The Energy Argument

My friend Doran Barton posted the following link on his Facebook page:

Estimated U.S. Energy Use in 2010

http://justonly.com/physci/ps107/pdfs/LLNLUSEnergy2010.pdf

One of his friends, who is very obviously a liberal, made the following comment:

“Let’s move away from stupid, dirty energy resources that were first developed over 200 years ago before they’re completely exhausted.”

This is typical liberal groupthink. It’s like abandoning a ship on the off chance that it might sink at some time in the future. Where are the lifeboats? How are we going to survive the freezing water? Or, if you happen to be a Bill Cosby fan, “How long can you tread water?”

It got me thinking, though, about the state of the energy industry, and of the environmentalist movement. And it prompted me to write a little fable:

Imagine, for the sake of argument, a community of hard-working Americans living in a town out in the middle of nowhere. There is a local grocery store selling food at very good prices. Sure, they might not be the “prestige” brands, but they allow the community to stay happy and well-fed without taking too big a dent out of their paychecks.

For various reasons, there is a group of people who don’t want these community members to shop at this particular grocery store. The store shelves are kind of dusty, and the parking lot has some litter blowing around. They sell lots more generic and store brands than gourmet foods. It’s all kind of tacky, but the people shop there because it’s convenient and the prices are good.

There ARE stores that sell high-priced specialty foods but they’re all out of state, several hundred miles away, with sky-high prices. A few snobs from the community actually do buy their food at these stores — paying two, five or even ten times as much for their groceries as their neighbors do. The additional cost is worth it to them, though, because it allows these people to look down their noses on the people around them.

The elites and malcontents do everything they can think of to convince the residents of this community to shop at the expensive, far-distant gourmet establishments. They convince the government to give some of the residents free cab rides to the expensive shops, paid for by taxing the food in the cheap local store (which, of course, raises the prices for everyone). They jack up property taxes in the town to pay for expensive “research” and media campaigns to convince the townspeople not to shop at the local store. They force the government to subsidize the shelves and cash registers and payrolls of the gourmet out-of-town shops, and to pay for larger parking lots even though very few of the town’s citizens actually shop there. They warn people that the local store will quickly run out of food — in spite of plenty of evidence that groceries can be plentiful and cheap for generations and generations if the snobs will simply let people shop where they want.

All of this pressure actually has a very positive effect on the local grocery store. They dust their shelves more often and keep their parking lot clean. They do everything they can to keep their prices low, which of course makes the local people want to shop there even more.

If the snobs and elites were to put their efforts toward building a reasonable alternative to the neighborhood grocery store, they might find some success. If they could find ways to bring down the prices in the gourmet shops, or to build some stores closer to the community, they might make some in-roads. But they haven’t. Instead, they continue to put all of their energies into trying to shut down the local shop so that hardworking people will have no choice but to drive hundreds of miles to purchase the brands they prefer.

No matter how much the elites want to force their gourmet foods down the people’s throat, the people just want to eat. They don’t want to give up their hard-won standard of living and sure as hell don’t want to go hungry. Is that too much to ask?

70,000 Big Ones

Well, not BIG ONES. Words, actually. Some of them are small, while others are a bit longer.

Just passed the 70,000 word mark on the current novel in progress. The draft is currently just over 250 pages, double-spaced in 12-point Times New Roman with one-inch margins. Feels like about about halfway through, though you never know at this point.

I have at least one chapter that is completely out of place–doesn’t really lead to anything. I’ll either have to cut that one or find a way to connect it to some of the other threads in the narrative. It’s all about tying things together.

Anyway, that’s how it’s going. Thought I’d share.

Robo-Nipples and My Buddy JB

Last Thursday I drove from Phoenix to Salt Lake City. Early in the trip, I noticed that my manual transmission was getting harder and harder to shift. I would have to use some real muscle to go from 5th to 4th when I needed to climb a hill, or back to 5th on the straightaways. Getting into reverse was a real grind. Seriously … a grind. Shifting into first from a stop was almost impossible. Something was obviously wrong.

I finally stopped at a service station once I got over to I-15. I had done some Googling along the way and had come to the conclusion that my clutch fluid was probably very low. I bought a bottle of DOT-3 and poured some in, only to see it dribble right out the bottom of the clutch master cylinder reservoir. DRAT!

Broken NippleOne of the service station mechanics saw it before I did. The plastic nipple that provides the connection between the master cylinder hose and the reservoir itself had snapped off cleanly at the base, leaving a gaping hole in the bottom of the reservoir and causing most of the clutch fluid to leak out. Without any fluid in the reservoir, I had no hydraulic pressure to actually make the clutch … clutch.

Naturally, they didn’t have a replacement clutch reservoir in Beaver, Utah. That would be too easy. I called ahead to a couple of parts stores in Fillmore, and ended up with zip and zip. One of the guys from Fillmore said that the master cylinder reservoir was probably a dealer part, so I called the closest dealer, which was a couple hours ahead of me in Provo.

After keeping me on hold for 10 minutes, the dealer’s “parts guy” said they don’t sell the reservoir by itself. He transferred me to the service department, which kept me on hold for another 15 minutes before telling me I needed to talk to the “car guy.” (He was apparently the “truck guy.”) When I finally got to talk to the “car guy” he told me in no uncertain terms they would have to replace the entire master cylinder assembly at the same time, and quoted me a price (including parts and labor) of $370.

Since it was obvious that I wouldn’t be able to get the car fixed on Thursday, I limped into Salt Lake and forgot about the repair until after my interview. Friday afternoon I called around to at least a dozen auto parts stores, junk yards, “pick a part” lots, and so on. Nobody had a replacement reservoir. When I searched online, there were plenty of online dealers that offered a full clutch master cylinder for my type of car, but none of them had the reservoir. The forums for Neon repairs were filled with desperate pleas from shadetree mechanics looking to get their hands on “just the plastic reservoir–not the whole assembly.” I obviously wasn’t the first person who had encountered this particular problem.

Robo-Nipple!My buddy Doran was convinced that we could simply repair the part. So on Saturday, that was exactly what we set out to do. After discussing various possible strategies, we ended up buying a $2.50 brass “hose end” and a $5.00 package of JB Weld. I cleaned out the reservoir thoroughly with detergent and drilled out the bottom to receive the threads of the brass fitting. Once the fitting was threaded in nice and tight, I mixed up some good ol’ JB Weld and coated the seam liberally both inside and out. We put the new-and-improved “robo-nipple” up in the laundry room so the epoxy could cure for a full day.

On Sunday, we pulled the ol’ ox out of the mire and installed the reservoir back into my little car. It was as easy as slipping the barbed nipple back into the tube and then securing the bracket in place with a single nut. I poured some DOT-3 inside and pumped the clutch a bunch of times. When the cap was back in place, the clutch worked just as good as new!

The entire repair cost under eight bucks, and I feel pretty good about cheating the Larry H. Miller estate out of $362. Maybe, if you share this blog post with all of your Facebook friends, I’ll get a good SEO bump and then all of the other thousands of Neon owners with broken clutch reservoir nipples will eventually be able to see how I stuck it to The Man by fixing a poorly designed plastic part.

Adventures in Geocaching

Caching at Lookout Mountain

Nate, Meg and Ian at one of the caches we found on Lookout Mountain

My fabulous wife gave me a Garmin eTrex for Christmas. It’s a basic handheld GPS unit, but it’s exactly what I needed to give “geocaching” a try.

For those of you who know nothing about the “sport” of geocaching, it has kind of an interesting history. Back when the Department of Defense built the Global Positioning System (GPS), it was meant for military use only. Because of this, the signals put out by the satellites were intentionally scrambled. If you weren’t in the military, your GPS device was only accurate to about 100 yards. This was just fine for navigation purposes (i.e. getting from town to town or port to port), but terrible for any application that required real accuracy.

In early 2000, the DOD removed the restrictions, allowing civilians to get positioning information that was about ten times more accurate. Just days after this happened, a guy in Oregan hid a bucket of “treasure” (really just a few trinkets) and published the exact coordinates on the USENET newsgroup sci.geo.satellite-nav. In less than a day, complete strangers were using the recently descrambled satellite signals to locate the bucket, sign the log, and trade for trinkets.

