Medary.com

What causes ice ages? 

"Slight shifts in solar radiation caused by predictable changes in Earth's rotation and axis."

In a publication to be released Friday in the journal Science, researchers from Oregon State University and other institutions conclude that the known wobbles in Earth's rotation caused global ice levels to reach their peak about 26,000 years ago, stabilize for 7,000 years and then begin melting 19,000 years ago, eventually bringing to an end the last ice age.

The melting was first caused by more solar radiation, not changes in carbon dioxide levels or ocean temperatures, as some scientists have suggested in recent years.

What? Something other than CO2 can be responsible for "climate change?" The hell you say!

Just heard on KCMO Talk Radio in Kansas City:  A caller to the morning show suggests a work stoppage to thwack the donkeys right between the ears to get their attention.

I think that's a capital idea, no pun intended.

I propose the week after Labor Day.  If you can afford it, close your business for the week, or even for a day or two, the week of September 8-11.  Call in sick.  Take the week off.

Head to Washington, D.C. for the September 12th rally.

Tell the politicians that your life, liberty, and property belong to you, not to them, and they need to BACK THE HELL OFF.

Don't tread on me.

 Linda Douglass, Minister of Truth for His Highness the One Barack Obama, has a message for you, the subjects:

"we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House," health reform Communications Director Linda Douglass says, "we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

For the Good of the People's Republic, report to the Government all instances of "fishy behavior".

We're talking to you, Sarah Palin.

Update:  Yes, Iowahawk does it better.

Update II:  This was the 2,000th post on this particular incarnation of Medary.com.

Update III:  Dang, comments look kinda ugly with this theme.  Oh, well, I don't get that many comments, anyway.

 From the (Democrat-written) Hillbuzz (the "Hill" in the blog's title is Hillary, in fact):

Why are you forcing this healthcare bill through in 3-4 weeks when the current President took SIX MONTHS TO PICK A DOG?

Heh.

 

I've updated my software here at Medary.com.  It went much easier than I thought it would.

One thing I've been meaning to do for some time is to change the look of the site.  It currently uses a look (a "theme") called "Professional."  That's the one with the blue header bar, and left and right sidebars.

I've found another theme, called "pure" which has a black header, and only a right sidebar--no left sidebar at all.  I think it's cleaner than Professional and I've set it as the default theme for Medary.com.  If you don't see the new theme, just delete your browser's cookies, and that should take care of it.  If you actually log into Medary.com, then you'll have to go to My Account, pick Layout and Language, then pull "Pure" down from the menu and then hit "Save Information."

Enjoy, in moderation.

I underestimated the arrogance of Democrats  They don't just want to demonize insurance companies.

They want to demonize EVERYBODY who doesn't absolutely agree with them.  The President wants you to inform on anyone who disagrees with his government takeover of health care.

Obama, as the leader of the Democratic Party, is now completely revealed as a totalitarian, a socialist, and a fascist.  He is intolerant of dissent and debate--a totalitarian.  He believes the government can spend your money better than you can--a socialist.  He believes that govenrment should operate banks, automobile companies, insurance companies, hospitals, and doctor's offices--a fascist.

He will get away with everything that good people will let him have.  The fate of the Republic truly hangs in the balance this August.

The strategy for the Democrats this August is to demonize the health insurance companies in order to provide an Enemy which will be defeated by the Good Guys via socialized medicine.

There's a fairly obvious problem with this strategy, of course. While I take second place to no one in my disdain for health insurance companies generally, there is a fundamental difference between an insurance company and the government. I can fire the insurance company any time I want and, if I so choose, do without health insurance at all. Well, at least I can until Obamacare is passed.

On the other hand, not only can't I fire the government whenever I want, if I should try to do so, they will come after me with guns. And they have far more guns than I do. This health care "crisis" is not about health care at all. It is about power--the power that some people want to seize and hold over other people. It's a story as old as humanity itself.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

. . . is sauce for the gander.

The (in)famous Obama-Joker poster

Bush as the Joker in Vanity Fair

Several comments come to mind, other than "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

"You can dish it out but you can't take it."

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

"The truth hurts, doesn't it?"

And, of course, from the movie The Dark Knight from which the Joker makeup comes: "Why so serious?"

Update: Here's the deal--if you find one of these images upsetting but not the other, you are a rabid partisan at best, or a rank hypocrite at worst. If you're offended by both of them, then you have a well-developed sense of fairness (and you're also a bit naive about politics in general). If you're able to at least find a chuckle in both of them, then you're a fairly emotionally balanced, stable person.

Some clueless authoritarian statist writing in The New Yorker decides that federalism--i.e. the Constitution of the United States--has outworn its usefulness:

Federalism, often described as one of the great strengths of the American system, has become a serious impediment to reversing the downturn.

No, sir, federalism isn't the problem. It's precisely the LACK of federalism--in the high-handed, neofascist way Congress and President Clinton demanded that lenders start loaning money to people who couldn't afford to pay back the loans--and in the myriad of other ways that the Federal Government squanders the wealth of the nation. And yes, State governments squander plenty of our money too, but they at least seem to be somewhat accountable precisely because we demand balanced budgets from State governors and legislatures.

So Cash for Clunkers, originally "budgeted" (and I use that term extremely loosely, we're talking about Congress here) for $1 billion, is being expanded by 200% to three billion dollars.

Congress has a long, ugly history of severely underestimating the cost of their social engineering programs.

Remember this when your Congresscritter is in front of you telling you how much health care "reform" will cost.

The official Congressional prediction when Medicare passed in 1965 was that the program would cost $9 billion in 1990. The actual bill in 1990 was $66 billion. Today, it costs even more, and the program circles closer to the drain of insolvency every day.

We can't afford to have the government involved in delivery of health care.

We.
Can't.
Afford it.

UPDATE: How about this little fact:

While listening to a clip of doctor representatives of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, I wasn’t surprised to hear that internal polling of their members revealed that 65 percent of doctors would prefer to treat Medicare and Medicaid patients for free than deal with the government. That’s certainly my perspective.

In fact, in my own office, Medicare and Medicaid are not accepted, but we do affiliate with the free clinics around the county, as do many, many other doctors. Helping people heal is why most doctors go into the business. That the business is also intellectually stimulating and personally rewarding is often secondary.

Why would the majority of doctors prefer not to deal with the government’s health care system?

Yep, costs out of control, and the providers would rather give their services away for free rather than deal with it. More government health care, PLEASE (that's sarcasm, in case you're humor-deprived, or a Democrat).