The advertising above is just a source of revenue, and sometimes, I don't know what will appear there.
Unique grips and accessories for your 1911!
Relocating to Boise? Use my realtor, neighbor, and friend, Cindy Smith csmith@1realtyone.com.
Magazines for cheap!
PayPal members: to make a contribution
Email me at blogmail at claytoncramer dot com. Sorry to be so indirect, but all spambots must die! But they haven't died yet! Include the word spamIamnot in your subject line to make sure that my spam blocker lets you through.
Labels: establishment of religion Labels: telescopes Labels: gun rights Labels: gun rights Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: homosexuality While the apportionment of the delegates will distort her victory, the message is clear: Obama's surge fell short. Once again, the polls proved to be blind to the single women, the core of Hillary's base, who flood the polls to back the possible first woman president. Obama may inspire, but it is Hillary who quietly wins the unmarried women who struggle at minimum-wage jobs and desperately need public schools, mass transit, day care, health insurance and public services. The political establishment does not hear their voices, but Hillary's victory on Super Tuesday is based on them. Labels: homosexuality A recent study conducted by Israeli doctors among mountain climbers in Africa found a link between erectile dysfunction drugs and improved performance in high altitudes, the mass-selling Yediot Aharonot reported. The active ingredient in the drugs was found to make climbers perform better in an environment with less oxygen, which causes fatigue and dizziness. This has led army doctors to consider giving jet fighter pilots - who can fly at altitudes of up to 50,000 feet - the same drug. "The Viagra family of drugs is considered effective in these conditions because when there is a long shortage in oxygen it leads to high blood pressure in the lungs, and the drugs help fight that," the report quoted military medical sources as saying. Labels: humor Labels: 2008 presidential candidates I had some misgivings about Romney's sudden conservativism--and I have more than misgivings about McCain's increasing liberalism--but Romney clearly sees that the War on Terror takes precedence over his own personal ambition. I applaud Romney for that. Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: gun history, gun rights Sun Stays Sluggish as Weathermen Fight for Anti-Ice Age Funding Tapping oversees the operation of a 60-year-old radio telescope that he calls a “stethoscope for the sun.” Recent magnetic field readings are as low as he’s ever seen, he says, and he’s worked with the instrument for more than 25 years. If the sun remains this quiet for another a year or two, it may indicate the star has entered a downturn that, if history is any precedent, could trigger a planetary cold spell that could bring massive snowfall and severe weather to the Northern Hemisphere. The last such solar funk corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. While there were competing causes for the climatic shift—including the Black Death’s depopulation of tree-cutting Europeans and, more substantially, increased volcanic activity spewing ash into the atmosphere—the sun’s lethargy likely had something to do with it. Carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas produced by combustion of fuels, has become a cause of global panic as its concentration in the Earth's atmosphere has been rising alarmingly. This devil, however, is now turning into a product that helps people, countries, consultants, traders, corporations Labels: global warming Labels: telescopes 1. Not only does McCain support McCain- Feingold, it is one of his signature issues. This will infect many aspects of his presidency, including his appointment of judges. It will be devastating to have a President and a Congress who strongly support this issue at the same time. 2. McCain opposed the Bush Tax Cuts, and what is worse, used class warfare rhetoric to criticize them. 7. McCain takes a strong position on opposing global warming. For the record, I think that the evidence probably supports taking some actions now, such as establishing prizes for the development of technology reducing greenhouse gases, but not the kind of strong regulatory actions that McCain seems to support. 8. McCain opposes drilling in ANWR. 9. McCain generally favors regulating American business, including pharmaceutical companies and transportation companies. This is his instinctual reaction to actions he does not like. He does not seem to understand economics. Recently, he spoke about the subprime problem in terms of “greedy people on Wall Street who need to go to jail." Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: house project Labels: telescopes Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: 2008 presidential candidates, gun rights Labels: history The outcome will chiefly benefit Muslim men with more than one wife, as is permitted under Islamic law. Ministers estimate that up to a thousand polygamous partnerships exist in Britain, although they admit there is no exact record. The decision has been condemned by the Tories, who accused the Government of offering preferential treatment to a particular group, and of setting a precedent that would lead to demands for further changes in British law. New guidelines on income support from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) state: "Where there is a valid polygamous marriage the claimant and one spouse will be paid the couple rate ... The amount payable for each additional spouse is presently £33.65." Income support for all of the wives may be paid directly into the husband's bank account, if the family so choose. Under the deal agreed by ministers, a husband with multiple wives may also be eligible for additional housing benefit and council tax benefit to reflect the larger property needed for his family. The ruling could cost taxpayers millions of pounds. Ministers launched a review of the benefit rules for polygamous marriages in November 2006, after it emerged that some families had benefited financially. The review concluded in December last year with agreement that the extra benefits should continue to be paid, the Government admitted. The decision was not publicly announced. Four departments - the Treasury, the DWP, HM Revenue and Customs, and the Home Office - were involved in the review, which concluded that recognising multiple marriages conducted overseas was "the best possible" option. In Britain, bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in prison. Islamic law permits men to have up to four wives at any one time - known as a harem - provided the husband spends equal amounts of time and money on each of them. Labels: health care Labels: deinstitutionalization
Never forget!
I ran for Idaho state senate in 2008--didn't win
I've written a number of history books, as well as scholarly and popular articles, (see my web page).
Sorry, high pressure isn't included.
My nephew Shippy makes very pretty ceramic items. Click here to visit his online studio. Give someone one of these, and you can be sure that they don't already have one!
Click here to find out why the Amazon.com Honor System paybox is no longer here.
RSS feed
Other blogs you may enjoy:
My civilian gun defense use blog
My daughter's blog
Pete Drum's Web Page
Gun Laws Don't Work
instapundit.com
Dissecting Leftism -- By John Ray
A courageous Briton arguing for relaxing Britain's gun control laws
Right Thoughts
Final Protective Fire
Amitai Etzioni's Blog
Scrappleface -- Dangerously Clever Satire
Michael Williams -- Master of None
Another Conservative Blogger
A Group Blog By Iraqis
THE MESOPOTAMIAN: TO BRING ONE MORE IRAQI VOICE OF THE SILENT MAJORITY TO THE ATTENTION OF THE WORLD
Specializing in discussions of discrimination and affirmative action
An Iraqi dentist
Promoting children being raised by their own parents
A federal law clerk opines about the law
Michelle Malkin's blog
Impearls: a blog as electic and interesting as mine
Proving that the United States military does more than kill people and break things.
May not agree with this group on everything, but stopping the ACLU is high on my list
A conservative/moderate black blogger.
Another sensible American
Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party
Music, Politics, Motorcycles
Maggie's Farm: Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
A blog dedicated to "Documenting Saddam Hussein's support of Terrorism"
The blog of one of my fellow bloggers on the Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog
J. Norman Heath's Blog--a circus rigger and Second Amendment scholar (really!)
Buckeye Firearms Association, for you Ohio gun owners and activists
Click here for a FREE NEWSLETTER on Ohio Gun Rights from Buckeye Firearms Association!
Another conservative.
Neocon Blues
Conservative Oasis
Other Idaho Bloggers
Bubbleheads is a retired submariner
An Idaho State University student. A Democrat. Someday, she'll start paying income taxes and change.
A retired Las Vegas stagehand, of all things.
archives
Search only this site: Click here and enter your search string at the beginning of the search field.
Disestablishing Scientology
I've mentioned in the past the bizarre situation where one particular religion enjoys a special tax status under U.S. law. People paying Scientology for their bogus training on the way to "Theta Clear" have been allowed to deduct these expenses as charitable contributions--even though they are clearly payment for services. There has been a case working its way up through the federal courts challenging this special treatment that Scientology gets. (Why? Probably because Scientology is the religion of Hollywood, and this special treatment decision was reached during the Clinton Administration.)
In this case, a couple named Sklar are arguing that Scientology is allowed to do this, then should be allowed to treat Jewish school tuition the same way. If the courts actually treat the Sklars' case the same way as Scientology, then they will effectively create a religious school tuition tax deduction. This article from the February 8, 2008 New York Sun tells what happened at the appellate court hearings:During arguments on the case this week, three judges who ride the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals expressed deep skepticism of the IRS's position that the way the agency treats Scientologists is irrelevant to the deductions the Orthodox Jews, Michael and Marla Sklar, took for part of their children's day school tuition and for after-school classes in Jewish law.
"The view of the IRS is it can unconstitutionally violate the Constitution by establishing religion, by treating one religion more favorably than other religions in terms of what is allowed as deductions, and there can never be any judicial review of that?" Judge Kim Wardlaw asked at the court session Monday in Pasadena, Calif.
"That is not at all what I said," a Justice Department lawyer representing the IRS, Ellen Delsole, said.
"That's the bottom line," Judge Wardlaw and a colleague on the panel, Harry Pregerson, both replied. "This does intrude into the Establishment Clause," Judge Wardlaw added.
The case stems from an agreement the IRS reached with the Church of Scientology in 1993 to end more than a decade of lawsuits, audits, and other enforcement actions involving the tax agency, Scientology entities, and church leaders. The church paid $12.5 million, while the IRS agreed to drop arguments that Scientology, which was founded by L. Ron Hubbard, was not a bona fide religion.
This isn't as good for those who put their kids in private religious schools as a tuition tax credit (since it only reduces your adjusted gross income by the tuition amount, not the taxes you pay), but it would certainly create some real competition for public schools.
I happen to think that the right solution is to scrap Scientology's special treatment--not expand it. Something like this should come from a legislature--not imposed by the judiciary.
The World's Clumsiest Optical Bench
Before I spend the money on the square aluminum tubes on which to mount the upper and lower tube assemblies, I wanted to make sure that I had the dimensions right. I set them up at about the right distance in the garage.
Click to enlarge
You may be wondering, "Can you really get everything aligned adequately to test whether the focal point is correct?" By eye, no. I was beginning to get rather frustrated with all this, then I pulled out the Orion Deluxe Laser Collimator that I bought several years ago, turned it on, and everything became much easier. Then it was just a matter of making some adjustments to the diagonal, and adjusting the collimation screws on the main mirror.
Then I opened up the garage, and tried to bring the 35mm eyepiece to focus. That should be about 56 power. What did I see? The snowbank in front of the house, which is far too close to focus--but I could see what seems to be a Ford pickup truck at the edge of the field--and quite large.
So I stand up, look that direction--and where's the pickup truck?
Click to enlarge
I think it might be over at the Good's house (the people that were neighborly a few days ago and brought the road grader up our driveway). But I sure couldn't find it with the zoom lens on my camera.
I have increased confidence that I haven't wasted a pile of money!
The Amicus Briefs Keep Flying In!
The amicus briefs in support of striking down DC's gun law just keep flowing in. Here's a brief by ten retired U.S. generals (two major generals, five lieutenant generals, three full generals) and the American Hunters & Shooters Association (which was actually set up as a "reasonable alternative" to the NRA) arguing that a complete ban on handguns in DC, and effectively a ban on self-defense use of long guns, makes it harder for the military to train soldiers.
And a brief by Georgia Carry, Inc., pointing to the racist roots of gun control. Some of the material is clearly the result of mining my "The Racist Roots of Gun Control" paper published some years ago in Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy. I'm slightly miffed that they didn't cite that paper. Of course, as some people have pointed out, I'm a rather controversial figure--best not to have my name too closely attached.
Pink Pistols, the LGBT gun rights group has a brief.
And there's even more of them available here!
This is beginning to look like a parade. Here's the brief signed by 250 members of the House of Representatives, 55 members of the U.S. Senate, and President of the Senate who you all know as Vice President Cheney.
And a partridge in a pear tree!
UPDATE: Here's the Second Amendment Foundation's amicus brief, which focuses on grammar--and cites to the paper by Joe Olson and myself about the meaning of "bear arms." It emphasizes that "right of the people" necessarily includes much more than just militia members--even much more than the unorganized militia. It also emphasizes the self-defense aspects of the question.
UPDATE 2: And here's the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership amicus brief, emphasizing the role of gun control in enabling genocide in much of the world--and in making oppression of the freedmen possible after the Civil War. It's nice to see them quoting from Eric Foner's book Reconstruction. I'm sure that this will steam him pretty good for writing an honest history book that doesn't conform to the politically correct standards of academia today. Love that quote from Judge Kozinski's dissent in Silveira v. Lockyer (9th Cir. 2003)!
Gun Makers: Come To Idaho!
Red's Trading Post points to the efforts of the Idaho Department of Commerce to encourage firearms and ammunition manufacturers to move to Idaho by advertising at the SHOT Show in Las Vegas. This ad includes Art. I, sec. 11 of the Idaho Constitution, which is worth reading if you live somewhere like Texas or New Mexico, and think that your state constitution is pro-gun. Well, it is, but not like ours:The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person nor prevent passage of legislation providing minimum sentences for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, nor prevent the passage of legislation providing penalties for the possession of firearms by a convicted felon, nor prevent the passage of any legislation punishing the use of a firearm. No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition. Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony.
Some states are actually trying to push gun makers out. We'll take them.
Bryan Fischer's Sense of Humor
His most recent posting over at Idaho Values Alliance about the disastrous recent Republican primary actions is titled, "Electile Dysfunction."
The Transgendered 3rd Grader
To be blunt, I find it very, very difficult to believe that this situation isn't an indication of some pretty serious trauma in this kid's life. From February 8, 2008 channel 9:
The article mentions that the child "had left to go to classes in another district for about two years." Hmmm. Divorce? New stepfather? It makes you wonder, doesn't it?
"As a public school system, our calling is to educate all kids no matter where they come from, what their background is, beliefs, values, it doesn't matter," said Whei Wong, Douglas County Schools spokesperson.
Wong says the staff at one of Douglas County's schools is preparing to accommodate the student and answer questions other students might have. In order to protect the child as much as possible, 9NEWS has chosen not to reveal his school or other names that might identify the child.
"I see this as being a very difficult situation to explain to my daughter to explain why someone would not want to be the gender they were born with," said Dave M.
His daughter will be in the same class as the student.
The student had attended this same school in years prior, but had left to go to classes in another district for about two years. The transgender student will be returning to what is the child's home school. Dave M. thinks classmates will recognize the change.
"I do think that there's going to be an acknowledgement that 'Why are you in a dress this year when you were in pants last year?'" said Dave M.
Wong says teachers are planning to address the student by name instead of using he or she. The child will not use the regular boys or girls bathroom. Instead, two unisex bathrooms in the building will be made available. The school is handing out packets to parents who have questions. The packets contain information about people who are transgender.
Dick Morris Makes An Interesting Point
It's about why Clinton is still in the race, and may still win the nomination. From the February 6, 2008 New York Post:
I had imagined that single women tended to vote Democrat because of abortion (since married women were less likely to be having abortions), but Morris is making an interesting point that anyone who wants to win elections better think long and hard about: it isn't primarily the 25 year old woman with a professional career making $50,000 a year who is voting Democrat, but the woman whose husband or boyfriend left her with two or three children--and at best, a beat up heap of a car.
A conservative argument would be that feminists, by making divorce so easy, have encouraged a lot of men to flake out on their responsibilities. I saw the prominent historian Elizabeth Fox-Genovese make that exact argument some years ago on Firing Line. She pointed out that for women like herself, with a Ph.D. and a professional career, feminism has been a very good thing--but that feminism has been a disaster for the vast number of women living in a trailer park, trying to keep their kids fed with little or no child support.
This is true. But it is an incomplete statement, too. There are a lot of teenaged girls who are coming out of disastrous home lives, who hook up with the first guy that is prepared to pretend to love them--at least until she's pregnant, and or until he finds another gal who still looks good. There are some steps that government can take that might deal with some of this--such as more aggressive enforcement of statutory rape laws--but at the core of the problem is that there are an awful lot of kids growing up in very screwed up homes. There's a limit to what the government can do about those problems, without video cameras in every home, and an army of child protective services employees watching all the screens--and pretty obviously, that's neither possible nor desirable.
I'm not seeing any solutions at the moment. But this underclass of desperate women with dependent children and sperm donors (I hesitate to call them fathers) is a real issue, and one that isn't going away very quickly. I am not surprised that Hillary Clinton is getting their votes; what is a surprise is that some of them vote Republican anyway.
It's Just a Game
I'm sorry, but I'm not prepared to believe that this divorce was anything but a game to force Rhode Island to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. The case is Chambers v. Ormiston (R.I. 2007). The facts of the case are that Chambers and Ormiston, both women, were residents of Rhode Island. In May of 2004, they went to Massachusetts, and got "married." Then they came back to Rhode Island, and on October 23, 2006, they filed for divorce in Rhode Island--insisting that Rhode Island, which does not recognize same-sex marriage, should recognize it for purposes of divorce.
And what do you know: the Rhode Island Supreme Court said that there is no same-sex marriage recognized in Rhode Island law. Therefore, they would not untie a knot tied elsewhere.
Is there anyone who doesn't see this "divorce" as a little game to try and trick Rhode Island into recognizing a marriage? The goal, of course, would have been then to go back to court, and argue that if Rhode Island was prepared to divorce them, then they had effectively recognizes same-sex marriage.
And Perhaps They Will End Up With More Little Fighter Pilots, Too
From one of the Australian news services:
I'm not sure that I believe it. Note that this is categorized as humor.
UPDATE: Here's an older news story from June 24, 2006 Science Daily confirming this.
Plato's Republic
I read a bit of Plato in high school, as I think everyone does--in particular, the Parable of the Cave, which I found quite thought provoking. But I never read Plato's Republic, although I often see it referenced. This has never bothered me, and perhaps it should. (Hey, I'm a computer geek, not an intellectual.)
Anyway, I'm reading Felipe Fernandez-Armesto's Ideas That Changed the World at the moment. It's a series of two page articles, lavishly illustrated, about various major ideas...well, the title gives it away. The page on "Philosopher-Kings" has this to say about The Republic and Plato:Among philosophers, Plato was surely the best-ever writer and perhaps the greatest-ever philosopher. He was, however, a member of an Athenian brat pack of rich, well-educated intellectuals, who resented democracy and felt qualified for power.
Except for the militarism--and at least on some topics, censorship, this is a disturbingly accurate description of the intellectual, media, and political elite of the Democratic Party.
When he wrote his prescriptions for the ideal state in The Republic, they came out harsh, reactionary, and illiberal. The many objectionable features--censorship, repression, militarism, regimentation, extreme communism and collectivism, eugenics, austerity, rigid class structure, active deception of the people by the state---all had a baneful influence. The key idea, however, is that all political power should be concentrated in a self-electing class of philosopher-rulers called Guardians. Their qualification for office would be intellectual superiority, guaranteed by a mixture of heredity and education, which would make them selfless in their private lives and "godlike" in their ability to see what was good for the citizens.... His Guardians are the inspiration and intellectual ancestors of the elites, aristocracies, party apparatchiks, and self-appointed "supermen" whose justification for tyrannizing others has always been that they know best.
Grow Up, Everyone
Yes, I'm disappointed. Yes, I won't trust McCain on much of anything but War on Terror and maybe gun rights. But ask yourself: would you rather have a President who can't be trusted, and may do the wrong thing on issue after issue? Or a President that you can count on to do the wrong thing on all the same issues? And probably screw up the War on Terror as well?
I can't quite figure out what went wrong here. I know that there are still conservatives in America, and since I have some readers who approve of what I say, I know that there's more than one or two of them. But we better get our act together, darn quick, or we are going to start lose not just at the national level, but the state levels as well.
Who will McCain pick for VP? Some cynics have suggested Joe Lieberman. Others have suggested Romney (good choice), Fred Thompson (better choice), Mike Huckabee (bad choice, made especially so because of his strong physical resemblance to the VP in season four of 24. (And no, I don't think that Huckabee would be that useless.)
Remember that McCain stands a pretty decent chance of not surviving his term. That's not a wish, nor is a suggestion. It's just a harsh reality of the abuse he suffered, his health, and his age. It would be really nice if it turns out that the reason Romney pulled out of the race was in exchange for the VP slot. Not perfect, of course, but it might put Massachusetts and perhaps a couple of the other New England states in play for the Republicans. Not necessarily winnable, but at least the Democrats would have to spend some time and money to hold those states.