Since then, over a million “caches” have been hidden, and millions of people have taken up the pastime of searching them out.

It’s easy. You sign up for a free account on Geocaching.com, where you can search for “hidden treasure” by address, ZIP code, coordinates, and so on. You pick a cache and get the latitude/longitude coordinates, which look something like this:

N 33° 38.966 W 112° 00.015

Then you simply enter the coordinates into your GPS device (or even your GPS-enabled mobile phone) and go out hunting. Eventually you’ll arrive at the place where the cache is supposed to be, and then you’ll have to start really looking. Sometimes the cache will be a box under a pile of rocks, or a Tupperware container tucked into a hollow tree. “Urban” caches often involve creative use of magnets. Even with my limited experience I’ve already seen a huge variety of containers and hiding spots–including a small plastic tube embedded in a tire tread on the side of a road.

You’re welcome to take something from a cache as long as you leave an object of equal or greater value. There’s almost always a log to sign. When you’re done, you’re supposed to re-hide the cache in exactly the same place so the next person can find it. Then you go online and register your “find” on the Geocaching website.

It should be obvious to anyone who knows me why I would be so attracted to this whole concept. Geocaching is just such a cool combination of technology and the outdoors. After all, geeks like me need a reason to go out and stretch our legs and ramble around in the countryside!

Plus, it’s really fun for the kids. Here’s a great video that my buddy Doran put together to document one of our early cache hunts:

Watch the video and ask yourself: what other activity would get two geeks and several of their children outdoors on a Utah December afternoon? How likely is it that any of us would have decanted ourselves from in front of our computers, Kindles, iPads, iPods, Android devices, Boxees and so on to climb a frickin’ mountain?

The jaunt in the video was our third or fourth cache hunt. Since then, I’ve logged another 16 “finds” in both Arizona and Utah. On Monday, my kids and I spent almost three hours hiking around Lookout Mountain in Phoenix, locating seven of the eight caches we set out to find. It was a great afternoon.

On Wednesday, I took the next logical step and placed my first cache. There are a bunch of rules, so I familiarized myself with what was required, then put together a cache. It was just an Altoids tin (they’re curiously strong!) covered in camouflage duct tape. Inside I placed a small plastic bag containing the standard note of congratulations, plus some slips of paper for people to sign. I also included the requisite trinkets–in this case, they included an American flag pin, a “Vegas” pin, a small carabiner and a guitar pick. I hid my cache under a flat rock behind some bushes in a park near the house I grew up in. Then I took the GPS coordinates and registered the new cache on Geocaching.com.

The Geocaching website requires that all new caches be reviewed by a volunteer before publishing. At about 8:00 this morning, I received notification that my cache had been posted, and at 8:31 I got another e-mail telling me that someone had just logged the FTF (first to find). How about that? Within half an hour of my little Altoids tin making its public debut, a complete stranger:

  1. Went looking for it.
  2. Found it, signed the log, traded a trinket
  3. Reported the find on Geocaching.com

It’s kind of an amazing idea, and a very fun hobby. Tomorrow I’ll be driving back up to Utah for a second job interview, and I’ll probably look for a couple of caches along the way.

View my first geocaching gallery!

Here are a few fun photos from our first couple of weeks geocaching:

'Gallery' Post | By on January 19, 2012

Another Racemonger in the White House

Civil War and ReconquistaThere is already plenty of evidence that, under Obama, Eric Holder’s Justice Department has implemented clear policies of racial politics. The obvious case is that of the New Black Panther Party, where illegal voter intimidation by the militant group–caught on videotape for all to see–was dismissed without even a slap on the wrist for the perpetrators or the organization of which they were members.

In his book, Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department, whistleblower J. Christian Adams tells the inside story of how Eric Holder’s Justice department spiked the lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party, partly as a protection measure to insulate President Obama. Obama had made a public appearance with leaders of the New Black Panther Party, and the DOJ dropped the “slam-dunk” case in order to protect Obama from obvious (and valid) criticisms.

As Texas Rep. John Culberson said in a 2011 appropriations hearing: “There’s clearly evidence, overwhelming evidence, that your Department of Justice refuses to protect the rights of anybody other than African Americans to vote…. There’s a pattern of a double standard here.” Holder, of course, denied the accusations.

