|
"My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy!"
-Thomas Jefferson |
Aboot Reader's Rep Home RSS Feed Save money when you DIY with appliance parts POSTS BY TOPIC Baseball Beer Culture Drinking Economics Football Global Warming Hockey (02-05) Hockey (06-07) Hockey (08-09) Media-Local (02-04) Media-Local (05-07) Media-Local (08-09) Media National (02-06) Media National (07-09) NARN (04-05) NARN (06-07) NARN (08-09) Politics-Local (02-03) Politics-Local (04-05) Politics-Local (06-07) Politics-Local (08-09) Politics-National Religion Separated At Birth? Travel Contributors Chad The Elder: rightwinger23 at hotmail.com Twitter Saint Paul: saintp at excite.com Twitter JB Doubtless: abunodisceomnes at hotmail.com Atomizer: atomizer77 at yahoo.com
FEATURES ATOMIZER's A-LIST JB's SACK SITES SAINT PAUL'S SHOW STOPPERS ELDER's ELITE THE USUAL SUSPECTS IN AGGREGATE CENTER OF GRAVITY INVISIBLE AIRWAVES |
Thursday, July 02, 2009
The pride of St. Louis Park MN, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times on the opposition to the Democrats recent carbon credit cap and trade bill:
What are Republicans thinking? It is not as if they put forward a different strategy, like a carbon tax. Does the G.O.P. want to be the party of sex scandals and polluters or does it want to be a partner in helping America dominate the next great global industry: E.T. -- energy technology? How could Republicans become so anti-environment, just when the country is going green?And the Western suburbs weep. Awaiting former St. Louis Park resident Chad The Elder's statement on this disturbing incident. The Elder Adds: I'll cede my time to another rich and famous writer whose work is actually deserving of said fame and fortune. George Will words are from a piece on health care reform, but I think they're fitting for cap and trade as well: Regarding reform, conservatives are accused of being a party of "no." Fine. That is an indispensable word in politics because most new ideas are false and mischievous. Furthermore, the First Amendment's lovely first five words ("Congress shall make no law") set the negative tone of the Bill of Rights, which is a list of government behaviors, from establishing religion to conducting unreasonable searches, to which the Constitution says: No. Labels: Global warming, Media-National (07-09)
To follow up on Saint Paul's post on Mark Sanford's loose lips and on behalf of married men everywhere I'd like to take this opportunity to call on Governor Sanford to kindly shut the hell up. It was bad enough when he destroyed the sanctity of two of our favorite innocent activities forever.
"So what are you going to do this weekend when I'm out of town with the kids, honey?" "Nothing much. Thought I might take a long solo hike on the Appalachian Trail." And... "So what are you going to do this weekend when I'm out of town with the kids, honey?" "Nothing much. Thought I might fly down to Argentina, drive along the coast, and do some deep thinking." Now he's forever soiled yet another of our traditional weekend getaways. How do you think this is going to go over from now on? "So what are you going to do this weekend when I'm out of town with the kids, honey?" "Nothing much. Thought I might get together with some friends and blow off steam." Thanks for nothing Governor. When it comes to Sanfords, Mark should heed the advice of Fred and "Shut up, dummy!" If the whole sordid Sanford scandal has any positive side at all it may be the new sexual euphemisms that come out of it. "I'd like to hike through her Appalachian Trail." And... "Looking forward to your date, dude?" "Oh yeah. Definitely goin' to be some crying in Argentina tonight." "Blowing off steam" however sounds a bit too literal to qualify. Labels: Politics-National Wednesday, July 01, 2009
For some reason, Gov. Mark Sanford sat down with the Associated Press over two days to give even more details on his romantic conquests. This part stood out: He acknowledged that he had casual encounters with other women while he was married but before he met Chapur, on trips outside the country to "blow off steam" with male friends. Pundits nationwide are perplexed as to why he insists on unnecessarily confessing these details to the press, to the further detriment of his career and reputation. I think his motivation can best be found in this classic Borscht Belt quality joke:
Labels: Politics-National
George Newman has an excellent piece in today's WSJ in which he Parses the Health Reform Arguments and concludes by picking apart one of the most oft-heard rationales:
- "We need a public plan to keep the private plans honest." The 1,500 or so private plans don't produce enough competition? Making it 1,501 will do the trick? But then why stop there? Eating is even more important than health care, so shouldn't we have government-run supermarkets "to keep the private ones honest"? After all, supermarkets clearly put profits ahead of feeding people. And we can't run around naked, so we should have government-run clothing stores to keep the private ones honest. And shelter is just as important, so we should start public housing to keep private builders honest. Oops, we already have that. And that is exactly the point. Think of everything you know about public housing, the image the term conjures up in your mind. If you like public housing you will love public health care. Labels: Health care
