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: economics ERIC. HOLDER. ROCKET. SCIENTIST. Labels: gun rights Labels: machining Labels: gun rights, Idaho politics Labels: freedom of religion, freedom of speech Labels: my books Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border. "I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S. Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S. A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence. "Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez." Today's vote came a day after Attorney General Eric Holder raised the possibility that the Obama administration would push to bring back the ban on assault weapons. But Feinstein's San Francisco neighbor, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, shot down that notion today, The Hill reports. "On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now," the Democratic leader said at her weekly news conference. "I think it's clear the Bush administration didn’t do that." Labels: gun rights This is going to be some trick. Even the most basic inspection of the IRS income tax statistics shows that raising taxes on the salaries, dividends and capital gains of those making more than $250,000 can't possibly raise enough revenue to fund Mr. Obama's new spending ambitions. Consider the IRS data for 2006, the most recent year that such tax data are available and a good year for the economy and "the wealthiest 2%." Roughly 3.8 million filers had adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 in 2006. (That's about 7% of all returns; the data aren't broken down at the $250,000 point.) These people paid about $522 billion in income taxes, or roughly 62% of all federal individual income receipts. The richest 1% -- about 1.65 million filers making above $388,806 -- paid some $408 billion, or 39.9% of all income tax revenues, while earning about 22% of all reported U.S. income. ... But let's not stop at a 42% top rate; as a thought experiment, let's go all the way. A tax policy that confiscated 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning over $500,000 in 2006 would only have given Congress an extra $1.3 trillion in revenue. That's less than half the 2006 federal budget of $2.7 trillion and looks tiny compared to the more than $4 trillion Congress will spend in fiscal 2010. Even taking every taxable "dime" of everyone earning more than $75,000 in 2006 would have barely yielded enough to cover that $4 trillion. Labels: economics, global warming Labels: gun rights A faculty report has stirred some racial tensions at Sonoma State University, following claims from its author that the institution’s administration has deliberately targeted those from higher-income families as potential students for the past decade. In this process, the report claims that the university has become the “whitest” public institution in California, effectively preferring white students to minorities in an admission practice that it deems “reverse affirmative action.” One aspect of Sonoma State that is decidedly diverse is the administration, where the president, provost and director of admissions – all criticized in the report – are Latino. The professor who brought forth this report, however, is white. Labels: affirmative action Labels: gun rights Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: economics According to real property data search information, Hanks bought the two-story home in the summer of 2001 for $87,000. At some point in the next five years, she re-financed the original home loan for $270,000. Question: Where did all that money go? You know, if you buy a house, and refinance an existing loan to get a better interest rate, that makes lots of sense. I can somewhat understand the person who takes a home equity line of credit. (This is usually abbreviated HELOC, which is very close to "helot," the Greek word for slave--a curious coincidence.) Labels: economics 'Roll up for the great pollution fire sale, the ultimate chance to wreck the climate on the cheap. You sir, over there, from the power company - look at this lovely tonne of freshly made, sulphur-rich carbon dioxide. Last summer it cost an eyewatering €31 to throw up your smokestack, but in our give-away global recession sale, that's been slashed to a crazy €8.20. Dump plans for the wind turbine! Compare our offer with costly solar energy! At this low, low price you can't afford not to burn coal!" Set up to price pollution out of existence, carbon trading is pricing it back in. Europe's carbon markets are in collapse. Yet the hiss of escaping gas is almost inaudible. There's no big news headline, nothing sensational for TV viewers to watch; no queues outside banks or missing Texan showmen. You can't see or hear a market for a pollutant tumble. But at stake is what was supposed to be a central lever in the world's effort to turn back climate change. Intended to price fossil fuels out of the market, the system is instead turning them into the rational economic choice. That there exists something called carbon trading is about all that most people know. A few know, too, that Europe has created carbon exchanges, and traders who buy and sell. Few but the professionals, however, know that this market is now failing in its purpose: to edge up the cost of emitting CO2. The theory sounded fine in the boom years, back when Nicholas Stern described climate change as "the biggest market failure in history" - a market failure to which carbon trading was meant to be a market solution. Instead, it's bolstering the business case for fossil fuels. Understanding why is easy. A year ago European governments allocated a limited number of carbon emission permits to their big polluters. Businesses that reduce pollution are allowed to sell spare permits to ones that need more. As demand outstrips this capped supply, and the price of permits rises, an incentive grows to invest in green energy. Why buy costly permits to keep a coal plant running when you can put the cash into clean power instead? All this only works as the carbon price lifts. As with 1924 Château Lafite or Damian Hirst's diamond skulls, scarcity and speculation create the value. If permits are cheap, and everyone has lots, the green incentive crashes into reverse. As recession slashes output, companies pile up permits they don't need and sell them on. The price falls, and anyone who wants to pollute can afford to do so. The result is a system that does nothing at all for climate change but a lot for the bottom lines of mega-polluters such as the steelmaker Corus: industrial assistance in camouflage. Labels: global warming Had anyone said a few months ago that the federal government would step in to provide a trillion dollars to subsidize gasoline—to bring it down to $1.85 a gallon nationwide from prices that were exceeding $4 a gallon—we would have had a national debate. And yet as quietly as the Iraq war cooled down and was ignored, so too we think nothing of the hundreds of billions of dollars saved in reduced energy costs. For the average driver who puts 15,000 miles on his car per year, the annual savings (depending on regional prices, miles per gallon, and the amount and type of miles driven) could reach $1500-2000. Or contemplate again: What if the Chinese had announced three years ago that in a spirit of good will they would begin buying trillions of US Treasury bond at a .5% interest rather than the 3-5% of the recent past. The result, of course, would be a multi-billion-dollar stimulus for the indebted US economy that would enjoy a temporary reprieve from the cost of its indebtedness. (Remember, in the Carter years T-bills and US bonds were paying out 8-12% and more). Labels: Csharp Labels: gun rights
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.
Clever Parody of Publishers Clearing House Ads
Here. Taxpayers Clearing House is handing out huge checks to ordinary people--then explaining that the check isn't actually for them!
How Did I Miss That?
Ace of Spades points out that along with the idiocy of Holder's support for the assault weapon ban--the U.S. Attorney General wants to pass a law that is already on the books!
Keeping track of Holder's ignorant statements is rather like trying to keep track of all the Democrats in big legal trouble because of corruption right now--it's a target-rich environment. As Red State points out:Holder beclowns self, displays ignorance of existing firearms law
..."I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller," Holder said...
Ahem, the existing law about bullets...27 CFR 478478.37 Manufacture, importation and
sale of armor piercing ammunition.
No person shall manufacture or import,
and no manufacturer or importer
shall sell or deliver, armor piercing
ammunition, except:
(a) The manufacture or importation,
or the sale or delivery by any manufacturer
or importer, of armor piercing
ammunition for the use of the United
States or any department or agency
thereof or any State or any department,
agency or political subdivision
thereof;
(b) The manufacture, or the sale or
delivery by a manufacturer or importer,
of armor piercing ammunition
for the purpose of exportation; or
(c) The sale or delivery by a manufacturer
or importer of armor piercing
ammunition for the purposes of testing
or experimentation as authorized by
the Director under the provisions of
§ 478.149.I’m sure that the vaunted technocratic brilliance that we were promised with regard to the Obama administration will be downright breath-taking - once they get around to actually showing any.
Machining
A while back, I removed a particular caster assembly from the ScopeRoller product list because it was just too much work to make. It was a complex part, with two protrusions that replaced an even more complex foot on the Vixen HAL-110 tripod leg.
Another customer needs it, and because he was confused about what Vixen tripod he had, I feel somewhat compelled to build the right part to replace what I have already made. I've been planning to work on the HAL-110 tripod leg problem anyway, so it's not that big a pain.
What made the part in question complicated was:
1. I needed to make cuts in three different dimensions, and the workpiece would have been very difficult to position in one direction because it was 2.69" wide--and the mill vise that I have is only 2" wide. Yes, there are ways to get around that, but they involve cutting vertically over a very great distance--and when the height of a workpiece exceeds the height of the vise jaws by too large a margin, you have to make very small cuts (.010" or .020" at a time), or risk having the workpiece pull out of the jaws.
2. I had too large of a base that set on the caster, relative to the protrusions that go into the Vixen tripod leg. This meant that I had to either do a lot of cutting with relatively coarse tools (like a bandsaw), and then mill for precise dimensions. There isn't much (at least in my garage) in between the .05" - .1" precision of a bandsaw, and the .001" - .003" precision of a vertical mill.
So I have shrunk down the dimensions of the base a bit. Now the amounts to be removed from a solid block of Delrin are much less. Two .210" sections have to be cut off; a .130" section; a .060" section. And a 0.500" section in the middle, that I will do with a .4375" drill, and two bandsaw cuts.
By experimentation, I have concluded that when the monstrous, 0.75" diameter, 1.75" long end mill is in play, I can remove .020" of Delrin at a time with the edge of the end mill. (This means that I move the end mill up alongside the plastic, and cut a 1.5" high, .020" depth section of Delrin at a time.) Using the frace of the end mill, I can remove .050" of Delrin at a time. This means that it only takes a few passes back and forth to remove what is in the way.
I can also see why CNC vertical mills make so much sense. Much of what is happening here is repeating certain steps. If I had the CNC control unit, I would spend a bit of time programming the motions once. Then I would position the workpiece in the mill vise, start it up, and walk away. Ten minutes later, that operation would be complete, and I could move the workpiece to a new position and have it resume.
Clever Space Saver
BedBunker--a gun safe that replaces your boxspring, both saving floor space for a gun safe, and making it a little less obvious for a burglar. Of course, the vast majority of burglars, even if they found an out in the open gun safe, wouldn't stick around long enough to try and open it. On the down side--if you need to get a gun out to deal with an intruder, this would be even slower to open than a conventional gun safe in the bedroom.
I'm Sure The Motivations Are Purely Religious
I have serious concerns about the energy inputs required to make fuel alcohol from corn, but I read stuff like this from February 19, 2009 Al Arabyia, and I just shake my head:A prominent Saudi scholar warned youths studying abroad of using ethanol or other fuel that contains alcohol in their cars since they could be committing a sin, local press reported Thursday.
Look, I understand the Islamic prohibition on alcohol. Alcohol destroys a lot of lives every year. I can understand the prohibition on being involved in the alcohol trade. But that's drinking alcohol--not fuel alcohol. And it's not like there's some interaction between the places that produce drinking alcohol and fuel alcohol.
Sheikh Mohamed Al-Najimi, member of the Saudi Islamic Jurisprudence Academy, based his statement on a saying by the prophet that prohibited all kinds of dealings with alcohol including buying, selling, carrying, serving, drinking, and manufacturing, the Saudi newspaper Shams reported Thursday.
Saudi and Muslim youth studying abroad would violate the prohibition if they used bio fuel, he said, since it “is basically made up of alcohol.”
A cynic might suggest that the sheikh is concerned about reduced demand for petroleum.
Not Quite As Far As Montana
House Joint Memorial 3 has been introduced into the Idaho legislature, and would put the Idaho legislature on record as opposing HR 45, the bill before Congress to require a license (with written tests, fingerprinting, etc.) to own any handgun, or any semiautomatic detachable magazine weapon. (That includes plinkers like the Ruger 10/22, and hunting rifles like the Remington 7400.)
Ten Commandments
Those of you in the Boise area, or regular readers of this blog, know that several years ago, the city of Boise removed a Ten Commandments monument from Julia Davis Park. They did so because the Rev. Fred Phelps, a long-time liberal political activist before he was disbarred, and became Mr. Homophobe, demanded the right to put up a monument filled with anti-homosexual materials in the same park, unless Boise removed the Ten Commandments.
Boise chose to remove the Ten Commandments monument--even though there was case law that established that Phelps didn't have a leg to stand on, and there were lawyers prepared to defend Boise pro bono. But Mayor Bieter, who is a Democrat, used this as an excuse to remove the Ten Commandments monument, since this has become something of a symbol to local Democrats of our benighted state here--allowing something identified with the religion of 80% of the population of Idaho to survive.
The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently upheld the Texas legislature having a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the statehouse in Van Orden v. Perry (2005)--a situation even more fraught with potential Constitutional problems than its presence in a city park. And a couple of days back, a case exactly on point was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (2009). The Court held that there was no obligation for the city to add any monument that a crackpot group wanted in the park, just because the Ten Commandments monument was there.
What is astonishing about this case is that while there was some difference of opinion about why, there was complete and total agreement from all nine justices--even the raging liberals--about the result. Justice Alito's opinion explained that when the government speaks (as opposed to providing a public forum), it is expressing its opinion, and is under no Constitutional obligation to present all points of view.We conclude, however, that although a park is a traditional public forum for speeches and other transitory expressive acts, the display of a permanent monument in a public park is not a form of expression to which forum analysis applies. Instead, the placement of a permanent monument in a public park is best viewed as a form of government speech and is therefore not subject to scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause.