President Obama is at it again.

This is from yesterday’s White House announcement:

Today, January 10th, the White House announced that current Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Cecilia Muñoz will now serve as the Director of the Domestic Policy Council.  Ms. Munoz [sic] will coordinate the policy-making process and supervise the execution of domestic policy in the White House.

Just in case you’ve never heard of Cecilia Muñoz, she’s the former senior vice president of the National Council of La Raza. The group, whose name means “The Race,” styles itself as the “largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States.”

Michelle Malkin, herself the perennial target of racism from the left, did a great job of explaining exactly what La Raza stands for:

15. “The Race” supports driver’s licenses for illegal aliens.

14.”The Race” demands in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants.

13. “The Race” vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state, and federal authorities.

12. “The Race” opposes a secure fence on the southern border.

11. “The Race” joined the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds from entering immigration information into a key national crime database — and to prevent local police officers from accessing the data.

10. “The Race” opposed the state of Oklahoma’s tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions, and strengthened local-federal cooperation and information sharing.

9. “The Race” joined other open-borders, anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California’s bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law.

8. “The Race” bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an “absolute disgrace.”

7. “The Race” has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn.

6. Former “Race” president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton’s Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: “U.S. English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks.” He was referring to U.S. English, the nation’s oldest, largest citizens’ action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. “The Race” also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms “illegal” and “amnesty.”

5. “The Race” gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as “a radical racist group … one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West.”

4. “The Race” is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration-enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves — in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes. The New York Times reported that current “Race” president Janet Murguia believes “hate speech” should “not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights.”

3. “The Race” sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz., the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose principal inveighed: “We don’t want to drink from a White water fountain, we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain in our aqueducts. We don’t need a White water fountain . . . ultimately the White way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction.”

2. “The Race” has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home-loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal “mortgage counseling” grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks, and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens.

1. “The Race” thrives on ethnic supremacy — and the elite sheeple’s unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes: “[The] organization’s very nomenclature ‘The National Council of La Raza’ is hate speech to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of ‘race’ in Spanish, not ‘the people’ — and that’s precisely why we don’t hear of something like ‘The National Council of the People,’ which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and tribal chauvinism.”

True to form, Muñoz seems to be cut from La Raza cloth. She once referred to Tea Party activists and other border-enforcement proponents as “the xenophobic wing” of the Republican Party. She refused to accept “enforcement only” approaches to immigration, even though it’s been clear all along that most of us are promoting “enforcement first,” not “enforcement only.”

Just this morning, it was announced that the Tucson Unified School District would finally disable its “Mexican-American Studies” program, which had continued to run in spite of the fact that it was clearly in violation of state law that prevented programs that offered “one or more classes designed primarily for one ethnic group, promoting racial resentment and advocating ethnic solidarity.” This was only possible when the state superintendent made the gutsy move of partially de-funding the district until it complied with the law. The is the type of program Muñoz and others at La Raza have supported, in order to indoctrinate Hispanic youngsters and make them stand separate from the American mainstream.

According to the official White House press release, Muñoz “leads the Administration’s efforts to fix the broken immigration system.” I think we can all anticipate that this woman will not be addressing the Administration’s paltry efforts to fix our porous southern border, to stem the identity theft and other crimes by illegal aliens or to capture criminal aliens already within our country. There is no indication of whether she will continue to support the Administration’s lawsuits against states that pass laws meant to fix the problems caused by the federal government’s refusal to enforce America’s sovereignty–but that seems to be a sure bet.

I think Americans will find it more difficult to work towards achieving a color-blind society people like Muñoz and Holder in such key positions in government. Both seem to advocate more racial preferences, not less.

Just what we need … another racemonger in the White House. But it looks like we’re stuck with her.

Mr. Snuffleupagus Opens the Kimono

Anyone who is following the Republican primaries and debates has by now seen the infamous exchange between ABC debate “moderator” George Stephanopoulos and presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Just in case you didn’t get a chance, here’s the YouTube link (they have disabled embedding):

Republican Debate

Scott Whitlock over at the Media Research Center’s site, NewsBusters.org, has already done a fine analysis on the questions asked during the ABC debate. As Whitlock points out, “Of the 48 queries by George Stephanopoulos, Diane Sawyer and others, 20 came from the left, three were from the right and 25 were neutral or horse race questions. A whopping 25 percent (12 questions) revolved around contraception-related subjects or gay rights.”

It’s incomprehensible to me that Republicans would subject themselves to this nonsense at this point in the race. Why is it that–time and time again–the Republican candidates have agreed to participate in debates run by far-left operatives? The eventual GOP nominee will have to deal with a tilted podium during each and every debate with the incumbent Democrat. (That is, if the President will agree to any public appearance that doesn’t involve a Teleprompter.) The eventual candidate will be up against a media machine that spent years colluding to put Barack Obama in the White House in the first place, and have a stake in ensuring their candidate’s reelection. Everybody knows this. Anybody who denies it is either woefully ignorant or flat out lying.

It’s no news to anyone that the alphabet networks are all left of center. It’s no news that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, HLN, and MSNBC are so shot through with bias that it’s only notable in situations like this one, when it’s particularly egregious. In this case, abandoning all pretense at impartiality, former Clinton operative and full-time “journalist/activist” Stephanopoulos goes all-in to try to embarrass and humiliate Mitt Romney.

And it backfires.

Let’s face it: it was a stupid question to start with. There is no state in the Union that is currently considering a ban on contraception. This is not one of the “big issues” in this election cycle. It’s not even a small issue. It’s a non-issue. The only possible reason to ask this question–and follow it up with five additional attempts to needle the candidate into saying something bigoted and stupid-sounding–is to score political points and portray the Republican front-runner as some kind of “Jesus-Taliban” monster who wants to turn America into the Saudi-style Christian theocracy.

I mean, come on, Mr. Snuffleupagus:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Governor Romney, do you believe that states have the right to ban contraception? Or is that trumped by a constitutional right to privacy?

STEPHANOPOULOS: [I'm] asking you, do you believe that states have that right or not?

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hold on a second. Governor, you went to Harvard Law School. You know very well this is based on-
ROMNEY: Has the Supreme Court — has the Supreme Court decided that states do not have the right to provide contraception? I-
STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, they have. In 1965, Griswold v. Connecticut.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you’ve got the Supreme Court decision finding a right to privacy in the Constitution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I understand that. But you’ve given two answers to the question. Do you believe that the Supreme Court should overturn it or not?

To Romney’s credit, he handled the moderator’s complete lack of professionalism with humor and aplomb. He did everything short of slapping on a Reaganesque grin and saying “There you go again.” He won over the studio audience, the viewing audience, and even the other candidates with his grace under fire. He looked damned presidential.

Stephanopoulos should be ashamed and humiliated with the way he conducted this exchange–and much of the rest of the debate as well. But he won’t be. For the far-left, any tactic is worth it if there is even a chance of scoring a few points and making a GOP challenger look bad to easily-fooled voters.

Romney and other members of the Republican party would do well to remember this. Stephanopolous, Sawyer, and everyone else in the Obama-fellating media understand that they are unofficial members of their president’s election committee. The only thing you can rely on is that they will do everything they can to try to prop up Obama and his failed presidency, and destroy any candidate foolish enough to oppose him.

It’s gonna be an interesting election year.

Occupy Linguistics!

As many of you know, my formal training is in linguistics. That’s the field in which I received my master’s degree. In all practicality, when I received my degree, I was much more qualified to give a phonetic, phonemic, morphologic and syntactic analysis of the question “Would you like fries with that?” than your average graduate school graduate.

Even though I am a trained linguist, I have never actually worked directly in the field of linguistics. This is due to three reasons:

  1. I discovered too late that most of the jobs in linguistics are research or teaching positions at universities, and the political climate at most institutions (word choice intentional) of higher learning would drive me bonkers.
  2. Even if you can get a job as a linguist, there’s not much money in it.
  3. The field, even all these years later, is dominated by Chomskyan structuralists, who frankly just tick me off.

