H. Cleland ordered the briefing schedule and hearing set. He also instructed that the plaintiffs’ original motion for a temporary restraining order, which would have stopped enforcement of the mandate for up to 14 days, be converted into a motion for a preliminary injunction.
That "injunction" stuff is serious.
Now there’s word from the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan that a federal judge there has set a court date of Sept. 26 for arguments on whether the Obama administration should be enjoined from enforcing the same mandate against Ann Arbor-based Weingartz Supply Co. and Legatus, the nation’s largest organization of top Catholic business leaders.
...As part of that court schedule, the judge noted, “the government agreed not to enforce the regulation against plaintiffs prior to Jan. 1, 2013 …”
In that case, Judge Robert H. Cleland ordered the briefing schedule and hearing set. He also instructed that the plaintiffs’ original motion for a temporary restraining order, which would have stopped enforcement of the mandate for up to 14 days, be converted into a motion for a preliminary injunction.
That "injunction" stuff is serious.
The Cost of Oil
Here's an interesting tidbit:
Shell has been planning to explore the Arctic for seven years and has spent more than $4 billion on leases, permits, and studies to reap an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil.
That tells me that Shell spent 20 cents/bbl just on pre-drilling faddletwatter.
The rest of the article is not "news." It describes the Obozoites' methods of delaying the project.
Shell has been planning to explore the Arctic for seven years and has spent more than $4 billion on leases, permits, and studies to reap an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil.
That tells me that Shell spent 20 cents/bbl just on pre-drilling faddletwatter.
The rest of the article is not "news." It describes the Obozoites' methods of delaying the project.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