In the meantime: we have to figure a way to at least hold Republican and conservative Democrat seats in the House, and if possible, retake the House. (At least not lose any more seats in the Senate.) Based on last time, what is going to make this possible will be Democrats who are weak, or scandal ridden. Unfortunately, the only example I know of right now is my U.S. Senator Larry "Wide Stance" Craig--and he's a Republican.
We also need to be grooming some Republicans in state legislatures who can move up to Congress later. Of course, maybe I'm kidding myself. Maybe there aren't that many conservatives left in America.
Romney Clearly Loves America
Perhaps he was only putting a positive spin on a decision made for more pragmatic reasons, but this is a darn impressive way to leave the race. From February 7, 2008 CQPolitics:Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney suspended his campaign for president Thursday, clearing the main obstacle from Arizona Sen. John McCain ’s path to secure the Republican nomination.
Romney’s departure, announced in a speech to conservative activists in Washington, came two days after a poor showing on Super Tuesday left him badly trailing McCain. He told the Conservative Political Action Conference that continuing his campaign would hamper his party’s effort to oppose either New
York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton or Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in the November general election.
“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win,” Romney said.
“This is not an easy decision for me. I hate to lose,” he added.
Romney noted disagreements on policy with McCain but indicated that McCain’s views on Iraq policy and the war against terrorism were far superior than those of the two Democratic candidate.
“If this were only about me, I’d go on. But it’s never been only about me,” Romney said. “I entered this race because I love America. And because I love America, in this time of war, I feel I have to now stand aside — for our party and for our country.
Resources that might have been spent on getting Romney the nomination can now be at least partly diverted to a McCain victory in November--and to try and get back control of Congress.
I'm not happy about McCain. But as I have pointed out previously, there is a real risk that McCain might do the horrible things that Clinton and Obama promise to do. Those conservatives who think we are better off with a Democrat picking the next two, three, or four Supreme Court justices, as well as hundreds of appellate and district court judges, are kidding themselves. Those who are prepared to risk more 9/11 attacks by electing Barack Hussein Obama, and thus putting a Michael Moore approach to foreign policy in play, aren't just kidding themselves--they are endangering all of us.
Romney for VP?
The Heller Briefs
The Respondent's Brief (which is to say, the one written directly by the attorneys who represent the guy who brought the suit against the District of Columbia for its absurd gun control laws) is now visible here. I provided significant input and comments during the writing of it--as some readers of my book Armed America have already figured out, from some of the historical facts included in the brief.
Dave Hardy at Arms and the Law points to this February 5, 2008 Washington Post article about the brief, and calls it "quite a fair one." I agree. Perhaps liberals are beginning to figure out that they are going to lose. Dave also links here to a variety of law professor blogs discussing the merits of the case. You can hear the desperation in some of the negative comments at those blogs.
The Academics for the Second Amendment amicus brief, which I helped to write, will be visible shortly, as will some other briefs which I contributed inputs to as well.
UPDATE: The NRA's brief is here.
UPDATE 2: And here's another brief that I provided significant input and data for.
A Rather Peculiar Article
It almost reads like two different people wrote the article, and didn't communicate with each other. From February 6, 2008 Popular Mechanics:
And then, immediately following:
Every day, scientists hoping to see an increase in solar activity train their instruments at the sun as it crosses the sky. This is no idle academic pursuit: A lull in solar action could potentially drive the planet’s temperature down, or even prompt a mini Ice Age.
For millennia, thermonuclear forces inside the star have followed a regular rhythm, causing its magnetic field to peak and ebb, on average, every 11 years. Space weathermen are watching for telltale increases in sunspots, which would signal the start of a new cycle, predicted to have started last March and expected to peak in 2012. “When the sun’s active, it’s a little bit brighter,” explains Ken Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada’s National Research Council.
So far, Tapping reports no change in the magnetic field strength, as measured by radio telescopes. On the more positive side, last month NASA reported a small, earth-sized sunspot with a magnetic field pointing in the opposite direction from those in the previous cycle; qualities that designate the spot as a signal of a new upturn in activity. At the solar maximum, scientists expect to see between 75 and 150 such sunspots per day.Just how much influence the sun has on global temperatures has been the subject of sometimes acrimonious debate. While an upswing in solar activity may cause a warming trend, it was discounted in the mid-1990s as the sole driver of current
Hmmm. China has the worst winter in more than a century. I've previously mentioned snow in Baghdad, Cyprus, record cold in Bulgaria and Siberia and across the U.S. And you know about my driveway! And now this article. Wake up, people! The anthropogenic global warming scam is an attempt to loot your pockets and enrich businesses intent on being in the carbon credit trading business:
climate change. And for anyone hoping that a solar downswing might bail us out of our current dilemma: Solar influence on climate is slight compared to the impact of man-made greenhouse gases, a National Academy of Sciences report
concluded in 1995.
and even farmers earn billions of rupees. This was an unimaginable trading opportunity not more than a decade ago.
Carbon credits are a part of international emission trading norms. They incentivise companies or countries that emit less carbon. The total annual emissions are capped and the market allocates a monetary value to any shortfall through trading. Businesses can exchange, buy or sell carbon credits in
international markets at the prevailing market price.
