BBC News - US and China leaders in 'historic' greenhouse gas emissions pledge

BBC News - US and China leaders in 'historic' greenhouse gas emissions pledge



On the surface of this, this appears to be great news for those who see CO2 emissions as the biggest threat. Now, it may be - I am not a scientist, just a generalist who knows enough about a lot of things to be sufficiently skeptical about a host of threats - but having said that, after reading the article, there are a few warning bells being set of in the old skeptical brain.



First item is the agreement that the US will cut its emissions by 25 to 28 percent below 2005 levels in the next 10 years (by 2025) while China will stop increasing its emissions in those same 10 years.



Now, there are two ways of looking at that: First is that it is a plus that the Chinese have promised to do anything about their carbon emissions, now that they are the world's largest emitter of CO2, and that they have actually set a deadline on it. They second way to look at that is that the Chinese can front-load their emissions over the next 10 years (I read somewhere they are bring a coal-fired energy plant on-line at the rate of one per week).



If they did that, the Chinese could really significantly increase their energy output as well as emissions and make the reductions in the American emission rate actually superfluous in the effort to stem climate change. Of course, the Americans could pat themselves on the back, while feeling morally superior, while watching their own energy needs go unmet.



Understand, I am not a "global warming denier"; I am a global warming skeptic, especially the claim that it is anthropomorphic. Be that as it may, reducing pollution always is something that is in our own enlightened self-interest but it must be balanced against the potential costs. You see, the only way to eliminate anthropomorphic generated pollution is to eliminate the anthro part of the equation. You possibly can reduce some of the pollution, but pretty much anything that humans do is going to create some pollution ... actually, just by existing we humans pollute the planet.



With 7 billion and increasing, humans are in a fix. Why? Because most of the world lives in what Americans would perceive as abject poverty and those people aspire, for the most part, to bring their standards of living up to something equivalent to what they see on their mass media. The problem with that is that is that it takes energy to do that, and lots and lots and lots of energy.



Unfortunately for the world, most people get that needed energy from evil, polluting, carbon-based sources. Yes, there are other ways to generate energy, but unfortunately - for various and sundry reasons, at least to my knowledge - they are either unacceptable or just not ready for the major leagues yet (or in many ways, dependent on our carbon-based energy sources to be created).



I just wonder how many people these adherents to crushing the carbon-energy-based world want to die, because they will die when the distribution systems collapse for the lack of fuel, and manufacturing economies die because of lack of raw materials and energy. But that will not be my problem as I probably will die before it becomes a problem for my neck of the woods.



The second thing in that article that really disturbed me was way down at the end when it said that President Obama told the Chinese leadership that the US would not intervene in any of China's territorial disputes with its neighbors in the South China Sea. Does anyone remember how the US got itself involved in the Korean War or the First Persian Gulf War (aka Desert Shield/Desert Storm)? Well, I do.



For those who don't remember, in 1950, the Truman Administration made the announcement that the Korean peninsula was outside the areas of American interest ... and the North Koreans promptly invaded the South. In 1990, the Bush I administration essentially told Saddam Hussein that US would not intervene in its border dispute with Kuwait and the Iraqis promptly invaded. OOOPSIE!



Now, President Obama is telling the Chinese that its disputes with our friends and allies who border the South China Sea that we will not intervene to assist them as we are obligated to do by treaty in some cases. Now, you can argue the wisdom of said treaties, but they do exist and saying that we are no longer interested in supporting our friends in the area, well ... that does not engender a lot of trust in the US ... not that most of them trust all that much anyway, given the fickleness of of American leadership.



Still, these things bother me. I can't do anything about them, except maybe express my concern and vent those concerns here.

America and the IMF: Dereliction of duty | The Economist

America and the IMF: Dereliction of duty | The Economist



This story is an example of what Americans have come to detest. It doesn't matter that it probably is the best course for the US, realistically, but that is not the point.

The point is that when the Americans lead, they get hammered for doing whatever they do. And now, when their representatives fail to go along with the program and avoid putting the US in the lead, they get hammered. It is the "damned if  you do and damned if you don't" paradigm that has just got most Americans throwing their hands up in disgust and saying "to hell with the rest of you. We have carried much of the world (at least the part that was known as the Free World) for 70 years and all we seemed to have gotten is kicks in the shins and spat on. Well, try it without us for a while."

There are those of us Americans who realize that attitude really is not the making of good policy, but the sentiment is understandable.

However, it is our perpetual "guns and butter" approach to domestic and international relations and policies has pretty much spent ourselves into a deep pit financially, while those who have benefited from the Pax Americana Era, pretty much skated by without having to add too much to the kitty.

Add to the mix that we have a president who seems to be ignorant of what a foreign policy is, as well as living in some ivory tower world of academe that cannot seem to connect with the real world and that there a) are evil and bad people out there and b) they don't really respond well to Occidental reasoning and rhetoric that is the basic foundation of what passes for liberal/progressive thought these days.

So, what you see is various and sundry wannabees scrambling around to see if in all the smoke and chaos of what passes for world affairs these days if they can expand their sphere of dominance whether it is by hook or crook.

All I can say is that all you out there outside the US of A are in for a heck of ride for at least the next three years because not much is going to change inside those borders.

Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God?

Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God? – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs





This article sums up pretty much my view on the existence of a God, the Bible, and religion.



I have had my own personal revelations during my life, that have reinforced my views. What they were and when they happened are not important. What is important is the understanding that God is there ... and all we see is his/hers/its (you choose because I am not going to argue about gender) handiwork and it really is incredible. To deny this beauty and the way it seamlessly goes together seems to me rather obtuse.



The rest, as they used to say, is about as useless are arguing how many angels can fit on the head of pin.

My take on the Ukraine situation

Nato warns that Russia is risking Europe's peace and security - Telegraph



My take on the Ukrainian crisis (subject to being overtaken by events after 2 March 2014) is that there will be no general war, Russia will gain de facto control of the Crimea and east of the Dnieper River. It will basically be Czechoslovakia  in 1938, but without Baldwin proclaiming peace in our time.



First, despite what the progressives and those believers in the idea that man has evolved so much in the 21st Century that rationality, diplomacy and negotiations can resolve all conflicts and that leaders today's major powers will not use military force to achieve their geopolitical aspirations, the world really isn't like that ... and that 19th century vision of power politics that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry thinks isn't flying really does happen to be the way of humankind. Sorry, Mr. Heinz, but people really haven't changed their spots.



Now, having said that:



President Obama has pretty much said that whatever happens in the Ukraine is not of any concern of the US. The Europeans maybe; the Russians probably; and the Ukrainians definitely. Despite all the bluster that Putin and the Russians are violating X number of international laws, Y number of international agreement and basically being pigs about the situation, Obama really has no stomach to do much more than sputter and Putin knows that.



Secondly, the Europeans - whether through the EU or NATO - aren't about to do anything other than bluster either. Why? Because they don't have the power to do much, at least not militarily, and Russia does have its hand on the value to the natural gas that fuels much of Europe's energy needs.



Third, the UN ain't gonna do squat. The Security Council is absolutely powerless because anything it tries to do will be blocked by the Russians with their veto power.



Fourth, even if Obama got beyond just blustering, what could the US do to help defend or prevent the dismemberment of the Ukraine? Zip, zero, zilch. Hell, the progressives have been so busy for the last five or six years eviscerating US military capabilities (the peace dividend from ending the Iraq debacle and the soon-to-be Afghan debacle to fund Obamacare) that the US has no forces in any position to take on the Russians, short of a nuclear attack and nobody thinks the Ukraine is worth having nukes hitting US cities (not even Washington, D.C., or Detroit and maybe Chicago which probably would come out better in that case). With no conventional options on the table, the assurances we, the Brits and others gave the Ukraine that their territorial integrity as defined at the fall of the Soviet Empire would be honored if it gave up its Soviet nuclear weapons, basically are worthless.



So, there will be a media feeding frenzy for the next few days/weeks/months and then the Ukraine effectively will be dismembered with a portion - like happened in near by Georgia six years ago - basically being ceded back to the Russian Empire.



And people think the Americans think in imperial terms. Give me a break.

Personal notes and a miracle (of sorts)

For those who knew: Thank you for your kind thoughts.

For those who didn’t know: I still felt your kind thoughts.

Last week (of February 2014) was a bit of an adventure for me, involving a trip to the hospital emergency room, that morphed into a little more than a three-day hospital stay.

For those who don’t know me, I have suffered from a chronic heart condition for many years, which has included the implantation of a number of arterial stents in my coronary arteries, a rather unsuccessful attempt at coronary artery bypass graphs and chronic angina (chest pain and discomfort). It was the confluence of those conditions that compelled me to retire eight years ago.

Anyway, the last few weeks the level of my chest discomfort had increasec to the level which, at the advice of my brother (the surgeon) and my cardiologist's  physician assistant,led me to pay the visit to the emergency room at the area’s trauma care and teaching hospital, which led to yet another heart catherization (of which I have had quite enough, thank you) followed by a second catherization to install two or three (I really have not been able to keep that straight) stents (which brings me to at least 10 now) in my poor battered ticker.

The good parts of the story are a) I survived it all; b) I was able to have both my daughters visit (which is special) and c) I got rather good news, for which no one really has much an explanation.

The good news, for those who have followed my condition, is that one of those three occluded arterial bypass graphs has for some unknown reason and methodology reopened and essentially is clear now. I find this remarkable, as you see, as cardiologists in two major cardio-research hospitals had told me that it was closed and there wasn’t much that could be done about it.

The cardiologists working on me had said the new blockages in my heart (well at least one) offered them a considerable challenge since it one of them was at the junction of two arteries that already had one stent. Exactly how they solved the problem of putting a stent in this Y junction, I am not sure (even though I was essentially awake for most of the process and counting holes in the acoustical  tile in the ceiling and listening to the humorous chatter among the operation room staff).

However, I am home once again. Relatively pain-free (back to my normal level of angina discomfort that has been my companion for the last 14 years).

For those who may have said prayers for me: I thank you.

For those who say prayers for me now: I thank you.

For those who believe in these sort of things, know that I am thankful for the apparent miracle that has occurred in my body and am extremely grateful for the divine power that allowed it to happen to me.

You know, I really do think there is a God and God does have a purpose for us and takes an active role in our lives (if we let “him”). We just have to keep the faith and keep on truckin’ as the old saying goes.

Military cutbacks

Get real, Hagel tells nation in proposing military cuts – CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs



The US Secretary of Defense is proposing to cut the Army back to levels it hasn't seen since before World War II and if that doesn't say something about what role this administration wants the US to play in the future around the world, nothing does.



Understand, I have nothing against downsizing the Army as we disengage from Afghanistan. It is quite traditional for the U.S. to gut its military capabilities in the wake of conflicts. It is something we do after every war, which of course makes the next one (and there will be one, make no doubt of that) all that the more costly as we rebuild our capabilities.



About 20 years ago, I wrote an opinion piece which got inserted into the Congressional Record (I have a copy suitable for framing around here somewhere signed by Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-S.C.) who inserted it in the official journal of the federal Congress). The thesis was that while it probably was good to downsize the active components of the Defense Department, it really should be beefing up the reserve components. Unfortunately, now, as 20 years ago, the yahoos in the Pentagon want cut back on the National Guard and the Reserve while eviscerating the active side as well.



But then various and sundry governors already are in dither because the drones in the
five-sided puzzle palace on the banks of the Potomac have decided, once again, that is better to
chop those pesky National Guardsmen than even more Active Component
types ... even though they get a far better bang for the buck with the
Reserves than they do with the Regulars.



I could go into all the political and social benefits of enlarging
the "militia" of the country, but who would be listening ... not the
people in Washington, that is for sure.





For example, the Air Force will try - yet again - to divest itself of the venerable A-10 Thunderbolt II close air support attack jet that ground pounders like the infantry have come to love so much. The Air Force has been trying to get rid of this ugly but useful - and very survivable - Warthog of a plane for about 35 years. It doesn't fly fast enough, or look sexy enough, or nor is stealthy enough, for the jet drivers who run the Air Force.



I suppose the Air Force could give them all to the Air National Guard, but I think they already have done that, so now it is time just to throw it in the ash bin of aircraft; just like the C-27 cargo planes they just bought for the Guard.



Understand, I am not knocking the Regulars. Especially, since over the last decade they really have been rode hard and put up wet. It doesn't matter which branch of the service they serve in, all of those volunteers have had to put up with a lot of fecal material that they shouldn't have to ... and their families have to go through even more.



Of course, the
last decade and a half have not been all that kind to the National Guard
and the Reserves either, because they truly have become a part of the total
force and have spent a lot more time than they used to on active service
in combat zones. (Which is one of the reasons it should be a whole heck
of a lot larger than it is now, and is proposed to be in the future).



Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel promises that the force of future will be more tactically proficient as the military faces the realities of the fiscal difficulties faced by the federal government, once again trying to trade troops for technology, ala Donald Rumsfeld. Hey, Secretary Hagel, as Gen. Eric Sinseki once warned Rumsfeld before going into Iraq: Quantity has a quality that can't be overlooked. (Note that Sinseki was sacked for telling Congress that little fact)



However, I think the secretary is overlooking a couple of things. First, it appears the cuts will be coming on the warfighting side of the house, leaving the civilian bureaucracy (which is unionized - although in my experience with it, that union really sucks) relatively intact. Secondly, all that new stuff costs a bunch.



In addition, technology is great, it really is. But as soldiers probably will point out to you, it only works as long as the batteries do. Then it is back to basics, the basics of being a soldier. Of course, we could just automate all the tasks and run all the robots out of some conexes in Nevada or somewhere (but they run on batteries too). That is what this president likes to do: You know, death from above (and I don't mean the good old airborne) but I digress.



Still, I should take note that the progressives are getting what they have been advocating for most of my life now ... but then they have been in control for going nigh on eight years now. I just hope all their kumbayhya stuff works out for them, because - unfortunately - I am a bit too old, and definitely too battered and beaten - to be taking up arms for them again. I am not all that hopeful, mind you, but that is because I look at the world right now and don't see much to be hopeful about.



Still, we are living in a relatively peaceful lagoon here in North America (well, at least north of the Rio Grande - or is that the Medina River valley these days ... heck for all I know it may be the Red River Valley) and maybe it will stay that way. I hope so, but as I said, my reservoir of hope in this age of hope and change is getting mighty low ... you almost would think I was back in California and farming in the Central Valley.

It is all about the language

Calling immigrants criminals is insulting

Simple definition of illegal immigration

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor recently said calling those people who have immigrated to the United States without the proper documentation criminals was insulting.

I am not sure I agree. I mean in more ways than one, immigrants without documentation have broken the law in the United States.

First, they failed to get the appropriate documentation at the border. That is in violation of federal law.

Now, if they got a job without a work permit, then they violated another law and subjected their employer to possible fines and legal sanctions.

If they gave a Social Security number to anyone, then that would have been fraud and another crime.

If they drove a car without a valid driver’s license, then that is a violation of state law.

I mean you really can go on and on, making such a list. The question then becomes at what point does such a person become a “criminal”?

I suppose you have to find them, arrest them, try them, find them guilty of violating whatever laws they have broken and then you can call them a criminal. I suppose if you do it before such a determination then you are defaming them … which is insulting them.

But the real issue here is about the language. You see if you call a person a criminal – even if they have done something criminal – then you putting them in a lower status then those people who don’t break the law.

Unfortunately, we all break the law, probably daily. Of course it is little laws like speed limits, jaywalking and improper lane changes, but it still is breaking the law. Most of us just wink at people who do such things and just rack it up to their not getting caught.

My take from what Justice Sotameyer is saying is that we should just “wink” at those people who are violating US immigration law.

However, I don’t agree, but then I have a different perspective. I am married to a non-citizen. We had to get the proper documentation and then go through the process to get first a work permit and then a permanent residence card … which took more time than I hoped and cost more than I expected, but we paid both prices in order to stay within the law – before all the post-9/11 changes that went into effect in the the latter half of the Oughts.

I read these stories, truly sad stories, about families torn apart when parents are deported but their anchor children remain behind and I don’t have a solution.

I really don’t think we need to ignore our law, because if we ignore it, what other laws should we just start ignoring? And if we as “men” (meaning individual people) decide what laws we will obey, then we truly become a nation of men and not of law.

Being a nation of law is what sets the US apart from most other countries. It is one of the good things about the country, although views like Justice Sotameyer’s tend to push the envelope toward less equality before the law and more injustice in name of the law.

What people like Justice Sotameyer and others associated with the progressive view of this issue are doing is seizing control of the language and warping it to hide the fact that undocumented immigrants are in fact illegal aliens. In many countries, if it doesn’t get you quickly escorted to the border, it does get you locked up in jail (with the latter more often than not the consequence).

Once they control the language used to describe those individuals who anywhere else would be called criminals or illegals, then they control the debate and can shape the issue any way they want to do.

The key is that if you control the words, then you control the people. I think George Orwell wrote a book on that called 1984. Well, it may be three decades or so late, but I am beginning to suspect that “newspeak” is become the lingua franca of 21st America.

Media Rant time

I really wish I wasn’t a journalist sometimes, because what I am seeing for passing for news reporting these just about makes me want to puke.

The blame game in this coverage is bovine scatology of the first order.

Now, understand folks, I spent about 30 years working in the news rooms of newspapers. Some of it I was reporting, some of it I was editing … but I will say this: the crap, and that is being generous, that was put up by CNN about the storm in the South was about the poorest example I have seen coming out of that once respected cable news outlet.

First of all, I lived in the Atlanta area for six years, and in the South generally for the better part of 25 years, and so I am quite familiar with what is paralyzing the region … as the saying goes, been there, done that … got the T-shirt, and lost it – a number of times. I doubt, honestly, that any folks up in Yankeedom (that is anywhere north of the Mason-Dixon line or the Ohio River) probably would have done much better on the first big blizzard of the year, but then they do get a lot more practice.

I can tell you that on a good day that the traffic jams in Atlanta are epic, and the drivers worse (I had a Jaguar coupe try to swap paint with my old Ford pickup truck at 75 mph on an Atlanta freeway one day – and only because I grew up driving the Southern California freeways, we didn’t).

No, Southerners do not know how to drive on snow and ice, and for most years they don’t have to. On those few occasions that it happens, well, you are seeing the results.

For that reason, which my Canadian wife got real hoots out of, at the first snowflake, towns, schools and just about everything else closes up shop – and people all run to the grocery store to stock up on milk and bread. Don’t ask me why, but it is a Southern thing.

I have no doubt that the state, counties, cities and towns affected by this storm had emergency plans in place to deal with it … but when the rubber hits the road, the plans go in the bit buck about as fast as you can say snow flake or especially ice crystal.

Add to that the track record for meteorologists is nothing to write home about. For example, I now reside on the coast of Maine and the weather forecast has called for snow or some other type of frozen precipitation for just about every other day for the past week and I ain’t seen nary a flake yet … oh, there were a few drops of mist on the windshield when I went to the doctor’s on Monday, but not enough even to make the pavement damp.

So, between weather forecasters who can’t get their act together and a storm that comes along maybe once a decade – if not once a generation – and you expect things to go normally?

Now, if  you are journalist, you report what is happening, and you don’t go pillorying every government official you can put your microphone and camera in front of for failing to get everybody home.

Reminds me  of Hurricane Floyd in 1999. (Background on Floyd) As Floyd skirted up the East Coast, the governor of South Carolina, as a precaution, ordered all the people in the counties east of I-95 to evacuate. It turned into a royal mess with it taking people 10-12 hours to cover normally is a 90 minute to two hour drive.

And then … Floyd didn’t even come ashore in South Carolina and just brushed the North Carolina Cape Hatteras area before finally slamming in the Virginia and Maryland.

Now, what do you think people thought of evacuations then?

So, all you people who are pointing fingers at the folks down South: Bless your pea-picking little hearts, but you weren’t there and I have heard from folks from up North of the Border who were there and were saying that they doubted it would have been handled any better.

Actually, rather than try to blame somebody, CNN could have been going out and reporting actually what was happening, which probably was some really great human interest stories about people pitching in and helping one another when the going was tough and at its worst.

Like the teachers and school administrators who made the brave choice to hunker down in their schools with their students and do their best to make them feel safe and comfortable.

Or those police officers and firefighters going out and doing their jobs, despite the conditions. And yes, even those much maligned state and county road crews who had to put that strange and little used equipment to use out there on highways not even a snowshoe hare would dare to travel.

I have lived through a slew of those ice storms, and believe me, I will take the 30 inch snowfall we had here in Maine over them anytime.

Anyway, suffice it to say, I think CNN’s coverage sucked the big green weenie and what little respect I had for the institution slipped even further into the john.

The minimum wage isn't a living wage

The minimum wage I make isn't a living wage - Jan. 22, 2014 - CNN



OK, folks, get ready for a rant.



I am sorry, but nobody, but nobody, can be guaranteed a "living wage" - period.



Why do I say that? Because you have to define what a "Living Wage" is and that varies from individual to individual to begin with.



The problem is what "standard" determines what "living" is? The basic standard could be three hots and a cot, as I say, which is three meals a day that can sustain a body and a cot under shelter from the elements to sleep in. Anything after that is gravy and up to the personal preference and expectation of the individual.



Obvious, in the situation described in the CNN story, the man is expecting far more than that, but then whose responsibility is it to see that he, and his family - wife and three kids, are given all the things that meet his expectations? Is it society's job? The government's job? (if so at what level of government: the local village or the United Nations?)



I don't know where people are coming from when they seem to think that people are owed a certain standard of living. I am sorry but it flies in the face of reality to expect that any social structure involving millions of individuals can provide for the expectations of all. It just ain't gonna happen folks.



Once again, I will point out that a) that life is not fair and b) we are not equal in skills, talents and capabilities. If you think either of that life is fair or that we are equal in what we contribute to society, then you are living in an entirely different universe than the one that planet I have come to know and love occupies. And if you have learned nothing from the last two centuries, I would have hoped that your review of history would have taught you that the utopian concept of "to each according to their needs and from each according to their abilities" not only is totally unworkable but it is the rankest folly to try to make it work.



But it isn't fair that some people have all they want and then some, while others go without. No. Fairness is not a part of this equation.



But it is not right that some people go without while others have a surplus. Says who? Religion? Be careful when citing religious texts, because you can "prove" and support anything you want from them.



Granted, I would say that it is the best interest of those who can to help those in need, but that is different than those in need expecting that others will provide for them. Unfortunately, what we see in stories like the one run by CNN is that we have raised people in this country to expect that someone else will provide the means for them to achieve their expectations.



The sad thing, to me it seems, that the level our expectations have risen so far that we have lost sight of what really is needed. We have, in many instances, become consumed with the need to fulfill our material expectations that far exceed what we need to survive and possibly thrive. No, we take for granted that all the little luxuries that we enjoy - from food to clothing to transportation to housing to entertainment, without realizing the true value of these things.



Folks, we in the US have it so good ... even our poor ... that it almost is obscene, if you compare it to the standard of living for probably the vast majority of the world's population.We have maybe 5 percent of the world's population but say 25 percent of its material goods, if not more. All those things we take for granted - cars, cellphones, computers, television sets - well, you get the drift.



No, I am not trying to keep others down ... hell, folks, I don't think I made over the median income level until I was four years from being forced to quit working because my heart gave out ... and then it was at the median level. And I never felt disadvantaged during all those years, but that was because I wasn't taught to expect anyone else to give me anything.



Yes, I expected a return for my labors, and I pretty much got that everywhere I went. But then again, I know, times have changed ... and attitudes have changed ... and we are the worse for it.



Just remember, the minimum wage is not, can not, could never be, was never intended to be able to provide subsistence for more than one person ... and that person absolutely devoid of any skills, training or more than basic education.



This "living wage" mantra is bovine scatology of the highest order ... and we should recognize it as such when we start turning to government to guarantee that everybody is provided it (like what if you don't have a wife and two kids?)



Ok, I am through for the moment ... but you need to think about what you wish for ... you just might get it and it may turn out not to be what you expect.

Cuomo: ‘Extreme conservatives … have no place in the state of New York’

Capitol Confidential » Cuomo: ‘Extreme conservatives … have no place in the state of New York’

This is New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's position in a nutshell:

"Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are."

OK, with all due respect, but if that doesn't sound like a very bigoted thing to say, then I think you need to take  your blinders off. Exchange any of those descriptions with some other protected group and put those words in the mouth of some Republican and I think you would see the media in the United States in full-meltdown and feeding frenzy mode.

Let me get this straight, Mister Governor: If a person is pro-life, or thinks people have the right to own semi-automatic rifles or believes that homosexuality is a religious sin, then they have no place in the State of New York? And  you are going to do what to them? Are you going to make life so difficult for them that they have to move to another state? Are you going to start jailing them? How about shooting them?

Now, I am not advocating any of the positions that seem to have Gov. Cuomo in such a dither, because that is not the point of this essay. My point is how we in America let such demagogues get into leadership positions in our governments. You want to see what is wrong with the political dialogue, you need only to look no further than his comments.

Granted, there are conservatives who are just rhetorically flamboyant, but they get hammered in the media when they open their mouths. But, so far, I have seen nary a peep about Gov. Cuomo's rant in any of the major news dissemination sites. Since it is OK for him, then I suppose that conservatives and Republicans are now justified in their positions that all progressives have no place in the United States, because "that is not who Americans are."

While I may think progressives and liberals like Gov. Cuomo have a totally screwed up worldview and vision of what America should be, but I wouldn't say that they have no place anywhere in the US. That would be wrong. For them to say it about others is just as wrong.

And what if Gov. Cuomo said Muslims have no place in New York, or Jews, or Hispanics, or Asians, or African-Americans. He already has said that Baptists, Pentecostals, Mormans and Catholics are not welcome. Who else gets the rhetorical heave-ho in New York.

He says that people who take the Second Amendment at its word and believe (as the 1794 Militia Act, which was the law for more than 110 years, said) that the people - that is individual citizens making up the unenrolled militia - are to arm themselves with military caliber firearms and other things needed to rally to the defense of the community are a threat. A threat to whom? Study after study shows that the things gun control advocates don't work, while arming people seems to reduce crime and protect life and property

Of course, we can't have that.We are people, in our enlightened humanity, who see no need for violence in the world (except for those who resist the government) and if everyone would just lay down their arms their would be peace on Earth and all men would treat each other with good will. We are a 21st Century country with cellphones, tablet computers, big screen televisions, and more material goods than we can shake a stick at. We just need to understand that we are governed by angels (if they are Democrats, liberals or progressives) who never will succumb to their lesser natures and who merely want to take care of us from cradle to grave if we would just listen to their wisdom and surrender our lives to their benign direction. These experts and technocrats know all the solutions and if we want to enter the paradise on Earth, we merely need to bow them.

Now, let us all link arms and sing Kumbayah.

Ding, dong. Obviously Gov. Cuomo is going to exclude some people from that circle because they don't happen to agree with his worldview. That doesn't surprise me, and I hope it doesn't surprise you.

People, wake up and smell the roses.

First of all, the government cannot and will not be able to take care of all of us.We have to be able to take care of ourselves. Yes, we can work together to help each other, and that is well and good and proper, but government or "the state" - whether it is municipal, county, state or federal - does not have the capability to provide for all of us. If you learned nothing from the last 100 years, one would think that a cursory review of the history of the 20th Century would have show that to be the case.

Second, tyranny can only exist when good people stand aside, rather than stand up to it. To disarm yourself is to place yourself aside unwilling to defend, protect and preserve the community-state-nation that some of us have given at least sweat and tears, if not blood, pieces of our bodies and minds or our lives, that was bequeathed to us by those who came before us.

