“God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.” ... Daniel Webster ... These posts will reflect my personal opinions, and views, of the world in which we live from, of course, the viewpoint of a conservative "Southern American".
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Monday, December 23, 2013
America Survives Another Year ... J. D. Longstreet
America Survives Another Year
Annus Horribilis
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
******************
Well,
we have made another year without a complete meltdown. Nevertheless,
we are growing closer. As every day passes we draw nearer that
apocalyptic terminus.
We have reached the final few days of the year and it is customary, sort of, for folks to look back over all the bad and unusual things that occurred in the twelve months just ending. But, honestly, I don't want to drag them up again. They were difficult enough to handle the first time through, so why punish ourselves, right?
If anything, 2013 established, beyond doubt, that Mr. Obama is intent upon presiding over a nation in decline -- and he insists on increasing the rate of acceleration of said declination.
But that doesn't touch the lies, the deceit, the scandals, the abuse of power by the Executive Office, nor the assumption of dictatorial powers by the Chief Executive and on, and on, and on. And I haven't even mentioned OBAMACARE ... yet!
In fact, I'd like to look ahead. I'm the sort who anticipates darn near everything. I'm just wired that way. No apologies for it. I rather like to act in advance of an anticipated problem and to deal with it ahead of time and/or before it becomes a menace in one fashion or another.
Peeling back the layers of the future is most certainly a job for the clairvoyants, the fortune tellers and such. I am neither. No. I'm more of what you might call -- a worrier. So believe me when I tell you I am mightily worried about next year, about 2014.
The US is currently reeling from the onslaught of socialism/communism led by our socialist-in-chief, B. H. Obama. Mr. Obama is, at this writing, in the lovely state of Hawaii where, frankly, I wish he'd stay, sending us his resignation as a Christmas gift to the nation.
Two things: One -- Mr. Obama does not share our low opinion of himself. And second -- Vice President Joe Biden is waiting in the wings to become President should Mr Obama step down. (Yeah, it's sorta like a double feature horror movie special at the local cinema, right? Egads!)
Moving right along ...
That socialism/communism thing, in the guise of health insurance for everyone, will still be with us next year. Like an infection deep inside it will continue to destroy the tissue of America and will, over time, murder the country.
The problems with the roll out of Obamacare were just petty "stuff" compared to that which is coming in the close and distant future. Those of you who have not turned your hand to insuring yourself under our new law are in for a bone rattling shock. If you have an attorney on retainer, I suggest assigning him/her the job of signing you up to Obamacare -- and paying him a bonus if he succeeds.
Small business owners who, up to now, have provided health insurance for their employees are going to learn they simply cannot afford it any longer and the millions of employees of small businesses in America are going to find themselves without insurance and then they, too,will be dealing with Obamacare.
It's going to get downright ugly.
Repeal of Obamacare will not happen in 2014. We'll have to have another election before there is even a possibility of a repeal of Obamacare. That election is coming up next November.
The President must take another shot at immigration reform or, as I like to call it -- amnesty for illegal aliens. The democrats understand that with passage of immigration reform, they will secure, for themselves, the reins of government in the US for generations to come.
Oh, there is much, much, more but it's just too depressing to touch on it.
One thing, however. I can't shake the feeling that the US will find itself engulfed in another Vietnam type quagmire, this time on the African continent, sometime in 2014. We have troops fighting little brush fire wars in various places in Africa now. It is not outside the realm of possibility that one of those brush fires will flare up into a huge conflagration without the American public even being aware that American warriors are bleeding and dying in the jungles of that mysterious land. Too, I would be less than honest if I did not tell you that I have no idea why we are spending our blood and treasure on such a hopeless cause as saving Africa. Only Africa can save Africa. Our efforts on the dark continent are almost as hopeless as bringing peace between the Israelis and the so-called Palestinians. Oh. by the way, that, too, will fail in 2014.
One is drawn to ask if America is in Africa fighting indigenous insurrectionists, or, are we actually establishing forward bases from which to attack Al-Qaeda in Africa? If the latter, I must wonder what happened to the Al-Qaeda Mr. Obama suggested to the nation was through, kaput?
As we chart our course for 2014, I suggest we would be wise to take a back-azimuth off 2013. For, if my suspicions are anywhere near correct, we are in for a replay of 2013 -- at least until November.
© J. D. Longstreet
****************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
"OMEGA OPTION" is the sister site to Insight on Freedom. Please feel free to leave comments at Omega Option. All four thousand and some blog posts from this site have been transferred to Omega Option. I appreciate all the traffic my sites receive.
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
Annus Horribilis
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
******************
Well,
we have made another year without a complete meltdown. Nevertheless,
we are growing closer. As every day passes we draw nearer that
apocalyptic terminus. 
We have reached the final few days of the year and it is customary, sort of, for folks to look back over all the bad and unusual things that occurred in the twelve months just ending. But, honestly, I don't want to drag them up again. They were difficult enough to handle the first time through, so why punish ourselves, right?
If anything, 2013 established, beyond doubt, that Mr. Obama is intent upon presiding over a nation in decline -- and he insists on increasing the rate of acceleration of said declination.
But that doesn't touch the lies, the deceit, the scandals, the abuse of power by the Executive Office, nor the assumption of dictatorial powers by the Chief Executive and on, and on, and on. And I haven't even mentioned OBAMACARE ... yet!
In fact, I'd like to look ahead. I'm the sort who anticipates darn near everything. I'm just wired that way. No apologies for it. I rather like to act in advance of an anticipated problem and to deal with it ahead of time and/or before it becomes a menace in one fashion or another.
Peeling back the layers of the future is most certainly a job for the clairvoyants, the fortune tellers and such. I am neither. No. I'm more of what you might call -- a worrier. So believe me when I tell you I am mightily worried about next year, about 2014.
The US is currently reeling from the onslaught of socialism/communism led by our socialist-in-chief, B. H. Obama. Mr. Obama is, at this writing, in the lovely state of Hawaii where, frankly, I wish he'd stay, sending us his resignation as a Christmas gift to the nation.
Two things: One -- Mr. Obama does not share our low opinion of himself. And second -- Vice President Joe Biden is waiting in the wings to become President should Mr Obama step down. (Yeah, it's sorta like a double feature horror movie special at the local cinema, right? Egads!)
Moving right along ...
That socialism/communism thing, in the guise of health insurance for everyone, will still be with us next year. Like an infection deep inside it will continue to destroy the tissue of America and will, over time, murder the country.
The problems with the roll out of Obamacare were just petty "stuff" compared to that which is coming in the close and distant future. Those of you who have not turned your hand to insuring yourself under our new law are in for a bone rattling shock. If you have an attorney on retainer, I suggest assigning him/her the job of signing you up to Obamacare -- and paying him a bonus if he succeeds.
Small business owners who, up to now, have provided health insurance for their employees are going to learn they simply cannot afford it any longer and the millions of employees of small businesses in America are going to find themselves without insurance and then they, too,will be dealing with Obamacare.
It's going to get downright ugly.
Repeal of Obamacare will not happen in 2014. We'll have to have another election before there is even a possibility of a repeal of Obamacare. That election is coming up next November.
The President must take another shot at immigration reform or, as I like to call it -- amnesty for illegal aliens. The democrats understand that with passage of immigration reform, they will secure, for themselves, the reins of government in the US for generations to come.
Oh, there is much, much, more but it's just too depressing to touch on it.
One thing, however. I can't shake the feeling that the US will find itself engulfed in another Vietnam type quagmire, this time on the African continent, sometime in 2014. We have troops fighting little brush fire wars in various places in Africa now. It is not outside the realm of possibility that one of those brush fires will flare up into a huge conflagration without the American public even being aware that American warriors are bleeding and dying in the jungles of that mysterious land. Too, I would be less than honest if I did not tell you that I have no idea why we are spending our blood and treasure on such a hopeless cause as saving Africa. Only Africa can save Africa. Our efforts on the dark continent are almost as hopeless as bringing peace between the Israelis and the so-called Palestinians. Oh. by the way, that, too, will fail in 2014.
One is drawn to ask if America is in Africa fighting indigenous insurrectionists, or, are we actually establishing forward bases from which to attack Al-Qaeda in Africa? If the latter, I must wonder what happened to the Al-Qaeda Mr. Obama suggested to the nation was through, kaput?
As we chart our course for 2014, I suggest we would be wise to take a back-azimuth off 2013. For, if my suspicions are anywhere near correct, we are in for a replay of 2013 -- at least until November.
© J. D. Longstreet
****************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
"OMEGA OPTION" is the sister site to Insight on Freedom. Please feel free to leave comments at Omega Option. All four thousand and some blog posts from this site have been transferred to Omega Option. I appreciate all the traffic my sites receive.
I
hope to have the problem worked out soon. INSIGHT ON FREEDOM will
remain up for a while longer so that I might attempt a "fix." If
unsuccessful, I will be forced to take "INSIGHT on Freedom" down. Omega Option will then become the primary blog site for Longstreet's Commentaries.
Thank you!
****************
Thank you!
J. D. Longstreet
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
Sunday, December 22, 2013
Obama Must Be Forced to Resign ... Alan Caruba
Obama Must Be Forced to Resign
By Alan Caruba
By Alan Caruba
A December
17 Reuters article was titled, “Obama’s Current Approval Rating Is The Ugliest
Since Nixon.”
“President
Barack Obama is ending his fifth year in office with the lowest approval
ratings at this point in the presidency since President Richard Nixon,
according to a new Washington Post/ABC poll released Tuesday.”
Nixon was forced to resign on April 22, 1974 after two long years that followed
the revelations about Watergate, a break-in of the Democratic Party offices in
Washington, DC. The backlash against the horrors of Obamacare, concerns about
the “deal” with Iran, and a succession of scandals from Fast and Furious to
Benghazi, have raised fear and anger over his judgment, competence, and behavior
in office.
Having
lived through the years that led to Nixon’s resignation, I am seeing the same
national resistance that Obama’s five years in office have led to. Nixon was
never a “popular” President, widely seen as “Tricky Dick”, but like Obama, he was
twice elected to the office. His Vice President, Gerald Ford, who assumed the presidency was defeated by
Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and, four years later, an unhappy electorate defeated
Carter and elected Ronald Reagan who would serve two terms. Even the popular
Bill Clinton faced impeachment.
Not since
the days of the Great Depression in the 1930s have Americans endured an economy
that has failed to overcome slow growth despite Obama’s full first term in
office and another year in his second term.
Ignoring
the central role of a free market prolongs bad economic conditions and high
taxation to maintain an ever-expanding central government led to big problems
for European nations and promises the same—or worse—for the U.S.
When you add
in the increased debt imposed in Obama’s first term you are looking at the
road to ruin. Blaming “millionaires and billionaires” or “income inequality” is
the very essence of communism. It is a rejection of our capitalistic economic system.
Financial
ruin for America is embedded in its huge debt, its deficits, and its
multi-trillions of dollars in unfunded debt that already insolvent Social Security
and Medicare programs represent. And Medicare was looted to fund Obamacare!
The
destruction of our healthcare system, one sixth of the nation’s economy, is
widely regarded as a disaster and it bears the President’s name. Passed late at
night prior to Christmas in 2009 and signed into law by Barack Obama, Obamacare
is distinguished by the lies the President told all Americans about their right
to keep their healthcare insurance plans, retain their personal physicians, and
see their costs reduced. It has done the opposite and it is impossible to
believe the President did not know this would occur.
The nation
has reached a point when the President must be told to resign.
Whether a
Congress, also held in extraordinary low esteem, can or will do this is
unknown. While I have said in the past that Obama cannot be removed by
impeachment, I now believe that if the House would initiate impeachment
proceedings that in itself would focus public attention, for example, on the President’s excessive use of
executive orders to by-pass Congress and his unconstitutional altering--tweaking--of the Obamacare law.
His first term was filled
with scandals that included using the IRS for political gain. His role in
dragging down the nation’s international position as an exemplar and protector of
freedom has made the world less safe. These and other issues need a review and
discussion that would not occur in the mainstream press in any other way.
This isn’t
about a President who authorized a break-in. This is about a President who is a
current and future threat to the Constitution, the nation’s military strength,
and the restoration of its economy.
This is about a President who can use
existing laws to declare martial law based on a manufactured crisis. Existing
law would permit him to seize control of all aspects of life in America.
The
nation’s mainstream print and broadcast media is showing signs of
disillusionment, but not enough to abandon a President they have supported with
deliberately biased reporting.
Complicating
a demand for his resignation is a divided Republican Party whose elites have
rejected the Tea Party movement that has already elected a number of members to
Congress. Many find little to differentiate the GOP from the Democratic Party,
but there are differences and the House of Representatives is proof of that.
Many
Americans sense that the nation is at a very dangerous point.
Dramatic
action is needed. A demand for Obama’s resignation via petitions and other
measures is needed to save America from the worst President ever elected to
that office.
Editor's note: In the Daily Caller.com, an interview with Rep. Amash (R-MI) reveals his comparable concern about the powers Obama is asserting for the executive office. It's worth viewing the video.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/21/amash-obama-is-setting-the-stage-for-something-very-dangerous-in-the-future-video/
Editor's note: In the Daily Caller.com, an interview with Rep. Amash (R-MI) reveals his comparable concern about the powers Obama is asserting for the executive office. It's worth viewing the video.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/21/amash-obama-is-setting-the-stage-for-something-very-dangerous-in-the-future-video/
© Alan
Caruba, 2013
*****************************
Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" and shared on dozens
of news and opinion websites. His blog recently passed more than 3 million page
views. If
you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. For information on his professional
skills, Caruba Editorial Services is the place to go!
You can find Alan Caruba on both Facebook and Twitter as well.
*********************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
"OMEGA OPTION" is the sister site to Insight on Freedom. Please feel free to leave comments at Omega Option. All four thousand and some blog posts from this site have been transferred to Omega Option. I appreciate all the traffic my sites receive.
I
hope to have the problem worked out soon. INSIGHT ON FREEDOM will
remain up for a while longer so that I might attempt a "fix." If
unsuccessful, I will be forced to take "INSIGHT on Freedom" down. Omega Option will then become the primary blog site for Longstreet's Commentaries.
Thank you!
Thank you!
J. D. Longstreet
Americans Hate Freedom ... Eric Peters
Americans Hate Freedom
I
read the other day that overwhelming majorities of Americans support
federal fuel economy mandates: 77 percent of Republicans and 92 percent
of Democrats, according to a recent poll (see here).
That means they also support the $1,300 line item on the window sticker
of the new Cadillac CTS-V GM dropped off for me to evaluate this week.
It’s not a wheel/tire package. Not an upgrade audio system. Not special
paint.
It’s a “gas guzzler” tax.
You buy the CTS-V, you pay $1,300 extra – on top of the sales tax; on top of the title taxes – with the money you’ve got left after paying federal, state, local, Social Security and Medicare taxes. And why? Because your fellow (and frequently flag-waving)
Americans are anti-freedom. They resent you – the buyer of a car like the CTS-V, which uses more fuel than they think it ought to use – and have put in place mechanisms designed to punish you for having the effrontery to buy such a car.
They will cry, “but the CTS-V is a gas hog!”
And they are liberty hogs – because they cannot comprehend that whatever gas the CTS-V uses - whether it’s a lot or a little – every last drop of it was paid for in toto by the owner of the car. These people have no more right to bitch about the gas that goes into the tank of a CTS-V than they do about the gas that goes into the tank of a Prius hybrid. In both cases, the owners of the cars bought the gas. It is their gas. Whatever stake that amorphous entity that goes by the name of “society” might have had in the disposition of that fuel prior to the sale of that fuel is vitiated by the fact of its purchase – at which point the fuel becomes the property of the person who bought it. Who paid for it in full – including the regressive and confiscatory motor fuels taxes that are part and parcel of every gallon purchased.
The buyer of a car such as the 556 horsepower supercharged CTS-V, which does indeed use a great deal of gas, also pays a great deal more in motor fuels taxes than the Prius driver. That means, he pays more to maintain “our” roads than the Prius driver. A great deal more, in fact. It says so – in bold face type, right there on the MSRP window sticker: “You SPEND $6,150 more in fuel costs over five years, compared to the average new vehicle.”
The Prius driver should applaud the CTS-V driver, who is subsidizing his hybrid. At the least, he ought to have the decency to leave him in peace. After all, he’s paying the lion’s share of the tab for “our” roads – not the Prius driver.
Instead, the Prius driver, the freedom-hating American, wants to punish the driver of the CTS-V.
Again. (Don’t forget all those other taxes, already paid – and in greater proportion, since “the rich” who buy cars like this also pay disproportionately higher taxes).
It’s despicable.
But also indicative of the envy-addled, control-freak cancer that’s metastasizing across the country. The sickness of mind – and heart – that begrudges others their liberty, their free choice. And which is determined to impose its values and views on others by force.
It’s not enough for such people to choose a fuel efficient car for themselves – and leave others free to choose whatever type of car meets their needs (and wants). No. They insist others buy the type of car they believe they ought to buy. Hence CAFE – the acronym that stands for the federal government’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy edicts – and the broad spectrum public support for such measures.
CAFE is responsible for sea-change distortions of the car market by infusing government “incentives” – that is, artificial incentives – which displace natural free market incentives (free people exercising free choice). The sole reason for the existence of legions of bulbous SUVs – the bete noirs of the people who venerate CAFE – is because of the existence of CAFE. The “loophole” (a lower CAFE standard for so-called “light trucks”) that incentivized their mass production has been closed – but new distortions have been effected.
Cars are becoming much more complex – and costly – just for openers.
Cars like the CTS-V – a very high-performance car – are black swans; cars that manage – despite all the obstacles – to get built, if only in very small numbers and sold at very high prices Very few people can afford one, given a base price of $63,215. Even accepting the control freak’s premise, the effect of such a car’s consumption on “our” resources is not even measurable, given the minuscule production of such cars. (And if you did wish to measure it, how about measuring the consumption of every CTS-V made against the consumption of oh, I dunno, a division of M1 Abrams battle tanks? Or Dear Leader’s armored – and 4 MPG – limousines? But then, “gas guzzling” only applies to the conveyances of Mundanes.)
And so – out of pure spite – a $1,300 “gas guzzler” penalty is affixed belligerently to the CTS-V’s window sticker, as if to shame the buyer as well as financially penalize him.
Cars like the CTS-V (powerful V-8 engine, rear-wheel-drive) have become all-but-impossible to make as mass-market cars, because of CAFE. But it’s not enough that nine out of ten people will never get the chance to drive such a car. The one out of 10 (more like one out 10,000) who manages to somehow retain a sufficiency of funds – after being fleeced at multiple levels by federal, state and local taxes – to be in a position to afford a car like the CTS-V (and to afford to put gas into a car like the CTS-V, to afford being able to pay 2-3 times the motor fuels taxes that the average driver pays) must be punished one more time.
How long before wealth-and-freedom-hating Americans decide that “we” need a luxury tax on cars more opulent than a Hyundai Accent or Toyota Yaris? Before it is decided that “we” don’t really “need” privately owned cars at all?
I have no doubt such is in the works. It’s the logical terminus of a society – and people – that not only no longer understands freedom but which actively despises it.
Eric Peters
*****************
Eric Peters is a longtime car/bikes/Libertarian-minded journalist. His book, “Road Hogs,” came out June 2011.
Peters has been writing a weekly column about cars for almost 20 years now. He is the author of “Automotive Atrocities” and “Road Hogs” (MBI). He lives in rural SW Virginia with his wife and a polyglot crew of animals.
*****************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
*****************
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
by Eric Peters
It’s a “gas guzzler” tax.
You buy the CTS-V, you pay $1,300 extra – on top of the sales tax; on top of the title taxes – with the money you’ve got left after paying federal, state, local, Social Security and Medicare taxes. And why? Because your fellow (and frequently flag-waving)
Americans are anti-freedom. They resent you – the buyer of a car like the CTS-V, which uses more fuel than they think it ought to use – and have put in place mechanisms designed to punish you for having the effrontery to buy such a car.
They will cry, “but the CTS-V is a gas hog!”
And they are liberty hogs – because they cannot comprehend that whatever gas the CTS-V uses - whether it’s a lot or a little – every last drop of it was paid for in toto by the owner of the car. These people have no more right to bitch about the gas that goes into the tank of a CTS-V than they do about the gas that goes into the tank of a Prius hybrid. In both cases, the owners of the cars bought the gas. It is their gas. Whatever stake that amorphous entity that goes by the name of “society” might have had in the disposition of that fuel prior to the sale of that fuel is vitiated by the fact of its purchase – at which point the fuel becomes the property of the person who bought it. Who paid for it in full – including the regressive and confiscatory motor fuels taxes that are part and parcel of every gallon purchased.
The buyer of a car such as the 556 horsepower supercharged CTS-V, which does indeed use a great deal of gas, also pays a great deal more in motor fuels taxes than the Prius driver. That means, he pays more to maintain “our” roads than the Prius driver. A great deal more, in fact. It says so – in bold face type, right there on the MSRP window sticker: “You SPEND $6,150 more in fuel costs over five years, compared to the average new vehicle.”
The Prius driver should applaud the CTS-V driver, who is subsidizing his hybrid. At the least, he ought to have the decency to leave him in peace. After all, he’s paying the lion’s share of the tab for “our” roads – not the Prius driver.
Instead, the Prius driver, the freedom-hating American, wants to punish the driver of the CTS-V.
Again. (Don’t forget all those other taxes, already paid – and in greater proportion, since “the rich” who buy cars like this also pay disproportionately higher taxes).
It’s despicable.
But also indicative of the envy-addled, control-freak cancer that’s metastasizing across the country. The sickness of mind – and heart – that begrudges others their liberty, their free choice. And which is determined to impose its values and views on others by force.
It’s not enough for such people to choose a fuel efficient car for themselves – and leave others free to choose whatever type of car meets their needs (and wants). No. They insist others buy the type of car they believe they ought to buy. Hence CAFE – the acronym that stands for the federal government’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy edicts – and the broad spectrum public support for such measures.
CAFE is responsible for sea-change distortions of the car market by infusing government “incentives” – that is, artificial incentives – which displace natural free market incentives (free people exercising free choice). The sole reason for the existence of legions of bulbous SUVs – the bete noirs of the people who venerate CAFE – is because of the existence of CAFE. The “loophole” (a lower CAFE standard for so-called “light trucks”) that incentivized their mass production has been closed – but new distortions have been effected.
Cars are becoming much more complex – and costly – just for openers.
Cars like the CTS-V – a very high-performance car – are black swans; cars that manage – despite all the obstacles – to get built, if only in very small numbers and sold at very high prices Very few people can afford one, given a base price of $63,215. Even accepting the control freak’s premise, the effect of such a car’s consumption on “our” resources is not even measurable, given the minuscule production of such cars. (And if you did wish to measure it, how about measuring the consumption of every CTS-V made against the consumption of oh, I dunno, a division of M1 Abrams battle tanks? Or Dear Leader’s armored – and 4 MPG – limousines? But then, “gas guzzling” only applies to the conveyances of Mundanes.)
And so – out of pure spite – a $1,300 “gas guzzler” penalty is affixed belligerently to the CTS-V’s window sticker, as if to shame the buyer as well as financially penalize him.
Cars like the CTS-V (powerful V-8 engine, rear-wheel-drive) have become all-but-impossible to make as mass-market cars, because of CAFE. But it’s not enough that nine out of ten people will never get the chance to drive such a car. The one out of 10 (more like one out 10,000) who manages to somehow retain a sufficiency of funds – after being fleeced at multiple levels by federal, state and local taxes – to be in a position to afford a car like the CTS-V (and to afford to put gas into a car like the CTS-V, to afford being able to pay 2-3 times the motor fuels taxes that the average driver pays) must be punished one more time.
How long before wealth-and-freedom-hating Americans decide that “we” need a luxury tax on cars more opulent than a Hyundai Accent or Toyota Yaris? Before it is decided that “we” don’t really “need” privately owned cars at all?
I have no doubt such is in the works. It’s the logical terminus of a society – and people – that not only no longer understands freedom but which actively despises it.
Eric Peters
*****************
Eric Peters is a longtime car/bikes/Libertarian-minded journalist. His book, “Road Hogs,” came out June 2011.
Peters has been writing a weekly column about cars for almost 20 years now. He is the author of “Automotive Atrocities” and “Road Hogs” (MBI). He lives in rural SW Virginia with his wife and a polyglot crew of animals.
*****************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
"OMEGA OPTION" is the sister site to Insight on Freedom. Please feel free to leave comments at Omega Option. All four thousand and some blog posts from this site have been transferred to Omega Option. I appreciate all the traffic my sites receive.
I
hope to have the problem worked out soon. INSIGHT ON FREEDOM will
remain up for a while longer so that I might attempt a "fix." If
unsuccessful, I will be forced to take "INSIGHT on Freedom" down. Omega Option will then become the primary blog site for Longstreet's Commentaries.
Thank you!
Thank you!
J. D. Longstreet
*****************
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
Saturday, December 21, 2013
America's Not So Bright Future ... J. D. Longstreet
America's Not So Bright Future
Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
***********************
Back in 2012, the government took our 100 watt light bulbs and left us with these awful, pathetic, sickly, fluorescent bulbs. (The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act) These ugly, squiggly, things are called "Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs." In my opinion, the "light bulb" portion of the name is a fraud.
Now that they have taken our 100 watt and 75 watt bulbs, they will relieve us of our 60 watt and 40 watt bulbs effective in 2014. (Stores will be allowed to sell their inventory of the 60 and 40 watt bulbs but after that -- there will be no more.)
Why does this upset me? WHY, indeed?!
I’ll point you in the direction of some evidence that the fluorescent bulbs may not be as helpful and energy efficient as claimed and might even damage American’s health and contribute to pollution of the earth. You decide, for yourself, if you really want to put them in your home, where you and your children will be exposed to them, or if you want to raise hell with the Congress until they repeal this ridiculous law and give us back our tried and true incandescent light bulbs.
Did you know it required a special exemption from the Environmental Protection Agency of the US government to allow fluorescent lamp bulbs to be sold to the pubic in the US in the first place? Why? Mercury, that’s why!
“Fluorescent lights are filled with a gas containing low-pressure mercury vapor and
argon, or sometimes even krypton. The inner surface of the bulb is
coated with a fluorescent coating made of varying blends of metallic and
rare earth phosphor salts. Fluorescent light bulbs are more energy
efficient than incandescent light bulbs of an equivalent brightness, and
the efficiency of fluorescent lighting owes much to low-pressure
mercury photon discharges. But fluorescents don't produce a steady
light, and they burn out more quickly when cycled frequently; they also
contain items such as fluorine, neon, and lead powder as well as
mercury.” (From: “Compact fluorescent light bulbs contaminate the environment with 30,000 pounds of mercury each year” at: http://www.newstarget.com/021907.html . (This
article was written by Mike Adams a natural health researcher and
author with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and
the power of nature to help us all heal He has authored and published
thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics
like health and the environment, impacting the lives of millions of
readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits
from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with
strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product
or company.)
Also from the same article we learn this:
“According to www.lightbulbrecycling.com, each year an estimated 600 million fluorescent lamps are disposed of in U.S. landfills, amounting to 30,000 pounds of mercury waste. Astonishingly, that's almost half the amount of mercury emitted into the atmosphere by coal-fired power plants each year. It only takes 4mg of mercury to contaminate up to 7,000 gallons of freshwater, meaning that the 30,000 pounds of mercury thrown away in compact fluorescent light bulbs each year is enough to pollute nearly every lake, pond, river and stream in North America (not to mention the oceans.")
Then, there is this. The CFL bulb “…. can cause people with epilepsy to experience symptoms similar to the early stages of a fit. There have also been complaints of discomfort from people with lupus”\." Read more about this in The Daily Mail at:
www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=463911&in_page_id=1774
Now… what if you accidentally drop and break one of the CFL’s? Well, you could be looking at a $2000.00 plus “professional clean-up job”. I mean… they do contain Mercury, remember? Don’t believe me? Check this story out: The CFL mercury nightmare [break a compact fluorescent, face $2000 in cleanup costs] at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1825609/posts
Add to this the fact, and I do mean fact… that there certainly appears to be less light output (lumens) from the CFL than from an incandescent bulb.
Now… all the research I have done tells me that the CFL’s produce the same lumens as a comparable incandescent bulb. But, in practice, I have found that replacing a 60 watt incandescent with a 60 watt CFL will not produce the same amount of lighting. The area I am trying to light is dimmer, not lighted nearly as well, with the CFL as it was with the incandescent. I have found the same true with 75-watt bulbs and 100-watt bulbs. I have even swapped the 60’s out for 75’s and the 75’s out for 100 watt CFL's and I STILL don’t see the crisp brightness I get from the old incandescent bulb.
These days, I am using 150 watt CFL.s to replace the old 100 watt incandescent bulbs around my home. And I am STILL not satisfied with the light from the CFL. In fact, I have taken to carrying a penlight flashlight in my pocket, all the time now, in order to see into many of the dark spaces that were not dark before the CFL's. (I suffer from "nearsightedness" and those of us with that curse require LIGHT to be able to see clearly.)
Now, I am not an engineer. I’m just an old country boy, who has been around the block a few times, and experience tells me there HAS to be something different about the lumens emitted by an incandescent and the lumens emitted by a CFL. Is it a different KIND of light -- a different COLOR of light? Is that what the matter is?
OK... so I did a bit more research and this is what I found:
A 100-watt incandescent light bulb will produce about 1200 lumens. I read that a 20 t0 25 watt CFL will produce the same amount of lumens... but… if the light fixture you are using isn’t DESIGNED for CFL's you will get a "dingy looking" light. Not nearly as bright as the old incandescent bulb! It seems someone forgot to inform us that CFL's radiate their light differently. What that means is... that even though the CFL is producing the same amount of lumens, it may not be producing the same amount of light to the lighted area! AHA! I knew it! Read more on this at:
http://lighterfootstep.com/how-to-live-with-cfls.html
So besides the fact that CFL's don’t work well in cold climates… or just plain old cold weather, they don’t work well, at all, in overhead fixtures, they don’t work, at all, with dimmers, they contain poison, they do not produce the same amount of light as the incandescent light bulbs… in today's light fixtures, and ...they must be treated as hazardous waste material when you get ready to toss one out, … why… they’re just GREAT!
Why do I get the feeling I’ve been scammed… yet again?
As I write, I am in my office, and I have five different light fixtures on right now. I have CFL's in all five of them and, frankly, it is as through I am sitting here, in front of this computer, working by the light of a number of oil lamps situated around the room! The light is that bad! If I drop something on the floor, I have to get up and turn on the overhead lights, which have four four-foot long fluorescent bulbs in them, so I can find the dropped item on the floor. If the dropped item happens to have rolled beneath my desk, out comes the trusty penlight pocket flashlight in order to find it in the shadows.
This is madness! I’m at the point, with the CFL bulbs, that I would happily see the oceans boil and keep my incandescent bulbs!
I have nearly depleted my horde of 100 watt incandescent bulbs. In fact, my last inventory I had only two bulbs left. I've been supplementing them with 90 watt bulbs I was able to find at one of the big box stores. They, too, will be gone soon.
I was thinking recently how the CFL bulb so accurately represents an America in decline. We've lost our "brightness", and have become the "dim lights" of the world as a result of our public eduction system that often ranks beneath that of third world countries. "Smart" people, "bright" people, would not have allowed their government to do this to them. But WE did.
I also wonder if a contributing factor to the lost luster of the once "Shining City On A Hill" is the possibility that we have changed all the light bulbs in the city to Compact Fluorescent Bulbs!
J. D. Longstreet
******************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
***********************
Back in 2012, the government took our 100 watt light bulbs and left us with these awful, pathetic, sickly, fluorescent bulbs. (The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act) These ugly, squiggly, things are called "Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs." In my opinion, the "light bulb" portion of the name is a fraud. Now that they have taken our 100 watt and 75 watt bulbs, they will relieve us of our 60 watt and 40 watt bulbs effective in 2014. (Stores will be allowed to sell their inventory of the 60 and 40 watt bulbs but after that -- there will be no more.)
Why does this upset me? WHY, indeed?!
I’ll point you in the direction of some evidence that the fluorescent bulbs may not be as helpful and energy efficient as claimed and might even damage American’s health and contribute to pollution of the earth. You decide, for yourself, if you really want to put them in your home, where you and your children will be exposed to them, or if you want to raise hell with the Congress until they repeal this ridiculous law and give us back our tried and true incandescent light bulbs.
Did you know it required a special exemption from the Environmental Protection Agency of the US government to allow fluorescent lamp bulbs to be sold to the pubic in the US in the first place? Why? Mercury, that’s why!
“Fluorescent lights are filled with a gas containing low-pressure mercury vapor and
argon, or sometimes even krypton. The inner surface of the bulb is
coated with a fluorescent coating made of varying blends of metallic and
rare earth phosphor salts. Fluorescent light bulbs are more energy
efficient than incandescent light bulbs of an equivalent brightness, and
the efficiency of fluorescent lighting owes much to low-pressure
mercury photon discharges. But fluorescents don't produce a steady
light, and they burn out more quickly when cycled frequently; they also
contain items such as fluorine, neon, and lead powder as well as
mercury.” (From: “Compact fluorescent light bulbs contaminate the environment with 30,000 pounds of mercury each year” at: http://www.newstarget.com/021907.html . (This
article was written by Mike Adams a natural health researcher and
author with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and
the power of nature to help us all heal He has authored and published
thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics
like health and the environment, impacting the lives of millions of
readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits
from reading his articles. Adams is an independent journalist with
strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product
or company.)Also from the same article we learn this:
“According to www.lightbulbrecycling.com, each year an estimated 600 million fluorescent lamps are disposed of in U.S. landfills, amounting to 30,000 pounds of mercury waste. Astonishingly, that's almost half the amount of mercury emitted into the atmosphere by coal-fired power plants each year. It only takes 4mg of mercury to contaminate up to 7,000 gallons of freshwater, meaning that the 30,000 pounds of mercury thrown away in compact fluorescent light bulbs each year is enough to pollute nearly every lake, pond, river and stream in North America (not to mention the oceans.")
Then, there is this. The CFL bulb “…. can cause people with epilepsy to experience symptoms similar to the early stages of a fit. There have also been complaints of discomfort from people with lupus”\." Read more about this in The Daily Mail at:
www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=463911&in_page_id=1774
Now… what if you accidentally drop and break one of the CFL’s? Well, you could be looking at a $2000.00 plus “professional clean-up job”. I mean… they do contain Mercury, remember? Don’t believe me? Check this story out: The CFL mercury nightmare [break a compact fluorescent, face $2000 in cleanup costs] at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1825609/posts
Add to this the fact, and I do mean fact… that there certainly appears to be less light output (lumens) from the CFL than from an incandescent bulb.
Now… all the research I have done tells me that the CFL’s produce the same lumens as a comparable incandescent bulb. But, in practice, I have found that replacing a 60 watt incandescent with a 60 watt CFL will not produce the same amount of lighting. The area I am trying to light is dimmer, not lighted nearly as well, with the CFL as it was with the incandescent. I have found the same true with 75-watt bulbs and 100-watt bulbs. I have even swapped the 60’s out for 75’s and the 75’s out for 100 watt CFL's and I STILL don’t see the crisp brightness I get from the old incandescent bulb.
These days, I am using 150 watt CFL.s to replace the old 100 watt incandescent bulbs around my home. And I am STILL not satisfied with the light from the CFL. In fact, I have taken to carrying a penlight flashlight in my pocket, all the time now, in order to see into many of the dark spaces that were not dark before the CFL's. (I suffer from "nearsightedness" and those of us with that curse require LIGHT to be able to see clearly.)
Now, I am not an engineer. I’m just an old country boy, who has been around the block a few times, and experience tells me there HAS to be something different about the lumens emitted by an incandescent and the lumens emitted by a CFL. Is it a different KIND of light -- a different COLOR of light? Is that what the matter is?
OK... so I did a bit more research and this is what I found:
A 100-watt incandescent light bulb will produce about 1200 lumens. I read that a 20 t0 25 watt CFL will produce the same amount of lumens... but… if the light fixture you are using isn’t DESIGNED for CFL's you will get a "dingy looking" light. Not nearly as bright as the old incandescent bulb! It seems someone forgot to inform us that CFL's radiate their light differently. What that means is... that even though the CFL is producing the same amount of lumens, it may not be producing the same amount of light to the lighted area! AHA! I knew it! Read more on this at:
http://lighterfootstep.com/how-to-live-with-cfls.html
So besides the fact that CFL's don’t work well in cold climates… or just plain old cold weather, they don’t work well, at all, in overhead fixtures, they don’t work, at all, with dimmers, they contain poison, they do not produce the same amount of light as the incandescent light bulbs… in today's light fixtures, and ...they must be treated as hazardous waste material when you get ready to toss one out, … why… they’re just GREAT!
Why do I get the feeling I’ve been scammed… yet again?
As I write, I am in my office, and I have five different light fixtures on right now. I have CFL's in all five of them and, frankly, it is as through I am sitting here, in front of this computer, working by the light of a number of oil lamps situated around the room! The light is that bad! If I drop something on the floor, I have to get up and turn on the overhead lights, which have four four-foot long fluorescent bulbs in them, so I can find the dropped item on the floor. If the dropped item happens to have rolled beneath my desk, out comes the trusty penlight pocket flashlight in order to find it in the shadows.
This is madness! I’m at the point, with the CFL bulbs, that I would happily see the oceans boil and keep my incandescent bulbs!
I have nearly depleted my horde of 100 watt incandescent bulbs. In fact, my last inventory I had only two bulbs left. I've been supplementing them with 90 watt bulbs I was able to find at one of the big box stores. They, too, will be gone soon.
I was thinking recently how the CFL bulb so accurately represents an America in decline. We've lost our "brightness", and have become the "dim lights" of the world as a result of our public eduction system that often ranks beneath that of third world countries. "Smart" people, "bright" people, would not have allowed their government to do this to them. But WE did.
I also wonder if a contributing factor to the lost luster of the once "Shining City On A Hill" is the possibility that we have changed all the light bulbs in the city to Compact Fluorescent Bulbs!
J. D. Longstreet
******************
Attention Visitor: If you have problems with a hacker redirecting you from this site (INSIGHT on Freedom), please go to: http://www.omegaoption.blogspot.com/.
"OMEGA OPTION" is the sister site to Insight on Freedom. Please feel free to leave comments at Omega Option. All four thousand and some blog posts from this site have been transferred to Omega Option. I appreciate all the traffic my sites receive.
I
hope to have the problem worked out soon. INSIGHT ON FREEDOM will
remain up for a while longer so that I might attempt a "fix." If
unsuccessful, I will be forced to take "INSIGHT on Freedom" down. Omega Option will then become the primary blog site for Longstreet's Commentaries.
Thank you!
******************
Thank you!
J. D. Longstreet
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)