For those of you who don’t know who Noam Chomsky is, you can look him up on Wikipedia. His 1955 monograph, “Syntactic Structures,” turned linguistics on its head by introducing transformation-generative grammar to the world. Chomsky believes you can understand the essence of language (its “structure”) by deducing and identifying the underlying principles and parameters. He also holds the odd (for a linguist) notion that meaning isn’t really that important. I can’t lay my hand on the quote, but in my final semester of graduate courses I ran across a statement by Chomsky saying something to the effect that there was no reason to consider “meaning” an essential or even interesting part of language.

That’s hogwash, of course. In reality, meaning wasn’t essential or interesting to the jerk from MIT because he just couldn’t figure out a way to diagram it. Any grade schooler can tell you that language without meaning is meaningless. It’s all “colorless green ideas sleeping furiously”–to bastardize Chomsky’s pet sentence.

In the words of another Linguist, John R. Searle, “It is important to emphasize how peculiar and eccentric Chomsky’s overall approach to language is. Most sympathetic commentators have been so dazzled by the results in syntax that they have not noted how much of the theory runs counter to quite ordinary, plausible, and common-sense assumptions about language.” To which I say, Exactly.

On top of his wooly-headedness when it comes to semantics, Chomsky also really really hates America. In his eyes, America is the most repressive, most evil country sing … well, since ever. Here are a few gems, taken from a David Horowitz article in the far-right Salon.com:

  • According to Chomsky, in the first battle of the postwar struggle with the Soviet Empire, “the United States was picking up where the Nazis had left off.”
  • According to Chomsky, during the Cold War, American operations behind the Iron Curtain included “a ‘secret army’ under U.S.-Nazi auspices that sought to provide agents and military supplies to armies that had been established by Hitler and which were still operating inside the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe through the early 1950s.”
  • According to Chomsky, in Latin America during the Cold War, U.S. support for legitimate governments against communist subversion led to U.S. complicity under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, in “the methods of Heinrich Himmler’s extermination squads.”
  • According to Chomsky, there is “a close correlation worldwide between torture and U.S. aid.”
  • According to Chomsky, America “invaded” Vietnam to slaughter its people, and even after America left in 1975, under Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, “the major policy goal of the U.S. has been to maximize repression and suffering in the countries that were devastated by our violence. The degree of the cruelty is quite astonishing.”
  • According to Chomsky, “the pretext for Washington’s terrorist wars [i.e., in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, Guatemala, Iraq, etc.] was self-defense, the standard official justification for just about any monstrous act, even the Nazi Holocaust.”
  • In sum, according to Chomsky, “legally speaking, there’s a very solid case for impeaching every American president since the Second World War. They’ve all been either outright war criminals or involved in serious war crimes.”

True to form, Chomsky actually penned a poison-laced opinion piece for Al Jazeera on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. The subtitle says it all: “Suppression of one’s own crimes is virtually ubiquitous among powerful states, at least those that are not defeated.” Man, the guy really knows how to commemorate the death of almost 3,000 innocent people!

And it is in this light that I read today’s article from Britain’s Daily Mail:

When it’s comes to being the word of the year, ‘occupy’ is camped out at the top this year, keeping down ‘the 99 percent’ and stifling ‘job creators.’

The word, which became synonymous with anti-Wall Street protestors who took over parks in New York and across the nation this year, was selected as the top term by a large majority of delegates at the American Dialect Society’s annual meeting.

All I can say is, “Really?” With everything that happened last year, and with virtually every claim by the mainstream media about the “non-violent” Occupy movement having been proven completely untrue, these nitwit linguists are choosing “occupy” as their “word of the year”?

I’d love to hear your opinions. What should have been the word of the year? How about “bias”?

My preference would have been “gunwalking,” but I’d love to hear your opinions.

Let’s Give Joe a Break

In a recent interview with Newsweek magazine, our nation’s vice president made what many might consider the most ridiculous and factually questionable comment in a career of real doozies:

Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy. That’s critical. There is not a single statement that the president has ever made in any of our policy assertions that the Taliban is our enemy because it threatens U.S. interests. If, in fact, the Taliban is able to collapse the existing government, which is cooperating with us in keeping the bad guys from being able to do damage to us, then that becomes a problem for us.

– Vice President Joe Biden [emphasis added]

Vice President Joe BidenI’ve seen all sorts of indignant reactions to Joe’s statement in the conservative blogosphere. Some have remarked that Joe should explain to the family members of all the soldiers killed in Afghanistan how the radicals we’ve been fighting for 10 years aren’t our enemy per se. Others have simply laughed and pointed fingers at “Crazy Joe,” using this as yet another opportunity to joke about the intellectual bankruptcy of the American Left.

While I’m not going to make a “leave Britney alone” video, I’d just like to ask others on the Right to stop, take a deep breath, and remember exactly who and what Joe Biden is.

Remember, folks, this is the guy who recently gave a speech about a “three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S.” This is the guy who gave a wide-eyed commentary about FDR going on television when the stock market crashed and explaining the economic situation to the American people–even though FDR wasn’t president in 1929 and almost nobody had TV sets back then. This is the guy who couldn’t come up with the right “web site number” on live television. This is the man who referred to his own running mate as “Barack America” during the 2008 presidential campaign. He’s also the person who said, “If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there’s still a 30% chance we’re going to get it wrong.” He has famously (and publicly) mourned living people and asked a wheelchair-bound state senator to “Stand up.”

It’s a sad truth, but Joe Biden is an “intellectually disabled” American. We used to call people like Biden “idiots” or “morons,” but now we just call them “special.” It’s impossible to know whether his condition is congenital or whether it happened because of some injury or perhaps a tumor or stroke later in life. It’s entirely possible that a lifetime of exposure to leftist philosophy has left our poor VP barely able to tie his own shoes. But honestly, that doesn’t mean we should take advantage of each and every one of his precious little gaffes in order to poke fun and make political hay.

If anyone is to blame, it’s probably Barack Obama. This is a man who is already noted for making fun of the disabled. Obama is also the person who chose this barely functional person as his vice president. He is, after all, using a person with provable mental retardation as a “human shield.”

Back when Obama was running for office, he made the calculated political decision to use the simpleton from Delaware as the only thing standing in the way of “Madame President Pelosi”–if anything unfortunate were to happen to him. Sure, the campaign used the wink-wink explanation of Biden’s “foreign policy credentials” as its public reason for picking as a running mate a man who is so intellectually inadequate that he has notably resorted to plagiarism and lying about his academic accomplishments in order to compete with the “big boys.” But everyone knew what was really going on.

While I’m a full advocate of heaping scorn and derision upon people who deserve it, Joe Biden isn’t one of these people. Instead, let’s pat him on the head with a hearty “Great job, Joe!”–like they do in the Special Olympics. Let’s give him a medal, like the kind they gave to Obama in Oslo, and rally behind our mentally retarded vice president instead of making fun of him in this way.

After all, he’s Joe Biden. He just can’t help it.

South-of-the-Border Axis of Evil

Hezbollah Suicide BombersThe novel I’m currently writing connects the problem if Islamic terrorism with border security. It explores how radical Islamofacists could exploit Mexican drug- and human-smuggling routes to attack Americans in border states.

Sound far-fetched?

Not according to the compelling evidence that Mexican drug cartels are already actively working with terrorist organizations like Hezbollah.

According to a recent indictment in US court:

Ayman Joumaa, 47, was accused in absentia of conspiring to smuggle over 90,000 tons of cocaine into America and laundering over $250 million for the cartels.

… The indictment asserts that Joumaa made millions through his money-laundering operation, receiving between an 8- and 14-percent cut for his services.

… Joumaa is also “known to Israeli intelligence”, having allegedly been in contact with a member of Hezbollah’s elite 1,800 Unit that coordinates attacks against Israeli targets, and who, in turn, “worked for a senior operative who the Israelis believed handled Hezbollah’s drug operations.”

This certainly contradicts the Obama administration’s laughable stance that the US-Mexico border is “more secure than ever.” On one hand, it gives me lots to work with as I write my novel. But on the other hand, it makes me even angrier at our federal government for refusing to do what’s necessary to protect American citizens from the growing violence that is spilling across the border.

And, of course, it disgusts me that the Obama justice department has sued my own state for trying to do the job that the feds refuse to do.