Third, a dependent person is not a free person, but merely a slave, a captive, a prisoner in mind or body. I would hope that we would choose not to be dependent, and to stand as individuals, willing to respect and tolerate those who do us no harm but merely view the world through a different prism; and that we would ferociously defend those who stand beside us in respect and dignity against all those who would cast us aside.

Gov. Cuomo is an ass. Unfortunately, I don't look for a media storm to break upon his head. But I would hope the people of New York, as well as the rest of America will be able to see the danger in his words and react accordingly.

Court: Bloggers have First Amendment protections - AP News 1/17/2014 8:40 PM

Court: Bloggers have First Amendment protections - AP News 1/17/2014 8:40 PM

Amen and amen!

I have argued this for years and years, much to the dismay of others in my chosen profession. I kept telling them that the first amendment does not just protect news gathering and disseminating businesses and organizations, but is a protection that is extended to every one.

It is like my argument about "shield" laws. They are not based in the Constitution nor can they ever rest on the First Amendment. If you want to have a "journalist" privilege, like that of doctors, priests and lawyers, it can't happen in the Constitution or really based in common law. You can base in statutory law, that passed by legislatures, but you have to remember that what the legislature can giveth, it taketh away ... plus it gets to define who or what is in the protected class, not the Constitution.

I hope the Supremes uphold this ruling on appeal.

Elections Don't Matter, Institutions Do

RealClearWorld - Elections Don't Matter, Institutions Do

There is much to be said for Mr. Kaplan's thesis here.

Elections don't matter as much as institutions do when it comes to stability and progress, but one has to remember that it takes individuals who are willing to invest in those institutions for it to work as well.

You can have the framework of institutions, just as one has the framework of the democratic process and still you will find yourself awash in the problems of societies torn by religious, ethnic and tribal factionalism. However, if individuals within those societies are committed to seeing the institutions work, then it tends to be able to overcome those divides. It is why the US works as well as it does.

Americans by an large, at the moment, are deeply invested in the notion that we are a nation of laws and that there are institutions that can effectively administer those laws and rules that govern any society. Unfortunately, from my perspective, we are seeing assaults on those institutions in ways that will tear apart the nation, and unfortunately, those assaults are being mounted by our opinion leaders and elected leaders which makes it even worse.

We have come to very near a tipping point, in my estimation, where those in charge of protecting the institutions are so busy tearing them down by selectively enforcing them that they will collapse. Maybe not tomorrow or the next day ... or even year, but sooner than necessary or even desired.

Whether it is saying that selectively applying tax breaks to political fellow travelers is OK, or saying that race needs to be considered when enforcing school discipline, or this group or that group will be exempted from the law for this year or next, all of them are wrong.

The point Mr. Kaplan was making was that if there is not equality before the law - or in the waiting line of the institutions - then the whole system is going to break down.

We are so fortunate in the United States (and Canada, I think, so basically two-thirds of North America) that our institutions have developed and work as well as they do that we essentially take them for granted and assume that it is the natural order of things. Actually, it is not the natural order of things and the miracle of what is our society and culture (so far) is that it does work so seamlessly that we can take it all for granted.

Unfortunately, again from my perspective, we have those in our leadership who want to pit ourselves against ourselves; to set class against class, group against group, community against community. The endgame of this strategy to me is so obvious, it becomes almost a tragedy in slow-motion.

As the old song goes:
Go ahead and hate your neighbor,
Go ahead and cheat a friend.
Do it in the name of Heaven,
You can justify it in the end.


We are seeing the politics of division and we will pay the price. We have come to see our "government" as the source of all solutions and the great equalizer to make up for our individual differences. We want it to level the outcomes, regardless of reality.

Life is not a zero sum game, unfortunately not enough people can't see that. No, we have to blame someone else for our faults and shortcomings. We are never to blame.

Well, folks, it appears that we have chosen the path we want to take by the people we have elected to act in our name. We will have to accept the consequences of our choices. Individually, we may not have made these choices, but collectively we have. Those of us who oppose these choices that are made in our name have to accept that. I know this does not seem fair, or even right, to many, but life is not fair ... nor is it always right in our eyes.

I am religious enough to ask God for forgiveness, for we know not what we do. Maybe we will learn, but it will be a painfully slow process that will see setbacks.

You may not see it that way, and that is your choice, but I fear it is the way it is.

Overkill

FDA Warns Against Prescription Drugs With High Levels of Acetaminophen

When I first saw this story, it was the banner headline at the top of CNN''s web site (now, I can't even find the story).

 I was alerted to the story later by my progressive former classmate out west who stridently called for anyone taking Tylenol or acetaminophen painkillers to stop immediately and seek out another pain medication.

I called him on that reaction in a comment on his Facebook page, and he proceeded to advise me that he was a Registered Nurse (who is not practicing nursing at the moment - he helps run a gaming software company) and started spouting some figures about the number of people treated for side effects.

Having laid that foundation for context, let me say: Has my old classmate lost his flipping wig?

First, his reaction is one that absolutely amazes me, especially coming from one who is supposed to have a modicum of medical knowledge. I don't profess to be an expert, but even I know that EVERY drug has potential side effects ... often serious if not fatal. All drugs, substances, etc., no matter what - period - potentially will produce an adverse reaction in the human body. That is the risk we take when we use the substance and if we are not aware of that, then we really are acting pretty silly and didn't listen to Momma when we little.

I am reminded of the little orphan's cry is some war movie I saw way back when: "No Momma. No. Poppa. No Uncle Sam." Only in this case, we always have Uncle Sam to fall back on or so it seems he believes.

You see, I am one of those people who realize that there is no "zero defect" solution to life (unless you are God and that I surely am not, nor do I suspect is anyone else in the human race who isn't crazy) and that everything comes with adverse effects of one order or another.

Granted, each individual is important and a valued person, but at the same time that individual also is expendable. I guess that is the old soldier in me coming out. Not everyone is going to live (in fact, if  you really look at it - none of us are), so the point is that we not waste those who die or take away the dignity of their death. We do the best we can, and then we move on.

To deprive the 99.97 percent of adults in the United States (if I did my math right) of the benefit of something because .03 percent may get seriously ill (and .015 percent may end up in the hospital) seems to me to be a little out of whack, but then I will let you be the judge.

Secondly, my brother (the surgeon) once said at a symposium where I was sitting in the audience a very profound observation: The Enemy of Good is Better.

Now, that might seem a bit odd at first glance, but it actually makes a whole heck of a lot of sense after I thought about it ... and I had been applying the idea all my life (I guess we learned it from our Momma or sumptin')

The point being that if you don't use the good when you can, while you are in the quest for the better, then you are denying yourself, and others, the value of the good. Since there is never enough good to go around, we best not waste any of it and every little bit helps.

It is sort of like the pep talk I used to give my copy editors: What we do tonight is not engraved it stone. We will do the best we can, knowing that it not be perfect and hope that it will be good enough, because tomorrow night the paper we slave over tonight will be wrapping fish or lining Polly's cage. Keep it in perspective folks.

Or another point I made after the Persian Gulf War in 1991. There was some criticism that the Patriot missile was not a perfect defense against Iraqi SCUDs. I thought that criticism was extremely shortsighted and rather ignorant. There were some 85 SCUDs launched during the war, with about half landing in Israel and half in Saudi Arabia. I know that at least one warhead was destroyed, because I saw it happened, but the reports after the war ranged from 80 percent of the warheads were intercepted down to about 30 percent.

The criticism was that there were leakers, warheads that got through. Well, speaking as a grunt on the ground, if the Patriots intercepted one, and it was headed in my direction, then I am extremely grateful that Patriots worked even that limited amount because I could have been a casualty if it hadn't been there to do its job.

So, the missile defense was not perfect ... but it was better than no defense at all. It was the triumph of good over better.

Acetaminophen is not perfect ... but its good outweighs the bad in my estimation, but then I am not a progressive who expects perfection and that silly people can be protected against their own silliness by Uncle Sam and the FDA.

People, we can abandon the good things can do, in our quest of the perfect solution, or we can accept that some people won't be helped - in fact might get hurt - while we try to help as many as we can. It is what doctors and nurses do in triage and what generals and admirals do when they send their airmen, marines, sailors and soldiers in harms way.

We know that some will not make it, but we hope that the good will be worth the price. And sometimes waiting for the perfect solution or overkill is not worth the price.

Anyway, that is my view on the situation ... you are welcome to yours.

"They died for nothing?"

Jake Tapper's Interview with Lone Survivor Vet Marcus Luttrell: 'They Died for Nothing?' - YouTube

Having been a journalist (admittedly a print journalist and not a broadcast air head) and a soldier, I find Tapper's performance here not only arrogant and ignorant but obscene. They were never without out hope. It may seem to have been hopeless from the outside, but that is because you know what happens. And it was not senseless nor were these men sent to their deaths needlessly.

First, ops go bad. Sorry, but that happens.
Second, you never have enough good intel.
Third, the bad guys always have a vote in any plan.
Fourth, just because mistakes are made, you don't go lopping off heads ... mistakes are to be learned from, even ones costing human lives.

War is not a video game. It just about as unsanitary and ugly as it gets, and unless you have seen its true cost (not on a screen but  up close and personal embedded in your skin and clothes close) then you really don't get to appreciate that reality. All losses are bad, but losses are necessary in combat because you have to take risks and sometimes those risks overwhelm you.

Tapper doesn't get it. Period.

People wonder why I don't like broadcast journalists ... Tapper, however genuine his sympathy and concern may be, is an example. He just doesn't get it.

To the SEALs: Godspeed, gentlemen, and may the grass be green in those Elysian Fields.

In pictures: Niagara Falls freeze over on US side - Telegraph

In pictures: Niagara Falls freeze over on US side - Telegraph


When you are talking about how cold it has been ... this is it. NOW this is cold.

War on Poverty 50 years on, victory nowhere in sight

War on Poverty 50 years on, victory nowhere in sight | Fox News

As wars go, America's war on poverty is its longest and it portends to grind on indefinitely. Some $15 trillion later (roughly the size of the current national debt) and by most metrics, it would seem that the Americans have gotten precious little for this war.

Of course, the truth is rather different. The various campaign fronts have not all been total losses and millions of Americans have benefited from its programs (or is that pograms?) but the turnover in the demographic not static, in fact is quite high, so there are replacements for any losses reflected by the beneficiaries.

I have decided that the problem with the War on Poverty, like the Global War on Terror, the War in Afghanistan and the War in Iraq, and unlike the  Persian Gulf War, is that the US Government had no "exit strategy" when it declared war on poverty. You see, that is the flaw with all the unsuccessful wars the US has fought since World War II that none of them really had an exit strategy to give the war an ending point. A point set in advance that said when we achieve this goal, we can declare victory and go home now.

We achieved those goals in World War II, the Cold War, the Persian Gulf War. Of course, others my view it differently, but I think the Americans pretty well definitely (along with various and sundry allies) won those conflicts.

So, my challenge to anyone wanting to be president of the United States, including its current President Barack Obama, is to come up with the definitive exit strategy for the War on Poverty. Lyndon Johnson made a huge mistake and sold the American a bill of goods, with his lies and distortions, by not defining that exit strategy. No president since then has corrected that mistake.

I mean any stupid arm-chair general and military genius knows you have have an exit strategy when you go off to war.

Interesting juxtaposition

Gates’ tell-all rattles White House, Congress – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Book on Roger Ailes alleges sexual harassment

Interesting juxtaposition.

Maybe I am becoming increasingly cynical, but I find the release of these two books  - or at least advance stories on the books coming out - hit the wires on the same day. How fast can you say "damage control" or "diversion"?

The first book by former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates apparently paints a pretty dismal picture of the competence and commitment of President Barack Obama to policies that the president has been selling to the American people.

The second book is an unathorized biography of the head of dreaded Fox News, Roger Ailes, that obviously is an attempt to tar and feather him will allegations that are guaranteed to capture audiences and by guilt by association discredit the Fox News organization. I mean allegations of sexual harassment really is a big selling point because SEX SELLS.

Now, I know much smarter and much more erudite people will weigh in on this point - at least I hope they will - but I find it quite curious that the allegations (concerning conduct some 25-30 years ago, supposedly) floated to disclosure the same day as a book written about events of the last five years starts getting publicity.

Something here does not meet the smell test.

An example of news headlines with an agenda

Some states confirm water pollution from drilling - Yahoo News

Ok, folks, just so ya'll remember, I was a newspaper journalist for 30-some-odd years, so I kinda know from what I speak.

With that said, I going to take the AP/Yahoo news story apart.

First the headline sucks, because it really hypes something that is not supported by the story. By that I mean, as I read the story I was struck by the experts repeatedly pointing out that fracking (a practice going back to at least into the 1980s in Texas) by oil well drillers - not including those that drill not using fracking (but then what is drilling mud but essentially a fracturing fluid) - is responsible for a tiny slice of the actually pollution from the complaints that are filed in the four states the story references.

That is like writing a headline that says: Some states confirm eating causes asphyxiation deaths. Taken alone, it would make you wonder about whether it is safe to eat or not, and then question the premise. The truth be know that you can eat the wrong food, vomit and then asphyxiate yourself ... especially if  you are drunk or under the influence of some intoxicating substance (like drugs - for us old folks, that is how the singer Cass Elliot died way back when, as well a number of inebriated persons, famous or not).

You really have to reach into the story to realize that the number of confirmed cases of water pollution actually are a very small portion of the number of complaints over the last decade and the vast majority of the pollutants found have nothing to do with drilling, fracking, or anything the oil companies but actually naturally occurring contamination. And in those few cases, the oil drillers have agreed to pay substantial settlements to the affected parties.

The problem with most stories like this is that they fail to help people understand that no matter where we live, our water supply most likely is contaminated by something. In fact, public water suppliers publicly admit it every year (at least everywhere I have lived in the US) in a publication that they are required to send to their customers that charts and graphs all the major contaminants detected during routine testing they are required by law to do practically daily. Most people just throw these bill inserts away, but they are there.

People with their own wells, rarely go to the trouble to test their water, but - again from my experience covering this issue - when they do they are shocked to find it often is loaded with "natural contaminants" like methane, radon, various and sundry metals, bacteria and other stuff that can make you sick ... and with nary an oil well or even and underground pipeline to blame.

The other thing about fracking that they fail to point out is that a large chunk of the oil wells these days are being drilled to a depth of near a mile-and-half to two miles. Ground water usually hit impermeable  rock at a little more than half a mile and any water below that layer usually isn't liquid but gaseous (essentially steam) because as you go deeper it keeps getting hotter and hotter (see volcanoes).

So, rather than the big bad oil companies creating some sore of environmental catastrophe, while at the same time pushing the US toward energy independence and giving a humongous much-needed boost to the American economy, maybe those oil prospectors are actually doing us some good.

Now, I am not going to digress into the debate over hydrocarbon fuels, because - for the foreseeable future, in my estimation - that issue is moot. None of the alternatives are ready for prime time and until they are and some entrepreneur can pull a Henry Ford with the technology, hydrocarbon fuels will have to do until something better comes along.

Which is not to say the alternatives should stop development; nor should those people making products that use hydrocarbons stop trying to find more efficient ways to use it with cleaner results.

To scare people into opposing what works now based on insufficient evidence does everyone a disservice.

Obamacare: Republican Obstruction or Needless Blunders?

Obamacare: Republican Obstruction or Needless Blunders? | Robert Kuttner

Robert Kuttner, the author of the above article, makes a few relevant points, most of which focus on a) how sloppily and poorly crafted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its enabling regulations have been and b) how the policy fails to recognize and adapt to simple and understandable facets of basic human nature. Ignore these things and the usual result if somewhere between merely failure and an unmitigated disaster.

Where he errs, however, is faulting the Republicans for failing to go along with the Democrats/Progressives' obviously virtuous plan. Some where along the line Kuttner fails to make the connection that people who are elected to represent a different constituency and worldview are not just going to roll over and rubber stamp whatever comes along ... particularly if is conflicts with the worldview they hold.

Of course, the Republicans are going to do everything in their power to obstruct, make more difficult and derail a policy that they see as being the wrong approach. Are you telling me that Democrats are above doing exactly the same thing when they don't control the levers of power? Give me a break ... and you need to do a reality check on your assumptions if you think that even for an instant.

No, the problems with Obamacare is series of avoidable and unnecessary blunders on the part of the Obama Administration and their Democratic enablers in the House and Senate. No use trying to lay the blame on the Republicans. Unfortunately for them, the Democrats "own" this fiasco from start to finish.

Just as George W. Bush and the Republicans pretty much "owned" the Iraq War (although a host of Democrats were onboard for it) when it went South before the change of tactics in "the Surge", and Bush Jr. owned a big chunk of the Recession of 2008 (although a big part of it can be laid at the feet of Barney Frank, but that is another story), the Democrats now own what is happening with the economy, with the War in Afghanistan and with healthcare funding and financing muddle. (Oh, and the Iraqis own what is going down in Iraq right now, not the Americans or Obama)

However, in order to stay viable in elective politics, the Democrats will spend the next 10 months until November's mid-term elections thinking up ways to transfer what is their fault and they are to blame for to the hapless Republicans who never know when to just stand back and let their opponents keep digging themselves in deeper. Of course, since most of the people you see on most of TV news programs (sans Fox) and who write for the majority of news publications share the world view of the progressives and Democrats, those folks will do what they can to help along the Democrats. (Nothing really wrong with that, since it is their right to be that way, but it helps to give people fair warning.)

Anyway, before one begins to try to foist the blame for his or her own foibles and mistakes on someone else, it behooves one to re-examine his or own assumptions and seek to determine their validity before going on.

Besides, heck, I could be just blowing smoke here ,,, but I - after careful review (from my perspective) - don't think I am. What you think about it, is up to you.

USA to the rescue!

USA to the rescue! US Coast Guard Ice breaker asked to assist Antarctic rescue vessels trapped in ice due to #spiritofmawson fiasco | Watts Up With That?

Ok, I understand that the USCGC Polar Star was nearest icebreaker available, but I am having a little bit of fun with the thought that it is a US ship that is coming to the rescue of Russian and Chinese ships.

You have to understand that the Russians maintain a far larger and probably more capable fleet of icebreakers but all of the are stationed in the Arctic, rather than the Antarctic, which makes sense because of the Russians long Arctic coastline and the need to open its ports there for trade.

I am not aware of any Chinese icebreakers, although with their interest in developing Arctic passages for their shipping (and other less obvious reasons) one would think they  would have one or two at least on the drawing boards to ride to the rescue of their own ships should  they become icebound.

Still, I am glad the Coasties still have the capability, because our ocean-going icebreaker fleet is getting a little aged. However, don't look for the Congress or the current administration to suddenly see the light and order up a few newer ones, stronger and with greater capabilities. Tis not going to happen.

So, for now, lets just cheer on the crew of the Polar Star and wish them Godspeed as the make the voyage toward the stranded vessels.

Beep, wrong answer, Senators.

McCain, Graham blast Obama for Al Qaeda-related takeover of Fallujah, call situation 'predictable' | Fox News

Had to post this as a followup to the previous post on this topic.

Sorry, Senators McCain and Graham, it ain't his fault. Lindsey, I would have thought better of you, but then I guess all these years in Washington since I had coffee and a series of interviews with you back on that first campaign for the House seat in South Carolina have changed you.

Iraq conflict: Sunni fighters 'control all of Fallujah'

BBC News - Iraq conflict: Sunni fighters 'control all of Fallujah'

Sunni fighters allied with elements of Al Qaeda have seized control of Fallujah from the Shia-led central government of  Iraq.

There will be those who will spin this as an American failure. Folks, it ain't the fault of the Americans, nor is it to the discredit of those American servicemen and women who took the city from these same groups six or so years ago.

The discredit falls on the Iraqi government. The Americans were able to co-opt the Sunnis now fighting against the Baghdad government by including them in their efforts. Unfortunately, the Maliki government has abandoned that approach. From a human perspective, its decision is understandable, but it just creates another tragedy.

However, this tragedy is not the fault of President Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, American neo-conservatives, the Republicans, the Democrats or any other person or group in the United States. It is the fault of the Iraqis themselves, and they bear sole responsibility for it.

Don't try to spin the fact that it is the fault of the US because it and 40-some-odd other nations invaded in a vain attempt to enforce UN sanctions and Security Council resolutions. One only has to look at Syria next door to see what eventually would have happened to Iraq. The Americans just brought the Arab Spring to Iraq a little earlier than it came to other countries in the Middle East (and that is not to say that the Americans are to take credit for the Arab Spring, it was an Arab thing).

The point is that in Iraq, as well as across the Middle East (in fact the entire world), the old adage that the enemy of my enemy is my ally (for now). Yes, it makes for strange bedfellows but it is the real world. In battles, political or actual combat, allies are always welcome (as long as they stay allies until the battle is fought and is over). Unfortunately, the Maliki government has failed to prove to minority groups in Iraq that it can be inclusive. So, those minority groups, however they may dislike each other, form alliances of convenience, much like minority governments in parliamentary states cobble together coalitions to rule.

It is a tragedy ... particularly for those people who don't want to pick sides and just want to live their lives without clashing with the tax collector and other representatives of the government, for that is the way most of us are. Let us live in freedom from oppression. Let us live according to the dictates of our own conscience. Unfortunately, as we are seeing as a growing trend in the United States, that paradigm is under assault.

The trend increasingly is to enforce one societal view upon all the others who fall under the purview of the current party or political faction in power. Unfortunately, as being witnessed in Iraq, Southeast Asia, Central Africa and to a lesser extent in the United States, it leads to strife and conflict which, if left unchecked, will lead to violence.

You may not want that; I may not want that, but unfortunately the time will come when if you want to live free to follow the dictates of your own conscience, then you will be compelled to choose sides. (Or vote with your feet, which may or may not be a successful option to maintain your liberty.)

I know this may seem to be a dark assessment of the future of the world, but we have to face reality. We can visualize world peace, but without a common point of reference then trying to peacefully reconcile all the competing points of view of the world will not be able to happen. You may want it, but it isn't going to happen. People, unfortunately, just are not made that way.

Remember: If you want peace, prepare for war

This expression originally comes from the Romans (from "Epitoma Rei Militaris," by Vegetius (Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus)). 

In Latin the phrase is: "Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." It also has been cited as: "Si vis pacem, para bellum."

It is time to prepare for just that contingency.

And you were expecting them to do elsewise?

NSA seeks to build quantum computer that could crack most types of encryption - The Washington Post

In its inimitable fashion, the Washington Post once again points out that the nefarious NSA is up to no good and is trying to build a computer that will defeat all current methods of cryptology.

You got a problem with that? Well, welcome to the real world. That is exactly what the National Security Agency was set up to do, especially to the codes and cryptology efforts of those people who are not exactly on the same sheet of music as the U.S. and its government.

Now, you may not like what the NSA does, or how it does it, but its job is to help the US not get blindsided like it did on Dec. 7, 1941, or Sep. 11, 2001. We can debate until the cows come home whether the ends justify the means, but that is the mission we have entrusted to the NSA in the world of electro-magnetic communications. It merely is trying to do its job to the best of its ability ... albeit myopically and tone-deaf as it possibly can in seems.

The problem, it seems is that some people will be strict constructionists on certain civil liberties while the obverse on others. They also sometimes will be so myopic on the maintenance  of their view of civil liberties to the point that it becomes a mutual suicide pact. The trick, as it always has been, is on how to maintain a proper balance between security and liberty. And I for one am not good enough to know exactly where that balance should be.

The thing is that we long ago crossed the Rubicon on what was secret and what was not when we send our thoughts via the electro-magnetic spectrum. Whether it is by wire, microwave, fiberoptics, or the ether, our communications are not secure ... at least for for the vast majority of us and for those of us who do not have access to the most advanced encryption algorithms.

I remember, back in the day when I was a part-time soldier, trying to keep our communications secure. I became increasingly aware that essentially our efforts were basically fruitless. Just as I could not understand, initially, transmissions masked by the KY-58 units attached to our radios unless given the proper key, I began to understand that if you can break the key, you can break any code ... even one-off codes like book codes and others.

I also began to realize that if you transmitted any electronic emission, you basically were hanging a big neon sign that said "HERE I AM." I had fun explaining that concept to a couple of captains and majors why having my mortar platoon in their vicinity was not the brightest of ideas unless they could un-ass the area and move at least a kilometer in any direction in less than the 10 minutes it took my guns to fire three rounds in adjusting fire (because the grid square - per Soviet doctrine - would cease to exist about three minutes later due to counter-battery fire), My guys were well-practiced in shooting and scooting, because we knew our survival depended on it.

So, security in a digital world is quickly becoming something we can't rely on, no matter how much we want to. And if the NSA doesn't build the quantum computers, others will ... you can bank on that - the story above points out the Swiss and the European Union (basically the French and the Germans) are pushing the envelope on that front as we speak. So, you can either be circumspect about what you say and send over the ether ... or you accept that others can and will know what you sending.

It is not a pretty prospect, but reality rarely is a pretty thing.

Think it's cold now? Short Memories

Think it's cold now? 140M in U.S. will shiver at 0 degrees -- or lower - CNN.com

I love it when I see these types of stories ... because they are so indicative of the state of American affairs today. We have no memories.

Yes, folks, it will be cold ... it is winter, silly people! It is supposed to be cold when it is winter.
Yes, we are getting snow ... it is supposed to snow in the winter.

So, before everybody croaks in surprise, there is a reason yo mama taught  you to put on your coat, button it up; and then put on a cap and a scarf and wear some gloves or mittens. Put on your galoshes or some boots and then venture outside. Oh, you forgot those lessons? Was it do to all the hype about global warming?

Now, the world is or is not getting warmer ... I can't tell ... I keep moving north were it is colder in the winter, but even if the the climate is changing, this weather should not come as any surprise. It is winter in the Northern Hemisphere, folks. This is what happens in the winter in the north. Did we all forget that?

Oh, and climate change ... like winter, it happens and what happened in the last 15, 50 or 100 years ... that is indicative of zip. That is like trying to project the flight of a ball from a snap shot photograph.

Anyway, bundle up folks, 2014 is probably going to be a rough ride, weather-wise and just about every other-wise  you can think of. We are living in interesting times.

Another Rocket Scientist story

Warning issued about oil shipped from North Dakota, Montana | Fox News

It seems that shipping oil by rail is dangerous ... ah, that is news?

Ok, it has fallen off the radar, but that is why they invented long-distance pipelines, like the Keystone Pipeline that the Obama Administration has done its best to block ... even if it pisses off our neighbors, the Canadians.

The US needs hydrocarbon-based fuels to exist. Don't like that? Get over it. Sorry, but unless you want to destroy the economy, kill a whole bunch of people, then the US needs natural gas, oil and coal products. Of course, if you are fine with millions starving or freezing, then, by all means, continue to block the use of  hydrocarbons to power our world ... only would you please volunteer you and yours to stand at the front of the line to die ... because I don't want me and mine to die for your folly.

I can remember back to the first big news story I covered at the first newspaper I worked for (I was its editor and sole news staff member)  and a train derailed in the tiny town of Belpre, Kansas. It came about fifty feet from being a huge disaster for the small town of maybe 150 people, because a freight car almost hit an oil car on the siding that would have caught fire (probably), which would have spread to the grain elevator beside it (with lots of red winter wheat in it, and full of grain dust), which then probably would have exploded (with the force of a small nuclear weapon as grain dust is wont to do) and flattened everything in its vicinity.

So, if shipping oil products by rail seems "safe" to you ... well, all things are relative when it comes to safety ... remember, that there are trade-offs we make in life. The choice always is yours.