Drill For Oil Everywhere!

Here is a video from a local TV station featuring Jamie Allman, a popular radio talk show host in St. Louis.

I say drill everywhere possible with the current technology (that uses very little land.)

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

The Green Police Live Inside of My Head….

I thought this ad was both hilarious and scary.  I’m sure the enviros saw this ad as a call to arms. 

(If you don’t get the title of the post, see The Dream Police by Cheap Trick.)

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Man’s Best Friend is Killing the Planet

In all the frenzy of Climate Change, Global Warming, Global Cooling, Kyoto, Copenhagen (the city not the snuff), etc. etc., evidently your lovable dog is killing the planet.  No, I’m not exaggerating. 

In an article from France entitled, “Polluting pets: the devastating impact of man’s best friend,” the author expounds on how detrimental dogs are to the planet.  I decided to reprint the whole article as I find it rather humorous.

PARIS (AFP) – Man’s best friend could be one of the environment’s worst enemies, according to a new study which says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle.

But the revelation in the book “Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living” by New Zealanders Robert and Brenda Vale has angered pet owners who feel they are being singled out as troublemakers.

The Vales, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, analysed popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164 kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year.

Combine the land required to generate its food and a “medium” sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) — around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4×4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

To confirm the results, the New Scientist magazine asked John Barrett at the Stockholm Environment Institute in York, Britain, to calculate eco-pawprints based on his own data. The results were essentially the same.

“Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat,” Barrett said.

Other animals aren’t much better for the environment, the Vales say.

Cats have an eco-footprint of about 0.15 hectares, slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year, while two hamsters equates to a plasma television and even the humble goldfish burns energy equivalent to two mobile telephones.

But Reha Huttin, president of France’s 30 Million Friends animal rights foundation says the human impact of eliminating pets would be equally devastating.

“Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly,” Huttin told AFP.

“Everyone should work out their own environmental impact. I should be allowed to say that I walk instead of using my car and that I don’t eat meat, so why shouldn’t I be allowed to have a little cat to alleviate my loneliness?”

Sylvie Comont, proud owner of seven cats and two dogs — the environmental equivalent of a small fleet of cars — says defiantly, “Our animals give us so much that I don’t feel like a polluter at all.

“I think the love we have for our animals and what they contribute to our lives outweighs the environmental considerations.

“I don’t want a life without animals,” she told AFP.

And pets’ environmental impact is not limited to their carbon footprint, as cats and dogs devastate wildlife, spread disease and pollute waterways, the Vales say.

With a total 7.7 million cats in Britain, more than 188 million wild animals are hunted, killed and eaten by feline predators per year, or an average 25 birds, mammals and frogs per cat, according to figures in the New Scientist.

Likewise, dogs decrease biodiversity in areas they are walked, while their faeces cause high bacterial levels in rivers and streams, making the water unsafe to drink, starving waterways of oxygen and killing aquatic life.

And cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo — owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease.

But despite the apocalyptic visions of domesticated animals’ environmental impact, solutions exist, including reducing pets’ protein-rich meat intake.

“If pussy is scoffing ‘Fancy Feast’ — or some other food made from choice cuts of meat — then the relative impact is likely to be high,” said Robert Vale.

“If, on the other hand, the cat is fed on fish heads and other leftovers from the fishmonger, the impact will be lower.”

Other potential positive steps include avoiding walking your dog in wildlife-rich areas and keeping your cat indoors at night when it has a particular thirst for other, smaller animals’ blood.

As with buying a car, humans are also encouraged to take the environmental impact of their future possession/companion into account.

But the best way of compensating for that paw or clawprint is to make sure your animal is dual purpose, the Vales urge. Get a hen, which offsets its impact by laying edible eggs, or a rabbit, prepared to make the ultimate environmental sacrifice by ending up on the dinner table.

“Rabbits are good, provided you eat them,” said Robert Vale.

 

So not only are cows and volcanoes bad for the environment, but I guess we can add dogs and other domesticated animals to the mix.  I wonder how long it will be before we start to get rid of the humans.  Next step: Soylent Green.  I’m just sayin.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Poet Al Gore Gets Creepy on The Early Show

This is just a tad creepy.  I think there is a little man-love going on here.

Try to contain yourself Harry Smith.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Conservatarian Values: Common Sense for America

As we are a country of many views and thoughts, not many people fall simply within Republican or Democrat camps.  A small portion of the electorate adhere to a hybrid version that I and others dub as conservatarian.  This is a combination of conservative and libertarian viewpoints.

Abortion – Abortion is the taking of a life.  Human rights should apply to everyone, even the unborn. 

