Patio Pics

So I have put up the roofing for the new patio area. looks great! we are very happy with the way it turned out.

It's been a while

It's been a while since anyone has added anything to this blog so I thought I would post this. The Princeton Review selected the best regional colleges and Taylor was name a best midwestern college. Wheaton also receive this designation......but I went to Taylor so don't care about Wheaton :) http://www.princetonreview.com/best-regional-colleges.aspx?uidbadge

Obamassiah

thanks to Ace

Great words from a great man

“You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man’s initiative and independence. You cannot help them permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.”

-Abraham Lincoln


I dont think I need to add any comments to that.

Gun owners are happy people

The Wall Street Journal reports that gun-clingers are not, in fact, bitter.

According to the 2006 General Social Survey, which has tracked gun ownership since 1973, 34% of American homes have guns in them. This statistic is sure to surprise many people in cities like San Francisco...

Who are all these gun owners? Are they the uneducated poor, left behind? It turns out they have the same level of formal education as nongun owners, on average. Furthermore, they earn 32% more per year than nonowners. Americans with guns are neither a small nor downtrodden group.

Nor are they "bitter." In 2006, 36% of gun owners said they were "very happy," while 9% were "not too happy." Meanwhile, only 30% of people without guns were very happy, and 16% were not too happy.

In 1996, gun owners spent about 15% less of their time than nonowners feeling "outraged at something somebody had done." It's easy enough in certain precincts to caricature armed Americans as an angry and miserable fringe group. But it just isn't true. The data say that the people in the approximately 40 million American households with guns are generally happier than those people in households that don't have guns.

The gun-owning happiness gap exists on both sides of the political aisle. Gun-owning Republicans are more likely than nonowning Republicans to be very happy (46% to 37%). Democrats with guns are slightly likelier than Democrats without guns to be very happy as well (32% to 29%). Similarly, holding income constant, one still finds that gun owners are happiest.

In 2002, they were more likely to give money to charity than people without guns (83% to 75%). This charity gap doesn't reflect their somewhat higher incomes. Gun owners were also more likely to give in other ways, such as donating blood. Are gun owners unsentimental? In 2004, they were more likely than those without guns to strongly agree that they would "endure all things" for the one they loved (45% to 37%).

...for many Americans, happiness often does indeed involve a warm gun.

I love that last line.

Will we be allowed to drill?

You may have heard that the House just passed a silly bill taxing American Oil companies for their record profits with the pretense of easing the financial burden on the consumer and researching alternative energy. (never mind that the TAX on a gallon of gas is about 20-30 times the profit margin at any stage in the manufacturing and supply process)

Its funny.

No new drilling allowed in Alaska, no more nuclear power plants built, no hydroelectric plants... all because of the eco-hippies on the left, but now that oil is rising in cost, they are suddenly feeling sorry for the less fortunate Americans.

Then I read This Article on the incredible reserves which are being surveyed in the Dakota / Montana region. Reserves that could potentially drastically reduce, if not end US dependence on foreign oil.

Will the region be slapped with ecological protection laws? or will we be allowed to utilize our national resources?

Latch-key dog exerciser

I especially like it when about 1/2 way through the video the dog isn't really done chewing on the ball yet, but the machine goes into its launch cycle. He just doesn't really want to give it up quite yet.

I can see Kohl making good use of a machine like this, maybe in the yard, as I rock in my porch chair sipping sweet tea and smoking my pipe...

thanks to boingboing

Iraq war insights

In a fascinating NYT article, the insurgency in Iraq is being blamed for turning Muslims away from their faith. “Before, parents warned their sons not to smoke or drink,” said Mohammed Ali al-Jumaili, a Falluja father with a 20-year-old son. “Now all their energy is concentrated on not letting them be involved with terrorism.”

Evidently, the Iraqis are growing weary of not only the constant Iraqi on Iraqi violence, but also having to live under the harsh rule of Sharia law, having "found themselves stranded in neighborhoods that were governed by seventh-century rules. During an interview with a dozen Sunni teenage boys in a Baghdad detention facility on several sticky days in September, several of them expressed relief at being in jail, so they could wear shorts, a form of dress they would have been punished for in their neighborhoods."

The blame, it seems, is being squarely placed on the religious clerics of the region.

In two months of interviews with 40 young people in five Iraqi cities, a pattern of disenchantment emerged, in which young Iraqis, both poor and middle class, blamed clerics for the violence and the restrictions that have narrowed their lives.

“I hate Islam and all the clerics because they limit our freedom every day and their instruction became heavy over us,” said Sara, a high school student in Basra. “Most of the girls in my high school hate that Islamic people control the authority because they don’t deserve to be rulers.”

This story appeared 3/4/2008. As one commenter on Commentary Magazine's Contentions blog put it:

Like it or not, the NY Times sets the agenda for the entire left-of-center media and virtually all Dems. The piece is significant mostly for that reason, although whether other segments of the liberal media will push back remains to be seen. Hillary and Obama will ignore it, b/c their narrative of a failed war is central to their foreign policy ideas.

