We've moved!

Social Icons

twitterfacebooklinkedinrss feed

Friday, June 11, 2010

Bid to Bar EPA Carbon Regs Fails, But Not by Enough

Boy, hand me my Tea party application. I mean really, aren't you tired of a Congress that doesn't accurately reflect the will of the American people? 71% of Americans want Uncle Sam to regulate greenhouse gases. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike all give majority support to such legislation.

But in the U.S. Senate, every Republican and six Democrats reject the will of the people and vote against letting the EPA regulate carbon emissions. These naysaying usurpers were still a minority, but a far too large minority.

So I'm with you, Tea Party. Let's throw some bums out and replace them with legislators who are more attuned to what the American people really want.

p.s.: That reminds me: a big majority of Americans wanted a public insurance option included in health care reform. Congress rejected that, too. Time for more change!


  1. Giving you a generous benefit of the doubt here, you're missing what the Tea Party movement is about.

    It isn't about some populist mobocracy blather.

    Rather, it is about a return to sane and responsible government via the requirements of the United States Constitution.

    In short it is not about a form of populism or a democracy (which the founders deliberately rejected), but about the rule of law--with the U.S. Constitution chief of all laws.

    The Constitution grants no authority for wealth redistribution--not through socialized health care, and not through environmental hoaxes either.

    So if you're ready to finally honor the United States Constitution and help us restore our constitutional republic, welcome aboard.

    But since in the past you have always shown an irrepressible lust for socialist policies that are contrary to the American way of life, I have to be up front with you, though: there is no place in our constitutional republic for homage to hoaxes and junk science, nor is their constitutional authority for strangling the economic engine that supplies all we enjoy, and certainly no authority for wealth redistribution schemes.

    But if you're ready to join the real world and forsake the Fables of Marx, the Tea Party patriots welcome you!

  2. Bob, as always, your presumptuousness is astonishing. The truth is, you have no more authority to decide whether someone is— or is not — a Tea Party than you do to declare whether someone is, or is not Christian. But that never stops you from trying, does it?

  3. If the EPA is the only tool Americans have to make changes, we're in big trouble.

    Think contributor base.

    Stockholders really control the messages lobbyists whisper into Congressional ears. Only the targeted massive boycott of product will shift that.

    If enough pressure is put on specific areas of the market investors will pull some money from stocks and buy municipal bonds, where more local control can do good.

    Bankrupt the offenders.

  4. Bill, as always, your attempts to avoid unpleasant truths and distract others from the truth is astonishing.

    (As a side note, I'm curious from where you derive the presumptuous authority to question my statements :-)

    Do I have any authority to decide whether the sun is in the sky? Do I have any authority to decide whether something is Christian in doctrine? Do I have any authority to decide whether something is Republican in philosophy?

    The real question is: do I NEED any authority to state the obvious? No. I require no particular authority to state the sun is in the sky because anyone who wants to can verify it by looking up. I require no particular authority to say what is Christian in doctrine because anyone can look it up in the Bible. I require no particular authority to say what is Republican in philosophy because that, took, is easy to look up since Republicans have clearly articulated their values in their "Why I am a Republican" statement and in their platform.

    In other words, one needs no particular authority to state an obvious truth, other than a familiarity with that truth and a commitment not to distort that truth.

    The same is true of the Tea Party movement. I have been involved with it since the beginning, I helped found a Tea Party group and I help lead one. I have closely monitored the statements and activities of Tea Party groups across the country. I am as familiar with the beliefs of the Tea Party movement as anyone you can find, and like Christian and Republican beliefs, Tea Party beliefs aren't hard to ascertain, either. Tea Party groups all across the country are centered around principles of limited, constitutional government.

    But I know that you don't like having it demonstrated that you are wrong, so instead of attack truths you know can't be defeated, you find it easier to attack the messenger. I have no problem with that, since the truth isn't about me, but I want to make sure the truth is not lost amidst your attempts to muddy the waters and distract people.

  5. I suppose it's pointless to expect Bob to know the difference between an empirical fact and a subjective judgement call.

    The fact that the sun is up is obvious, objective and demonstrable. The opinion that one is Christian and/or a Tea Party member purely subjective.

    Ask 10 Christians what a Christian is, you get 10 different answers. Same with Tea Party people and for that matter, Republicans or Democrats... and, (unfortunately for Bob) even Americans and Patriots.

  6. Bob-

    Just a quick question. How do you define a "fact"?

    I'm a bit confused about it because in your first post you make many claims that I consider non-obvious and would require some form of support for me to accept. You seem to just assume that everyone is on board with how you see things.

    For example, when you say "socialist policies that are contrary to the American way of life" you state that without evidence and to which many arguments could be made.

  7. Apparently it's pointless to try and teach Bill a single thing about truth; one cannot learn when one insists on remaining ignorant. He loves too much to avoid responsibility by pretending there is no truth and that one cannot know it even if it did exist.

    That leaves a lot of wiggle room for error, immoral behavior, and liberalism...which is what he likes best.

    There will come a day, though, when you will be held responsible for what you did or didn't do with truth, Bill--even the very fact that you ran from it. I hope you learn to seek it and embrace it before the opportunity is forever lost to you.

  8. I don't "just assume that everyone is on board with how you see things." I know full well that there are plenty of people (such as those often found in Madville) who are not only not "on board with how you see things," but are in total denial about facts and reality in general. But I cannot hold a meaningful conversation or impart meaningful information while entertaining errors and falsehoods as if they had any validity, any more than I could have a legitimate dialog about a package of hot dogs that someone insisted was an eggplant. They may insist on calling it an eggplant, but the fact that the object contains several cylindrical objects made of meat and says "hot dogs" on the package means I can only reasonably call it a package of hot dogs; pretending that it might actually be an eggplant wastes everyone's time and gets us no closer to reality.

    In examining whether something is in harmony with something else or meets a certain criteria, consider real currency and counterfeit currency.

    When someone has looked closely at genuine currency for a considerable time and knows just what genuine currency looks and feels like, they can spot counterfeit currency pretty easily. Likewise, someone who has taken the time to study our Constitution and our founding principles can spot counterfeit principles, or principles that aren't in harmony with the way our nation was designed to run and by law (i.e. the highest law of the land: the Constitution) should run. Those who aren't familiar with what genuine currency (or genuine American principles) look like, may be taken in by a fake. Someone who is familiar with how real currency (or real Constitutional policy) is supposed to look can point out these differenced to someone less familiar with them. Now, bad eyesight, poor observation skills, or a simple unwillingness to learn can prevent them from grasping these differences--especially if they have taken in several of these counterfeit bills and stand to lose a substantial investment by acknowledging that they are illegitimate. In fact, if the person attempting to pass the counterfeit currency is themselves knowingly trying to pass off fakes as genuine in an attempt to secure illegitimate gain, they will likely not only vehemently deny any knowledge of their illegitimacy, but may in fact insist they are genuine, hoping the other person will be fooled by their "confidence" (thus the term "con artist"). Unfortunately there are also those who are unable or unwilling to openly identify counterfeits of American principles--for the same reasons.

    Fortunately for those who are genuinely interested in the truth don't need vast amounts of training to understand the Constitution, American history, or grasp the fundamental principles of Americanism. Even the people of the relatively agrarian 18th Century could understand these things. Of course, they had just thrown off the yoke of bondage to oppressive government, and had no desire (like some today) to re-enslave themselves out of a desire for, as Samuel Adams put it, "the tranquility of servitude" in exchange for "the animated contest of freedom." (CONT)

  9. (CONT)
    But to get more to the point of your query about facts: Put simply, Tony, facts are things which are well established and verifiable

    For instance, as I discussed earlier, it is well established and verifiable that the sun is in the sky during the daytime. Republican principles are well-established and verifiable (even though some people who call themselves "Republican" do not follow them) because they are well-established and defined (you can look them up on Republican websites including the national GOP website. Christian principles are well-established and verifiable. You can open the Bible and look them up, and unless you have an agenda to deliberately disbelieve them, you will easily determine what they are.

    Tea Party movement principles are well-established and verifiable. Go to any Tea Party event or talk to any Tea Party person about what motivates them and they will describe principles of limited government and constitutionalism to you.

    Finally, it is also verifiable that "socialist policies that are contrary to the American way of life." Socialist policies require government to intervene in areas where it clearly has no authority; check Article 1 Section 8 in addition to the Tenth Amendment. Socialim holds that government is authorized and empowered to medddle in the operations of privatley owned businesses because government can should better decide how to run that business than the owners; there is no constitutional authority for such interference with private businesses. Socialist policies assume government knows better than the individual how to run their own life and should be empowered to make everyday decisions for the individual; there is no constitutional authority for this, and it runs completely counter to the principles of freedom and personal responsibility enjoyed by Americans since the dawn of our nation. Socialist policies require wealth redistribution; there is no constitutional authority for the federal government to do this, and it is contrary to the American way of life which involves personal responsibility and private charity to the needy. Socialism posits that government should be able to forceably take property from one person and give it to another person the government deems to be "in greater need" than the owner of that property; there is no constitutional authority for such activities, and Americans have since the birth of our nation recognized such undertakings as "theft."

    All of these things are verifiable in the U.S. Constitution and by recorded historical fact.

  10. Hey Zeus!

    Bob, you're cutting and pasting from the McCarthy hearings, right?

    This "Socialism posits that government should be able to forceably take property from one person and give it to another person the government deems to be "in greater need" than the owner of that property..." bent is a bizarre interpretation of the rule of law, if not complete delusion.

    Stick to your scholarship of christian dogmatic text, you suck at political science.

  11. Lying about your ideology again, I see Larry.

    You might want to read again the part where I said, "In fact, if the person attempting to pass the counterfeit currency is themselves knowingly trying to pass off fakes as genuine in an attempt to secure illegitimate gain, they will likely not only vehemently deny any knowledge of their illegitimacy, but may in fact insist they are genuine, hoping the other person will be fooled by their "confidence" (thus the term 'con artist'). "

    Come on, be brave: just admit your ideology and goals up front. It would be so refreshing. I know it's tough for Marxists to be honest, but I have faith in you.

  12. With Ellis, you can always tell, the wronger he is, the longer he writes.

  13. Posters with institutional memory here will recall that Ellis will deny the constancy of the speed of light if it suits his rhetorical purposes. So much for the rest of absolutist arguments here.

    We have met the charlatan, and his name is Bob. He is, at long last, nothing but a bombastic, boorish mountebank.

    How do I know this?

    Well, I just took Bob's advice, to wit:

    "When someone has looked closely at genuine currency for a considerable time and knows just what genuine currency looks and feels like, they can spot counterfeit currency pretty easily."

  14. Sorry I lost you there, Bill. There are tough choices when trying to explain things to ignorant people. You can either provide quick explanations that may be too quick and leave them in their ignorance...or you can provide a more detailed explanation so that even the dim-witted should eventually pick up on the truth--but some are so dim-witted that they simply can't follow along at all.

    Then there are those who are emotionally and ideologically invested in refusing to drink even when led painstakingly to water. It's obvious which kind you are.

    Nevertheless, I can say that I have gone to great lengths to help you find truth; I really want to help you, but of course you can't help someone who refuses to be helped. You'll have a lot to answer for someday when someone powerful beyond your wildest imagination finally asks you why you thumbed your nose at truth. But according to Ezekiel 3:18-19 I have met my responsibilities.

  15. Bob, I may, in your apocalyptic mind, have a lot to answer for some pie-in-the-sky day, but you, my friend, have a lot to answer for right now, this minute.

    And so far, you're not doing a very good job of it. I can't find one person who agrees with you on any of this.


    I'm sorry, man but so far, you're just a legend in your own mind. A study in the pathology of a grandiose delusional, narcissist personality type.

  16. Further reading for Ellis:

    DYSFUNCTIONAL COGNITIVE PROCESSING. An elaborate term for thinking is "cognitive processing." Delusions may arise from distorted ways people have of explaining life to themselves. The most prominent cognitive problems involve the manner in which delusion sufferers develop conclusions both about other people, and about causation of unusual perceptions or negative events. Studies examining how people with delusions develop theories about reality show that the subjects have ideas which which they tend to reach an inference based on less information than most people use. This "jumping to conclusions" bias can lead to delusional interpretations of ordinary events. ... Additional research shows that persons prone to delusions "read" people differently than non-delusional individuals do. Whether they do so more accurately or particularly poorly is a matter of controversy. Delusional persons develop interpretations about how others view them that are distorted. They tend to view life as a continuing series of threatening events. When these two aspects of thought co-occur, a tendency to develop delusions about others wishing to do them harm is likely.

  17. I'm sorry, Bill, but if you continue to look among the liars and deluded, you will never find affirmation of the truth. They are as desperate to avoid the light as you.

    I can no more tickle your ears and provide the comforting lies you so desperately want to want to wrap yourself in than I can pretend that light is dark and dark is light.

    I hope someday you can find an end to your arrogance and pride, and be able to embrace the truth. I really, really do.

    But apparently it will not be today.

  18. Today, I'm just looking at you, Bob, to see if there's anyone home. Or if your mind has gone on permanent autopilot.

    One clear signal you could send us would be a demonstration that you have the ability to come off your act.

    Sane people can do that. Psychotics can't.

    It's as simple as that. (Even Sibby comes clean once in a while, just to show us he's not completely bonkers.)

    So far, your funking in the reality department, brother, sorry to say.

    I'm getting ready to recommend therapy.

  19. Bill, I always funk in the reality department.

  20. HA! Cory, I know, huh? I caught that typo and decided to leave it. Call it a happy accident. Artists love those (as you know.)

  21. Great vid link, BTW, CH. Good an' funkee.

  22. Maybe that's part of your problem, Bill. Maybe you're so used to putting on an act and being fake that you believe everyone else is too--especially someone who believes in values that you are too lazy to even consider embracing. Always catering to and aiming for the lowest common denominator is ruining your soul, Bill.

    I assure you, the values of virtue, public morality, limited government, freedom and truth are no illusion and they are no act.

    It's very sad, though, that you consider them a game or an act, worthy only of mockery (Psalm 1:1) You should try the grownup world sometime; it's much more fulfilling than living in the peanut gallery with the juvenile delinquents.

  23. Yup. Just as predicted. Thanks for the confirmation, Bob. Take good care of yourself, my friend.

    p.s. Just to help you keep it straight here, Bob (to the degree that's even possible), we're not talking about MY problem today. We're talking about YOUR problem.

    (Readers please note, "Projection" is another classic symptom of psychosis.)

  24. Wow. I don't even know how to join this thread but to say:

    Bill, by Bob's authority you are

    stupid, ignorant, a liar, etc.

    If it is any consolation, I've been called the same thing by him.

  25. Troy, yes, I know. Allow me to apologize on his behalf, my friend. The man can't help himself.


Comments are closed, as this portion of the Madville Times is in archive mode. You can join the discussion of current issues at MadvilleTimes.com.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.