In yesterday's WSJ Roger Altman--former deputy secretary of the Treasury in the first Clinton administration--wrote that it's not a matter of if President Obama will raise taxes but when. And he thinks that in order to get a grip on the growing budget deficits, it will be soon:
Only five months after Inauguration Day, the focus of Washington's economic and domestic policy is already shifting. This reflects the emergence of much larger budget deficits than anyone expected. Indeed, federal deficits may average a stunning $1 trillion annually over the next 10 years. This worsened outlook is stirring unease on Main Street and beginning to reorder priorities for President Barack Obama and the Democratic congressional leadership. By 2010, reducing the deficit will become their primary focus. Why has the deficit outlook changed? Two main reasons: The burst of spending in recent years and the growing likelihood of a weak economic recovery. The latter would mean considerably lower federal revenues, the compiling of more interest on our growing debt, and thus higher deficits. Yes, the President's Council of Economic Advisors is still forecasting a traditional cyclical recovery -- i.e., real growth of 3.2% next year and 4% in 2011. But the latest data suggests that we're on a much slower path. Probably along the lines of the most recent Goldman Sachs and International Monetary Fund forecasts, whose growth rates average about 2% for 2010-2011. A speedy recovery is highly unlikely given the financial condition of American households, whose spending represents 70% of GDP. Household net worth has fallen more than 20% since its mid-2007 peak. This drop began just when household debt reached 130% of income, a modern record. This lethal combination has forced households to lower their spending to reduce their debt. So far, however, they have just begun to pay it down. This implies subdued spending and weak national growth for some time. Altman goes on to suggest that some form of VAT will be considered and acknowledges that getting it passed will be an immense challenge for President Obama especially in light of his oft-repeated campaign promise to not increase taxes on those earning less than $250K a year. The first President Bush's infamous "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge ended up being a millstone around his political neck that helped sink his chances for reelection to a second term. Could a breaking of President Obama's promise not to raise taxes on "middle-class" Americans have the same impact? Labels: Obama, Politics-National Tuesday, June 30, 2009
While environmentalists like to spin the fantasy that "alternative energy" could replace our current conventional sources in the not so distant future, the reality is that alternative energy could have a more important impact in the larger energy picture by helping make those current carbon-based sources more efficient. Case in point is an article in Monday's WSJ on how Valero Harnesses Wind Energy to Fuel Its Oil-Refining Process:
In this windswept corner of the high plains, a big oil refiner is embracing new green technology in order to make more money producing old-fashioned fossil fuels. Valero Energy Corp., which has the capacity to process more crude than any other U.S. refiner, recently installed 33 windmills to supply a refinery here with green electricity to produce gasoline and diesel. The marriage is one of convenience, Valero executives say. "We didn't build the wind farm so we could get into the wind-energy business," notes Tom Shetina, the refinery's manager, who expresses awe at the windmills' size. "We built the wind farm so we could support the refinery and run it more economically." The company hopes to lock in fluctuating electricity prices by developing its own source of power, rather than relying on the grid, and to cut the $1.4-million-a-month electricity bill at the seven-decade-old refinery. The $115 million wind farm, which will be ready to operate at full capacity in August, will pay for itself in about 10 years at current electricity prices, company officials said. Using wind power to help an oil refinery run more efficiently? That's the smart way to go "green." Labels: Energy Monday, June 29, 2009
Long week of not working begins today. My employer has decided to shut the facilities down this week to save money and mandate that people use up their vacation time. Any and all complaints about the situation are directed to the department of "You're Lucky To Have A Job." The way things are now with the economy if companies asked workers to come to work in frilly dresses with silly hats riding unicycles, the only response from employees would be "How frilly?"