I was quite amused by one example of the absurdity of where this "all points of view must have an equal opportunity for expression if the government puts even one point of view up" might lead:
...
The Free Speech Clause restricts government regulation of private speech; it does not regulate government speech.Respondent contends that this issue “can be dealt with through content-neutral time, place and manner restrictions, including the option of a ban on all unattended displays.” Brief for Respondent 14. On this view, when France presented the Statue of Liberty to the United States in 1884, this country had the option of either (a) declining France’s offer or (b) accepting the gift, but providing a comparable location in the harbor of New York for other statues of a similar size and nature (e.g., a Statue of Autocracy, if one had been offered by, say, the German Empire or Imperial Russia).
I have a feeling the Statute of Autocracy today would look a lot like George Soros.
As Alito's decision points out, there are limits beyond which the government may not go, for example, with respect to creating an Establishment of Religion (which the Ten Commandments monument clearly does not)--but that the major limitation is that the voters can throw the rascals out:The involvement of public officials in advocacy may be limited by law, regulation, or practice. And of course, a government entity is ultimately “accountable to the electorate and the political process for its advocacy.” Southworth, 529 U. S., at 235. “If the citizenry objects, newly elected officials later could espouse some different or contrary position.” Ibid.
What this means is that Mayor Bieter's claim that the city removed the Ten Commandments monument for Constitutional reasons is nonsense. They did it because Rev. Phelps gave them an excuse to do what they already wanted to do: remind the people of Boise that this is not a Christian city. Pretty clearly, the unwillingness of the voters of Boise to throw the rascals out over this--and even their unwillingness to overturn the decision by referendum--shows that Bieter was probably right. Democrats are a dominant force in Boise, and therefore, Christianity is destestable.
I'm disappointed that Bieter and the majority of the council decided to remove the Ten Commandments monument. There was no good reason for the city to spend the money that it did on removal, or on the subsequent lawsuits. This was simply an attempt to assuage the sizeable fraction of Boiseans who find it destestable and offensive to think that Christianity has any significance to this place. But they clearly have the authority to do so, as the Pleasant Grove City decision clearly finds. But if you live in a city where Christianity is not yet destestable, you can use this decision to take away the excuses of people like Mayor Bieter.
Screenplay
I am still waiting for literary agents to respond to my query concerning Personal Tragedies. So far, I have lots of "not right for us" responses, and a few that have made a point of saying that it was very well written. In the meantime, I'm writing a subversive screenplay about one of the last great incidents of slave rescue before the Civil War started.
I've never tried something like this before, and it is exhilarating. Henry James famously once wrote, "Show, don't tell." This is even more true with a screenplay than it is with a novel. A voiceover or text on the screen can provide a certain amount of background, but only a little. I would say that the opening crawl of Star Wars is very nearly the maximum that a film can get away with, and even that only worked because of the way in which the words receded. The opening explanations of Red Dawn were, in some respects, a sign of laziness on the part of the screenwriter (or the necessity of getting the film to a length that the studio was willing to release).
Information that everyone in the film knows has to be explained in dialog--and in a way that feels natural--not like a character is lecturing the audience. If you want the audience to know a character's name, you need to introduce him--and one way of doing so is to have another character introduce him, or he introduces himself. I learned quite a bit about film taking film classes at USC--and I'm putting that knowledge to work now.
I'm about 15 pages in so far, and I'm already thinking of the next steps. I'm told that one strategy for raising the roughly $250,000 to $500,000 to make a small independent film like this is to film a few powerful scenes, and put that up as a trailer. We'll see how that works. I've lined up a colleague from HP to play a regionally prominent black abolitionist in the sentencing sequence. He isn't an actor, but I believe that he'll do a good job--the speech that Langston gave to the court was powerful, and with enough practice, I suspect that it will be a strong enough scene to show the power of the material. (And yes, you may find it hard to believe, but there are black people in Boise. To cast the whole film might, however, exhaust the supply of black actors in our state!)
For The Benefit of Mexico
One of these days, we're going to find the embarrassing pictures that the Mexican government must have of most of our politicians. It's the only explanation for the increasingly open manner in which the interests of Mexico are taking precedence over those of the U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder explained why the Obamination is going to push for a ban on sales of assault weapons (which is more severe than the 1994 ban, which only prohibited new manufacture). From February 25, 2009 ABC News:The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.