Crime and Justice – Protect citizens through effective law enforcement.  Penalize those individuals who do not follow the rule of law with common sense sentencing and limited parole.

Self-Defense – The ability to defend yourself, your property, and your family.

Environmental Issues – The environment should be protected and preserved but not at the expense of basic human liberties. 

Taxes – Replace the federal income and payroll taxes with a fair tax.  Stop the over taxation of the producers and under taxation of non-producers.

Energy and Resources – The United States should explore its own natural resources free from over reaching environmental agencies and left-wing environmental groups.

Financial Markets – The government should get out of the way of the financial markets and allow them to function properly.  Oversight should be utilized but without a full-on intrusion from the Fed.

Compulsory Retirement System – The forced bankrupt governmental retirement system (Social Security) should be abolished in favor of a voluntary method of individual contributions.

Health Care – Health care should not be run by the government in any realm.   

National Defense – The military should be available to first protect citizens against domestic threats and then against international threats.

Domestic Security – The United States should first protect her citizens and then the rest of the world.  Threats to domestic security should be handled swiftly and with minimal bureaucracy.

Illegal Immigration – Illegal immigrants should be deported out of the United States.  Businesses that employ illegal immigrants should suffer steep and progressive fines.

Legal Immigration – Individuals should have the opportunity to continue to become citizens of the United States without exorbitant red tape and expense.

Discrimination Issues – Discrimination in any form is anti-American.  Everyone should be equally protected regardless of sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, or sexual orientation, but no individual group should have more protection than another.

Many of these ideals have come through years of thoughtful study with assistance from various groups and organizations.

Download a pdf file of this post here.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

The National Parks Are Racist!

Yes, I couldn’t believe it either.  How could all of those sweet and innocent National Parks be racist?  Yellowstone, Yosemite, Smoky Mountains….say it ain’t so!

According to this gentleman, evidently the only African American Park Ranger in the National Park System, blacks don’t visit the parks because of…..wait for it……wait for it……RACISM! 

Now I really don’t think this is a racist issue dating back to the time of slavery in America.  To me this is more of a marketing issue – or lack thereof.  If you want to attract a particular group of people to your specific park, advertise to that group and convince them why they should take their time to visit.  It’s a revolutionary concept called PROMOTION.  Many businesses do it.  It’s not that hard.

I’m all for everyone visiting the National Parks.  They are beautiful and a national treasure.  I have not been to Yosemite or Yellowstone, but I plan on visiting both someday.  The United States has some of the most beautiful scenery in the world and thankfully long range thinkers like Thomas Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt recognized the need. 

To address this specific situation, I’m really sick of everything being about the “original sin” of slavery and if you decide to oppose that point of view then you are a racist.   I guess I’m a racist.  Didn’t know it, but I guess that is what it’s come to. 

Why are more black people not visiting national parks?  Maybe they just don’t want to!  Novel concept I know, but it’s a possibility.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Actual Stimulus Program Almost Denied

All government ideas are not ALL bad.  I’m not sure I would advocated a “Cash For Clunkers” program if the economy was humming along, but it seems like a decent idea. Actually giving money back to the citizens (some are actually tax payers) while selling new cars.  Forget the fact that it will benefit Obama Motors or that buying a new car is a horrible investment, this seemed like a great idea, right?  Well, maybe not.

Early on Friday we learned that only a couple of days after launching the “Cash for Clunkers”  program, it was out of money.  They only allotted one billion to reimburse dealerships – a very small sum in government figures.  Fortunately on Friday afternoon Mr. Obama got involved and infused the program with another 2 billion.  I say throw a whole bunch of that unused Stimulus money into this program and actually do some stimulating instead of creating signs and other useless spending.

The consensus of many dealers is that this program has worked.  They have had activity like they have not seen in quite some time.  This is what we see when the government gives back money to the citizens to actually spend.  What would happen if the government took less of our money at the front end, cut THEIR bloated spending and let us do what we want with our hard earned money instead of funding an unending bottomless pit that is government?  That would end this recession in a heart beat and growth would skyrocket. 

Again, like so many of my rants, I’m not holding my breath.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Barbara Boxer Gets A Smack Down

This is just great.   Black Chamber of Commerce, President and CEO Harry Alford gives Senator Barbara Boxer a smack down.  Accusing Sen. Boxer of racism is awesome – by an African American no less.  It’s past time for someone to call these guys to the carpet.  Great job Mr. Alford! 

It sounds like Sen. Boxer likes the the old phrase…”some of my best friends are black.”

Of course, that is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

 

 

Local Bakery Says Cap and Trade Will Kill His Business ***UPDATE***

Living in the St. Louis area is great.  This is a wonderful city with lots to do and also a great environment to raise your family.  To that end it is always good to see a local business make national news.

A local business, McArthur’s Bakery, decided they had had enough when local Representative Russ Carnahan voted to approve the 1,500 page Cap and Trade bill.  Randy and Dave McArthur decided to do what they could to let their customers and others passing the bakery in south St. Louis what his US Representative did – he posted it on his electronic sign.  This attracted not only the attention of Rep. Carnahan, but also the likes of FoxNews.

According to Randy McArthur:

“We make (our product) with electricity, we bake it with gas, we refrigerate and freeze it with electricity and we distribute it with gas and oil,” said McArthur, who said he worries that high prices could cost his company up to $15,000 a year in an industry with a very tight margin for profit.

That video really highlights the concern of small businesses and the real cost of this massive expansion of government for a non-problem.  Hopefully this will start a real uprising of small businesses to show the “real” effects of cap and trade.

 

***UPDATE***

Dave McArthur was interviewed on Glenn Beck’s show last week.  Good interview.

 

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Steve Doocy Schools Carol Browner

The massive Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill that narrowly passed in the House has made it’s way to the Senate.  Hopefully the Senators will have more common sense than their buddies in the House.  We’ll see about that, but I’m always hopeful.

Steve Doocy of Fox and Friends is not known to be a hard interviewer.  He’s a common sense guy and very entertaining.  He recently conducted an interview with Carol Browner, the Energy Czar.  Mr. Doocy asked a simple question – “Did you read the bill.”  Simple enough right?  Not so much.  It seems that Ms. Browner didn’t read the whole bill.  If you are an insomniac and need some rest – here’s the entire 1200+ page bill.  Sweet dreams.

Now correct me if I’m wrong, but if you are the ENERGY CZAR, wouldn’t you take the time to actually read the most important ENERGY legislation in modern times?  If I had this type of careless disregard for my position I would be fired.  The fact is that Ms. Browner doesn’t really care what is in this bill.  As long as she is able to pass sweeping changes to force us all to change our lives and “make the planet cleaner“, then life is good in her mind.  What was the rush?  Why not take a couple days to at least peruse the contents of the legislation?  I’m sure that’s not in her job description – or maybe it’s above her pay grade.

The threat of Climate Change is not a settled matter and should be up for debate, but sadly it is not.  Global Warming skeptics are silenced and ostracised by their colleagues – especially by those in academia.  What happened to looking at the facts and then determining a course of action?  I’m not a climate scientist but I try to use common sense.  Not sure there is any happening in this “debate”.

Good job Mr. Doocy.  Keep up the good work.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

John Boehner – He’s the Republican with a Pair

On Friday evening the House of Representatives passed the massively overreaching Cap and Trade bill.  Again, as has been the custom over the last couple of months, this bill was voted on with very little debate – or actual reading of the bill.  I’m confused on how legislators can vote on something that they haven’t read.  If I did that in my job I would be fired – but I guess I should be a Representative to have this kind of “perk”. 

Fortunately my Representative, Jerry Costello (D) from Illinois, and 44 of his Democratic brethren voted no on the bill.   No thanks to the 8 Republicans that voted yes on the bill. 

John Boehner (R), Minority Leader from Ohio, really says it best in this clip.  This is government at it’s best.  How do they stay awake?

Hmmm…John Boehner 2012.  Hopefully he doesn’t have any skeleton’s in his closet.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Happy Earth Day From Moses

I’m trying very hard to do my part on Earth Day 2009!  I’m using double the paper at work and pumping gas during daylight hours.

OK, I really don’t care much about Earth Day because I think every day is Earth Day.  The real environmentalists are the ones that know that no matter what we do, we can’t kill the earth.  The best we can do is take care of what we have but don’t take things to an extreme that take us back to the 12th century (hmmm…sounds like the Middle East).

Following is an excellent oration (well, transcript) from Charlton Heston.  He read this passage from Michael Crichton’s prologue of Jurassic Park on the Rush Limbaugh show in 1995.  I think this says a lot although I would dispute the age and origins of the earth.    

 

You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There’s been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away — all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years.

Earth has survived everything in its time. It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in Arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears the earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It’s powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out.

Do you think this is the first time that’s happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive glass, like fluorine. When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago we didn’t have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can’t imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven’t got the humility to try. We’ve been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we’re gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us.

 Happy Earth Day!

 

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

The #1 Cause of Global Warming!

Problem solved.  We’ve found the real culprit causing Global Warming Climate Change.  Mother of pearl, it’s our friend the COW!

I ran across this video on Youtube and just had to post it. 

I want to warn you, it involves cows pooping. 

Those of you from rural areas, this is not a big deal, but you city-folk may be grossed out.  Honestly, I can’t believe someone took the time to film this and produce it, but here you go.

So everyone do your part to fix Global Warming Climate Change….. EAT SOME MORE BEEF!

(After the video, make sure to leave a comment.  I left one and it was promptly removed)

What the Heck is Cap and Trade?

If many of you are like me, you are casual observers (OK, I’m a frequent observer) of the the news.  There seems to be some new term or program out there.  Who can keep it all straight?  To better inform everyone, I thought it would be useful to explain the Cap and Trade issue.  Don’t know what that means?  Well, I’ll try to tackle that in this post.

I found a decent definition from a “Green” looking website – Ecomii.com. 

Cap-and-trade is one method that can be used to regulate the amount of pollution emitted into the atmosphere.  The government sets a cap on pollution, limiting the amount that companies or other groups are allowed to release. The government then issues credits, which allow companies to each pollute a certain amount as long as the aggregate pollution equals less than the set cap.  Since some companies can reduce pollution more cheaply than others, the group engages in trading these permits. Companies that can cheaply reduce pollution sell permits to companies that cannot easily afford to reduce pollution. The companies that sell the permits are rewarded while those that purchase permits must pay for their negative impact. Applied to climate change, this system would theoretically reduce carbon emissions at the lowest total cost.

Co2 Monster - Oooo, Scary!

Confused yet?  As a thinking person ask yourself, “Who does this benefit?”  I can tell you it is not the normal folk in this great country.  This is another boondoggle that is being hoisted on the taxpayers of America to help fund government programs.  How much extra cost will that add to production of a product and ultimately the cost at Wal-Mart? 

It’s so nice that we work hard to institute laws and regulations to tray and tax ourselves into a clean environment.  The fact is that the US is one of the cleanest countries in the world.  Without getting into some nerd-like discussion about the environment, let’s consider things in terms that I can understand.   We can agree that if a country is deemed to be more polluted (lax environment regulations, poor government oversight, third-world / Communist economy, etc.), THEYshould be the ones footing the bill for any supposed problems with the environment.   According to the Associated Press in a story dated from 2006, the most polluted areas in the world are listed below.  Funny, I don’t see the US on that list.   To be fair, I looked at several sources, although many were from sources I didn’t know and didn’t want to list here, but the list was pretty much the same.  

Linfen, China

Haina, Dominican Republic

Ranipet, India

Mayluu-Suu, Kyrgyzstan

La Oroya, Peru

Chernobyl, Ukraine

Kabwe, Zambia

 

What does this have to do with Cap and Trade?  Well, I believe it’s all the same issue – Global WarmingClimate Change.  We as Americans are being asked to correct a problem that is really not a problem.  Cap and Trade is just another way to give up our money, to clean the environment when there is no hard evidence that there is a problem in our country – or anywhere else for that matter.  Climate patterns are cyclical throughout history.  The impact that man has had on these patterns is not conclusive and some evidence has surfaced that we are now in a cooling cycle (same as in 1924 & 1974).   In fact, the wonderful edible Cow is responsible for 65 percent of nitrous oxide – much more powerful than Co2.  (Those of you who don’t know, cows fart a lot – that’s nitrous oxide!)

Bottom line is that I really don’t think it is prudent to further burden our system on theories and suppositions.  I think at this point we’re all in the mood for a little global warming (we’ll wish for global cooling in July and August).

Of course, that’s just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

 

Sources: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1723.cfm, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20772&Cr=global&Cr1=environment, http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15320729/

If Green is In, I’m Out

I’m all for conservation. Conserving our parks, making sure we have clean water, reducing pollution – those things are great. I think most rational people agree with my sentiment.

What I am really getting tired of is seeing, hearing and reading about all this “Green” stuff. I’m the type of person who goes the other direction of someone is doing something or suggesting that I do something. If going “Green” means that it will inconvenience me or cost me more money, I’m out.

I don’t buy into all the Global Warming hysteria. There is no credible evidence that Man and our technology has affected the temperature of the planet (minus of course all the sanctimonius Hollywood stars touting the genius of Algore). Many climatologists are actually talking about Global Cooling. Actually, back in the 70’s, this was the hip term. (See Newsweek article from 1974 – http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf). A great history of the warming and cooling from the Business and Media Institute (http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/FireandIce.pdf).

Bottom line is that we are very arrogant if we believe we can actually affect the temperature of the planet. This stuff is cyclical. Considering that we are freezing in 10 inches of snow here in the Midwest, a little global warming would be appreciated.

Get the facts and stop bothering me about going Green.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant