We're Using Food as Biofuel, Why, Again?

The insanity just gets more insane.

We're using food as fuel in an attempt to appease the dread goddess Gaia, who, in her benevolence, has repaid our worship in the form of a drought. Corn prices are going through the roof as a result. This will result in an unnecessary spike in prices of meat and everything else that corn feeds. Watch the video in the link (it's short) to get a quick lesson in where the corn crop goes.

Now ask yourself, why wouldn't government lift the mandate for corn fuel (ethanol) during a drought? Normal people would do such a common sense thing. But if your goal is to keep the contributions from the fringe radical environmentalist groups coming in, those are the people you must please in order to keep your power, normal people be damned.

There is no need for this, given that we've discovered more oil beneath American soil than the whole middle East.

We should be using oil, not food, for fuel.

Lord Monckton Gets It Right - Environmentalism is the New Face of Communism

Good Monday morning, y'all.

I had originally planned to ask a question of you today. Consider it a bit of mental homework if you will: Why doesn't anyone ask "Why?" these days?

It seems that intellectual curiosity is on the wane. Far too many otherwise intelligent people lack this one vital part of their thinking process. The Ancient Thinkers had this quality, and for a long while, their teachings of this timeless question were always present in our modern society. Indeed, I would propose that our modern societies were built upon the answers to their intellectual curiosity.

However, this recognition of ageless truths seems to be in decline for reasons I have yet to fathom. Our educational system relies less and less on teaching children how to learn and tends to focus instead on whatever socially popular theories are currently floating about. The emphasis appears to me to be misplaced: hard truth, that which has remained constant throughout our recorded history, is discarded in favor of consensus.

Nowhere is this more evident than in science classes. Studies of the laws of physics has been displaced in recent years with what I'd call "consensus science." In this strange, new discipline, long-held accurate descriptions of the world around us and the various physical laws that guide it take a back seat to a form of crowdsourcing wherein an organized group of scientists are paid to agree on an erroneous, yet-to-be-proven theory, and this is promoted as a fact.

I'm old enough to remember what was called the "Scientific Method" of research. It was and remains basic and easy to grasp: the first step was to observe a phenomenon, the second step was to experiment based upon the results of the observation to test the validity of the observation to see if the results could be duplicated. Simple enough.

However, there is a trend these days to forward outrageous theories that not so long ago would have gotten you laughed out of the bar. If you said that the human race had the capability of affecting the climate of the whole planet, you would have rightly been considered on the edge of sanity. Yet, this preposterous idea is the foundation for a worldwide movement today called "environmentalism."

Granted, it has taken us a while to begin to question this premise, but question it we have. And those of us who have dared to question something that we know innately to be false have been excoriated, denigrated, and called any and every name you can think of. That this is so proves that those who are advancing this hoax is proof enough that their entire movement is bullshit.

But I digress. I'd almost forgotten how to do that.

In this unholy marriage of "science" and politics, the environmental movement has become the shiny new face of an ancient enemy, Totalitarianism (or Communism or Progressivism).  In the following video from Trevor Loudon's site, Lord Christopher Monkton examines this movement and its attempt to impose a One World Government on us in the name of Goddess Mother Earth. Entitled Lord Monkton on Agenda 21 and Environmental Marxism, it's well worth your time to view.

If Agenda 21 rings a bell, it's because I've written about it before here. I would recommend that you read that post and watch the accompanying video if you're unfamiliar with it.

Anyway, back to my original question. Here's a video of someone who has the intellectual curiosity to ask "Why?" and the capacity to understand the answer.

Bless you, Lord Monkton. The world needs more men like you.

Public Parks Are No Longer Public

They told me if I voted Republican, we'd be living in a police state where everyone has lost their freedom.

They were right.

Roping off national parks to the public and limiting opportunities for recreation, which in some cases were at the request of environmental groups, is a growing trend that lawmakers say they will examine during an oversight hearing of a House Resources subcommittee on April 27.

Examine? I have a better idea: how about rescinding whatever ridiculous Diktat from the Obama administration caused this, and firing everyone who is responsible for it.

When did we start allowing unaccountable, unelected, radical, left-wing environmental wackos to run our country?

