Political Poem

This is another bleedover from my poetry site. Couldn’t pass it up.

Political Haiku

Flickr image from foreclosurpro

A politician’s
Most fundamental question,
What’s in it for me?

The Way of Things

The new people in the congress,
Intent upon disruption,
Soon will be slowing down
To the speed of mass corruption.

An honest politician
Is such a fleeting breath.
Seldom do we catch it
Before it meets its death.

The people are important,
With their torches and their axes.
Without their marching hordes,
Where would we get our taxes?

Published in: on March 4, 2011 at 8:19 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

The Wave of the Future

Anything that won’t sell, I don’t want to invent. Its sale is proof of utility, and utility is success.
Thomas A. Edison—inventor

I have been a bit remiss in posting in the Ooz, spending too much time in my poetry blog I guess, but an article I read in the Mail Online today http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360297/25-000-eco-classroom-used-solar-panels-dont-provide-heat.html, demands every bit of coverage it can get.

The quote from Thomas Edison, printed above, is also quite apt. Edison believe that an invention should be useful, something the people wanted, would use, and most importantly, something many people would pay for.

The fact that there is a tiny pool of gullible people who will buy anything was not relevant. Of course, in his day, there was not a larger pool of politicians waiting to spend other peoples’ tax dollars on any kind of tomfoolery, which might buy them another vote.

Published in: on February 27, 2011 at 12:50 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Sweet Subsidies

Did you ever wonder about the return one gets for tax dollars? There is a bit of a sad story at the Examiner http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/02/green-energy-plant-sucks-subsidies-then-goes-bust of a bio-fuel plant closing down. It is an example of what we get for our subsidy dollars.

Range Fuels built a cutting-edge refinery, to turn wood chips into fuel. Net cost to the taxpayer: $162,000,000, and private investors added another $100,000,000. $262 million and the amount of bio-fuel they produced: zero. The realization that the taxpayers and green investors were taken for a ride: priceless.

Don’t worry. We are still subsidizing bio-fuel, and the farmers are doing somewhat better than Range Fuels, but bio-fuel costs more to make than it is worth. The same goes for wind generated electricity and photoelectric cell electricity, but what the heck. It’s only taxpayer money. Do you suppose it’s too late to jump on the investment wagon?

Mandatory Mischief

The Harvard Law states: Under controlled conditions of light, temperature, humidity, and nutrition, the organism will do as it damn well pleases.
Larry Wall-author

We stopped at Burger King today for lunch and ate in the restaurant. After we had finished our meal, I glanced at the place mat, or whatever it is they use to line their serving trays. Printed on the thing, both the front and back, was nutritional information. The front explained how I could have it my way for under 650 calories, by ordering one of six meals displayed.

On the back was the listing of their entire menu, followed by columns with the header listings for Calories, Calories from Fat, total Fat, Sat. Fat, Trans Fat, Cholesterol, Sodium, Carbs, and Protein.

Overlooking the fact that all this vital information was presented on a paper, placed on the tray under the food I had already ordered, my question is, who wants it? I go to Burger King to get my comfort foods: a burger, fries and a Coke. If I was worried about all that gobbledygook, I would not be in Burger King, I would be at home eating salads.

I do not know if this information is Burger King’s attempt to be responsible or if it is government mandated, but it is a waste of time and money printing it out. I did not see anyone else in the crowded restaurant even look at it. If Burger King wants to do something for me, start cooking the French fries in the earlier generation of cooking oil, the one that gave the fries the great taste. I am an adult. I do not need Burger King, or the government, telling me what to eat, and I damn sure do not need them trying to tell me what I like.

As for it being for my own good, I have already lived longer than 95% of the Homo sapiens who walked this earth, and I’m still good for a lot more years. Any health problems I enter into now will be due to aging. Neanderthals did not live long enough to have to worry about aging diseases. Is it not wonderful that we do?

As a child, I lived on a farm. I do not remember my mother ever fixing a meal that did not include gravy. We ate fried meat, fried eggs, fried potatoes and fried green tomatoes. It did not harm us. Does anyone really think that changing their diet will allow them live forever?

I grew up in a society where over 50% of the people smoked. None of them ever believed smoking was good for them, but it was something they enjoyed. The only one of them that died of a smoking disease was my father, emphysema got him after smoking a couple of packs a day from the time he was 14 until he was into his seventies—well over the average life expectancy. He enjoyed it, it was no one else’s business. I never started smoking because my high school coach said smokers would be kicked off the football team, but all the second-hand smoke from a lifetime of being around smokers never harmed me.

Working on the farm, I handled animals, fertilizers and pesticides. They never harmed me or anyone else. They allowed us to improve and increase farm production, and to feed more people.

It is time for the government, and the do-gooders, to get out of our kitchens, get out of our bedrooms, get out of our businesses and get out of our lives. If the do-gooders are concerned, they should spend their time and money cleaning up their own lives—the lives that concern them. If the government wants any credibility, they should read the bills they pass, and those bills should affect them just as much as the everyday citizens. The government that governs the best, governs the least.