India and China are likely to emerge as the biggest sellers and Europe is going to be the biggest buyers of carbon credits.
Who Pays Taxes?
Since the Democrats are going to make a big issue of "screwing the rich" on taxes, I thought you might find this interesting. According to this article, the bottom 50% of American income tax filers pays about $27.4 billion in taxes. Exxon in 2007 paid $30 billion in income taxes. One corporation (admittedly, the largest one on Earth), paid more income taxes the bottom half of filers?
Now, I can't find anything that says that Exxon paid $27.4 billion to the U.S. government. I get the impression from articles like this from U.S. News & World Report that much of this income tax may be to foreign governments. This Exxon balance statement again jus says "income tax" without identifying whether this is to the federal government, state governments, or Arabistan. You can read this in two ways:
1. When you buy gasoline, you are contributing to foreign aid!
2. When you buy gasoline, you help some corrupt politician somewhere else put money at best, into his Swiss bank account--and at worst, in al-Qaeda's pocket.
A Peculiar Need
I'm full of peculiar needs. I need some dust covers to go over the ends of the telescope tube assemblies. I'm thinking either elastic bowl covers large enough to go around a 20" diameter bowl (so like something a restaurant would buy), or shower caps that you might find aboard an alien spaceship--especially the bigheaded aliens that the original Star Trek series so often used.
Any hints? I've tried Google, but looking for 20" bowl covers isn't doing the job.
UPDATE: Large (22" diameter) stuff sacks, such as are used for large sleeping bags, have been suggested. Since I am going to have to create a light shroud for the telescope anyway (attached to the tube ends with Velcro), I may just buy a little extra, and some elastic, and make the dust covers myself. Hey, at least I am not going to make the cloth myself!
What A Miserable Set of Choices
I don't recall the last time I was this disappointed with my choices--and by the time we hold the Republican primary here in Idaho in May, most of the choice will almost certainly be made. I'm not the only blogger disappointed with the results. Professor Mike Rappaport at The Right Coast lists the objections that he has to McCain. Some of them are objections with which I completely agree with Rappaport:
There are some areas where I disagree with McCain, but to steal John Kerry's favorite word, I have a more nuanced disagreement:
...4. McCain opposes strong interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, for top members of Al Qaeda like Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
I understand McCain's reasons for this. As I pointed out in my discussion of 24 and torture, there are certainly a few circumstances where it might be the only way to get information necessary to save innocent lives, and that it is best to leave terrorists in doubt as to whether it might be used against them. I was tempted to paraphrase Bill Clinton's famous statement about abortion, "legal but rare," but that's just a little too playful for such a serious subject.
I think that waterboarding crosses the line between "strong interrogation techniques" and torture. I believe that it is best to leave such practices unlawful--and recognize that there may be circumstances where if torture is actually necessary to save innocent lives, the President has it within his authority to pardon someone for such an unlawful act. If this happens on a regular basis (to the point where the President has a stack of fill-in-the-blanks forms for this), I would be very skeptical that there's good reason for it.
There are a few aspects of McCain that I agree with, for example, his recognition that premature withdrawal from Iraq will make a real mess. I can admire his courage and service to America as a naval aviator and POW.
But there's a lot about McCain that I don't like. This article from American Thinker points out that McCain's American Conservative Union rating isn't really all that impressive--and is getting worse over time. To my surprise, McCain voted against the 2004 renewal of the federal assault weapons ban.
Not to my surprise, McCain voted to close the so-called "gun show sales loophole" which is really the private party loophole. There's nothing special about gun shows. Many states have no laws against private party sales of guns. There's a legitimate argument for requiring background checks on firearms sales, but that's properly the job of the states--not the federal government. I would be more tolerant of such a requirement once we get the Supreme Court to make a clear statement that the Second Amendment protects an individual right--and applying strict scrutiny as the standard for laws regulating that right.
I'm concerned also that McCain has so many skeletons in his closet (such as the Keating 6 scandal) that the leftist news media, once he is the Republican nominee, will use to hammer McCain into defeat. Now, if the matchup is McCain vs. Clinton, this won't be a problem. Clinton doesn't have a skeleton in her closet; she has a warehouse full of them, and there won't be much traction against McCain on this basis. McCain vs. Obama might be another matter. (I doubt that Obama is all that clean--he is an elected official, after all--he just looks clean compared to Senator Clinton.)
Rapport also makes the argument that while McCain is the Republican most likely to defeat the Democrat for President--because he is so far to the left--that it might be better for the Democrats to win this election. I've seen this argument made quite a bit, especially by pro-life Republicans. The argument is essentially, better to get whipped, and let the Democrats run the country into the ground, so that Republicans can take control again in 2012.
There are several problems with this theory:
1. The winner of the 2008 presidential election will be picking at least two, and probably more, Supreme Court justices. If McCain wins, there is a real risk that they will be Justices like O'Connor and Souter--Republicans who are hard to tell sometimes from Democrats. His statement over at the Federalist Society page (like that of Romney, Huckabee and Ron Paul) are all about the same--and if they do so, great! I just don't trust McCain to appoint judges that so fundamentally disagree with his policy positions.
Of course, if Clinton or Obama win, there is a near certainty that they appoint Democrats, and almost certainly in the style of Breyer or Ginsburg. The living, breathing, constantly mutating Constitution will be completely unrecognizable. Gay marriage? Mandatory, for every state. Striking down statutory rape laws? Very possible. Requiring churches to officiate at gay weddings, or lose their tax exempt status? Possible. McCain's choices will likely be bad, but I doubt that they could be as bad as the choices that Clinton or Obama will make.
2. We are at war. Now, I think Clinton will actually try to win--but she will be fighting a Democratic majority (perhaps a stronger majority than now) that includes significant numbers of the billionaire's wing of the party, who desperately want us to lose the War on Terror. I think McCain will end up being stronger than Clinton for that reason alone. I do worry about McCain's legendary temper. Our enemies should fear that our President might overreact, but that's not quite the same as actually having someone short-tempered whose finger is on the nuclear button.
Obama is another matter. Obama seems to represent the bilionaire's wing of the party rather too well. I really don't want someone up there who I have to worry is going to let George Soros and Michael Moore's view of foreign policy influence what we do.
3. What if all the suffering and blunders that the Iraq War represents, starts to bear fruit? We're already see some serious improvements in that theater. The last thing I want is for the party that has aggressively tried to lose this war then get into office and try to take credit for it. The economy is also taking a dip right now (standard business cycle stuff, as near as I can tell). I don't want the Democrats to take credit for a recovery that is almost certainly going to happen anyway.
I can't spend the time right now to discuss my feelings about Romney. I'm not thrilled with him, or his sudden conservatism. Was he misleading people when he was governor Massachusetts? Or is he misleading them now? Will he tack to the left if he is running against a Democrat in the general election? I don't know.
Huckabee manages to combine the worst aspects of populism and liberalism together. I can't take him seriously.
Dealing With Snow
This morning my wife and I grabbed our snow shovels, planning to move enough snow to use the Trailblazer to crush down the remainder. As I was working my way down the hill, pacing myself to avoid snow shovel induced heart attack, our neighbor Dave called to me--and then I noticed someone using a Bobcat (a type of small earthmoving equipment) driving up the common road.
It turned out Mr. Helmick had brought his Bobcat over to help out one of his friends who lives in the same subdivision--and was quite to willing to do some snow removal for the rest of us for a very reasonable fee. Now, liberals would complain that he was taking advantage of our need because he had something that we didn't have. I would say that he had capitalized the equipment, and I was quite prepared to pay him $50 to make several passes over our driveway--a very reasonable price compared to shoveling it myself.
Anyway, you can see the results here.
Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge
The sun is out today, and we're beginning to get some melt.
Click to enlarge
One of our neighbors outside of the subdivision was feeling neighborly, and without asking for any money decided to clear the common road in--and our driveway.
Click to enlarge
That's one of the virtues of living here. A lot of people are prepared to work for a reasonable rate of pay, and others do things out of the goodness of their hearts.
The Telescope Is Coming Together
Actually, rather literally. As you can see from this picture, the top tube assembly now has the eyepiece focuser and the elliptical mirror installed.
Click to enlarge
At this point, I need to drop the mirror into the mirror cell, put the parts in rough alignment so that I can verify the exact spacing required between them, and the buy the aluminum square tubes that will hold it all together.
I mean, alternatively, I could just visualize spacedness, and have a very Marin County kind of telescope!
RezkoWatch
There's a blog with this name devoted to examined indicted Syrian-born Antoin Rezko, and his connections to various Middle Eastern crooks and Barack Hussein Obama.
I rather doubt that Obama is any dirtier than the average Democratic politician. (Read my friend Stacy McCain's book Donkey Cons if you want your eyes opened about this.) Obama just looks so clean compared to the Clintons. This is not a high standard of comparison.
Barack Obama, Liar
He was here in Boise over the weekend for a rally, and emphasized that he is not trying to take anyone's guns. He's a liar. It isn't just that he supports bans on semiautomatics, and more possession and purchase restrictions. He claims that he wants more laws to keep guns out of the inner cities. Why? Does he think black people lack the sense that white people have?
He was a member of the board of the Joyce Foundation, the primary funder of extreme gun control measures in the United States. And he claims that he isn't trying to disarm Americans?
He's a liar, through and through.
UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers. Check back here regularly--you will find a lot of material about gun rights issues.
UPDATE 2: Sportsmen for Obama has a number of surprisingly recent statements by Obama that show where he stands on gun control. If you want to have a hunting weapon, that's okay, but for self-defense--or if you live in an "inner city" (which is a euphemism for "black people can't be trusted with guns")--well, you are out of luck.
Interesting Notions of Causes of Mental Illness
In the early 19th century, the causes of mental illness were subject to quite interesting speculations. I've mentioned previously a 1645 diary entry by Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts, who ascribed the insanity of the wife of the governor of Hartford (not yet merged into Connecticut colony) to excessive study and writing books. (Women weren't supposed to write books.)