I won't hold my breath as I wait for this news to work its way through the mass media; moreover, the campaign. But the authority of the NYT is hard for the left to resist, and convenient for the right to laud when it serves our purposes.

I remain convinced that President Bush will be vindicated in the long run. Perhaps this article is just a crack in the mighty edifice of the anti-Bush rhetoric. As the Contentions blogger put it:

This Times piece represents a tectonic shift in the Iraq War and in the larger ideological struggle. From this date on, the War cannot be talked about in quite the same way. Those opposed to it can no longer snicker so easily when recalling the President’s assertion that people everywhere want freedom, and they may have to check their rage before declaring we’ve created more terrorists. There are some who understood that changing hearts and minds was the only way to triumph in the long run, but felt that Iraq was a huge setback in that pursuit.

Anyway, if this trend does in fact continue, it will bring interesting and significant changes to the region. Let's hope so, anyway.

Friday's Walk

(click on photo for greater detail)

Woe to the Middle Class!

This video I just found is a really interesting piece of work. Not full of enough facts and data to satisfy my skeptical nature, but interesting.

It makes me want to read that book...

The Dangers of "Touchy - Feely" Politics

It is quite interesting how all the democrats love Obama (well, half of them anyway), but he really has no track record at all. He can sure talk all sweet and pretty, but how do we know he isnt just all full of talk? He has no actions to support his rhetoric.

But a lot of people dont seem to care; they just like him because he is inspirational. A vague sense of doing good things for america...



Annnnd round 2...


people scare me sometimes...

And shouldn't we be a bit more critical of behavior such as THIS coming from a candidate for president of the US?

Biofuel Farce

This Article outlines the issues with the lofty eco-retarded idea that biofuels (ethanol, etc) are the answer to the world's energy needs. It highlights some interesting aspects that I admit I had not considered.

The Evil Exxon

According to Dr. Mark Perry, professor of economics at U of Michigan, at their 41% corporate tax rate Exxon contributed $27.9 billion to our tax coffers in 2006, paying

as much in taxes ($27 billion) annually as the entire bottom 50% of individual taxpayers, which is 65,000,000 people!

Now, we can point out their outrageous profits that year - $39.5 billion, bemoan the price of gas at the pump (which appears to be driven more by oil traders than Exxon - but that is a topic for another post), or debate the ecological impact their business might have, but rarely do we hear about how much they oil the engines of Washington - that is, apart from their evil lobbyists. I think we should give them their due as responsible tax paying citizens of our land.

btw, the comment section at the bottom of Dr. Perry's article provides interesting and further insight into the actual tax situation for Exxon by some obviously knowledgeable folk, as well as a few different perspectives on Exxon's moral standing by some outspoken embittereds...as is typical of most comment sections!




Thanks to Patterico for the story

Jesus abducted in Grand Rapids

"Jesus was gone..."

But a ransom note was received, reading, in part,

...we are holding Jesus ransom until you clean up the poopie from your weiners...

clean up all your weiner poopie if you want to see Jesus unharmed.

4 weiners; 2 feet of snow. Strikes me as nigh unto impossible to fully comply with the demands of the Jesusnappers. Does this then cast doubts on Jesus' imminent return?




Thanks soooo much to Ace

The World's Hottest Chili

It's 200 times hotter than the jalapeño. Workers handle it with goggles and face masks. And spicy-food lovers can't wait to get their hands on it.

By STAN SESSER
February 2, 2008; Page W1

Guwahati, India

The bhut jolokia chili pepper fires up the imagination, as well as the taste buds. The thumb-sized chilies are so potent they could be used in pepper spray, says the director of India's Defense Research Lab, R.B. Srivastava. "I've been told the U.S. and Israel have considered it for antiriot material," he says.

"Food scientists speculate that hot chilies have an unexpected side effect that boosts their popularity. A publication of the Brooklyn Botanical Garden in New York described it this way: "When capsaicin comes into contact with the nerve endings in the tongue and mouth, pain messengers, called neurotransmitters, are sent to the brain in a panic. The brain, mistakenly perceiving that the body is in big trouble, responds by turning on the waterworks to douse the flames. The mouth salivates, the nose runs and the upper body breaks into a sweat. The heart beats faster and the natural painkiller endorphin is secreted. In other words, you get a buzz."

It's similar to a runner's high, says Bruce Bryant, a researcher for the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia, which specializes in analyzing taste. That may explain why plants shunned by starving animals end up in party bowls next to the chips. "We're about the only species who like hot peppers," he says. "You can't even train a rat to like them."

This is a good article - worth the read. Includes a video of a WSJ guy trying one.....