(h/t Matt Drudge)

Exposing "Nature Fakers" in the Modern Environmental Movement

Whilst surfing the web this morning, I found this article from the Hoover Institution over at Instapundit. It's quite good and shows how long radical environmentalists have been at war with capitalism and civilization. It also deconstructs the two myths that the radical, far-left, anti-human Green Nazis depend on, the Noble Savage and the Golden Age.

Here's a sample:

A pleasing and sentimental “nature fakery” is dangerous when it fuels policies that should be based on a rational cost-benefit analysis, and that should put people and their flourishing first. Rather than pleasing myths, we need what environmental writer Gregg Easterbrook calls “ecorealism,” the sober conviction “that logic, not sentiment, is the best tool for safeguarding nature,” and that an “accurate understanding of the actual state of the environment will serve the Earth better than expressions of panic.”

Ahhh, logic and the truth. Two things in short supply in Washington.

As Dr. Reynolds would say, were he here, is "Read the whole thing" and "More of this, please."

Green News and a Couple of Observations

Here's one jobs plan that definitely hasn't worked: "green jobs."

Here's why. They'll make you crazy.

Plus, it's old, too. They were discussing this back in Jefferson's day.

There might be something affecting our climate besides man. Imagine, if you will, a giant star in close proximity to Earth, that could generate a great amount of heat, and the amount of heat it generated varied...

All seriousness aside, here's something I've been wondering about for quite some time. As I understand it, man-made climate change theory depends upon a layer of gas called the Ozone Layer. When I remember back to physics class, I vaguely remember being told that the only way gasses could stratify was if they were completely still.

Since the atmosphere is in constant motion, I can't see how they could separate into layers. Since the atmosphere is constantly being disturbed by meteorites before they can burn up, that equates to a continuous stirring of the atmosphere, something that, to me at least, that prevents gasses from settling into a layer.

I could be wrong, but if anyone else knows more, I'd appreciate a link to in the comments.

The bottom line is that the actions of man only contribute to change in a small way, locally and only temporarily. There's still a lot left to learn about the planet and we haven't even gotten close to exploring the entire thing, nor documenting all of the critters here.

We would do well to heed some sage advice, "Don't panic."

While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Obama Raids Gibson Guitars

There’s a word for this, if I can just think of it…

On August 24, 2011, around 8:45 a.m. CDT, agents for the federal government executed four search warrants on Gibson’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis and seized several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. Gibson had to cease its manufacturing operations and send workers home for the day, while armed agents executed the search warrants. Gibson has fully cooperated with the execution of the search warrants.


The Federal Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. has suggested that the use of wood from India that is not finished by Indian workers is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because it is the Justice Department’s interpretation of a law in India. (If the same wood from the same tree was finished by Indian workers, the material would be legal.) This action was taken without the support and consent of the government in India.

Sooooo, let me see if I have this straight: Eric Holder’s Justice Department is upholding Indian law here in America while refusing to enforce America’s own immigration law at the Mexican border?

And this makes sense on which planet, again?

And it gets worse: this isn’t the first time Gibson Guitars has been the subject of a federal raid. It also happened way back in 2009. As the above quote states, this isn’t about the illegal use of an exotic, protected wood -

The wood the Government seized on August 24 is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier and is FSC Controlled, meaning that the wood complies with the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council, which is an industry-recognized and independent, not-for-profit organization established to promote responsible management of the world’s forests. FSC Controlled Wood standards require, among other things, that the wood not be illegally harvested and not be harvested in violation of traditional and civil rights. See www.fsc.org for more information. Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards.

OK, no issue there. It’s readily apparent that Gibson is an environmentally responsible company, so why the raid?

Well, when you look at some other American guitar companies, the answer becomes a bit more clear…

Putting aside the presumably misguided motivation to enforce another sovereign nation’s laws, why would a homegrown American company be the target of the Department of Justice in the first place?


It’s worth pointing out that Henry E. Juszkiewicz, Gibson’s Chief Executive Officer, is a donor to a couple of Republican politicians. According to the Open Secrets database, Juszkiewicz donated $2000 to Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN07) last year, as well as $1500 each to Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN). Juszkiewicz also has donated $10,000 to the Consumer Electronics Association, a PAC that contributed $92.5k to Republican candidates last year, as opposed to $72k to Democrats. (The CEA did, however, contribute more to Democrats in the 2008 election cycle.)

Hmm, this sounds rather Nixonian in tone and appears to be politically motivated, but that's perfectly fine as long as a Democrat is President. As usual, there’s more to this story.

One of Gibson’s leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Company. The C.E.O., Chris Martin IV, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the DNC over the past couple of election cycles. According to C.F. Martin’s catalog, several of their guitars contain “East Indian Rosewood.” In case you were wondering, that is the exact same wood in at least ten of Gibson’s guitars.


The Gibson facility wasn’t raided over allegations of tax evasion, charges of embezzlement, or even something as drab as child labor. Not even close. It was raided over what the DOJ deems an inability to follow a vague domestic trade law in India (one that apparently the Indian government didn’t seem too concerned about enforcing) regarding a specific type of wood. Not illegal wood, just wood with obscenely specific procedural guidelines.


Stand with Gibson: They have the Law on their side, just not the government.

Here’s one last thing you should know. If you have an antique guitar and are thinking of traveling abroad or even to Canada with it, you could be a criminal if you can’t verify, in writing, where every piece of it came from.

Why would the government use armed agents to attack one of the few major manufacturers of anything remaining in the United States? The political motivations for such an action are outside the scope of this article, but the justification for the action is the Lacey Act, which regulates the importation of plants, animals, and products thereof into the United States. The Lacey Act effectively permits wooden musical instruments to be seized indefinitely, without compensation, and places the burden of proof on the owner, not the government. Do you own an $11,000 2011 Gibson Eric Clapton Edition Les Paul? Want to take it to Canada and back? You’d better be prepared to document the source of all materials to the government’s satisfaction upon your return, or you could lose it indefinitely. If you thinking documenting that is tough, what if you’re ZZ Top’s Billy Gibbons returning from an overseas tour with your real 1959 sunburst Les Paul, for which you’ve already turned down at least one $5,000,000 offer? Good luck documenting the wood from a fifty-two-year-old guitar.


…Simply possessing the timber product can make you a felon, regardless of whether or not you were involved in the harvesting, were the original importer, or had received any information regarding the source of the timber product. Here’s an example. Let’s say you are driving a Bentley Flying Spur with a rosewood interior. Importation of Brazilian rosewood is a felony under the Lacey Act. Do you know where the rosewood in your Spur came from? Can you prove it? In Gibson’s case, it was Indian rosewood that supposedly caused the bust; although the importation of Indian rosewood is legal, it has to be finished and prepared to certain standards in India. If raw Indian rosewood is sent to Bentley for finishing into dashboards — and make no mistake, that is how it is done — it may not break any British laws, but it breaks an American one, and you are now a convicted felon for visiting the Canadian side of Niagara Falls and coming back.

Again, on which planet does any of this make any sense?

Not one American law was broken. And that word I’m searching for? Well, you can listen to this in the meantime…



*sigh* I miss freedom.

Another One Bites the Dust – Electric Car Maker Folds, Costing Salinas, CA $500K

Here’s a story that should come as a surprise to absolutely no one.

From KSBW.com,

A Salinas car manufacturing company that was expected to build environmentally friendly electric cars and create new jobs folded before almost any vehicles could run off the assembly line.


The city of Salinas had invested more than half a million dollars in Green Vehicles, an electric car start-up company.


All of that money is now gone, according to Green Vehicles President and Co-Founder Mike Ryan.

Van Jones hardest hit.

Here we have another story about a heavily subsidized company that promised grand and glorious things, only to fail in spectacular fashion at a great cost to innocent taxpayers. It’s far from the first and it certainly won’t be the last if we don’t come to our senses soon. One is left to wonder just how many more of these stories we’ll see before we finally realize the truth about President Obama’s dream of a “green economy.”

It. Will. Not. Work.

There are so many things wrong with the whole idea of a “green economy” that’s it’s difficult to know just where to begin. I suppose I could start with the idea behind the environmental movement itself.

Yes, for a while we did have an environmental problem. Rivers were on fire from the waste that was being emptied into them, the smog in some cities was chokingly bad and there were all sorts of nasty things in your drinking water that you really didn’t want to know about. So, from a sense of cleanliness if nothing else, the environmental movement was born.

Success came early to groups like the Sierra Club and others. They were able to have legislation introduced that forced companies to become more aware of their impact on the environment. The public was firmly behind their efforts, as no thinking person would be able to think for long if they were being slowly poisoned by modern life.

However, I can find nothing wrong with the idea behind the birth of the movement. What I am able to find great fault with is what is has devolved into, namely a large and way-too-powerful government agency that is now a destroyer of jobs, capital, and potential instead of a responsible steward, as the movement was in its infancy. The Environmental Protection Agency and the various private groups with whom it deals has become a haven for the Anti-Human League.

As fantastical as it sounds, there are actually some folk who think that mankind is a pox on the planet, just like Agent Smith in The Matrix,


And they live to control you: what you eat, what you drive, what kind of light bulbs you can use, even how you think.

The modern environmental movement has all the hallmarks of a religion, except backwards. In fact, you could look upon environmentalism as devil worship. You wouldn’t be far off the mark. The Earth is it’s god. It even has a name, Gaia. To many, it’s a deity to be worshipped and, on occasion, to be offered sacrifice. Instead of elevating mankind, environmentalism seeks to degrade it. Its adherents are constantly finding fault with even the slightest thing you do as you go about your daily life.

You use too much water to take a shower. When you use the bathroom, you use too much toilet paper. You wash your clothes with the wrong detergent. You drive the wrong car to work. In fact, you shouldn’t even drive at all, use public transit instead. Your job is killing the planet. Your television and computer consume too much electricity. You eat the wrong food. The earth is in peril because of you and needs to be saved, and environmentalists are the only ones who care enough to do it, you filthy human.

So pervasive is modern environmentalism that you can barely watch TV, go to a movie or turn on the radio without hearing the message. Think “Big Yellow Taxi.”

While being aware of how the world works isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it was carried to the absurd extreme long ago. Today, it’s just bitchiness and control. Enviro-nagging, if you will. And you must admit, it's the perfect bitch. Who could possibly want dirty air and water?

And it needs to stop.

I’m not suggesting that I don’t want clean air and water. But with our air and water cleaner today than ever before, I think the job is done. However, to those who populate the green movement, nothing is ever enough. New and more stringent regulations are issued daily from the EPA that are threatening our ability to produce energy in a cost effective way. These new regulations are currently fulfilling President Obama’s dream of shutting down the coal-powered electricity industry.

Now, common sense would dictate that the movement would embrace cleaner technology like hydroelectric dams and nuclear power. But even those technologies are frowned upon. We haven’t built a new nuclear plant in the US in over thirty years, and efforts are underway to reroute rivers away from their controlled route (and coincidentally, away from power producing dams) and back to their more “natural” state. This is a primary component in the recent flooding in the Midwest.

Common sense would also dictate that certain realities be recognized. However, neither common sense nor the laws of physics enter into the mind of the environmentalist. And forget about economic laws. To them, money is evil, too.

Look at what the movement has done to our gasoline. In the name of “saving the planet,” we’re now forced to use a mixture of gas and ethanol. Ethanol is made from corn, a food. Ethanol is also far less efficient than pure gasoline, resulting in poorer mileage and the deterioration of components in your car, causing your fuel system to wear out ahead of its time. Does that sound like an environmentally smart thing to do?

Now, much of the corn that was used for food for our livestock and us now goes to make fuel, resulting in higher prices for consumers and food shortages. Again, does that make any sense?

You can see where this is going, and it’s no place good. And this is only one example. Add to this the very false argument that we’re addicted to oil and you can see environmentalism laid bare in all its contradiction and self-loathing.

I’ve mentioned before that oil is the common sense substance to use. It contains the most potential energy of any naturally occurring resource. It’s portable and can be made into a wide variety of useful products, one of which greased your bottom as an infant.

But to the average environmentalist, it’s the source of all of our problems and must be eliminated entirely.

But I’m digressing all over my own post. Sorry.

The simple truth remains concerning a “green economy”: if it made sense to do so, we’d already be doing it. We already use energy-dense methods of production, but they are under attack from a group of people who don’t understand the laws of physics or economics.

The Salinas story is yet another failure in an industry that is the very definition of unsustainable. In order to survive, it must depend on taxpayer dollars. It cannot create wealth, if it did, it wouldn’t need subsidies.

The technology upon which a green economy depends has yet to mature. It makes no sense to waste tax dollars on windmills when a nuclear plant is much more efficient. It makes no sense to “invest” in solar power when a hydroelectric dam is nearby that produces electricity constantly. All of the so-called "solutions" forwarded by the green movement are far less efficient than what we’re currently using. And they all require a backup source of power.

Which is why it is designed to fail.

But, after a few generations are born into the culture of falsehood that is the environmental movement, the more people will cease to question it. For them, it will have always been that way. The lie of man-caused climate change will become the truth for too many.

Is that really the way we want to go? Or will we start to teach our children and grandchildren the truth about the movement that seeks to enslave them with their own guilt?

What You Should Know About the UN’s Agenda 21

I consider myself fairly well informed. I like to read and the advent of the Intertubes has been a Gore-send. I thought I was up to speed on a lot of interesting things, with politics being at the top of the list.

Imagine my surprise when a couple of my fellow Morons over at Ace of Spades HQ mentioned something called Agenda 21 this past weekend. Shirley, someone such as I would have already heard about this, the Boy thought to himself. Come to find out, I’m not as well informed as I thought I was.

Me, born in Alabama, slow, some assembly required. You know the drill.

After some exhaustive research, consisting of five minutes online, I discovered some things about this Agenda 21 that I found disconcerting. Being the good writer I aspire to be, I thought I’d pass along one of the things I discovered, and let your natural curiosity take over.

Here’s a primer…


If that doesn’t grab your attention, nothing will.

What I find most appalling about this is the complete lack of inquisitiveness on the part of politicians about this whole thing. It seems that they are more than willing to implement this agenda with no thought given to it. It’s as if they blindly trust the United Nations, when there is ample evidence that they don’t like America very much.

Another thing that concerns me is that the idea of surrendering our sovereignty never seems to occur to them. It doesn’t take much in the way of research to know that this agenda violates just about every principle that America was founded upon. Property rights, self-determination, local governance, accountability and many other principles would be abolished under this plan.

And the fact that it came about under Bush the Elder makes it even more concerning. At the time, when he introduced the phrase “New World Order,” stupid me thought nothing of it. At the time, America was the leader of the free world, so I thought the phrase naturally had a positive connotation. After all, hadn’t we shown the rest of the world how well freedom works? Weren’t we the envy of the planet for our freedoms and the opportunities that logically sprang from them to be welcome the world over? Wasn’t that why people were literally standing in line to become Americans?

I can sure be thick at times.

In light of what I’ve discovered since Sunday, this should be something that all seven of you should investigate for yourself. It’s not a good thing, for us, for our country or for our way of life.

I’ll even get you started here. I’m a giver that way.

I mean, when even Democrats don’t like it, you know that there’s something pretty wrong with it. Oh, and did I mention that the anti-Christ George Soros likes it as well?

So, whenever you hear the word “sustainable,” or one of the word's derivatives uttered by a politician, know that they’re really talking about a plan for world governance using the cover of environmentalism.

Also, know that they are unfit for office.

Why Are the Corps of Engineers Intentionally Allowing the Midwest Floods?

This is one of those days when I’m just full of questions.

Take the flooding in the Midwest along the Missouri river. I ran across this item over at Ace of Spades HQ this weekend entitled Corps of Engineers Mobilize to Protect Random Critters and Bogs: American Men, Women and Children Hardest Hit. All snark aside, it got me wondering about a few things.

Like, is the Missouri river system of dams being intentionally mismanaged so as to cause the flooding of millions of acres by radical environmental policies that put animals above the needs of people?

It would appear so, especially after reading this link from Ace’s post (actually, it’s Dave in Texas’ post) The Purposeful Flooding of America's Heartland from the American Thinker blog.

Some sixty years ago, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began the process of taming the Missouri by constructing a series of six dams. The idea was simple: massive dams at the top moderating flow to the smaller dams below, generating electricity while providing desperately needed control of the river's devastating floods.


The stable flow of water allowed for the construction of the concrete and earthen levees that protect more than 10 million people who reside and work within the river's reach. It allowed millions of acres of floodplain to become useful for farming and development. In fact, these uses were encouraged by our government, which took credit for the resulting economic boom. By nearly all measures, the project was a great success.


But after about thirty years of operation, as the environmentalist movement gained strength throughout the seventies and eighties, the Corps received a great deal of pressure to include some specific environmental concerns into their MWCM (Master Water Control Manual, the "bible" for the operation of the dam system). Preservation of habitat for at-risk bird and fish populations soon became a hot issue among the burgeoning environmental lobby. The pressure to satisfy the demands of these groups grew exponentially as politicians eagerly traded their common sense for "green" political support.

Things turned absurd from there. An idea to restore the nation's rivers to a natural (pre-dam) state swept through the environmental movement and their allies. Adherents enlisted the aid of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), asking for an updated "Biological Opinion" from the FWS that would make ecosystem restoration an "authorized purpose" of the dam system. The Clinton administration threw its support behind the change, officially shifting the priorities of the Missouri River dam system from flood control, facilitation of commercial traffic, and recreation to habitat restoration, wetlands preservation, and culturally sensitive and sustainable biodiversity.

Granted, I never thought about it until then. I mean, I knew that radical, far-left, anti-human environmentalists have found a home in our government, but I hadn’t considered that their infiltration would be so serious as to willfully cause the death of Americans and the destruction of so much land.

Although I did know it had been done before. In California’s Central Valley, what was once rich farmland has been turned into a dustbowl after our very own EPA shut off the water supply they say threatens some useless fish. And when I say useless, I mean we can’t eat them. And I’m still wondering why the good people of California are putting up with this blatant violation of our Constitution. After all, our government is supposed to promote the general welfare of the populace, and this action certainly doesn’t qualify.

In fact, I’m frankly surprised that the California governor hasn’t sent in Guard troops to turn the irrigation pumps back on. If I were Gerry Brown, or even Arnold Schwarzenegger, I would have already done so, and dared anyone in Washington to do anything about it. I would have stood up for the people I was elected to represent and would’ve fought any effort by the federal government to prohibit our basic right to feed ourselves.

But that’s just me.

I also wonder why this issue hasn’t been brought before the Supreme Court. I can’t think of a more egregious violation of our constitution than this, but I think the Missouri basin flooding may even be worse.

Another question is, and I’m really getting tired of asking this one, is noted America-hater George Soros involved in this?

Well, what do you know? It seems he is. This post from Radio Patriot entitled Who's Buying Up Flood Ravaged Farmland cites none other than cattle trader Ann Barnhardt. If her name sounds familiar, it’s because I posted the videos of her burning a koran several weeks ago. She’s somewhat of a firebrand.

1. File this one under “Now It All Makes Sense”. A Missouri farming and ranching contact just got off a conference call wherein he was informed that the federal government is sending out letters to all of the flooded out farmers in the Missouri River flood plain and bottoms notifying them that the Army Corps of Engineers will offer to BUY THEIR LAND.


Intentionally flood massive acreage of highly productive farmground. Destroy people’s communities and homes. Catch them while they are desperate and afraid and then swoop in and buy the ground cheap. Those evil sons of bitches.


2. Speaking of evil sons of bitches, George Soros appears to be “investing” in farmground through the same puppet company that he used to get into the grain elevator and fertilizer business. The company is called Ospraie Capital Management and is buying up farmground in a joint venture with Teays River Investments as a partner.

If any of you gentle readers know anyone in the Midwest that has been affected by this apparently intentional flooding, you should inform them of these links.

I have more questions: Why isn’t Darryl Issa investigating this?

And more importantly, why are we allowing our government to do this to us?