More on Obamacare

April 3, 2012

Mark Steyn, as usual, is must-read material:

Yet he was unintentionally making a far more basic point: A 2,700-page law is not a “law” by any civilized understanding of the term. . . . It’s not just that the legislators who legislate it don’t know what’s in it, nor that the citizens on the receiving end can never hope to understand it, but that even the nation’s most eminent judges acknowledge that it is beyond individual human comprehension. A 2,700-page law is, by definition, an affront to self-government.

Read the rest of this entry »

Sixteen scientists in the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal argue, “No Need to Panic About Global Warming: There’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy”.  Selected excerpts (emphasis added):

In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the “pollutant” carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific “heretics” is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.

Read the rest of this entry »

Can We?

September 6, 2010

[picapp align=”right” wrap=”true” link=”term=franklin&iid=214246″ src=”http://view.picapp.com/pictures.photo/image/214246/hundred-dollar-bill/hundred-dollar-bill.jpg?size=500&imageId=214246″ width=”234″ height=”156″ /]

The story of America in the twentieth century was the story of the growth of government.  It has accelerated and decelerated, and even retreated at times, but taken together, it looks almost inexorable—it grows and grows, slowly choking out freedom and economic activity.  Read the rest of this entry »

At least in America

I don’t even know what to say about this commercial—that no one is better qualified to parody liberalism than liberals? that sometimes if you wait, they’ll top themselves?

Read the rest of this entry »

Celebrate Good Times

January 20, 2010

Red Massachusetts

Scott Brown defeated Martha Coakley yesterday in the race for the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, 52% to 47%.  If you haven’t been following it, here’s the skinny:

This probably means that Democrats no longer have enough votes (60) to overcome Republicans’ filibuster of the health-care bill in the Senate.  That means that the Democrats’ version of health-care “reform”—already getting less and less likely as time went on, given that they hadn’t passed it before this year, an election year—is probably now dead.  We won.  Thank You, God, and a big thank-you to the people of Massachusetts. Read the rest of this entry »