A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Backdoor Big Government « Back to Story
Showing 26 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Vous avez de bons points il, c'est pourquoi j'aime toujours verifier votre blog, Il semble que vous etes un expert dans ce domaine. maintenir le bon travail, Mon ami recommander votre blog.
Mon francais n'est pas tres bon, je suis de l'Allemagne.
Regroupement de credit aussi Rachat de credits
The banning of incandescent illumination is based on a silly measuer of efficiency, lumens per watt. Incandecents typically don't do that well. They do, however, offer illumniation instantly. So in certain locations, such as a closet where a light is flipped on for a brief period, it is more energy efficient. If the concern is that folks don't turn off that closet light, mandate a timer, don't ban incandescents.
But a more important way of looking at the situation is efficacy... That is, is the light that one needs in the right place as the right time. Illunation is measured in footcandles, and the light one needs for certain tasks is defines in the Illunation Engineering Society of Norht America (IESNA) Handbook. Incandecents focus more easily (since they are a point source of light) than fluorescents, which just throw light waround. So, a refelctor halogen using 50 watts of power might put more light where you need it, than 6 - 13 watt fluorescents, even though the halogen has fewer lumens per watt. (Note lumens are the light emittin gform the 'lamp' i.e. the bulb) not the light at the surface.
So banning incandescents ins't a ' nuanced' political reaction to a 'need', but a group of people who FEEL they are doing the right thing, even though they are not. And that is before considering the principle of free choice which, in addition to supporting personal freedoms, will end up with a better result over time as people make the right choice for each situation.
To Larsky: wonder why Obama and the "Democratic" Congress/Pelosi and Reid were so hell-bent on enacting the "Healthcare" Bill and needed to do it so fast that few persons actually read it? Thousands of pages, it is said to contain many restrictions of Rights that have nothing to do with Healthcare.
All the culprits being lawyers KNOW it is far easier to enact than to repeal laws. You understand it is virtually impossible to repeal. Judging parts as impermissible is considered enough to defend Constitutional Protections of Natural Rights of citizens from usurpation from government. What do you think judges shall do with a Bill thousands of pages long. No wonder Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the Clintons etal are smiling. Or is that smirking?
Law is their game and judges play by their internal rules. Obama and the "Democrats" have now told Americans IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS they intend to take more and more rights from them. So there and what are you dumb, nazi, astroturf Americans going to do about it ?
Bet on mma, US players are welcome, recieve 140% more from first deposit ! bet on ufc
The best rules to form a young man are: to talk little, to hear much, to reflect alone upon what has passed in company, to distrust one's own opinions, and value others that deserve it..
[url=http://www.compu-phone.net]Digital phones Brooklyn[/url]
[url=http://www.compu-phone.net]business phone systems Brooklyn[/url]
The best rules to form a young man are: to talk little, to hear much, to reflect alone upon what has passed in company, to distrust one's own opinions, and value others that deserve it..
Digital phones Brooklyn
business phone systems Brooklyn
The sponsors of these new regulations clearly do not understand that their seemingly benign and well intentioned efforts simply add cost to everthing we produce and use making U.S. workers and products less competitive in a global market. I only hope they read the previous sentence and wake up to market realities and begin to understand that these activities are ruining this great country.
I can't wait until this inept LIAR faces off in a debate for 2012 election. He is a sneak,cunning, and totally transparent!! He thinks by hiring a few moderate business people that the public will forget all of his rants over the chamber of commerce,and small businesses. He is a distribute the wealth, destroy capitalism leader. I shouldn't even call him a leader because he isn't one.
Sure. This is the way government always does it - and not just the federal government. This is what the Tea Party opposes. The Tea Party is an outcry of the "silent majority" against this type of stuff. Regulations are how government directly affects the lives people. This is the stuff that makes people angry!
Democrats are a criminal organization. They are the party of perpetual fraud thanks to their cohorts in the treason Media.
Other players in this perpetual fraud should be obvious by now with the failed liberal run public school system molesting the minds of children with democrat hate speech and propaganda and spending their last years having their ears raped by liberal professors who simply cannot tolerate any other point of view but their own.
As far as Media Bias is concerned, call it what it is "ELECTION FRAUD" plain and simple. I wish the Republican Party would come out and inform the American People, hold investigations, prosecute and start imprisoning these arrogant evil creeps who think they can do as they please and dictate to us AMERICANS. They need to be put in their place.
"A number of states and industry groups have launched lawsuits to fight the regulations."
Unfortunately not California. Brown and his dimowit cronies have put out the word that California is flat on her back, legs splayed saying "Bring it on, baby. It feels soooo good."
And we sell nuke information to China...
Wow, what a world!
The Democrat strategy is simple - ignore the November 10 election and pretend it didn't happen. That is evident in everything that they have done since the election, including what they did at the lame duck session. Why would they do this? According to those I have spoken to, Democrats have made the determination that they can count on their allies in the traditional media to rescue them in 2012, which, along with union and other money which they expect to dwarf even the huge sum raised in 2008, should give them the next election, including a good chance of taking back the House, hopefully for good.
The key here is understanding that all of the Democrat's power is in the control over the traditional media - it is the beginning and end. As long as the Democrats have that, they control the agenda for the nation. And that means Democrats can easily ignore the uncomfortable results of the election, and claim it as a mid-term anomaly which can be rectified in the next election.
Also since now it has a target the traditional (a more accurate description than "mainstream") media can peck away at the Republican House, using tried and true methods honed over the decades.
To do anything about this situation would start with recognition by Republicans that the traditional media will never, nor does it intend to ever, level the playing field. The bias in favor of Democrats is institutional, and includes a revolving door between the traditional media and the Democrat party. In fact, more than ever the traditional media and the Democrat Party are one and the same - the examples are too numerous to set down here, but within a few years it will be hard to tell the difference. (Also think General Electric, ownership of NBC, and recent events as reported on Drudge, as to other side benefits of the relationship).
Yet Republicans blindly continue to play the fixed game set up by the traditional media - Boehner goes on "60 minutes", Palin on Barbara Walters, and on and on and on. Why? No good comes of Republican cooperation with the Democrat media machine - since the game IS fixed, the only result for the Republicans is negative. And there are more than adequate places in new media and Fox, so why do Republicans go to places where the 'journolistas' are out with knives? It's a mystery, but fully in keeping with the habit of Republicans to shoot themselves in the foot, over and over again, if possible. One only has to recall Bush and Rove's complete silence in the face of a media blitz that resulted in loss of Congress and the ascent of Obama. In fact, one could say that Bush and Rove's miserably poor judgment as to the traditional media led directly to the political situation we have today. Not that Bush has learned anything - his book tour went right to the belly of the beast - Oprah, and the morning network shows. In other words, the very places that went after him with guns blazing when he was in office. (metaphor intended). How stupid, or rather masochistic, can you be?
The traditional media just showed its still awesome power in the entire Tucson episode. And Republicans fell for it - endlessly on the defensive. At the very least conservative media should stop giving free publicity to low rated TV personalities like Chris Matthews and Keith Obermann. Both make outrageous statements just to get the reaction - and publicity - from talk radio and conservative bloggers. Conservatives need to be much more intelligent about how they respond to these obvious tricks.
Institutional media bias is a subject that gets surprisingly little written attention. While the traditional media is widely acknowledged to be biased, and Brent Bozells organization does a great job of pointing out instances of bias, no one on the Republicans side is talking about how to respond, if it is accepted that this will not change, and will get more pronounced with time. It's as if Republicans cling to the misbegotten strategy that merely pointing out the bias will somehow lead to its elimination. Unfortunately, that will never, as in not ever, happen. The Democrat Party and the traditional media are at this point getting closer and closer to one seamless whole, and the patina of objectivity has completely worn away, it is non-existent. In fact, few, if any, in the traditional media even bother to defend it against charges of bias these days - to do so would be to argue an absurdity. But no one on the Republicans side is talking about what to do about it.
So...how does the Republican party address the fact that the Democrat Party and the traditional media are now one and the same? First, Republicans need to understand and accept it, and moreover accept - in their hearts - that this will not change - it's there, learn to live with it, understand it for what it is. Second, avoid it like the plague, and go to where they like you and will put you in the best light - Fox, talk radio, internet - the new media. Third, if you can't defund public broadcasting then make it conditional on creation of a new network devoted to conservative causes.Let NPR and PBS admit what they are but create something for the Republicans.