Oh well. If you have to take an unplanned vacation the week of the Fourth of July is probably the best time to do it. On tap for today is a trip to the Minnesota Zoo with the kids. Haven't been there for many a moon, but can still recall referring to it as the "New Zoo" for years after it opened. I do look forward to hitting the petting zoo with the children before a big meaty lunch. Labels: Children Friday, June 26, 2009
 My wife's uncle Cliff died last Saturday at the age of eighty-nine. Today is his funeral. He served in the Army Air Corps in World War II. After the war, he came home to Hutchinson, Minnesota, took a job that he would work at until retirement, got married, and never ventured far from the area again. He and his wife moved into a house that they lived in until last year. Visiting it was like entering a time machine set to 1962 or thereabouts. Very few things in the always clean house were acquired after that, although since everything was in such good shape you could almost understand the couple's reluctance to change. The coffee pot may be forty years old, but if it still works why get a new one? Not surprisingly my favorite room in their house was their basement "recreation" area. The prominent feature in this room was Cliff's basement bar. I've long held a theory the basement bar boom was the product of WWII. Vets returning from overseas had the desire and opportunity to settle down in the wave of new homes built after the war. And after having served far flung tours of duty, they also wanted to have the comforts of life close at hand. Thus the birth of the basement bar. I think the whole sociology of the basement bar would make for an interesting study, one that I'd like to pursue some day. In order to have a basement bar, you obviously need a basement. Which means there are certain geographic restrictions to where they appeared. However, it's amazing how prevalent they were in homes here in the Upper Midwest built during particular time periods (40s-60s). When we were in the market for a home in late 2007 and 2008, we looked at many that had basement bars. The house that we live in now has one, although its not really the classic version. Cliff's was. It's hard to appreciate the pure glory of his bar and the entire room for that matter without actually experiencing it in person, but since that's no longer possible, pictures (taken a few years ago) will have to suffice.  The first thing that you notice is the knotty-pine panelling, pretty much a standard in these parts for the basement rec room.  Over the years, you can build up quite a collection behind the bar.  Glasses, knick-knacks, and bottles.  Ciao!  Interestingly enough, I have this same Florida souvenir bottle in my bar.  No bar is complete without a beer light (or several of them). What really sets it apart though is the little things.  Anything that plays on words is popular.  Another classic: the drunk hanging on the street lamp.  It was always happy hour at Cliff's.  Flavor of the South Seas. Why? Because.  A family of Old Crows and another beer light. Of course, not everything works.  Gee, thanks for the hand-crafted poodle. Another must have in any classic Midwest bar--whether on Main Street or in a basement--is a collection of wall signs. Use of off color language and adult humor is strongly encouraged.   As are cracks about sex.  ("Sex" It's the most fun you can have without laughing)  (I don't ask for much out of life Just a little beer money Just a little food money and every now and then JUST A LITTLE) As I said, it wasn't just the bar either. Check out this corner of the room.  Teal colored walls. Checkerboard floor tiles. Vintage chair and ottoman. Cool light. And the girly calender.  Yup, that is indeed a Grain Belt calender from 1977.  In this corner, we find another chair and more to appreciate on the walls.  Another must-have for a Minnesota basement bar, a Hamm's sign. What's that underneath the speaker?  Yes James, that is the work of one Art Frahm.  PBR me.  These wicker bar stools now seat people in our basement bar. One sure way that the memory of Cliff's bar will live on.  Here's a toast to you Cliff. R.I.P. Labels: Obit Thursday, June 25, 2009
What happens when you take one part populism with one part Puritanism and add a measure of politics? U Bans Alcohol In All Sports Arenas:
When fans welcome the Gophers to TCF Bank Stadium this fall, they will do it without access to alcohol. The University's Board of Regents overwhelmingly voted 10-2 Wednesday not to serve alcohol in the new stadium. Some members of the board had hoped alcohol could be served in premium-select seats, such as upper level suites. However, state lawmakers told the University it had to serve alcohol in the entire stadium or not at all. The select seats where they would have served alcohol would have gone to less than 5 percent of the fans, but those seats would have created about half the revenue on game day. When the state took that option off the table, University officials decided to go dry. The revenue that the University will forego by not being able to sell alcohol in the select seats? Never mind. We're more concerned with enforcing a twelve-year-old's notion of fairness and equity: if I can't have it than no one can. Rah for the U of M. Labels: college
Although I didn't get a chance to watch Mark Sanford's entire pathetic press conference yesterday, I was struck by the fact that during those parts of it I did see Sanford spent a lot of time talking about his heart:
And that is, I suspect, a continual process all through life of getting one's heart right in life. And so I would never stand before you as one who just says, Yo, I'm completely right with regard to my heart on all things. But what I would say is I'm committed to trying to get my heart right because the one thing that Cubby and all the others have told me is that the odyssey that we're all on in life is with regard to heart--not what I want or what you want, but in other words, indeed, this larger notion of truly trying to put other people first. And I suspect if I'd really put this other person first, I wouldn't have jeopardized her life as I have. I certainly wouldn't have done it to my wife. I wouldn't have done it to my boys. I wouldn't have done it to the Tom Davises of the world. This was selfishness on my part. And for that, I'm most apologetic. What the hell? This is sort of silly romantic drivel that one might to hear from a self-help author on "Oprah" or one of the self-absorbed man-boys on MTV's "The Real World." But not from a forty-nine year old governor of a state who previously had aspirations to become the leader of the free world. Instead of worrying about "getting one's heart right" Sanford should be focused on getting his head right. It's really sad that a man in his position would fall into the trap of believing the crap about "your heart's always right" and "go with your heart" as if we're helpless to resist emotional impulses. Yes, you have a heart, but you also have a head and it's never a good thing to completely allow one or the other to guide your life. The other thing that bothered me about Sanford's commitment to "get my heart right" is that this isn't all about his heart. Sanford is a Christian (Episcopal) and I know that he talked about his faith during the press conference. However, I'm surprised that a bigger part of his contrition wasn't focused on the sins he committed against God. It's great that you're going to work on getting your heart right Gov, but how about getting right with God? When you blindly follow your heart (or other parts of the anatomy) you easily can stray from God's path. Labels: Politics-National Wednesday, June 24, 2009
You know, the last time we had the Iranians over to the US Embassy for a gathering, they liked it so much, they refused to leave. It's like we were hostages or something!
Literally, actually. You may remember, late 1970's, binding and gagging, beatings, public humiliations, mock executions, etc. I ain't exactly Emily Post, but I don't believe that proper decorum dictates that earns you an automatic invitation back for another party. On the other hand, Barack Obama, an elegant man (as Sean Penn calls him), believes it's time to let bygones be bygones. Forgive and forget already! He invited Iranian officials worldwide to come to US Embassies for a party. Not just any party mind you, but a party to celebrate America on the anniversary of its founding, July 4th. Putting aside the astounding historical ignorance (or apathy) revealed by his extending any invitation to that same hostage taking Iranian regime to come to a US Embassy, what's truly striking is Obama's naďveté in thinking the Iranians would accept an invitation to a party to celebrate America. This Wall Street Journal article, previously excerpted on Fraters Libertas, bears repeating. Read it and wonder just what might have happened during the Embassy party singing of "America the Beautiful" had the Iranians accepted: Chanting "Death to America! Death to Israel!" has been the way Iranians applaud for over a quarter-century. When the soccer team from Isfahan scores a goal against the soccer team from Shiraz, its fans cheer wildly: "Death to America! Death to Israel!"Another awkward moment no doubt would have ensued when the American flag was raised, as the Iranians only previous experience with Old Glory is best summarized in this picture. It seems the leadership of Iran isn't as ready to forgive and forget as Barack Obama. Let's hope he figures out that rather stark and obvious fact soon. Or, alternatively, we can hope that Iran gets some similarly elegant men in charge during the next 4 - 8 years, so we can put that Great Satan talk behind us, and get down to some serious Fourth of July partying with the mullahs. For more on potential problems with inviting Iranians to Fourth of July parties, check out this post at the Nihilist in Golf Pants.
David Harsanyi has a piece on the myth of preventive medicine as a cure-all for our health care woes:
Surely, for some, preventive health care is worthwhile. And no one is stopping you from eating an apple. But unless policy changes have the power to stop the Grim Reaper--rather than only postponing his arrival--it will make health care more expensive. Let's begin with the morbidly obvious. The longer people hang around the longer they utilize the health care system. End-of-life care is often the most expensive. Old folks just love doctors. (I know I plan to unleash septuagenarian fury on MDs regularly.) As studies on Medicare have proven, easy availability to services at the tail end of life translates into lots of needless services. Second, a government policy that prods people into incessantly visiting medical offices for checkups, screenings and tests will only raise costs even further. According to studies, preventive medicine thwarts little, though it does mean early diagnoses for relatively harmless ailments--and treatments for them. As H. Gilbert Welch, a professor of medicine at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy, contends, "recent expansions in the definitions of diabetes, high cholesterol and osteoporosis defined millions more as suddenly needing therapy. A new definition of 'abnormal bone density'...turned 6.8 million American women into osteoporosis patients literally overnight." There is another vital aspect of preventive health care that many health professionals and bureaucrats simply refuse to accept: Some of us can't be helped. Or maybe more accurately "don't want to be" helped. The unsettling thing about the government becoming increasingly obsessed with preventive care is that we may not have much of a choice in the matter. In Saturday's WSJ, Dr. Abraham Verghese--himself a proponent of government driven health care reform--also weighed in on the myth of prevention: It is true that if the prevention strategies we are talking about are behavioral things?eat better, lose weight, exercise more, smoke less, wear a seat belt?then they cost very little and they do save money by keeping people healthy. But if your preventive strategy is medical, if it involves us, if it consists of screening, finding medical conditions early, shaking the bushes for high cholesterols, or abnormal EKGs, markers for prostate cancer such as PSA, then more often than not you don't save anything and you might generate more medical costs. Prevention is a good thing to do, but why equate it with saving money when it won't? Think about this: discovering high cholesterol in a person who is feeling well, is really just discovering a risk factor and not a disease; it predicts that you have a greater chance of having a heart attack than someone with a normal cholesterol. Now you can reduce the probability of a heart attack by swallowing a statin, and it will make good sense for you personally, especially if you have other risk factors (male sex, smoking etc). But if you are treating a population, keep in mind that you may have to treat several hundred people to prevent one heart attack. Using a statin costs about $150,000 for every year of life it saves in men, and even more in women (since their heart-attack risk is lower)--I don't see the savings there. Or take the coronary calcium scans or heart scan, which most authorities suggest is not a test to be done on people who have no symptoms, and which I think of as the equivalent of the miracle glow-in-the-dark minnow lure advertised on late night infommercials. It's a money maker, without any doubt, and some institutions actually advertise on billboards or in newspapers, luring you in for this 'cheap' and 'painless' way to get a look at your coronary arteries. If you take the test and find you have no calcium on your coronaries, you have learned that...you have no calcium on your coronaries. If they do find calcium on your coronaries, then my friend, you have just bought yourself some major worry. You will want to know, What does this mean? Are my coronary arteries narrowed to a trickle? Am I about to die? Is it nothing? Asking such questions almost inevitably leads to more tests: a stress test, an echocardiogram, a stress echo, a cardiac catheterization, stents and even cardiac bypass operations--all because you opted for a 'cheap' and 'painless' test--if only you'd never seen that billboard. Obviously preventive medicine is a net good for society. Living longer and healthier lives because of technology and testing is one of the great achievements of modern medicine. But we should not expect it to be the panacea to pay for the costs of President Obama's transformative health care plans. Labels: Health care
In a piece at American Thinker Gary Larson sounds the death knell for "mainstream" journalism. While the body is still technically twitching, his pre-mortem autopsy finds the primary cause of death to be the demise of credible, objective reporting:
Why am I not totally surprised? Inbred journalism majors only reproduce what their inbred professors fed them. For a lover of even-handed journalism, and an ex-practitioner like myself, the outlook is bleak. Time was, in my days in newspapering, street-smart blue-collar kids without fancy degrees entered the field if they could write intelligently and honestly. Not rocket science, just tell the @#$%& truth. The pay was not terrific; reporting was a relatively easy field to enter. Blue-collar kids worked their way to editor slots. They were not out to "save the [post-Watergate] world." These cubs just reported what happened, and who said what, without inventing stuff. "Go back," I was told by my crusty old city editor in my formative twenties, "to find out what the other side thinks of this proposal." Fairness was supreme to the guy--for all sides of the issue. (I had not a clue as to his political persuasion. I came to respect this more and more as time went on.) As a Journalism school graduate I emerged with the quaint, rather new notion, that "interpretative journalism" (a term found in the very name of our 1960's textbook) was Gospel. Context was king. It was the pathway to "acing" the public affairs course. Inserting "frame of reference" into our stories was a must. I was graded down without "context" gratuitously offered. When I entered the profession, my wise old city editor (a high school graduate) quickly disabused me of the notion of "context." "Leave the interpretation to the editorial side," he'd say. Today the field is rife with highly educated reporters. Fresh from their university indoctrination, they are out to save the world...or save something. For the last forty years or so, reporters who have behaved as if their mission was save the world and "make a difference" have done much to discredit journalism and contributed to the apparently irreversible decline of many of the field's leading institutions. It might be too late in the game to get back to the days of journalists simply trying to tell us what happened, but for those of us who still hanker for hard core news it would be a welcome shift. One that could maybe even salvage what's left of the industry. Labels: Media-National (07-09)
|
TALK O' THE TOWN 
Listen to the Northern Alliance Radio Network on Saturdays from 11am 'til 5pm on AM 1280-The Patriot:
|
![[Powered by Blogger]](bloggerbutton1.gif){kind=small}
