Has anyone seen "Chicken Little" Al Gore lately?
He's been strangely quiet. Must be crunching the numbers so that he can predict triple-digit temperatures for July and August to support his faltering global warming hubris.
See you around, Al.
Showing posts with label nonsense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nonsense. Show all posts
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Horrific Nebraska Child-Abandonment Law Needs to be Repealed NOW: Seventeen Kids Abandoned So Far
Back on September 25th, I wrote about the new Nebraska law that allows parents to abandon kids at local hospitals up to the age of 17, and not just infants. A father had just dropped off nine kids at a Nebraska hospital, and I predicted that the floodgates were open.
A blind man could have seen this one coming; Nebraska legislators have decided to hold a hearing on the new law after parents began dropping off their teenagers in increasing numbers. And for the first time since this abomination became law, parents are starting to drive in from neighboring states to abandon their kids in Nebraska too.
Who's the IDIOT or group of IDIOTS who came up with this STUPID plan? What were they thinking was going to happen? And how many kids are going to suffer devastating mental issues from being abandoned like garbage at a dump by their parents/guardians?
Yes, there's only 17 kids who have been abandoned since this law came into effect, but it's 17 new child placement cases, which is far too many. According to Nebraska officials, none of the kids were in life-threatening situations at home. The older kids said during interviews with child welfare experts that they had frustrated parents trying to deal with the issues normally associated with raising kids, and teenagers in particular and gave up.
This law is draconian, and I hope that the Nebraska legislature reverses a terrible mistake and takes care of the kids that it is partially responsible for orphaning. And it takes steps to strengthen their family and child welfare programs so the parents have more choices than abandoning their families to the state.
A blind man could have seen this one coming; Nebraska legislators have decided to hold a hearing on the new law after parents began dropping off their teenagers in increasing numbers. And for the first time since this abomination became law, parents are starting to drive in from neighboring states to abandon their kids in Nebraska too.
Who's the IDIOT or group of IDIOTS who came up with this STUPID plan? What were they thinking was going to happen? And how many kids are going to suffer devastating mental issues from being abandoned like garbage at a dump by their parents/guardians?
Yes, there's only 17 kids who have been abandoned since this law came into effect, but it's 17 new child placement cases, which is far too many. According to Nebraska officials, none of the kids were in life-threatening situations at home. The older kids said during interviews with child welfare experts that they had frustrated parents trying to deal with the issues normally associated with raising kids, and teenagers in particular and gave up.
This law is draconian, and I hope that the Nebraska legislature reverses a terrible mistake and takes care of the kids that it is partially responsible for orphaning. And it takes steps to strengthen their family and child welfare programs so the parents have more choices than abandoning their families to the state.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Presidential Signing Statements: President Bush Has Exceeded His Authority
In the history of the U.S. presidency, every President since George Washington has added comments to bills that they just signed; in many instances, it's to thank people who were instrumental in passing the legislation through the House and Senate; other times it's to voice displeasure with parts of the bill, or why they're supporting it, or other reasons.
President Bush has done something new.
In his presidential signing statements, he announces which parts of the bill he won't enforce. On a bill he just signed. What is the point in signing a bill if he isn't going to enforce it in it's entirety? Why didn't he veto it instead?
But that's not the worst of it. He's done this 500 times now, citing his interpretation of the Constitution and "national security." Since he's been so busy shredding parts of the Constitution that he doesn't like, perhaps he needs to re-read Article I Section 7.
The long and the short of Article I, Section 7: if the President signs a bill, it becomes law, and the President's branch of government oversees it's execution.
These 500 signing statements have impacted nearly 750 laws in all.
And it nearly equals the number of signing statements by all his predecessors--combined.
Every President has had legislation come across his desk that he didn't like, but forty-two of them were big enough to tell Congress to publicly "stick it where the sun don't shine" by vetoing an objectionable bill and forcing Congress to try an override, or signing it and living with it. But President Bush and his obsession with national security and secrecy decided to not enforce parts of dozens of laws, behind closed doors and out of the spotlight.
He should have been vetoing bills left and right, and if Congress overrode a bill he considered "unconstitutional" or imposing on presidential power, he should have filed suit in court.
This is nothing short of an all-out assault on the separation of powers. I don't like it, and some major judicial reviews need to happen to shrink presidential powers back to a more reasonable level.
The current administration is lucky that we're not midway through their term in office; Congress might have taken these five hundred presidential signing statements and turn them into parts of articles of impeachment. I don't know how the government will deal with this now, if at all.
I think after the Bush Administration leaves office, the full extent of what they've been doing will come into the light, and we'll be shocked beyond belief at what's been really going on. I'm more disappointed in this Administration than I was in the last one. I don't make that statement lightly.
What a mess.
President Bush has done something new.
In his presidential signing statements, he announces which parts of the bill he won't enforce. On a bill he just signed. What is the point in signing a bill if he isn't going to enforce it in it's entirety? Why didn't he veto it instead?
But that's not the worst of it. He's done this 500 times now, citing his interpretation of the Constitution and "national security." Since he's been so busy shredding parts of the Constitution that he doesn't like, perhaps he needs to re-read Article I Section 7.
The long and the short of Article I, Section 7: if the President signs a bill, it becomes law, and the President's branch of government oversees it's execution.
These 500 signing statements have impacted nearly 750 laws in all.
And it nearly equals the number of signing statements by all his predecessors--combined.
Every President has had legislation come across his desk that he didn't like, but forty-two of them were big enough to tell Congress to publicly "stick it where the sun don't shine" by vetoing an objectionable bill and forcing Congress to try an override, or signing it and living with it. But President Bush and his obsession with national security and secrecy decided to not enforce parts of dozens of laws, behind closed doors and out of the spotlight.
He should have been vetoing bills left and right, and if Congress overrode a bill he considered "unconstitutional" or imposing on presidential power, he should have filed suit in court.
This is nothing short of an all-out assault on the separation of powers. I don't like it, and some major judicial reviews need to happen to shrink presidential powers back to a more reasonable level.
The current administration is lucky that we're not midway through their term in office; Congress might have taken these five hundred presidential signing statements and turn them into parts of articles of impeachment. I don't know how the government will deal with this now, if at all.
I think after the Bush Administration leaves office, the full extent of what they've been doing will come into the light, and we'll be shocked beyond belief at what's been really going on. I'm more disappointed in this Administration than I was in the last one. I don't make that statement lightly.
What a mess.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Global Warming Hubris: Carbon Credit Market is a "Feel-Good About Polluting" SCAM, Nothing More
The carbon offset market is FINALLY being shown to be a huge fraud that takes provides those with a guilty conscience (about contributing to the world's carbon emission problem) a "feel-good" solution that ultimately does nothing. This is really dumb. And now some in the media seem to be treating the carbon market with a bit of well-earned skepticism.
Here's another report.
The Hollywood crowd that has joined the global warming alarmism campaign and use their celebrity star power to spread the word about the "threat" of global warming and toot their own horns about purchasing carbon credits should ground their private gas-guzzling jets instead. That would stop the carbons from getting into the atmosphere more than purchasing carbon credits from questionable sources who may not be doing what they're saying they're doing to reduce carbon. Or selling credits that they've already sold to someone else.
Global warming is inevitable, with or without us adding to or taking away from it. It's going to happen regardless of what we do, which makes this claim of man-made global warming highly dubious at best. If the governments of the world want to improve the environment for everyone, I am in complete agreement with that.
But trying to stop something that's as inevitable as global warming is the height of folly. Those with guilty consciences should learn to LIVE WITH IT and plant the damn trees themselves.
Someone, PLEASE, save these people from themselves!
But if no one wants to, then here's how to jump in on this fiasco.
Here's another report.
The Hollywood crowd that has joined the global warming alarmism campaign and use their celebrity star power to spread the word about the "threat" of global warming and toot their own horns about purchasing carbon credits should ground their private gas-guzzling jets instead. That would stop the carbons from getting into the atmosphere more than purchasing carbon credits from questionable sources who may not be doing what they're saying they're doing to reduce carbon. Or selling credits that they've already sold to someone else.
Global warming is inevitable, with or without us adding to or taking away from it. It's going to happen regardless of what we do, which makes this claim of man-made global warming highly dubious at best. If the governments of the world want to improve the environment for everyone, I am in complete agreement with that.
But trying to stop something that's as inevitable as global warming is the height of folly. Those with guilty consciences should learn to LIVE WITH IT and plant the damn trees themselves.
Someone, PLEASE, save these people from themselves!
But if no one wants to, then here's how to jump in on this fiasco.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)