Published in: on January 22, 2011 at 2:05 pm  Comments (1)  
Tags: ,

Laugh of the Day

This Congress has promised all manner of border security and port security to the tune of billions of dollars… yet we have – to date – funded our promises for port security at only $900 million. That’s quite a distance between what we say and what we actually do.
Solomon Ortiz-politician

One must read the entire paper it one really wants to know what is going on. For example, on page A5 of the Sunday’s St. Louis Post Dispatch was a small article with the heading of:

U.S. will send more trainers for Afghan police, customs.

Only by reading does one learn that American experts are being sent to train the Afghanis how to better manage their porous border. Presumably, we do not want any illegal aliens sneaking across their border.

Who knew that the United States had such experts? Better yet, why have they not been used to secure our own borders?

This administration is amazing. It seems that we have enough money and trained personnel to accomplish almost anything . . . in another country, but not here.

Published in: on January 2, 2011 at 6:38 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

What’s in a Name

Common sense and history tell you that rewarding illegal behavior will only encourage more of it.
Ric Keller—politician

What is in a name? Would not a rose, by any other name, smell as sweet? What IS in a name? Let us try “Illegal Alien.” Illegal alien brings forth a vision of a very unsavory individual: a criminal or someone who wants to commit a crime.

How about the name, “Undocumented immigrant?” One must stop and think about that. To me, it brings to mind the court scene in My Cousin Vinny, where Joe Pesci’s character uses the word “utes” (it is the way “youths” came out with Vinny’s Brookline accent). Fred Gwynne, in the roll of Judge Chamberlain Haller, asked, “What’s a ute?” A good question, a good question indeed. What’s an undocumented immigrant? Is it a legal immigrant who lost his immigration papers, passport or visa? Perhaps one without a birth certificate; a birth certificate is a pretty important document. A driver’s license? Maybe it is just a politically correct way to muddy the water and avoid saying illegal alien.

Along with undocumented immigrant, we also have undocumented worker, and I have even seen undocumented citizens used. Strange thing, they all mean the same thing: illegal alien, someone who broke the law by entering this country through means other than normal immigration channels.

Anyone who has been paying attention since Ronald Regan’s 1986 one-time amnesty act for 3 million illegal aliens and Bill Clinton’s Immigration Act of 1990 might notice they have one thing in common. They did not work. Why? Because they reward illegal behavior. Regan’s bill eventually ended up giving amnesty, and citizenship, to about 1.3 million illegals and encouraged millions of additional breaches of our border. Clinton’s act effectively decriminalized the illegal entry into the United States by creating a new status of “unlawfully present” unless the illegal alien commits a criminal act once on American soil.

A resent Rasmussen poll http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/voters_have_mixed_feelings_about_legalizing_young_people_brought_here_illegally reveals seventy-six percent (76%) of likely voters say adults who enter the United States illegally should be considered lawbreakers. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Americans oppose automatic citizenship for a child born in this country to an illegal immigrant. 65% say securing the borders is more important than legislation to legalize illegal immigrants.

So what are the Democrats worried about in the lame-duck session of congress? They are trying to pass the Dream Act allowing minors, who entered or were brought into the United States illegally, to become citizens if they serve two years in the military service or go to college for at least two years. More of the same-old, same-old, they did not learn a thing in the last election. Reward the lawbreakers so that others will be encouraged to do the same thing. What is the disconnect between Democrat politician thinking and that of the voting population? What does it take to get them to listen?

Published in: on December 14, 2010 at 1:15 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Mexico Missives 3 and 4

National sovereignty is an obligation as well as an entitlement. A government that will not perform the role of a government forfeits the rights of a government.
Richard Perle—public servant

More massive missive mails marginalizing the miserable misanthropes in Mexico. Lord Monckton has sent two more postings to WUWT. Mexican Missive #4, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/10/moncktons-mexican-missive-4/#more-29184, is Mexico’s answer to global warming and has to do with those damn CFL bulbs I wrote about in December 8th’s posting https://stlouisooz.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/a-light-goes-on-in-washington/. For that reason alone, I had to send it along, it is also funny and gives one an example of Lord Monckton’s back-of-the-envelope number crunching.

The other missive, actually the third one, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/09/moncktons-mexican-missive-3/, is much more sobering and much more troubling. It is a delineation of the hidden agenda of the IPPC and therefore of the U.N. It is truly frightening. While not fun to read, is should be required reading for every citizen in a democracy, because these unelected U.N. officials are trying to slip binding agreements into impossible-to-read documents. Documents that have to be signed and agreed upon before anyone finds out what is in them. Documents, once signed by a country’s legal representatives, would effectively undermine a country’s sovereignty. Please take the time to read it. It is important

Published in: on December 10, 2010 at 9:54 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

A Light Goes on in Washington

I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.
Thomas A. Edison

The effects of November 2nd’s political slap down are starting to appear. A Washington Times article, dated 12/6/10, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/6/upton-flips-a-switch-on-cfl-bulbs/ reports the flip/flop of Representative Fred Upton on the Compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb ban. Upton, a Michigan Republican, was a co-sponsored its inclusion in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. He is now working to have the ban repealed.