Superbowl Halftime 2002

This is awesome.







thanks to the anchoress for the reminder

New website

Well, I just set up a web server on my laptop.

www.EntropyAtWork.BoldlyGoingNowhere.org

My new website. Dont ask questions about the domain name... it was free and I liked it. that is all.

Anyway, there is nothing ON the website yet except for the default Apache page. And the site will only be available when my laptop is turned on... but i still think it is pretty cool.

This was just an exercise to learn more about networks and the nuts and bolts of the internet. I will make an actual web page eventually...

there's Josh! although I contest that this quiz is grossly simplistic and incomplete...

what a family of political diversity...

This is mom:

This is me:

Libertarian!

But I ain't votin' fer Dr. Paul...that's fer sher...

What's your score?

Thanks to Anchoress

The Invasion of the Nanny State

If you needed more evidence that environmentalism is the new fascism, and that environmentalists' goal is more control of your life (thinly disguised as "concern for the environment"), then look no further than the proposed revisions to Title 24 in the state of California. Title 24 is the manual of standards that governs the construction industry with respect to matters of energy efficiency. It provides the standards needed for calculating the size of your windows, capacities of your air conditioner and heater, and how much insulation needs to be in your walls and attic. Ever wonder why your new toilet clogs so much, or why it takes 2 flushes to coax the load down? You can probably blame your state's construction standards and the water-conservationists who forced through those water-usage limits.

On January 30 the California Energy Commission will consider recommended revisions to their building standards that include the requirement for what is called a "programmable thermostat control", or PCT.

Every new home and every change to existing homes' central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a "non-removable " FM receiver that will allow the power authorities to increase your air conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature setpoint to any value they chose. During "price events" those changes are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually override the changes. During "emergency events" the new setpoints can be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to alter them. -Joseph Samsel

Temperature disagreements between husband and wife are bad enough - but who do you think will win the battle between the homeowner and the nanny state? Is there any question with regard to where we are headed with this proposal? With their foot in the door, it won't be long before there are state-controlled settings for your thermostat. You can bank on that.

This is scary stuff, kiddos. And don't believe it's not occurring nation-wide. I think the toilet water usage standard is federal. Incandescent light bulbs is another more recent example. Auto fuel efficiency standards are also in this category. Once we sign away our right to make our own decisions, we will not get that right back without a fight. What ever you do, don't let them take away your guns...


**UPDATE**

The NCTimes is reporting:

The California Energy Commission will remove a proposed mandatory control feature from thermostats required in new homes, Claudia Chandler, the commission’s assistant executive director, said Friday.

The control feature, specified in an upcoming revision to building codes, would have required so-called Programmable Communicating Thermostats to be installed with the air conditioning systems of new homes. These thermostats would have deferred in emergencies to a radio signal broadcast by utilities, removing control from customers.

After public protests, Chandler said, the commission decided to remove the mandatory provision from the proposal for the “Title 24″ energy efficiency standards. Staff will make the recommendation at the energy commission’s Jan. 30 meeting, and the new proposal would be taken up at a later meeting.

Sources: American Thinker; NC Times
Thanks to Patterico for the tip

I suppose it's Ron Paul for America...

I'm reading Atlas Shrugged over my last week of break, and was doing some reading on Ayn Rand when I came across this, and found it interesting:

Both [conservatives and liberals] hold the same premise—the mind-body dichotomy—but choose opposite sides of this lethal fallacy.

The conservatives want freedom to act in the material realm; they tend to oppose government control of production, of industry, of trade, of business, of physical goods, of material wealth. But they advocate government control of man's spirit, i.e., man's consciousness; they advocate the State's right to impose censorship, to determine moral values, to create and enforce a governmental establishment of morality, to rule the intellect. The liberals want freedom to act in the spiritual realm; they oppose censorship, they oppose government control of ideas, of the arts, of the press, of education (note their concern with "academic freedom"). But they advocate government control of material production, of business, of employment, of wages, of profits, of all physical property—they advocate it all the way down to total expropriation.

The conservatives see man as a body freely roaming the earth, building sand piles or factories—with an electronic computer inside his skull, controlled from Washington. The liberals see man as a soul freewheeling to the farthest reaches of the universe—but wearing chains from nose to toes when he crosses the street to buy a loaf of bread.

Yet it is the conservatives who are predominantly religionists, who proclaim the superiority of the soul over the body, who represent what I call the "mystics of spirit." And it is the liberals who are predominantly materialists, who regard man as an aggregate of meat, and who represent what I call the "mystics of muscle."

This is merely a paradox, not a contradiction: each camp wants to control the realm it regards as metaphysically important; each grants freedom only to the activities it despises. Observe that the conservatives insult and demean the rich or those who succeed in material production, regarding them as morally inferior—and that the liberals treat ideas as a cynical con game. "Control," to both camps, means the power to rule by physical force. Neither camp holds freedom as a value. The conservatives want to rule man's consciousness; the liberals, his body.