In looking at T. Romeyn Beck, “Statistical Notices of Some of the Lunatic Asylums of the United States,” Transactions of the Albany Institute (Albany, N.Y.: Webster & Skinners, 1830), I see a list of causes of mental illness from the Connecticut mental hospital opened at Hartford, Connecticut, in 1824. Some of them aren't particularly bizarre ideas for possible causes such as "blow on the head" and others are even today recognized as possible causes of mental illness: "intemperance." But I see eight patients listed as ill because of "excessive study" and six listed as "Predisposition from various causes, (one from novel reading)."
"Honest, professor, I can't study hard enough to get an A on this test--I don't walk to end up hospitalized."
Welfare Benefits for Polygamous Marriages
Good news--this is only in Britain--not the U.S. (so far). From the February 3, 2008 Telegraph, thanks to JammieWearingFool:Husbands with multiple wives have been given the go-ahead to claim extra welfare benefits following a year-long Government review, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
As I have previously mentioned, the ACLU's president several years ago indicated that the ACLU would defend polygamy. I really don't see how the courts will say no once the ACLU files suit to demand legal recognition of polygamy. After all, other countries are doing it--and for the U.S. Supreme Court, that's certainly more important than our Constitution.
Even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, the decision by ministers means that polygamous marriages can now be recognised formally by the state, so long as the weddings took place in countries where the arrangement is legal.
We Can't Serve You, Sir--You Are Too Fat
I mentioned a couple of days ago about how the British National Health Service is discussing paying a truly shocking amount of money for "surrogate mothers" to bear children for couples who can't have them (both heterosexual and homosexual couples)--while life threatening illnesses (not elective procedures like this) are too expensive for NHS to handle.
I've also mentioned in the past that while some legitimate medical procedures were on long waiting lists in Canada, the Ontario Health Minister was enthusiastically supporting having the government pay for sex change operations--a procedure that is at best elective, and at worst, a waste of money.
Now, a friend points me to this proposal being considered in the Mississippi legislature that is a logical outgrowth of the idea that we are all in this together with respect to health insurance--a law that would prohibit restaurants from serving the obese. Now, if I ran a restaurant, there are people who might suggest need to go elsewhere. But that does not seem to me to be the government's job, anymore than it is their job to tell you who many children to have, what position to have sex in, or whether or not you are allowed to have cookies in the house or not.
Government health insurance is going to inevitably lead to all sorts of bizarre struggles about what is to be allowed, what is to be banned--and what is to be required. For some people, a big family is a blessing from God. For others, it's a weird and somewhat freakish form of genetic imperialism. I'm sure that if the federal government becomes the single health insurer, as many Democrats want, there will be calls from the ZPG crowd to insist that the government only pays for the first two children.
If I have to pay for liver transplants for alcoholics--I am going to insist (not that anyone will listen to me) that the government prohibit these alcoholics from drinking. If I have to pay for medical care for the obese, it is perfectly understandable that the government start telling restaurants that they can't serve the obese. If we have to pay for AIDS treatment, which is very expensive, it is perfectly reasonable to insist that you don't engage in risky behavior.
Having the government be the ultimate insurance company means "one noose, one neck." We are all in this together. At best, we end up paying an increasingly absurd amount of money to deal with bad lifestyle choices. At worst, we end up with an increasingly authoritarian level of control over personal choices.
Disappointing Errors in Serious Books
Irving B. Weiner, Donald K. Freedheim, John A. Schinka, Wayne F. Velicer, Michela Gallagher, Randy Joe Nelson, Alice F. Healy, Robert W. Proctor, Theodore Millon, Richard M. Lerner, M. Ann Easterbrooks, Jayanthi Mistry, William Michael Reynolds, Gloria E. Miller, Handbook of Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, 2003), 434, tells us that because of a shortage of mental health care being received by mental patients::In 1968 the Lanterman Petris Short Bill was passed by Congress to address this concern....
How many errors can you get in a single sentence? Let's rewrite this to match the facts:In 1967 the Lanterman-Petris-Short bill was passed by the California legislature...
And LPS wasn't passed by to address the shortage of mental health care at all. It was passed to institute a more exacting due process requirement for commitment, thus emptying the state mental hospitals. The net effect was not to improve provision of mental health care, but to move those who were hospitalized back into the community--where for the most part, they ended up living on the streets, and not getting mental health care.
I am just flabbergasted that what is apparently a serious standard work could have an error this gross. On the same page, they refer to 1957 Short-Doyle Act, and recognize that this was passed by the California legislature. You would think that the presence of Short's name in both acts might have caused someone to ask some questions.
Heated Driveways
The snow is deep enough today that even the Trailblazer might not make it out--or if it did, might not make it back up. And the snowthrower is in the shop. So today will be spent reading Henry F. Buswell, The Law of Insanity In Its Application to the Civil Rights and Capacities and Criminal Responsibility of the Citizen (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1885) for nuggets useful to the next book.
Heated driveways typically cost about $10 to $15 per square foot in addition to the cost of paving. If you have a traditional suburban driveway, that's a few thousand dollars--a very tempting expenditure. But if you have a driveway that is 600 feet long (like mine), that's at least $60,000. You can buy a beat up pickup or a new ATV, put a snowplow on it, and buy enough gasoline to run that plow for decades without even getting close to that kind of money.
I think we'll plan on having asphalt poured this summer, and then get an ATV and snowplow.