1. Automatic weapons are not assault weapons. Any automatic weapon is subject to National Firearms Act regulation. You can't just go into a store and buy automatic weapons in the U.S. There is a procedure, involving background checks, fingerprinting, a several month wait, signoff by your police chief, sheriff, or other chief law enforcement officer. In many states, it isn't even possible--state law either has additional restrictions or completely prohibits it.
2. Because of the ironically named Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, new manufacture of automatic weapons for civilian ownership is unlawful--and as a result, legal automatic weapons are hideously expensive. The cheapest full automatic that I have seen offered was still $7500. Since you can buy full autos internationally for a couple hundred dollars, I think we know from where the guns the Mexican drug gangs are using are coming.
3. Hand grenades aren't even as available as automatic weapons. I suppose in theory that they are considered destructive devices and there might be a way to get a license for them, but again, I have never seen a live hand grenade offered for sale. Ever.
4. Let's see, where might Mexican drug gangs be getting automatic weapons and hand grenades. Could they be importing them on the international black market? They're drug gangs. Do you suppose that they might have some expertise in smuggling, and contacts with international criminal organizations? Do you suppose that they might be buying them from corrupt members of the Mexican Army? The U.S. has historically had a problem with National Guard armories "leaking" automatic weapons. John Dillinger's automatic weapons, for example, were frequently purchased from corrupt police departments and National Guard armorers.
5. Gee, if Mexico really has a problem with guns coming across the border, perhaps they could work on securing the border. We'll help. That will stop the inflow of illegal drugs and aliens at the same time. Can you see why this isn't going to happen?
The only good news out of all this is that Nancy Pelosi (D-Hell) isn't as stupid as she looks. She's made it quite clear that she's not interested in seeing such a bill. From February 26, 2009 USA Today:
Enforce the laws we have right now? Did I read that right? She remembers what happened the last time a stupid bill like this got passed. The Democrats lost both houses of Congress because of it.
I have no idea what she is talking about when she says the Bush Administration didn't enforce existing laws. (And I'm quite sure that she doesn't either.) The Bush Administration aggressively enforced felon-in-possession laws, with often quite positive effects. I think she wants to distance herself from Bush--so she just makes stuff up.
Obama's Deficits
Remember when Democrats used to criticize Bush and Republicans for running up huge deficits? They were right to criticize. But it spite of Obama's claims during the campaign that he was going to cut spending and deficits, he and the Democrats have introduced spending increases that create deficits that make Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress look downright responsible. (And that's saying something.) Obama's budget is going to run up a deficit in a year that is bigger than eight years of Bush.
Ah, but he can raise taxes. The February 26, 2009 Wall Street Journal points out that Obama simply can't do it without raising taxes on the middle class:On Tuesday, he left the impression that we need merely end "tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans," and he promised that households earning less than $250,000 won't see their taxes increased by "one single dime."
James Lindgren over at Volokh Conspiracy points out that Obama's cap-and-trade proposal aims to reduce America's carbon emissions per capita below the level we had in the 1700s. Yeah, yeah, there's all sorts of wonderful new technologies out there that will be green and efficient. Does anyone believe that these will be enough to make up even half the difference in standard of living between now and Colonial America?
It isn't for the benefit of Mexico that Attorney General Holder is talking about an assault weapon sale ban (which is actually more severe than the 1994 law, which only banned new manufacture). It is because they know that the peasants are going to rise up when Obama and friends try to take us back 300 years.
This Is Why The Current Political Structure Must Be Destroyed
I don't know how reliable a source this Valleywag is, but I don't find it particularly unbelievable. I recall reading that after Dennis Hastert became Speaker of the House a few years back (when Republicans controlled Congress), his son closed his flower shop, and moved to DC to become a lobbyist:Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi loves to talk up her folksy grandmotherhood. But what's her record at raising kids? This much we know: Son Paul Pelosi Jr. is dating a lingerie model.
Uh, how many high paying jobs can you hold down simultaneously? And does anyone think that all of these jobs and important posts he has are just coincidental with his mother being the single most powerful member of Congress?
...
A number of people have pointed out how a lot of people get elected to Congress, generally pretty well off--and within a few years, they become extremely well off. Congressional pay is pretty decent (until you figure in the costs of having a home in DC and one in your district, and travel), but it isn't enough to get rich.
Many have pointed to the quite astonishing raise and promotion that Michelle Obama received shortly after her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate--where he was in a position to help her employer.
Here's a harsh fact: it is illegal to bribe elected officials, but it isn't illegal to give cushy jobs to their relatives. And by the wildest and most astonishing of coincidences, the employers who give those cushy jobs to relatives often seem to be beneficiaries of government programs. Hence the importance of earmarks--to make sure that the money goes where it is supposed to go.
The existing political class of America needs to be replaced. And it needs to be replaced so often that the new guys and gals don't stay there long enough to learn the corruption game--or at least, they don't get good at in the time that they are there.
Those Pesky Montanans
Idaho has this reputation for being a bunch of anti-federal government crazies, but I don't think that's particularly deserved. I mentioned last February that Montana officials had warned the Supreme Court that Montana joined the Union on the understanding that the Second Amendment protected an individual right, and they might have to rethink that situation if the Court ruled wrongly on D.C. v. Heller (2008). Fortunately, the Court got it right, so there was no need for Montana to seize the Air Force missile silos there, and become the world's lowest population and density nuclear power.
Anyway, it appears that the Montana legislature is preparing for the Obamination of restrictive federal gun control laws. From the February 23, 2009 Billings (Mont.) Gazette:HELENA - Montana lawmakers are betting the words 'Made in Montana' might be able to trigger a court showdown with the federal government, while also freeing some gun owners and dealers from background check and licensing requirements.
I understand that a lot of other states are mulling over declarations of state sovereignty as well. I have long thought that there was little chance of Civil War II being regional. Maybe I'm mistaken.
Under a proposed law before the Legislature, firearms, weapons components and ammunition made in Montana and kept in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation, potentially releasing some Montanans from national gun registration and licensing laws. The legislation could also free gun purchasers in the state from background checks.
Still, the bill's proponents say the measure has much bigger prey in its sights.
"Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I'd like to support that," said Republican Rep. Joel Boniek, the bill's sponsor. "But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It's about state rights."
Adding to the amusement of this is that those who were upset about the Raich decision (and they were right to be upset, even if it was for a very stupid cause: marijuana) will have to admit that if California has the right to legalize marijuana that doesn't move across state lines, free of federal intervention, then Montana has a similar right to tell the federal government that guns made in Montana are exempt from federal rules.
What Next? Does The Klan Have An EEO Officer?
The February 25, 2009 Inside Higher Education reports on complaints about a public university that is supposedly trying to make itself specially white. What makes this so funny (aside from the gross deficiencies in the study) is that it is Sonoma State University:
Inside Higher Education points out that SSU is in the middle of a very, very white community, and like many of the institutions of the California State University system, a lot of the students live nearby. SSU, when I attended there in the 1980s and 1990s, had a large number of non-traditional age students--meaning, people like my wife and myself who lived in the community, and fit classes around jobs and family responsibilities. That alone would make SSU an especially white college because of the surrounding community.
But it wasn't that SSU wasn't trying. There were pretty regular little reminders that many faculty members were disappointed at having a bunch of white kids in the classroom. I remember seeing one scholarship that SSU offered that was limited to Hispanics--and it wasn't a private scholarship administered by SSU, but using public funds. I wrote them a letter reminding them that this was a violation of federal law--and they didn't even bother to respond.
I keep hoping for a post-racial America. But as long guilt-ridden whites, and minorities who choose to play the race card for control continue to dominate university faculties, I rather doubt that this is going to happen.
H.R. 45--Much Worse Than I Thought
I just re-read H.R. 45, which I thought only imposed a federal licensing requirement for assault weapons. No. It imposes a federal licensing requirement for possession of:The term `qualifying firearm'--
This would force tens of millions of Americans to get a federal license to own any handgun, and pass a written test, and be fingerprinted. And what do we get in return? Nothing. `(A) means--
`(i) any handgun; or
`(ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device; and
`(B) does not include any antique.'.
So Many Errors
"The nation that invented the automobile" (referring to the United States) is just the most obviously ignorant statement from Obama's speech this evening. There are so many distortions, deceptions, intentionally left out details that it just flabbergasts me.
He insisted that if we didn't something, the economy would just keep sinking--contrary to what the history of the business cycle and the Congressional Budget Office's January prediction.
He insisted that he wasn't looking to lay blame--but put the entire blame for this crisis on the financial industry and consumers who didn't think far enough ahead--ignoring the part played by the government forcing lenders to make subprime mortgages.
This guy makes Bush look like an intellectual.
It's going to be a long four years.
Aurora Hunting In Alaska
It looks like my wife and I will be headed to Fairbanks to go aurora hunting in late March, over Easter break. Solar wind predictions and a new Moon suggest that March 22-25 will be especially good. Since I know that some of my readers live in Alaska, any suggestions on lodging somewhere out of Fairbanks (towards the north), but not hours and hours of driving north? What sort of road conditions should I be expecting in late March? Will it be -40 at night?
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Idaho Union PAC Deduction Ban
One of my friends here in Idaho is a school teacher and union activist. She told me something a couple of years back that reminded me that Idaho is almost a mirror image of California. She said that the legislature had passed a law prohibiting voluntary deduction of union dues from school teacher paychecks. In California, of course, there's nothing voluntary about it--it will happen whether you want it to or not.
It turned out that what she told me wasn't quite right. It wasn't union dues that Idaho prohibits from being deducted from paychecks--but political action committee funding. Today in Ysura v. Pocatello Education Association (2009), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there was nothing unconstitutional about Idaho prohibiting the deduction of political contributions from paychecks. Union dues can be deducted (with signed authorization of the employee, of course--this isn't California), but if the union wants teachers to kick in political contributions, they will have to write their own check, and not have the government collect the money for them. So, why is this a problem? As the Court explained:The court below concluded, and Idaho does not dispute, that "unions face
Huh? These contributions for political speech were voluntary before this new law took effect in 2003, and voluntary afterwards. The only conclusion that I can draw is that one of two situations makes payroll deduction dramatically more effective:
substantial difficulties in collecting funds for political speech without using
payroll deductions."
1. Teachers are too lazy to write a check to their union's political action committee.
2. There was some significant pressure on teachers to allow payroll deduction of political action committee funding, and without the state doing so, teachers just "forget" to do so.
Neither of these is exactly a ringing endorsement of the level of support that the teachers union enjoys from its rank and file, is it?
Leading vs. Lagging Economic Indicators
You have probably heard the term "leading economic indicators" on the news, and perhaps didn't know what it meant. "Leading" doesn't mean "most important" but those that often come before a change in the economy, while lagging (or trailing) economic indicators are those that come at the tail end of a change in the economy. There are also "coincident economic indicators"--those that are lined up with the general economy.
The Conference Board's February 19, 2009 report has what may me a positive sign (consistent with the Congressional Budget Office's early January assessment that the economy would recover in the second half of 2009, stimulus bill or not):The Conference Board Leading Economic Index™ (LEI) for the U.S. increased
0.4 percent...
The LEI increased for the second consecutive month in January, but November
and December values were revised down as new data for manufacturers' new orders
became available. Between July 2008 and January 2009, the LEI decreased 1.9
percent (a -3.7 percent annual rate), faster than the decline of 1.1 percent (a
-2.1 percent annual rate) during the previous six months. In addition, the
weaknesses among the leading indicators have remained widespread in recent
months.
This is probably worth keeping an eye on. It's still possible for Obama and the idiots that control Congress to crush the incipient recovery, but at some point, the LEI will stay positive long enough to start buying index funds.
Really Cool Chevrolet Ad
Here. Nice piece of work--it could almost make you believe that someone had a time lapse camera sitting in one place for a very long time!
I Wish That I Could Exercise In My Sleep
When I am in Bend, I try to hit the gym every night. I don't mind the exercise so much--just the time that it consumes. At least while I am on the treadmill, I can read, as long as it isn't too demanding of a book. But the time using the machines is just lost. The 15-20 minutes I spend in the pool I rather enjoy, and the 10 minutes I spent running my upper back along the jets in the Jacuzzi were heavenly! I just wish that the whole 70-80 minutes could happen while I was sleep. I wouldn't mind waking up a bit sore--because it would give me more time to do other things that are a bit more pressing.
Where Did That Money Go?
One of the rapidly growing sources of anger about Obama's mortgage relief plan is that it will tax those of us who were responsible to bail out a lot of people who are in over their heads for no particular good reason. I've mentioned in the past the strawberry picker who makes $14,000 a year with a $720,000 mortgage.
True, there are people who did nothing wrong, except buy a house at the wrong time. People lose their jobs, get transferred--and discover that they can't sell their house, except at a loss. The house we sold in West Boise last year, while not at a loss, returned very little more than the down payment we made in 2001. If we had bought that house in 2006, it would have been very, very painful. I can sympathize a lot with people in that situation.
The problem is that there were a lot of people who were in over their heads for absolutely no good reason at all. People who bought real estate not to live in, but to flip in 3-6 months and make $100,000 profit. People who made false claims about income or assets to get mortgages, on the assumption that somehow, the rising market would let them get away with this. Michelle Malkin shows the documents associated with ACORN's poster child of the moment, Donna Hanks (who just coincidentally, works for ACORN). ACORN has decided that they can break into the house that Hanks lost to foreclosure, and refuse to vacate. So how did Hanks get in so much trouble that her house was foreclosed as part of her bankruptcy?
If you use that HELOC to make improvements to the house, such as a new roof, maybe putting in a pool, or adding another bedroom--okay. If you actually enhance the value of the house, that might make sense.
If you use the HELOC to refinance your car loan, that can make sense too, because usually the interest you pay on the HELOC is tax deductible on Schedule A as mortgage interest. You get a comparable interest rate as a car loan, and it reduces your taxes. I wouldn't encourage this, but it isn't necessarily a bad thing, unless you are doing something extravagant, like buying a new Lambhorghini Diablo.
Things that you should not use a HELOC for: vacations; cocaine; groceries.
Where did that $270,000 go? And why should taxpayers do anything to help this person?
Cap-And-Trade Failure
I mentioned a couple of days ago the failure of Europe's cap-and-trade system to reduce pollution back in 2007. Whoops! It is now incentivizing carbon dioxide production! Or so this article by Julian Glover in the February 23, 2009 Guardian says. (And remember that the Guardian is a left of center British paper, heavily identified with the Labour Party.)
Don't Panic
Victor Davis Hanson points out that amidst all the chaos and fear, there are some good sides to what is happening to our economy:Imagine…
He also points out that as bad as this collapse of the stock market has been for those who are on the edge of retirement, or like myself, will be in the next few years, this will be a remarkable buying opportunity for those who are in their 20s and 30s. People like my daughter and son-in-law, who got a bargain on a house. One house that they made an offer on, and didn't get, was being sold by a welder who was going to take a bath selling it, because he had to move to Salt Lake City for a job. People whose 401k is buying stock right now will do extremely well over the next 20-30 years, since everything is dirt cheap right now. I confess that I keep looking for signs of the bottom, so that I can take advantage of bargains in stocks.
There's an aphorism often attributed to one of the Rothschilds, that the time to buy is when there is blood in the streets. I'm hoping that it doesn't literally get to that point--but if it does, the stock market will take an enormous dive--and I'll be buying. And if you are smart, you'll take a break from overthrowing the corrupt government long enough to place some buy orders. A good revolutionary should also be a good capitalist.
I Hesitate To Label This As Humor
But it does quite accurately show what TARP has turned out to be for the rest of the economy. Click here, and remember--the people responsible for this idiocy thought that they knew what they were doing, too.
C#/.NET Software Engineers Needed
The company at which I am contracting in Bend, Oregon, needs experienced C#/.NET software engineers for several months (perhaps longer) to help with product enhancement on a Point of Sale system. If you are one of the many skilled and experienced software engineers who have recently had your job Obaminated, send me your resume; contract work is better than unemployment. Besides, you get to hang out with cool people like me!
The working environment is a bit funky--we're working in an aircraft hangar at Bend Municipal Airport--but the people are nice. We operate by the Microsoft clothing standard--you must wear clothes.
Obama Lied
The Idaho Statesman published my piece today about how Obama lied to Idahoans. It's amusing to see the ferocity of comments in response. Apparently it bugs liberals to be reminded that Obama is a liar.
Bernoulli Principle Question
As I am sure most of my readers know, the Bernoulli Principle explains that if you constrict the flow of a fluid or gas, the speed of fluid or gas increases. There's a mass of equations here that explains how to apply it to incompressible and compressible masses. What I am trying to figure out--and I suspect one of my readers knows the answer--is what formula determines the velocity increase of air at low speeds (5-20 mph) as you constrict the input. For example, if you had a pipe that was one meter wide at the opening, and .5 meters wide at the exit, what happens to the speed of air as it goes through the pipe? It goes up, but how much?
Obviously, a rough inner surface will introduce turbulence, reducing velocity compared to a smooth inner surface. A pipe that shrinks down rapidly, I'm guessing, will introduce more turbulence than a pipe with a more gradual reduction.
