Hybrids: why does the leftist press not tell the truth?

Before I get into this, let me state clearly that I am virulently anti-SUV and gas hogs in general. Why we don't have clean diesels like they have in Europe is a mystery to me (actually not, but that is another blog entry) - but it is clear that we do not need the huge lumbering beasts that currently infest our transportation system. There is no possible rationale that holds water. But alternatives are not as clear as it might appear....

In March of this year, CNW Marketing Research (an Oregon based research firm -- American readers will understand Oregon to be hyper liberal as a general premise) came out with an analysis of hybrid vehicles from "dust to dust."

The results are nowhere near what you might think them to be:

Most energy efficient Cost per mile
Scion xB $0.48
Ford Escort $0.57
Jeep Wrangler $0.60
Chevrolet Tracker $0.69
Toyota Echo $0.70
Saturn Ion $0.71
Hyundai Elantra $0.72
Dodge Neon $0.73
Toyota Corolla $0.73
Scion xA $0.74

Least energy efficient Cost per mile
Maybach $11.58
VW Phaeton $11.21
Rolls-Royce $10.66
Bentley $10.56
Audi Allroad Quattro $5.60
Audi A8 $4.96
Audi A6 $4.96
Lexus LS 430 $4.73
Porsche Carrera GT $4.53
Acura NSX $4.45

Where are the hybrids? Well, not at the top of the most energy efficient list, that is where. How are these figures calculated? Well, they take into account all energy costs from the cost of shipping the raw materials to the plant where the steel was refined, to the cost of making the parts, to the cost of dealership staff commuting in to sell the cars.

Toyota Prius, the Honda Accord and Civic hybrids, the Honda Insight, and the Ford Escape hybrid–perform below average. For all vehicles, the average was $2.28 of energy consumption per mile. The Prius hybrid came in at $3.25 per mile, even though it is one of the highest-mileage cars in the world, getting about 45 miles per gallon in real-world driving. The Honda Accord hybrid consumed $3.30 of energy per mile, about the same as the hulking Ford Excursion SUV. The conventional Accord came in at just $2.18 per mile.

So what gives? The batteries cost a great deal more to produce and then eliminate at the demise date and also hybrids have LOTS more extra moving parts as compared to a standard gas engined car. And all that costs a lot of energy to produce. But compare this to the assertion of various green groups that if everyone in the US stopped driving SUVs and drove Prius-like cars, then we would not need to import foreign oil. What about that? That statistic/figure/pipe dream ONLY accounts for pumped gas usage and does not even address manufacturing and associated costs. Ahhhh.......

So if the cars are built in Japan, then we are clear? Not as a holistic global organism we aren't. The hybrid, then, is illusory -- a step to show that we are moving in the right direction, but NOT the panacea it appears to be. Which leads us into the next segment of this entry: why the lefty-Hollywood types are huge windbag hypocrites (not that you didn't already know that).

Julia Roberts was last week reported by the TMZ film buffs’ website to be the owner of a Toyota Prius, the first commercially produced car with a hybrid electric-petrol engine. TMZ also noted Roberts travelled by private jet from Chicago to Los Angeles, consuming 2,100 gallons of fuel. (London Times). Other Prius drivers with a fondness for private jets include Jennifer Lopez and Brad Pitt, whose recent private charter to Namibia with his lover, Angelina Jolie, burnt an estimated 11,000 gallons of jet fuel — “enough to take a Prius to the moon”, said TMZ.

George Clooney, one of Hollywood’s most outspoken liberal activists, owns an electric minicar called a Tango, which drives 135 miles on a full battery. But he recently took a private jet to Tokyo, a 5,500-mile trip which consumed 7,000 gallons of fuel.
Clooney’s spokesman said the actor often had “no control” over his schedule, which is dictated by studio commitments. Leonardo DiCaprio was one of the first celebrities to drive a Prius. He was also the latest star to fall foul of green scrutiny when the New York Post reported that he flew his mother, grandmother and girlfriend from Paris to Rome in a private jet for the Italian premiere of his latest film, The Departed.

So because you are out "of control" with respect to your schedule, you can justify your hypocrisy? No friends, that is not it. It is a classic "do as I say, don't do as I do." Like their heros, the Clintons. Somehow, their "star" status enables them to lead by example in buying a hybrid (which action turns out to be a net negative to our environment) and then conveniently ignore the environment when it means having to rub shoulders with the masses at the airport. No security search for Julia or George!! Leo thinks that Mom can't fly first on a public airline.

For people that can control their environment to the extent that only certain breads are flown in from their favorite baker in Paris, that there is always a particular brand of water available to them when filming in the Namibian desert, there seems to be a disconnect when it comes to traveling with the great unwashed. Sort of like social programs getting felons out on the streets earlier -- so long as they get arrested when they try to scale the walls at their Beverly Hills compounds, it is OK.

Contrast this with Warren Buffet who still lives in the same $31,500 house he bought some 35+ years ago. Who is the real hero here? Who SHOULD be on the cover of People to provide a role model for the American people Warren or George? Was America built on gadfly activism or hard work, savings and modesty? If you wonder about this, you need to re-evaluate your life. Now, quickly, before you vote in November.

Also, please read the comment and response to my last entry on torture. Thank you Audrey for commenting, I do appreciate intelligent commentary and you are right to suspect the weenies inside the beltway. But do not underestimate our enemies either.

Torture

The theory of when to apply the thumbscrews is being put to the test now. Right now.

Two days ago, a group of scumbag militia types in Baghdad kidnapped a US soldier at gun point, stuffed him into a car and took off. Today, during a sweep of Sadr city -- a Shiite stronghold (read hotbed of lunatics inspired, financed and armed by Iran), they found three of the suspects hiding inside of a mosque. Now apart from the blantant hypocrisy of hiding behind Islam that this represents, we are confronted with the hypothetical we dread: these guys know where the captive soldier is. We may not have very much time to find out where from the suspects. In fact, the news that the suspects are in captivity might have compromised that soldier's life already. "Suspects" is a pretty loose term in that we have pretty good intelligence of the abduction and even that the tips hotline identified mosques as the likely place where he might be found.

What to do? Start a polite interrogation to find out the whereabouts of the captive? Or wire the M-fers to some current, apply various psychotropic drugs, and ask some serious questions? There is a US life at stake here and these scumbags were caught hiding in a mosque -- which we typically DON'T SEARCH WHEN LOOKING FOR WEAPONS OR INSURGENTS (what are we totally f-in crazy ... that is like giving drug lords a safe house and only going after to street pushers ... no its worse, it is the same sort of bullshit that prevented us going after the Soviet ships and Chinese trains that poured weapons into Vietnam). We might not have even had time to wire them up -- word of capture spread quickly, better to pull out a Black and Decker on the spot and loosen up some lips. The brutality of the questioning would in no way affect the outcome or treatment of the captive: the enemy already enjoys sawing people's heads off with pocket knives -- slowly. That is not hyperbole, either. The internet -- heck even Al Jazeera -- is full of footage of that stuff happening.

Two relevant things here: (1) I don't and you should not give a rat's ass for the life of any of those in custody found hiding in a mosque -- they cheated and therefore should have forfeited any rights at all; and (2) the life of an American soldier is at stake.

And Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Windbag Kennedy, and a host of others would tell you that we have to abide by the rules. What rules, assholes? What rules? If not for your cowardice, your total failure to back our troops, petty political gamesmanship at the expense of American lives, these scumbag kidnappers would not be able to use mosques to hide in, stash weapons in and plot murder in. We would be able to assert CONTROL over designated territory.

Have we learned NOTHING from Vietnam? When you tie one hand behind your back as a result of "rules of engagement", you hand that engagement over to the enemy. Here as in Vietnam, they want to kill us so that they can drive us out -- to establish their own brand of oppression on the general population. Forget that hearts and minds stuff: their hearts are poisoned and minds narrow. We are infidel. You can't beat that. The only thing we can do is to train Muslims to police their own and prevent widespread murder ... for the benefit of any particular group's form of Islam.

And the mosque where they were found? Level it.

Dooval ... a disaster in the making

Let's be clear about this, Dooval is NOT the solution for this Commonwealth. While he is ahead in the polls not a single thing that he stands for, that he wants to do, is favored by the electorate. I'll put that another way: polls have shown that each individual suggestion and part of Dooval's platform has been soundly rejected by the people polled -- even those who intend to vote for him.

If you ask whether the average Joe out there wants a tax roll-back, on a 2 to 1 basis Massachusetts citizens have said "yes." If you ask whether they would support new taxes, 4 to 1 have said no. Dooval will not roll back the tax, and he WILL increase taxes. He refused to say that he wouldn't (both Mihos and Healy said definitively that they would not). And you know, he will HAVE TO RAISE TAXES. He has promised increases in benefits and pay to every single special interest group that you can think of. That can only come from our pockets. And you can be sure that this will not be a consumption tax, but a direct tax on those who already provide 70% of the Commonwealth's revenue (by other measures, 85%) the people in the top 10% of income earners -- the people who actually generate the wealth that benefits everyone in the Commonwealth. Corporate taxes will similarly rise forcing whatever headquarters of large companies that still remain in Mass to leave the Commonwealth.

Dooval wants to extend in-state benefits to illegals: tuition, housing, medical care, everything ... although only tuition has made it to the headlines. Crazy really, in that the huge burden is the other aspects of the benefits handout to come. And when polled, do Massholes want to extend this bounty to all comers? Resoundingly, "NO."

If you think that the People's Republic is out of touch with reality, then just wait until Dooval's policies are implemented: affirmative action will become the Affirmitive Diktat. White/Asian people will not be able to secure ANY public office, position or contract -- unless well hooked up through the Democrat system: graft. The state will become a haven for illegals: they WILL be allowed to get benefits and drivers licenses (the essential ID throughout the USA) through the administration, be allowed to vote locally, and receive medical care and in-state schooling fees -- or free -- if needy enough, which means bascially everyone. Who will pay? We will. Will illegals flock here from a bazillion other states? Yes. Who will pay? We will. Look for the tolls to be eliminated on the MassPike (promised years ago)? Dream on.

Illegals voting? Yup -- look for it. And at that point you can bet that the people who are actually citizens and pay taxes will NEVER be able to shuck off the yoke of paying. This place will become a petri dish for ultra-liberal politics and become the slum that New York City became under Ed Koch and David Dinkins. A place where the rule of law dissolves, where enfranchised criminals will run rampant -- a dangerous and vicious place of no rights for anyone but the illegals and criminals. Count on it. More police? Maybe, but they will not be able to do anything about crime -- Dooval will ensure that anything with a hint of "racism" will be prohibited, such as profiling, or sentencing guidelines taking repeat offenders out of the release loop.

Dooval is a protector of felons. Even when DNA evidence proves conclusively that the felon is guilty -- of heinous crimes -- he will advocate for their early release. But he will also take money (key concept)from Coca Cola to defend them against their (pretty clear) human rights abuses.

New Hampshire will thrive -- more people moving there to avoid confiscatory taxation, to have a say in local politics, to have the right to defend themselves against illegal aliens and violent criminals. Look for gun crime to INCREASE in Mass. Look for violent crimes such as robbery and muggings to increase, look for special wealth taxes on property and other taxes on the "rich". Are you rich? If you have a computer to read this, you are. If your house has increased in value to anything over $500,000 (nice three bedroom 2 bath in Somerville or Arlington), you will be part of the super wealthy. And do you think that with a Democrat controlled state senate and house of reps there is going to be anyone that says "no" to taxation and spending? That puts a limit to excess? This is scary.

I hear a giant sucking sound starting to come from Beacon Hill....

So why will Massachusetts vote for Dooval? Because they like him. Yup -- because he is a nice guy. Or at least appears to be a nice guy. Because as anyone who scratches the surface of what he stands for will find, he is NOT a nice guy. He is just as crooked as anyone to have stumped in this Commonwealth. A vicious hypocrite. He is a friend of Hillary and Bill -- two other people who are NOT nice. Who will squash you like a bug if you get in their way.

People WANT to vote for an educated black man to become our governor, even though he not a product of Massachusetts at all -- like Hillary, he is a carpet bagger. he is from Chicago. He is here to become governor because we are the only state where he could pull this off. We are the only state crazy enough to vote for someone who is against all our interests and beliefs. The only state where people are so reflexively Democrat that they will simply ignore what he stands for. Where people will nod and glow with the idea of electing a liberal minority candidate to offce -- "because it is time." Mihos and Healy are not nice people either -- the debates make this very clear. But they DO represent the polled interests of the citizens of Massachusetts and much to their amazement, they cannot get elected standing for what the citizens profess to want. They cannot believe that what matters is feeling, not fact. There is a suspension of reality happening here that could only happen here.

This is not a campaign about issues at all. It is about the world-reknown Masshole tendency to vote liberal, to take the liberal turn ... to avoid reality. Remember Dukakis? Mercifully, what flies in the Commonwealth generally does not in the USA at large. We also can't miss the fact that the press has created such an attitude of anti-Republican hate that Stalin could get elected as a humanitarian reformer.

We know you know, you know

tor·ture Pronunciation (tôrchr)
n.
1.
a. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
b. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish.
tr.v. tor·tured, tor·tur·ing, tor·tures
1. To subject (a person or an animal) to torture.
2. To bring great physical or mental pain upon (another). See Synonyms at afflict.
3. To twist or turn abnormally; distort: torture a rule to make it fit a case.

We in the West are said to abhor torture but our enemies practice it as standard operating procedure. We are "better" than they are ... or are supposed to be ... or maybe that is why they attack us?

Boosh yesterday signed into law a measure that would allow the executive branch to determine what torture is and what it is not. The idea is that this allow government operatives to extract information under federal guidelines (which will never be made public unless "someone" -- read DNC operative -- leaks it) and avoid legal liability for it. Good, it is not fair to task our soldiers and spies with the impossible and then hold them liable for following orders.

But then this law draws into the realm of public opinion the question: "what is torture?" And that, friends, is in the eye of the beholder.

The Loony-Left in this country regard a situation where detainees have to listen to the Red Hot Chili Peppers and have the lights on as torture. The Left in most places of western Europe follows this lead. But where the Loony Left are in power -- say in a third world country such as Venezuela, or Zambia or Zimbabwe, the Left are ardent practitioners of the ancient art of torture. Of course, the US and European Loony Left don't regard that as particularly important; the locals are just trying to cleanse the stain of capitalism out of their pure country.

Should we ask the UN? The same UN idiots who issued a report on American torture and inhuman conditions in Gitmo -- but failed even to visit it, instead relying on formal submissions by lawyers of the terrorist who are incarcerated there -- and who mostly come from countries with abysmal human rights records. The same two-faced apparatchiks who somehow fail ever to address their own countries'pecadillos, but then again, we know that denouncing the USA is what gets you ahead in international politics and the UN. Go to the entry archives of this blog -- I wrote a long one on that.

But is listening or being forced to listen to the Chili Peppers torture? Does it cause you excruciating or severe pain or anguish? It cannot be pyhsical in the truest sense of the word, although enough mental anguish could produce a physical response: vomiting, for example.

Does keeping the lights on to force sleep deprivation constitute torture? It would seem that the Left is pretty much unified that terror suspects need their sleep. Waterboarding -- where the subject thinks that he/she is going to die, but does not actually drown, seems to be more clearly in most minds as torture. But is is really torture and not the hyper-civilized weenie definition described above? Is having to stand naked infront of a dog really torture? Is humiliation of a male by a female guard torture -- of couse in the detainee's society he would instantly kill her for even looking insolently at him, let alone remarking on the insufficiency of his manhood. Is that torture?

Let's put it this way: IF YOU CANNOT CREATE AT LEAST SOME MENTAL ANGUISH (whatever "anguish" can be defined as) YOU WILL NOT GET THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED. So is it the position of the Loony-Left that we do not need information from our captives? Once caught, we ought to give them three squares, a nice comfy bed and a Qu'ran to leaf through at their leisure? How about pedicures? Because denial of liberty is enough to pay them back for plotting to murder our spouses and children? If we take the definition as broad as it appears, I would have to come down on the side of supporting "torture." That is not to say that I approve of physical harm (in general) -- I have to believe that we can get what we need without maiming someone.

Alan Dershowitz -- a notorious lefty constitutional lawyer puts the whole thing in context like this: say the police have captured an evil person. That evil person has placed your child in a box and buried it somewhere that only he/she knows. That evil person has given enough information or we have enough evidence to show that we have the right person in custody. That child has about an hour to live before the air runs out. What wouldn't you allow the police to do to that person in order to save the child? Is there ANYTHING that you would not allow to happen to the evil person if you though that the information might issue forth as a result of it?

There are two answers to the above situation: (1) an admission that you would do anything; and (2) a lie. If you, the reader do not have children, then you might not be qualified to answer -- not yet having experienced that particular element in the growth of humanity. In my case, it is not even a question of what I would let the police do, there is nothing I would not do myself to extract the information. The great American obsession with power tools.... The IRA favored Black and Deckers.

So, how is it that the Loony Left will let YOUR children die at the hands of terrorists, noting that the Loony Left often do not have children, and only extremely rarely have children in the armed forces -- let alone enlist themselves. Is it OK for your children to die for a (their) matter of principle? Is it a red state - blue state thing?

Certain idiots have come forward to say that coercive interrogation techniques do not work, that they do not yield good/reliable information. Bullshit. That notion is premised on the idea that a person in pain (pyhsical or mental) will say anything to stop it. While that is true, the ancient art would not be so ancient if skilled practitioners were not able to extract what was wanted. Do you think that the KGB and the Nazis wasted their time with it, or that they got results? (OOOOoooh we don't want to be like them!!!! No, instead you want our soldiers and civilians to die.)

All this sets up a slippery slope, of course. Does this mean that I suggest that the government can use torture at any time to anyone without oversight, without guidelines as to when it might be required? Difficult indeed. It leads to the same inquiry used to arrest someone in the criminal sense: probable cause. Who can we trust to determine probable cause? A judge? Someone appointed by Clinton? Clearly not. Perhaps a ten or twenty point test of evidence: you catch an Person/Iraqi/Insurgent running away from a spot in the desert where a US Humvee just blew up ... you have motive, proximity, consciousness of guilt, and no other likely suspect (you are in the desert!!). You let him go, you are consigning others to death. Better to find out what he knows about plans for other hits -- he didn't just get his explosives and training to use the IED in a vacuum. Is there urgency here? Is this a kid-in-a-box situation requiring extreme measures? Probably not, but say you caught him about to do the deed with an RC detonator in his hand ... what then? Or he was caught with binoculars about 500 yards away waiting for the explosion that by the grace of God did not happen ... what then? Do you have to go to a US federal judge to ask what he thinks -- like this asshole Koeltl who let the terrorist lawyer off with 28 months? The poor field commander -- likely a second lieutenant needs to know if his boys are at risk or about to run into an ambush -- he needs information right then. Probable cause? The people about to die are other people's children. As to the fact that the terrorist is someone's child too ... too damn bad. They are the enemy and want to kill us, we are not out there trying to kill them. As to why we are there ... that is NOT relevant to the issue at hand.

Some idiot on the radio yesterday called into a show to say that the whole threat situation is overdone -- the Nancy Pelosi theory -- and that as evidence he pointed out that there has been no attack in 5 years. Clearly the gent didn't regard London or Madrid as worth including and that absence in the US of successful attacks was happenstance. These are the people that vote for the Pelosi crew who want your children to die because terrorists need their sleep.

Oil prices ... a bad dream or ...

Oil prices keep slipping, just when everyone thought that they would continue to rise to $100 per barrel. So what happened? Or what is going to happen?

The American Left will tell you that this is all part of the vast right wing conspiracy (the same folks that forced the Clintons to commit perjury multiple times) purposely driving the prices down for the election so that Republicans can be elected again. The Left also believe that the oil companies are hand in hand with the Booshies in a vast plot to screw every last dollar out of the pockets of the honest, hard-working Democrat. Uh huh. They point to the VAST profits made by the oil companies in the last price run-up as evidence that the plot exists....

Some truths:

(1) PRICE CONTROL. The oil companies do not control the price of oil -- that is a market price that is dictated by supply and demand, tempered (or irritated) by speculation. If the oil companies controlled all the means of production, that is, if they owned the oil wells and everything else upstream, then it would be a fair complaint. But they don't -- the wells are owned by parties WHO DO NOT HAVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE US (or Europe or any other non-OPEC country)at heart or in their plans.

The oil producers -- the people from whom the oil companies buy their raw materials -- want to extract the maximum amount of money from their declining resources. They understand that too great a price shock, and demand will decline and users will be forced to seek alternative sources. That is NOT what they want. They are like heroin dealers: a well hooked client is the best client.

A caveat: some producers are also oil companies -- take CITGO for example. That is Venezuela and in this case, the government is behind the whole operation, from the ground to your gas tank. You would be a complete idiot to assume that they are part of any right wing conspiracy, no matter how vast or tiny. They want to continue to sell their product (think heroin) to the US to mess us up as badly as they can. They continue to interfere with local domestic politics to humiliate the Boosh government and Americans as much as possible. Lukoil -- that is the Russians. And the same applies. In both cases, they DO control the prices and want to jack them up as far as the market will bear. To that end they are loudly calling for OPEC production decreases to support the price: it is easy to prance around telling the world that the US president is the devil when your pockets are lined with easy petrodollars. Not so easy when your country is bankrupt. Think about spending too much on buying votes with useless social programs and then not being able to fund them: then you BLAME the Americans for the failures caused by their unkind desire to pay less for their oil (which you try to keep them hooked on). Either way, on the surface, you can make the US look bad ... provided nobody tells the great unwashed, Lenin's useful idiots, that they may be their own worst enemies. And by that time the petro-government's leaders will have stashed enough graft away in foreign climes to live comfortably for ever.

(2) OIL COMPANY PROFITS. By anyone's measure, it is unconscionable when the rest of the world is feeling the pinch. But when it is not understood, it makes them look complicit. Folks, oil companies take a margin, say 5% of the base material cost to them and pass the mark-up on to you. The trouble is that there is a lag involved that works only one way -- against you. You see, if the oil that they bought for $50 per barrel is suddenly worth $75 per barrel, they will charge you the same 5% on $75 -- and that is relatively a lot more money than the 5% at $50. Something like 50% more. So your $5 billion profit goes to $7.5 billion. AND, this is the windfall, they also pocket the extra $25 per barrel ... they charge you the current high price for something that they paid a lot less for. That is where sudden spikes in profit come from. They are in business to make money, not provide a service to the people. If they were public minded, they would only charge more for the gasoline as the more expensive oil comes on stream. But instead, it is overnight. You cannot prove a conspiracy or a plot here, because there isn't one. Any fool can calculate what gas WILL cost given a new high spot price for oil, and that is what you pay. Everyone in the business understands this without having to be told it. If CITGO or Lukoil was really interested in our welfare, they'd act differently and pass increased costs along only the new product went downstream. But as we have seen, they cannot be part of any conspiracy and they are just as interested in making cash as Exxon.

When oil prices drop, due to decreasing tensions in the Middle East and other speculative market forces, the price of gas only drops as slowly as the oil companies can manage based on current spot prices. AND, the cheap oil for which we were gouged earlier has been processed and sold. So the oil companies are concerned about keeping their margin only.

(3) SPECULATION. The world is full of energy traders have a great deal of influence on the current price of oil. When the traders perceive that there might be a risk to the supply of oil, they buy futures contracts and other contracts for forward delivery to bet that prices will be higher before they have to take delivery: they will then sell the contracts back to the market which consists of oil companies and other end-users (countries such as China, etc.). Some energy companies also have refining capacity, and only sell the product on to final distributors or large scale end users (airlines, industry, etc.).

When there is price overshoot such as the recent run-up, that is, where prices were driven by speculation to a point that had no basis in supply reality, there exists the potential for a collapse. Now, did the Booshies purposely drive the prices up (to help their friends the oil companies) just so that they could manipulate the market so that prices could crash in front of the election? That is what the Lefties would have you believe: yup, the government has control of Iranian meddling in Iraq, Al Qaeda helped up drive up the prices because they wanted Boosh to look good come election time, and Hugo Chavez and Putin just knew that life would be easier with Boosh fully empowered with GOP control over both houses of Congress. And if you believe those ideas, you need a enema through your nostrils, because we KNOW what you have inside your cranium.

(4) THE REAL CONSPIRACY. Of course, there is a lot to more to say about this ... but the basics are as described above. Would I like to charge a windfall tax to the oil companies? Yup, because you can be SURE that they were doing their level best to boost the price of oil. They are clearly not working in the best interests of our country or anyone else's -- except the oil suppliers: Arab states, Venezuela, Russia, Nigeria ... just listing them, you get the impression of the vilest odor ever. That is, America's richest companies are in practice enemies of the state. But at least some of the shareholders are also American -- it is only where we look at CITGO and Lukoil, etc., that we really see nothing but negatives for the US. We should boycott them as a nation: we don't want your oil. Ultimately, we need to break the oil habit for the sake of national security and seize the oil companies research assets for alternative sources of energy. They claim to be "energy companies" ... but the truth is far from that: they are coporate beings dedicated to the American enslavement to whatver source of energy that they can hook us on and profit from.

They EMPHATICALLY do not want to see us develop nuclear energy to wean us from non-renewable energy in their control. They are the same companies that bought out the Red Line in Los Angeles and replaced electric trams with "modern, clean and efficient [diesel] buses." A tip of the hat to their co-conspirator, GM. They also want to avoid windfarms (except where they own the patents to the technology), hydro power, tidal power and any other form of clean renewable energy. Oil sands are GOOD because they still control the basics. Coal is good, because that will devolve into the oil cabal. Electric cars powered by atomic fission are bad -- do you think that it is a co-incidence that American auto companies are so far behind in bringing that technology to market?

Let me list the ways...

I received a complaint about the following blog -- the comment was that this descends into a rave, a ranting about something that is lacking in reason and not well thought out. Accordingly, if you hold Cambridge and Cantabrigians dear DO NOT READ ONWARDS. I WILL APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE IF THIS OFFENDS YOU. READ OTHER ENTRIES IN MY BLOG

Well. So what?

That I hate Cambridge -- Massachusetts, that is. This is by no means a complete listing, rather a mere smidgeon, a fleeting taste.

First: why is it that Cantabrigians feel the need to walk across the street without looking? They just step out from between parked cars onto a cross walk and proceed across. No self-preservation involved. Just walk. If you happen to have to brake hard to avoid smearing some of the sebaceous scum on you car, they make a point of casting a brief glare, then walking even more slowly. I wish that they'd travel to Paris, or Rome ... or even Detroit. But then they don't travel, secure in the knowledge that what they have been told about the rest of the world is true, and if not left-wing and PC, then what was said was a vicious lie spread by the vast right-wing conspiracy.

Second: they drive Volvos. Even the moderate inhabitants of the People's Republic drive Volvos -- nice, new, shiny Volvos ... but Volvos. Newer Volvos are actually pretty good cars, and decent to drive ... but given the vast numbers of cars that fit that requirement, why Volvo? They are not cheap. They are not vastly safer than the rest of the automotive universe -- and if the car in question is a Volvo XC90 SUV, probably a lot more dangerous than some. So why do it? One thing is that this way you can drive a nice car and avoid getting it keyed by some liberal thug punishing the oppressive, capitalist pigs. Because it is a Volvo (or any hybrid), you are safe ... unlike the masochist driving a BMW which is the same sort of self abuse as throwing bucket of acid over your own car. But what really gets me is that the uber-greens, the absolute pinnacle of liberal granola-dom drive OLD Volvos. 244's and rusty 740s. Duval Patrick sticker, rainbow decals, Kerry-Edwards still boldly displayed ... and coughing out huge clouds of blue smoke. The kind of smoke that makes you sick. There is just something wrong with the juxtaposition of hyper-environmentalism and a gas-guzzling pollution machine. I don't care if you claim that they only drive this because they are poor -- it is FAR more than that. It is a counter-culture badge of merit -- and a startling example of how political beliefs are primary over reason and practice in the Republic.

Third: nobody EVER lets anyone in through traffic in Cambridge. For such a socially conscious group of bleeding hearts -- well those hearts seem to turn to stone on the road. Hairy armpit Annie will cut you off and back up over you to ensure that she gets to the parking space in front of you or anyone else, particularly when you were already trying to back in before she U-turned across the road to try and snag the space. Or even simply be first at the light. It doesn't matter how slight the perceived advantage might be, the politically stickered car driver will "fight for his/her rights!!"

Fourth: why can't anyone in Cambridge be concerned with personal grooming? Does concern with hygene preclude liberal political beliefs? This has been a theme since the days of the hippie, but whereas most of the world has come to realize that you don't have to smell like a ferret to be taken seriously, Cantabrigians cultivate an evil-smelling funk. And some guys look good with beards -- properly trimmed and cared-for, they can look great. But when you effect the neo-Che look in terms of facial hair, you DO prove that you are not concerned with what others think of you ... and that in turn evidences a certain self-absorption which precludes actually listening to someone else and subjecting your own views to critical analysis in the light of the world at large. Ladies: if you are going grey ... do something about it. Get a haircut, dye it, trim it, something. Floppy clothes, frumpy hair, Birkenstocks, lack of make-up and a fat ass inside a muumuu do nothing to show that you care about yourself. Consider: if you and your type get into real power, they will attempt to negotiate with the Imams and Mullahs ... all the while more women are repressed into servitude and terror. The women so consigned will not have the option to dress neatly, or express themselves in appearance or dress or anything else. Perhaps you simply don't care about yourself and by extension, other women either. You are not successfully telling the world at large that you are not bothered by such shallow and trivial things as looking good, you are merely showing the world that you don't care at all.

Fifth: brainwashed children. Children should not be running around spouting Doo-vile's campaign rubbish as "truth." Not only has this cretin not actually told us anything concrete that he would do, he misstates and falsely characterizes everything that others have done and are tyring to do. And little Che clones run around proclaiming him to be the saviour of Massachusetts. For goodness sake, let them grow up to make their own conclusions and defend their own beliefs, not the DNC party line (if I were writing about some whacko-reglious right wing settlement ... say Salt Lake City, I'd say the same thing to them).

Sixth: I've written about this before, but ... bike riders. I rode a bike all over Europe. I've put serious miles on a frame driven by pedals and eaten some road pizza. But the number of bike riders in Cambridge who evidently don't want to see tomorrow is staggering. And I don't want to be the person that obliges them -- my insurance would not like it and nor would my car. I have hopes that the people who regularly risk their miserable butts will leave the area, move to South Carolina or some such and grow up. But I fear that a great many of them will continue to wallow in political ignorance in the great cocoon of liberal thought -- the People's Republic. Recently the cyclists that have really made me wonder are the professorial types: grey hair, tweed jacket (no, really!!), clipped trouser legs, and a helmet with silly little mirrors taped to either side of it. No problem if you obey traffic laws, stay to bike lanes and look out for cars ... but the get-up seems to instill a form of bravado that is totally out of place when threading a fragile machine, on which you have entrusted your life, through corridors of SUVs, pick-ups and crazy white vans. Old dude: lissen up, yo! You gonna get hurt!! Give it up!! And most of all, stay the heck away from me!!!!

Seventh: Whole Foods (and just about any other market or palce where people gather to compete in shopping). Those granolas are bent on getting the tenderest vittles ... before you do. Never have I been so often elbowed, shoved, stepped on etc., as in Cambridge. Sort of figures though: the only groups of people you will EVER see shout down others trying to make a speech are far-lefties in the USA and whacko-religious types elsewhere -- just think about it. A far lefty can give a speech full of hate and venom and receive applause and cheers. A conservative can make a speech reporting the statistical analysis of showing the correlation of unwanted pregancy to education and cultural background and receive death threats, not to mention hardly being able to make the speech in the first place. Harvard gets a holocaust denying ex-Iranian president, a man who calls for the extermination of Israel and who presided over executions for ideological grounds and that is OK by the loonyleft in Cambridge. Larry Summer states that there may be a statistical and biological basis for one sex having an advantage in sciences and he gets led to the figurative post without a blindfold. Or a trial, or a hearing of any sort. One only presumes that the crazies would have done the actual deed, given a chance.

I hate the place.

Seoul Morons

“Let’s face the reality: North Korea is a nuclear power and it won’t be easy to change that,” said Moon Chung In, a professor of political science who is also an ambassador at large for the South Korean Government. “We could have prevented it, but the US would not. Now we’ve got to learn how to live with it.” So sayeth the appeasement monkeys living south of the DMZ.

Given that NK would not engage in talks with the US with all relevant parties around the table (SK, Japan, China and Russia), and the US would not engage NK alone (really what the F$%^& do we have to do with this anyway except to provide SK with a defense shield against the North), the South now holds us responsible that the paranoid troll at the helm of the good terrorist state lollipop decided to pop a nuke -- if it fact is was one at all. This is denial of reality and responsibility so profound that it is breathtaking. WE DON'T LIVE THERE ... YOU DO. We bailed your miserable asses out in the early 1950's and have paid richly for that ever since. Stand up and do something chickenshits!!!

BOOOOOM

North Korea announced 20 minutes ago that it successfully performed a nuclear test ... that is, it exploded a bomb underground. Whoop-dee-do-shit.

Now Japan will arm. China will have a frikkin infarction over a nuked Japan (although they secretly can't believe that they don't already have a hundred or so safely tucked away), South Korea has to come to the conclusion that they have been wrong all along with their sunshine policy and the American Appeasment Monkeys (DNC) has to come to the conclusion tha Bill the God Clinton was a f-ing idiot to believe them in 1994.

Why?

Could it be that the harvest in NK is even worse than thought and that there might be an implosion caused by millions of starving Koreans? Scary thought that: start a war because otherwise the whole house of cards collapses. It might even if they successfully invade the South. Independent armies rolling around setting up fuedal territories? Not so crazy. The Chinese? Maybe take a piece of NK with them too? BUt what they really do not want is to fight warlords bent on a piece of Chinese pie and lots of starving peasants to unload on them. This is a disaster for the Chinese. Long protective of the rat-assed Kim, they now look sort of foolish in that their best efforts to pressurize Kim failed miserably. Is Kim even in control? Who knows?

Of course NK claims it performed the test against a possible invasion by the US ... but perhaps to show that we have them and will use them if you mess with us doing what we intend ... or need ... to do. Like take food.

Think about Japan ... they know that there are a bunch of Taepodongs aimed them and various SCUD-2s and sundry other crap. You gotta believe that they will respond. They have to ... the Koreans (maybe justly) HATE the Japanese.

Of course, the NKs have said that they will not use these offensively, but then they denied making them at all for about 10 years, too. They also claim that these will be used for peaceful purposes ... name me just one "peaceful" use of a nuclear explosion anywhere. Just one. Right ... you can't. Although I guess you could blow a mountain out of the way to create hydro-electric power ... dunno about the fall-out though.

Folks, yet another genie is out of the bag.

Also, stay tuned for a civil war among the Palestinians: Hamas vs. Fatah. In the Hamas corner, Hezboohah, Syria, Iran and sundry Shi-ite rabble rousers. On the Fatah side, Jordan, Egypt and the Sunni Mob. Promises to raise the stakes in ugliness to new heights.

Overdue update

Dooval is just a lying toad. So it turns out that not only has he written to the parole board (twice) and allowed a published letter of recommendation on a website (since removed) supporting a convicted rapist, he also donated money to provide for DNA testing to exonerate the man. Of course, he could remember none of this -- he blamed his staff for not checking up on this matter before denying all of the above. But then generously "took the blame" for their failure. What? That is saying that you didn't do it, others did. The trouble is, YOU DID LIE.

Why not, you ask? Why not spend money to exonerate a potentially innocent man? Well, you see, this particular case was not even close. Dooval only initially decided to get involved because he thought that racism might have been involved in the decision to prosecute, not that the evidence was weak.

Dooval also turns out to have been the NAACP appellate advocate for an ADMITTED cop killer in Florida. Dude gets pulled over by a state trooper there and pumps five into the trooper from point blank. Got his sentence reduced. THAT is why cops look nervous when pulling over skeezy looking people: they are not racist or against hippies, druggies, long hairs, latinos, rednecks, etc. per se ... they are just worried about getting their ass shot off. AND the people that are statistically most likely to do that are members of the above list. Call that profiling or whatever the crap you will (and you liberals will no doubt bemoan the fascist cops), but when it is your life on the line -- personally -- you will do what you can to prevent its loss. Liberals might say that those people shouldn't be cops in that case if they can't take the heat. But I might remind them that if it wasn't for cops, their liberal asses would be the prime targets for gun wielding thugs looking for an easy mark (us conservative / independents just might have a 12 gauge semi under the seat, in the closet, etc.).

Or course liberals would then whine that the government isn't protecting "the people" and that it is the guns that make them unsafe, the guns supplied by the radical right. News flash: crooks will get guns. Unless you make crime unacceptable, you will get crime. Lots of people apparently adhere to the maxim "I robbed the bank because that is where the money is." (For my UK readers -- I have a few -- please note that Uk crooks, in particular your lovely refugee/asylum seekers, have plenty of guns.)

I am all for banning handguns outright, except for law enforcement and the military: you get caught with one, you do hard time, no exceptions. I want to preserve the right of Americans to blow in half the SOB who comes to burgle, rape and kidnap members their families. None of this Masshole crap that the criminal has rights. Provided the creep is in your house, you should have the right to terminate him, right there and then. Outside the house, no right to terminate except in defense of your life -- but since you, the law abiding citizen would have no handgun, you would be walking around with a legal racked and loaded 12 gauge semi, it is unlikely that someone is going to threaten your life. In fact, the very act of carrying it would likely cause someone else to feel threatened -- but since they would be on your property, tough. Off of your property, guns of any form may only be used for hunting or target shooting and you need to be on your way too or from that purpose and be able to prove it.

I stray. The thing is, do you want that advocate, so uniquely motivated by race and his notions of racial equality, to the exclusion of reality and your wellfare, as your governor? His slogan "together we can" ... do what? Free the felons, oppressed by the white, slave-owning majority? Cut a check to every minority family because of past sins of other people's ancestors (mine were peaceably starving in peat bogs)? Look what the people of New Orleans did with their checks: bought plasma TVs (that is not mere allegation folks, it is truth). So when Dooval picks your Masshole pockets, you rich, unworthy-capitalist-oppressor, you may have a pretty darn good idea where the money is going to go. Not that he is telling you anything before the election -- and why would he? You might just wake up.

The Airbus A380 sucks more wind. So far the airlines that ordered it are just collecting checks from the builder for non-delivery. Boeing must be loving this. And it turns out that Branson, Quantas and Emirates are looking seriously at a stretched version of the 747, the 747-800 as a stop gap. That might be gamesmanship, but it might also be real.

And North Korea. Friends, the cat that made a treaty/agreement with Kims in 1994 was the (let's say this out loud) CLINTON administration. You see Bill, thought he could trust a paranoid schizophrenic. Someone that starved a whole nation for the privilege of fielding a million man army. Silly Bill. Now they are going to test a nuke and there is little that anyone can do to prevent it. And why, actually, do they want to prevent it. He claims he has them, he can therefore send them to his allies in the Taliban and Hamas (remember those ship loads of weapons that Arafat denied he knew about, even though his closest aides were more or less on the shipping manifests and bills of lading?), as well as anyone else in the world. Would exploding one really change that much except to finally dispell all the bullpoop that the South Koreans and appeasement wonks (that would include most US liberals and Democrats) --oh, that might be it. If they do it, then they are all proven wrong.... As if the threat to do it is not proof by itself.

So let's say they blow one up this weekend. Japan will then decide that they need them too. My guess is that they already have warheads (very nicely miniaturized, indeed) all ready to go, just lacking some enriched plutonium -- that is unless they have not already figured out a way to use household products available at a spuermarket. So they fire up the enrichment process, and voila, 6 months later they have an arsenal. Of course, they will claim it will take years and they have to launch a whole program, etc. But remember folks, these are the people who brought you the walkman, the CD (with Philips), excellent HD TVs, flat panels for your watch ... and Pearl Harbor. That program is ready to go. Now.

The South Koreans will truly be in the poop up to their eyebrows. For so many years they have followed the "sunshine" policy. The students have rioted on an annual basis for North Korean rights and to enforce the idea that the North really has peaceful intentions (nice irony there). The North paid their agents handsomely for this. And it worked. South Korea became an industrial giant under the US umbrella of safety -- and bit that hand so many times, it looks more like mush. What now? There is only one option, and that is for the South to arm to the teeth and spend money to do so that previously we subsidized. We should leave the South. Just pick up and go. Now that would put the cat among the pigeons!!

The world needs to cut them off to starve them out. China has to get on board with the fact that complete lunatics are in the North -- crazies that in effect threaten their well-being too. Whether they will or not is a big question, and if they run true to form they will not do what is needed for the good of the world. The US is only really threatened in that our sources of those Samsung LCD TVs might vanish. The notion that we are more at risk because they "got the bomb" is a joke. The vast numbers of ex-Soviet tactical nukes that are unaccounted for are a much greater threat because they are not under the control of a government, however crazy. They are more than likely for sale unerneath a tarp in the back of some Lada in one of the 'Stans.

And while we are at it, we know Pakistan has them. We know that Pakistan also assists the Taliban, while pretending to be our friends. We know that Pakistan is the center for Al Qaeda madrassas and training centers. Why the hell are we worried about a crazy with a bad perm and not the tens of thousands of far out lunatic crazies bent and a personal interview with Allah? If Kim launched a nuke at us, or Japan, we would be perfectly entitled to level the place. Russia and China would step back and take a deep sigh of relief -- while making lots of noise about the terrible thing that we did just because they shot a few nukes at us. Contrast that with our inability to do poop if a Paki bomb were to get loose. What, nuke Lahore? Declare formal war on all of Islam? Kim is that weirdo kid in the playground that wants to be noticed, but that everyone shies away from because he is too creepy. His country too.

Since in my estimation the detonation of a nuke by Kim will do absolutely nothing to change anything in real terms, let him have a go. The political fall-out in the West will be funny to watch.