A grateful nation can only hope that Rep. Upton’s turnabout is a genuine recognition of the shortcomings of the CFL bulbs https://stlouisooz.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/thats-another-fine-mess-youve-gotten-me-into/ and the loss of the last incandescent bulb plant in the United States. Hopefully it is not just a ruse to improve his chances for the chairmanship of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. The Republican Party is no longer in the mood for RINOs who change their opinions when it is politically expedient.

Not mentioned in the article is whether Upton is working toward cutting the bureaucratic red tape which might get GE’s Westchester, VA, incandescent bulb plant reopened after its September closing http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/07/AR2010090706933.html. Until it, or another plant employing American workers, is opened, American citizens are stuck with sending our money to China for light bulbs.

The jury is still out on Representative Fred Upton. When one’s first job, in a new House of Representatives, is undoing what one did in the last House, it does not bode well with a Tea Party infused electorate. If Upton realizes this, his working to recover those American jobs his bill cost will be a greater indicator of his political future than being the chairman of any committee.

Published in: on December 8, 2010 at 3:16 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

The Tip of an Iceberg

There are few things as toxic as a bad metaphor. You can’t think without metaphors.
Mary Catherine Bateson—scientist

It is metaphor and trite phrases day here at the St. LouisOoz. Let us begin with the hens have come home to roost.

Interpol has discovered a fly in the ointment of the Danish emissions trading registry, see http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/12/05/lawrence-solomon-the-7-billion-carbon-scam/#ixzz17RIo17Jm. While their Johnnie-come-lately CO2 trading registry initially upped the ante for the carbon market, the bottom fell out due to $7 billion in fraud. All good things come to an end, but $7 billion ain’t bad, and in only two years; one cannot expect these fraudsters to get rich overnight.

It seems that the Danish emissions trading registry had 1,256 registered traders, and most of them were fly by night crooks. Finding the bad apples was a can of corn because some of the crooks were so blatant they used parking lots as business addresses; it did not take a rocket scientist to ferret them out. Still, what should one expect when one is in the business of selling hot air? Now, some 1,100 have been deregistered and placed in the dustbin of history.

While everyone thinks there is no such thing as a free lunch, it is not true when it comes to CO2 trading. Connie Hedegaard, who oversaw the Danish Minister of Climate and Energy, its trading registry and its pie in the sky growth in the carbon market, managed to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. For her innate ability to look the other way, she has been promoted to the post of EU Climate Commissioner. She is now basking in the sun of Cancun, Mexico, where, when she isn’t extolling the merits of CO2 Trading, she is soaking up the CO2 warmed rays while her country shivers in snow belly deep to a tall mule.

The Danish CO2 trading scheme is as common as mud. Perhaps there has never been an endeavor so riddled with corruption, and when viewed on its worldwide scale, it is not a pretty picture. With everyone discovering that climate is as changeable as the weather, and just as unpredictable, CO2 trading is winding down and finding its days are numbered. It is long past time to rid ourselves of this albatross around our neck. Doesn’t the time go fast when you are having fun?

Published in: on December 7, 2010 at 12:10 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Smoking Ban Part 2

It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.
Abraham Lincoln

I have to quit reading the Post Dispatch. Again, I find myself in another smoking rant. In the last week, there were two articles in the Post about smoking in the casinos. One of them related to East St. Louis, and the other was St. Louis County. In both cases, government entities wanted to get exemptions to the smoking ban for casino complexes.

Again, I do not smoke, but this really perturbs me. First, I do not think it is the governments’ business to control what goes on in privately owned establishments. If smoking is so bad for businesses, their patrons will go somewhere else; therefore, the business owners would prohibit smoking on their own premises for their own survival.

If the government is so adamant that public smoking is wrong, and they override the will of the business owners by making a law banning smoking, then it should be wrong everywhere all the time. Abraham Lincoln said, “The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” Various cities, counties and states have come up with these nonsmoking laws. They are apparently bad laws because, not long after going into law, they want exemptions for high volume (read high tax base) locations. These laws, supposedly for the protection of the people, are not so important when it causes reduced tax income. They are willing to change the law for places producing millions in taxes every year, but to Hell with the small business owner who loses business and profit. Hey, maybe small businesses will lose their patrons to the casinos, where smoking is legal. It is always so nice when the government picks the winners and the losers. Whatever happened to that “equal under the law” thing? Was that not part of some stupid government document . . . oh yes, the Constitution.

As I said, if smoking is so bad it needs to banned, outlaw it everywhere and enforce it strictly. If it is a good law, then it is worth the loss of the cigarette and the sales taxes. If it is a bad law, do not create the thing in the first place. How long before the people demand its repeal.

The United States has more than a little experience on the absolute banning of something a significant portion of the population enjoys: does prohibition ring any bells? The 19th Amendment banned liquor beginning one year after ratification on 1/16/1919. It was repealed on 12/5/1933—after being strictly enforced for only thirteen years; what does that tell you about it? I suppose the government entities, trying to modify the smoking ban to get the tax dollars, might be able to extend the smoking ban longer if is not strictly enforced; when only the little, unimportant businesses are getting hurt. What was that about unemployment?

Published in: on December 6, 2010 at 3:36 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: