Hurr-ray hurr-ray, step right up and get your carbon credits while they’re hot!

WEDNESDAY 4-30-08…Of all the “global warming” claptrap we’ve seen in our mainstream media, nothing points more to its hoax than the idea of “cap and trade”. In Europe, it’s called “carbon credits.” The idea is….if a company is told it can only emit fifteen tons of emissions per year (that’s the cap) and at the end of the year, it only emitted ten tons, it can sell the five tons it didn’t emit to a company that exceed it’s allotted emissions, or cap. (That’s the trade.) Rightfully, it should be call “buy and sell.”

An article in the London Daily Telegraph explains it quite simply, this way:

Company A is permitted 15 ton of emission per year, and company B is permitted 12 tons of emissions per year. If company A needs or wants to produce 17 tons of emissions, and company B is only producing 9 tons in a given year, company B can sell its “excess” allotment to company A.

No one has reduced the amount of emissions they were going to produce. And guess who gets to pay for the excess allotment that company A purchased from company B? It’s customers, or course. So, people in Britain are now paying through the nose for electricity and get not one iota of anything in return — not even reduced emissions. It’s like being forced to buy air.

I’ve always said, when it comes to global warming, just follow the money trail and you’ll be able to identify those who are pushing the scam and profiting handsomely from it.

The London Telegraph included this paragraph: “The whole scheme is a scam. Want to guess who is a major shareholder in two companies that make money brokering trades of Carbon Credits among corporations in Europe? Al Gore! Yup, he’s laughing himself all the way to the bank.”

So, in this country, when you hear the term “cap and trade”…just remember, it’s really buy and sell.


Fake war heroes – Ok if you are state officials

TUESDAY 4-29-08…It absolutely amazes me when I watch our democrat-controlled state legislature in action. You’d think I’d be used to it by now, but I’m not. The latest “keystone kops” ridiculousness involves Senate Bill 1482. It’s a bill by State Senator Lou Correa, which, on the surface seems like a good idea.

It would require local officials to forfeit their offices if convicted in federal court of violating the Stolen Valor Act of 2005, by claiming to have earned military decorations for which they were not entitled. My first question would be…”Why just local officials?” Seems to me such a bill should rightfully include all elected officials, city, county, state and federal.

Members of the Senate Committee debated the bill, and even touched on including the state’s elected officials, but for some strange reason, decided that wasn’t necessary. My first reaction was “Who, and how many in our state legislature are they trying to protect?” How many of our state elected officials got where they are by pretending to be a military hero, sporting ribbons and medals purchased at surplus stores or online?

We’ll never know. The idea of including state elected officials was left out of the Senate Bill, which was passed and sent on to the next committee.

Meanwhile, in the Assembly, AB 2149 was being debated. Investment advisers could not use titles along with their names, unless they’ve actually earned those titles. In other words, if a person uses the title “Senior Investment Advisor”, they better really be one, and prove it. Violators would risk license revocation if convicted. Democrat Patty Berg says “If you want to use a title, you have to earn it.”

Sounds good to me, but why shouldn’t the same apply to state elected officials who claim to be something they’re not? Sounds to me like democrats are giving them a free pass.


Uhh Jimmy, did ya notice the world criticsim?

MONDAY 4-28-08…So, former president Jimmy Carter took it upon himself to try to bring peace between Israel and the Islamic terrorist group Hamas. He says he managed to get Hamas leaders to agree to accept the Jewish state as a neighbor next door.

Then Hamas immediately began firing rockets across the border at it’s new neighbor contradicting the Islamic militant group’s positive words about co-existing. A four year old boy was wounded during the seven-rocket attack.

Hamas rocket – a dud this time

Meanwhile, the new Pakistan government has begun dialog with Islamic militants in that country, with the Pakistani government agreeing to pull it’s military forces out of the border area with Afghanistan. It resulted in a six-week lull before a suicide bomber blew himself up in a marketplace across from a police station.

Pakistan’s president Musharraf also struck truces with militants as well as Taliban and al Qaida fighters in the past. All that accomplished was giving militants the opportunity to resupply and build up their strength.

On the campaign trail in this country, Barack Obama who wants to be president and commander in chief says he wants to go to Iran and dialog with Iran’s president Amadinejad, and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and all other leaders who “hate America.” I remember pointing this out in an earlier Tidbit, saying how it scares me to think a U.S. President would go hand-in-hand, chin on chest to dialog with those that hate us.

It brought back recollections of British Prime Minister Nevil Chamberlain traveling to Germany to “dialog” with Adolph Hitler. After signing the slip of paper guaranteeing England peace, Hitler unleashed his buzz-bombs on the British populace.

Dialog with enemies? Militant Islamic fanatics, al Qaida, Hamas? Former president Jimmy Carter failed to realize it’s a recipe for disaster. But, then again, we must remember, Jimmy Carter failed miserably during his one term as president. That’s why it was only one term!

Whoever the next U.S. President turns out to be, let’s hope the individual is one who has learned from the events of history.


Good to the last drop

FRIDAY 4-25-08…Over the past few decades, coffee has gotten a bad rap (off and on) from food cops, nutrition “experts” and others who seem to be hell-bent on making everyone conform to what they feel is best for you.

I remember when decaffeinated coffee was first introduced. It was touted as the panacea for all the ills off regular coffee because caffeine was drug and drugs are “bad”. Soon thereafter came word that decaffeinated coffee was more likely to cause cancer, depending on how the caffeine was extracted.

But now comes word from three different sources showing coffee may cut the risk of dementia by blocking the damage cholesterol can inflict on the body. Coffee has already been linked to a lower risk of Alzheimer’s Disease.

Without getting too technical, there is a barrier between the brain and the main blood supply. The blood-brain barrier is a filter that protects the central nervous system from harmful chemicals carried around in the rest of the bloodstream. Studies show that high levels of cholesterol in the blood can make this barrier leak.

However, in tests, the blood brain barrier was protected in those given a caffeine supplement. Dr. Jonathan Geiger at the University of North Dakota says “Caffeine is a safe and readily available drug and its ability to stabilize the blood brain barrier means it could have an important part to play in therapies against neurological disorders.”

Then, in the Sacramento BEE, an article by Dr. Kay and Dr. Max pointed out two to four cups of regular coffee per day has been shown to reduce the incidence of gallbladder disease by up to 45 percent. Decaf coffee did not provide the same benefit.

For the coffee industry, I would say the defense rests.

Homo Rejectus

THURSDAY 4-24-08…San Jose State University has come to the conclusion that prohibiting homosexuals from donating blood simply isn’t fair, and that it’s discriminating against men who simply prefer sex with other men. So, the university says there’ll be no more blood drives on its campuses. If homosexuals aren’t allowed to donate blood, then nobody else is either.

As soon as that announcement was made, two other South Bay community colleges quickly jumped on board with the “us too, us too” scenario, and Sonoma State University is considering following suit.

The Food and Drug Administration refuses blood donations from men who admit to having had sexual contact with other men. It also refuses blood donations from people who have been imprisoned during the preceding twelve months, those who have lived in Africa, or have lived with someone from Africa, and those who have used illegal needle drugs or paid for sexual favors.

The Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta says more than 560,000 Americans have died of AIDS since 1985, and over 36 thousand new cases of AIDS reported in the U.S. in 2006, 45 percent of which were contracted by homosexual contact.

The whole idea for the constraints by the FDA is simply to protect the public from tainted blood. For a handful of California’s colleges and universities to ban blood drives, unless and until homosexuals are allowed to donate, is irresponsible and certainly counterproductive.

Save the whales

WEDNESDAY 4-23-08…Most states have laws that protect people from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation and ancestry. You’d think that oughtta be enough, right? Well, you’d be wrong!

The state of Massachusetts is on the verge of adding height and weight to the anti-discriminatory list (as if Massachusetts didn’t have enough problems created by Liberals already.) Democrat state representative Byron Rushing of Boston is sponsoring the legislation. He points out that San Francisco has a similar anti-discrimination law….so if its good enough for the city by the bay, it should be good enough for Massachusetts.

Brian Gilmore is the executive vice president of the Associated Industries of Massachusetts and says the bill is just another example of people going too far with regulations. In my opinion, is just another perfect example of liberalism wanting to control everybody’s lives.

I can see it all now if it passes in that state. Can you imagine a guy about five feet tall wanting to fulfill a lifelong dream of becoming a police officer. He’s 5’2″ and weights 139 pounds soaking wet. He fills out an application to become a cop only to be told he’s physically under par for such a job. He files a lawsuit claiming discrimination because of his height and weight. He wins! It’s like hitting the lottery, so other shorties decide to take a crack at it.

Or how about the morbidly obese individual who has to use a walker to get around. The person has always wanted to be a waiter or waitress. Fill out application, get turned down. File lawsuit for discrimination.

The bill working its way through that state’s legislature is a litigious individual’s goldmine and big trouble for that state. But then again, liberalism is big trouble everywhere it surfaces. Just take a look at our state legislature here in California.

Go forth and spendify

TUESDAY 4-22-08…Only a few more weeks to go before the IRS starts sending out checks. No, I’m not talking about normal tax refunds. The economic stimulus checks. It  represents the federal government’s efforts to stimulate the economy. You see, this country’s economic engine gets two thirds of it’s power from consumer spending. If consumers stop spending, the engine begins to sputter. The longer consumers refrain from spending, the power of the engine is sapped.

Why aren’t consumers spending? Apparently, the federal government didn’t find it necessary to look into that aspect. It saw the engine sputtering and decided to add a little bottle of octane to stimulate it. If my car’s engine started sputtering, I’d wanna’ know why.

In the case of the economy, higher prices at the gas pumps, in the grocery stores, restaurants, shops, mortgages, inflation in general, has pushed prices far beyond the discretionary money in people’s pockets. What money they do have goes for the essentials, gas and groceries. Everything else takes a back seat.

So, the federal government decided “We better give the people back some of their money.” Thus….the economic stimulus checks are due to start arriving in May. I wonder if the government realizes that it is admitting that it has been taking too much of our money by way of taxes, and that it is giving back some of the excesses it has taken from us?

If in fact it succeeds in stimulating the economy, will the federal government decide to permanently cut everyone’s taxes? You’d think so, huh? If the federal government is giving us back some of the money it took from us, and it succeeds in stimulating the economy, wouldn’t it stand to reason the government should let us keep more of the money we earn, and make the Bush tax cuts permanent?

Remember, it was our lack of spending which made the government realize the economic engine was sputtering. So, the government adds a bottle of octane to the engine. What happens when the bottle of octane (stimulus check) is used up? Does the economic engine begin to sputter again. If keeping money in consumer’s pockets was the sole purpose of keeping the engine running, wouldn’t it be prudent to cut everybody’s taxes so they’d be able to keep more of the money they’ve earned?