George Will at His Best

This is too good not to print in its entirety:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Inconvenient Kyoto Truths

Was life better when a sheet of ice a mile thick covered Chicago? Was it worse when Greenland was so warm that Vikings farmed there?

By George F. Will

Newsweek

Feb. 12, 2007 issue - Enough already. It is time to call some bluffs. John Kerry says that one reason America has become an "international pariah" is President Bush's decision to "walk away from global warming." Kerry's accusation is opaque, but it implies the usual complaint that Bush is insufficiently enthusiastic about the Kyoto Protocol's binding caps on emissions of greenhouse gases. Many senators and other experts in climate science say we must "do something" about global warming. Barack Obama says "the world" is watching to see "what action we take."

Fine. President Bush should give the world something amusing to watch. He should demand that the Senate vote on the protocol.

Climate Cassandras say the facts are clear and the case is closed. (Sen. Barbara Boxer: "We're not going to take a lot of time debating this anymore.") The consensus catechism about global warming has six tenets: 1. Global warming is happening. 2. It is our (humanity's, but especially America's) fault. 3. It will continue unless we mend our ways. 4. If it continues we are in grave danger. 5. We know how to slow or even reverse the warming. 6. The benefits from doing that will far exceed the costs.

Only the first tenet is clearly true, and only in the sense that the Earth warmed about 0.7 degrees Celsius in the 20th century. We do not know the extent to which human activity caused this. The activity is economic growth, the wealth-creation that makes possible improved well-being—better nutrition, medicine, education, etc. How much reduction of such social goods are we willing to accept by slowing economic activity in order to (try to) regulate the planet's climate?

We do not know how much we must change our economic activity to produce a particular reduction of warming. And we do not know whether warming is necessarily dangerous. Over the millennia, the planet has warmed and cooled for reasons that are unclear but clearly were unrelated to SUVs. Was life better when ice a mile thick covered Chicago? Was it worse when Greenland was so warm that Vikings farmed there? Are we sure the climate at this particular moment is exactly right, and that it must be preserved, no matter the cost?

It could cost tens of trillions (in expenditures and foregone economic growth, here and in less-favored parts of the planet) to try to fine-tune the planet's temperature. We cannot know if these trillions would purchase benefits commensurate with the benefits that would have come from social wealth that was not produced.

In 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol's essential provisions were known, a "sense of the Senate" resolution declared opposition to any agreement that would do what the protocol aims to do. The Senate warned against any agreement that would require significant reductions of greenhouse-gas emissions in the United States and other developed nations without mandating "specific scheduled commitments" on the part of the 129 "developing" countries, which include China, India, Brazil and South Korea—the second, fourth, 10th and 11th largest economies. Nothing Americans can do to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030.

The Senate's resolution expressed opposition to any agreement that "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States," which the Senate correctly thought Kyoto would do. The Senate said any agreement should be accompanied by "a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement" it, and an analysis of the agreement's "detailed financial costs and other impacts" on the U.S. economy.

The president is now on the side of the angels, having promised to "confront" the challenge of climate change. The confronting is one reason for his fascination with new fuels. (Another reason, he says, is U.S. imports of oil from unstable nations. Our largest foreign source of oil is turbulent Canada. Our second largest is Mexico, which is experiencing turbulence because of the soaring cost of tortillas. They are made from corn, which is ... well, read on.)

Ethanol produces just slightly more energy than it takes to manufacture it. But now that the government is rigging energy markets with mandates, tariffs and subsidies, ethanol production might consume half of next year's corn crop. The price of corn already has doubled in a year. Hence the tortilla turbulence south of the border. Forests will be felled (will fewer trees mean more global warming?) to clear land for growing corn, which requires fertilizer, the manufacture of which requires energy. Oh, my.

President Clinton and his earnest vice president knew better than to seek ratification of Kyoto by a Senate that had passed its resolution of disapproval 95-0. Fifty-six of those 95 senators are still serving. Two of them are John Kerry and Barbara Boxer. That is an inconvenient truth.

Lieberman Warns Democrats: I May Join GOP

Lieberman Warns Democrats: I May Join GOP

Joe Lieberman is a 'thinking' Democrat and he should be listened to. He faces a tough decision in the near future if his party decides to try to cut off funds for the troops in Iraq. That possibility may well persuade him to join the Republicans in national defense policy.

I think the Republicans would be blessed to have him, since the Democrat leadership worked against him in his reelection campaign.

A History Department Bans Citing Wikipedia as a Research Source - New York Times

A History Department Bans Citing Wikipedia as a Research Source - New York Times

This is an excellent debate at this point in our culture. Traditional scholarshipo vs. what some see as 'pop knowledge.' I firmly believe that Wikipedia is a good thing. In the long term, with solid editorial policies and disciplines, knowledge bases with thousands of contributors will more broadly disseminate good information.

I use Wikipedia frequently, not for scholarship, but for general information. Sure, I know there is misinformation and incorrect content, but for how I use it, it suits me just fine.

Those who believe that knowledge and reliability only come from 'experts' should fondly remember, or research in Wikipedia, the '70s when global cooling was the prevailing trend in climate science.

Commentary: Google's low-cost alternative to Microsoft Office | CNET News.com

Commentary: Google's low-cost alternative to Microsoft Office | CNET News.com

Forrester provides a rational analysis of Google's new offering to businesses, Google Apps Premier Edition. Software as a service(SaaS) is coming to businesses, that I'm convinced of. The issues for business will be inertia, depth of capabilities and price.

I am a big user of various Google applications because they are simple to use and contain most features that I need, yet I use Excel, Word and Access, too.

This will be an online horse race for the next decade.

Big Picture Thinking for Vermont

Published today in the Colchester Sun and other weekly community newspapers owned by Lynn Publications, Inc.
++++++++++++++++++++
Big Picture Thinking - David Usher

I was just thinking...In Vermont we have advocacy and special interest groups galore, some of which are very vocal and powerful. But who is looking at the big picture and the best future for our state? On specific issues, we trust our Governor and our Legislators to creatively use their intellect and power to make the best, if not always correct, decisions when conflicting views are vehemently argued in Montpelier's halls. If we don't like the outcomes, we simply elect new decision makers, but we seldom repeal policies (Laws simply encode policies so that the courts can have a crack at them if someone is aggrieved.). How can we expect long term thinking when our state leaders serve two year terms?

No group inside or outside government takes a comprehensive look at the future and the scenarios that may emerge from our current policies, demographics, Federal actions, and other important influences. Several groups poll people about how they feel about various issues and the media dutifully report the results before they migrate to dusty shelves or databases when their currency fades. But polls only take the temperature at a point in time. Who's looking after our climate?

Policy and politics are all about what people want in a democracy, but we often suffer from the law of unintended consequences because forces outside the full control of Vermont policy makers conspire to produce costs that we struggle to pay. Nationally, think Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, energy prices, and national defense. In Vermont, think Medicaid options, health care, permitting new development, corrections, education, social services, roads and bridges, etc.

What to do? Well, for starters we should agree to agree on a set of facts and assumptions about the future before enshrining apparent 'good ideas' into law. The true cost of a program into the future can be estimated and the legislative arithmetic should include the cost per capita for the people who are asked to fund it. Vermonters already pay more in taxes and incur a higher cost of living than in most other states, yet advocates argue that ever more unmet needs must be funded. Compounding the problem, Vermont's population is expected to grow slowly, only 7.5% in 10 years compared to 10% for the U.S. This means that any new Vermont policies and programs will be paid for by the taxpayers and ratepayers among the 652,000 of us in 2010. At the present rate of tax and cost of living increases, we will not be able to afford what we think we need or enable Vermont to be the place we desire.

We should convene a team of 6-8 of Vermont's best thinkers (You know who you are! If not, you could be selected by two or three well established no-ax-to-grind organizations in Vermont) from any walk of life with adequate support from a tiny staff of researchers and fact finders. The thinkers should leave their agendas, but not their values, at the door and spend sufficient time, perhaps a month or so of intensive preparation and research, considering likely outcomes. After that, they should collaborate using several days of "think-tank" time to thrash out two or three most likely scenarios and the resulting snapshot of Vermont in 5-7 years. The process should be repeated every two or three years with different thinkers but the same goal of updating the previous scenario(s) or creating a new one(s). A small permanent staff of 2-3 folks would keep the process alive, document the results, and serve as the resource for data and additional input as facts change.

The staff would be paid for their efforts and also the 'thinkers,' if they chose to accept compensation. This Vermont Policy Team could be housed at a university or in state government or could be a stand-alone 'Futures Authority' funded by the Legislature and private sector foundations.

This Vermont Policy Team would serve as a resource to all branches of state government and would be expected to be above the political fray. They would be available for consultation with both the Legislature and the Governor.

The alternative, it seems to me, is continued ad hoc policy making and a more costly and muddled future than Vermonters deserve from its leaders.

American Liberty at the Precipice - New York Times

American Liberty at the Precipice - New York Times

Once again the Times is wrong. Habeas corpus (from a non-lawyer's perspective) should not apply to sworn enemies of the U.S. who are terrorists.

Those Islamic radicals or other non-citizens who are sworn to destroy our way of life and have been found and arrested around the world for actions that threaten us should not have access to American courts or habeas corpus rights. It makes no sense to pretend that these people should have access to Constitutional 'rights.'

I trust the Supreme Court will agree.

Wolves in the Wild

Here's another remix that Carol produced using the Adobe tool on Photobucket and one or her Woolie creations. I think the product has real potential because it's easy to use. Needed additions include better text editing, a greater array of fonts (colors are fine), transitions and the ability to select (legal) music of choice.

Valentines Day Blizzard

Here is a minute and a half slide show created with an Adobe (beta) remix product with limited availability in my account at www.photbucket.com. There are a few glitches in it, but it's quite easy to use and allows images, video and audio to be mixed using only a browser, one more example of a web 2.0 mashup.

Click on the green arrow to play it.

The Future of Farming - New York Times

The Future of Farming - New York Times

This assessment by the Times' editorialists suggests that the proposed farm bill may be on target.

My frame of reference is Vermont's ailing dairy industry and I don't know how the proposal would affect it. Suffice to say that uneconomic agriculture may need some shoring up, but not by convoluted pricing paradigms that work against the small dairy farmer.

It's clear to me that Vermont cannot compete with large, efficient dairy operations elsewhere in the country producing bulk milk. If federal ag policy encouraged Vermont's small farmers to switch from bulk milk dairy to alternative specialty products, that would be a welcome change.

Vermont farmers must find a way to profitably keep the land open because so many other benefits flow from that.

Corn-based ethanol's a flawed concept - MarketWatch

Corn-based ethanol's a flawed concept - MarketWatch

A reasoned and balanced analysis of the economics, energy efficiency, and related market dynamics of corn-based ethanol as a motor fuel. Worth reading.

My take from it is that our net cost as a society will rise if using corn-based ethanol, but corn farmers should prosper. Protein producers may be negatively affected, but the net affect on consumers is they will pay more for their meat and gasoline when mixed with ethanol.

In Setback for New Orleans, Fed-Up Residents Give Up - New York Times

In Setback for New Orleans, Fed-Up Residents Give Up - New York Times:

The 'Big Easy' is easy to leave. The people who are leaving, never to return, are doing so for good reason. If there is no hope for improvement in a city run by incompetents, why stay? Yet, in the last election, the voters decided that Nagin was their man for mayor. Could it be that the choices were no better?

If global warming forecasters say the sea will rise a meter or two in the next couple of hundred years, sad as it may seem, the city is best left to return to the swampland it once was.

Tragic consequences, perhaps, but are the alternatives much better? Spending untold billions on levees to protect a city no one wants to live in is foolishness of the first order. Better to let the sea have it.


"...have made the wrenching decision to leave at a time when the population is supposed to be rebounding. Their reasons include high crime, high rents, soaring insurance premiums and what many call a lack of leadership, competence, money and progress. In other words: yes, it is still bad down here. But more damning is what many of them describe as a dissipating sense of possibility, a dwindling chance at redemption for a great city that, even before the storm, cried out for great improvement. "?The window of opportunity is closing," Ms. Larsen said, "?before more people like us give up and say it'?s too little, too late.""

Big Snow in Vermont - Valentine's Day Blizzard

It's Friday now, but Wednesday brought a nasty blizzard to Vermont. Click the link below for more photos of our family's and friends' homes.

It was a strong storm in the amount of snowfall, but the wind was not as fierce as it might have been.

Our town of Colchester road crews did an outstanding job in moving the snow and keeping the roads open. We have a selectman living on our street, but I'm thinking that did not make any difference . The plowmen did a fantastic job, as did my driveway plower, Kevin, who came twice during the storm to keep us open.

The locations that received the most snow in Wednesday's storm, according to the National Weather Service:

Cambridge: 36 inches
Jericho Center: 31.2
Monkton: 31
Eden: 30.4
Richford: 30
Killington: 30
Montpelier: 30
Waterbury: 30
Hinesburg: 29
Stowe: 29

STORM RANKING A one-day snowfall record was set Wednesday when Burlington received 25.3 inches. The previous record of 23.1 inches was set Jan. 14, 1934. Where the storm ranks in city history, according to National Weather Service data:

1. 29.8 inches, Dec. 25-28, 1969
2. 25.7 inches, Feb. 14-15, 2007
3. 24.7 inches, Jan. 13-14, 1934
4. 22.9 inches, March 5-6, 2001
5. 22.4 inches, March 13-14, 1993
6. 20.0 inches, Nov. 25, 1900
7. 19.7 inches, Jan. 25-28, 1986
8. 19.1 inches, March 16-17, 1937
9. 18.8 inches, Dec. 14-15, 2003
10. 18.3 inches, Dec. 6-7, 2003

I'm sure the global warming folks will point out that 7 of the top 10 snowfalls have occured in the past 40 years. But what of the "we don't get storms like we used to" folklorists? Are their memories failing or is their memory in he range of 40 years?

Helping People Help Themselves - New York Times

Helping People Help Themselves - New York Times:

Behavioral economics will continue to be a political football between conservatives and liberals.

The point I didn't find in this column is the premise that government acting in a citizen's 'best interest' now, without a choice by the person, to avoid a more costly outcome in the future for government (e.g., forced health checkups to prevent or find early diseases that are very costly to treat) is OK or not?

This is sensitive territory between personal freedoms and public policy. Not having studied the science (or art) of behavioral economics, I am skeptical by nature that a large, faceless government bureaucracy following rules and regulations, instigated by laws based on behavioral economics is, in all cases, better for a person.

If the prevailing wisdom favors BE, than we'd best be prepared to walk the road to a socialist state because that's the inevitable outcome.

I prefer not to take that walk. On the other hand, I know that people do not always make good choices for their best interests, even when addiction is not an issue, although I think addiction comes in many forms that we don't always recognize.

With this conflicted view of humanity in a market society, does that make me a libertarian?

"Â?...The presumption that individual choices should be free from interference is usually based on the assumption that people do a good job of making choices, or at least that they do a far better job than third parties could do,Â? wrote Richard H. Thaler Â? another presumptive candidate for the Nobel Prize Â? and Cass R. Sunstein, both of the University of Chicago, in a recent essay. Â?As far as we can tell, there is little empirical support for this claim.' The question for policy makers is not whether people can be counted on to consistently make rational decisions that maximize their welfare Â? demonstrably, they cannot. The question is whether corporations or government or can do a better job. And the challenge is to answer the question based on evidence, not unexamined beliefs. At times, market solutions to market problems have clearly been effective, such as reducing acid rain by developing a system to trade pollution credits. But if typical human biases undermine a policy goal, and those same biases present a profit opportunity Â? selling cigarettes, for example Â? itÂ?s silly to pretend that the market will act as a corrective. Â?ThereÂ?s no reason to think that markets always drive people to do whatÂ?s good for them,Â? Mr. Thaler was quoted saying in a University of Chicago Magazine feature on behavioral economics. Â?Markets also drive people to do whatÂ?s good for the people selling.Â?"

The Peaceful Majority

The Peaceful Majority
(Author unknown)

I used to know a man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.

"Very few people were true Nazis," he said, "but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything, I ended up in a concentration camp, and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" is the "silent majority" and it is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War Two was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians, most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold: we must pay attention to the only group that counts, the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, I wish to add: At the risk of offending someone, I sincerely think that anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the seriousness of this issue, or just deletes it without sending it on, is part of the problem. Lets quit laughing at, and forwarding, the jokes and cartoons which denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. They are trying to protect the interests and well being of the US and its citizens. Best we support them.

Taming the Deficit

 

This NY Times column contains well-meaning rhetoric from people who are out of power. I have little confidence in this budget constraint jabber, although I fully support reduced spending on both the state and federal level.

The reason that political good intentions to control spending usually fail is because the BIG spending programs, other than defense, are for people 'needs'. Maintaining these 'entitlements' (the very name suggests that they can't be reduced) are the promise that often leads to politicians' election success.

Votersget what they want because  so many politicians are panderers rather than leaders. Rhetoric is cheap on the campaign trail, but costly when the IRS collects for the laws made in Congress.

Dairy farming in Vermont

The Burlington Free Press today (2/11/07) has a column asking this question: "What needs to be done to ensure the future of dairy farming in Vermont?" (10 % of dairy farmers left the business since 2005; we have 40% fewer farms now than in 1997).

The answers from eight people within the industry offer several perspectives, but the common thread is that Vermont dairy farmers need a higher price for their milk, either through changes in the Byzantine pricing structure, direct subsidies from taxpayers (though they are reluctant to be that blunt about it) or higher prices to the consumer that flow back to the farmer.

The inescapable fact is Vermont cannot be cost competitive with other areas of the country in the production of bulk milk. In my thinking, there are only two practical long term alternatives (other than leaving the business) for farmers. First, some farmers should diversify away from bulk milk to other agricultural products to reduce reliance on a commodity cost/price structure that will always work to their disadvantage. Second, those that remain in dairying must become larger and at the same time as cost-efficient as technology allows, perhaps also capitalizing on the growing "organic" movement to command higher consumer prices.

It is not realistic to believe that Vermont can sway or sustain the pricing for a commodity product like bulk milk in a regional and national marketplace. Vermont is much better served by leveraging the higher margin products derived from milk, e. g., specialty cheeses, ice cream, etc., from the most efficient farms.

Meanwhile, Vermont should capitalize on it's quality image, in league with the private sector, to market the dickens out of these value-added products to our residents and visitors while exporting them to people where price is not the most important factor in purchase decisions.

I think an online marketplace for our "best-in-class" Vermont grown food and derived products is a necessity.

In Niger, Trees and Crops Turn Back the Desert - New York Times

In Niger, Trees and Crops Turn Back the Desert - New York Times:

This is an intriguing good news story about an area of sub-Sahara Africa that had been declared a basket case, but, as often is the case for me with the Times, I'm skeptical of the claims of huge success, even tempered as they are with opinions that Niger's success may be fragile and short lived. What's missing is content relating to how/if this reversal may be linked positively to global warming. Could it be that climate change is causing rainfall patterns to benefit Niger? If the claims of climate disruption by atmospheric warming have validity, then some regions of our planet will surely benefit. Is Niger one of them? Perhaps global warming is not a doomsday scenario for all the earth's people. Hey, ya gotta read this!! (http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,05650.cfm) Catastophe mongers, beware. Global warming is not bad for everone.

The story's emphasis is about the multiplier effect of small changes in human behavior, but I suspect climatic factors are also at work.

"Today, the success in growing new trees suggests that the harm to much of the Sahel may not have been permanent, but a temporary loss of fertility. The evidence, scientists say, demonstrates how relatively small changes in human behavior can transform the regional ecology, restoring its biodiversity and productivity.

In Niger’s case, farmers began protecting trees just as rainfall levels began to rise again after the droughts in the 1970s and ’80s."

The article's claim that:

"Better conservation and improved rainfall have led to at least 7.4 million newly tree-covered acres in Niger, researchers have found, achieved largely without relying on the large-scale planting of trees or other expensive methods often advocated by African politicians and aid groups for halting desertification, the process by which soil loses its fertility."

is astounding. Consider that Vermont's size is 6,156,800 acres. This means that an area 23% larger than Vermont has been reclaimed in 20 years. My intuition tells me that rainfall is the reason far more than changed agricultural practices. But...Hooray for Niger!

Recasting the Word Processor for a Connected World - New York Times

Recasting the Word Processor for a Connected World - New York Times

I am a dedicated fan of Software as a Service (SaaS). I used Writely, now Google Documents (and Spreadsheets), when it first hit the Web and became hooked. I now have more than 250 documents on Google Docs and a handful of spreadsheets, too. I also continue to use Microsoft Office because I'm not ready to entrust all my documents to Google. I particularly appreciate the ability to access them from anywhere on any computer and not worry about backup. The tagging/labeling paradigm beats hierarchical folders hands down. For the time being, Google has grabbed more than its share of my online time, but you can't beat 'free.'

Google Spreadsheets has some way to go compared to PC based Excel. Google handles simple spreadsheets, but it is still clunky and does not support graphing at all and printing not very well. But Google Docs does everything I normally desire, except footnotes.

I think we'll see Microsoft launch a powerful product that combines their PC-based Microsoft Office product line and their Office Live endeavor but only when they can develop a sustainable business model. They won't purposely erode the powerful revenue stream from Office until they must. I use the free basic version of Office Live just to keep my hand in the game.

So. I'll probably buy Office 07 when I upgrade my desktop in a couple of months because I want Access, Publisher and PowerPoint. Nevertheless, I'll continue to use Google Docs for the bulk of my word processing.

What a tremendously exciting online world we inhabit!!

Alternatives to Grid Electricity

The solar option for homeowners has a long way to go before an economic case can be made that's competitive with grid supplied electricity. Generous tax incentives will inch it along, but with payback periods in the 16 year range, even with incentives, it's not attractive in areas that don't get much sunshine...like Vermont.

"This means that buying a solar system can yield homeowners a 6% return on their investment. It would take about 16 years to pay the initial investment, though the payback period can vary depending on peak electricity rates in the region, the report's authors said in an interview. If homeowners are generating power during peak daytime demand when electricity rates are typically the highest they will save more money."

Nuclear energy is the best alternative for grid electricity and will become more so as plug in electric cars (which will want electricity at night) enter the mainstream. Unless we overcome the resistance to nuclear generated electricity, we will pay much more than needed for it.

Private Virtue...Public Vice

David Brooks makes the case that decent people, our leaders in Congress, have been manipulated in some way by the 'public process' into spinners of image and rhetoric while at their core they are decent people. That may be true for some, but honest men and women speak their true beliefs in private and public. At least that's what I expect from friends and politicians

The public process has become badly corrupted if the ideals of our democracy are subordinated to personal advantage, spin and media manipulation of our leaders.

Will truthful and men and women please stand up?  True leadership is not corrupted by the electorate.

 

"In short, our democracy, at least as it has evolved, takes individuals who are reasonable in private and it churns them through a public process that is almost tailor-made to undermine their virtues. The process of perpetually kissing up to the voters destroys the leadership qualities the voters are looking for in the first place: tranquillity of spirit, independence of mind and a sensitivity to the contours and complexity of reality. "

Ho Hum...More Pain from the Political Correctness Afficionados

Joe Biden is an egomaniac who has perennial hoof and mouth disease, a talent he thinks makes him presidential timber.

Immediately following his recent comments about Senator Obama, we have a spate of moans, groans, whinings and wailings suggesting that this is all about racism in America.

Please people, get a life!  Realize some PEOPLE are more articulate, some PEOPLE are more literate and  some PEOPLE are more intelligent.

Political Correctness is not a talent. It's an affliction.

First SS Recipient of Monthly Benefits

And now you know one tidbit that helps makes Vermont famous!

A woman named Ida May Fuller , from Ludlow, Vermont was the first recipient of monthly Social Security benefits....and she certainly got her fair share! "She started collecting benefits in January 1940 at age 65 and lived to be 100 years old, dying in 1975."

The U.N. Globa Warming Report (Summary)

Comments later, just wanted to link to it for now. Have not yet read it.

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

This link also bears reading. Have not done so yet, but will.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/a_necessary_apocalypse.html

More by J.R. Dunn http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/resisting_global_warming_panic.html

Chirac Strays From Assailing a Nuclear Iran - New York Times

Chirac Strays From Assailing a Nuclear Iran - New York Times

Here you have it, ladies and gentlemen, the words from the mouth of "Shady" Jacques Chirac. He says that a couple of nukes in Iran's hands, ...you know, that country run by the nutso mullahs and the president who denies the Holocaust. Chirac is a threat to the civilized world whenever he opens his big mouth.

It's incomprehensible that a western head of state would utter such foolishness.

"PARIS, Jan. 31 — President Jacques Chirac said this week that if Iran had one or two nuclear weapons, it would not pose a big danger, and that if Iran were to launch a nuclear weapon against a country like Israel, it would lead to the immediate destruction of Tehran."

The first part of the statement is what sets him apart as a loud-mouthed enemy of Western civilization. The second statement about Tehran turned into cinders may very well be correct, assuming Israel has nukes locked and loaded. But we don't want to ever get to that point if at all possible. And, mark my words, the U.S. won't allow that Iran regime to have nukes.

Berlusconi Flirts. His Wife’s Fed Up. Read All About It. - New York Times

Berlusconi Flirts. His Wife’s Fed Up. Read All About It. - New York Times

Ahhh these Italians. They are almost a race apart, not dour like the French...and their wine is just as good, too!