If Republicans don't do this, then they may well be doomed - the traditional media will simply never let a Republican administration or body exist without trying to bring it down - like Nixon, like Reagan, like Bush I and II, like today's House of Representatives.
For Republicans the attacks by the traditional media will never end and are getting more and more vicious. For some reason, however, Republicans go blindly along, not comprehending that no matter what they do they will never get a break from the traditional media. At this point, it's either wise up or go back what things were like right when Obama was elected - cause all indications are that is where we are headed.
My answer for the Obama administrations "more and more regulations" is more and more defunding. Starve the beast.
OOPPPS. Sorry about that. I just found a law that was taken off the books locally. Apparently the law not allowing Black Smith shops to operate within 500 feet of a school has been taken off the books here in Plainwell, Michigan and it is also no longer required of the village to remove horse poop from main street within 24 hours of its' deposit.
Thought you should know.
You want a smaller government? Let's start by shutting down the Department of Homeland Security. It's interesting How Bush gets a pass for that.
I'm curious. Other than slavery I can't think of any law or regulation that has ever been repealed. Welfare REFORM under Clinton was, well, reformed.
Obama and his minions know this. Repealing anything that government sets down in law is highly unusual. If indeed it has ever happened.
Changed, Yes. Repealed, No.
Anyone who thinks that Obama will actually eliminate any laws or regulations is not in the ballpark of reality. Change laws and regulations to suit his and the lefts agenda, hey you bet he will.
I think even the average American is slowly figuring this out. Let's hope so. 2012 will be a defining moment in our history.
None of this is surprising or for that matter unknown to observers. Obama as signal triumph, "New Kennedy" called Messiah of the political establishment calling themselves "Democrats/ liberals/progressives / internationalists know and DEPEND on their hands on the political machinery /power. Much of that power usurped -- BUT WHO CARES -- beginning with the "guns of August" that dismantled older western empires and gave chance and time to new empire builders as Lenin, Hitler,with their collectivist co-religionists.
The remaining national body, apparently immune to their assaults, to deconstruct : the Constitutional Republic of the USA. By chance the richest, most powerful of the prey. A genuine historical "hit"
Americans before 1960, jealous of their national character, would not easily cede their exceptionalism and Independence. Subtlety, patience, time and "education" were needed.
Woodrow Wilson, "Democrat" and "intellectual"
ceded after WWI, "for the common good", jealously guarded INDEPENDENCE of the USA to an international political body unaccountable to Americans. With the fantastic name the League of Nations
After WW II, Franklin D. Roosevelt, another "Democrat" / progressive again ceded the INDEPENDENCE of the USA "for the common good" to an international body not accountable to Americans, with the fantastic name the United Nations.
And gave to Stalin's prison state empire the USSR all of Eastern Europe and Eastern Germany. The USA spent much of its treasury for the next 65 years defending the world against this erstwhile "ally".
And then the coup de grace. The Vietnam War, just after the appearance of the "New Star in the East", Sputnik. THE weapon begun and escalated by "Democratic" presidents to destroy social cohesiveness of America. The sense and pride in "being an American" to become something else, e.g. Afro, Hispano, Asian, etc American.
To consider all these activities as collected under the name conspiracy is not acceptable is it? But doesn't anyone consider it strange so many disparate, chance, serendipitous behaviours of "democrats/liberals/progressives/internationalists" over the past century ALL lead to the present state of government in the USA. In which the elephant in the room is the status of this Chief Executive and that he names his chief advisors Csars? Shadenfreude, Black humour, gotcha?
Could of course all be circumstantial, or coincidental couldn't it ?
The sooner we get rid of the Obamas the better for the US. I'm so sick of that face I could scream. He's nothing but an elitest liar. What has he ever done before taking this country down under socialism?
If people don't start seeing him for who he really is and figuring out what he plans to do we will all be his puppets. It matters not that congress is now republican. Obama will bury us in regulations 'till no one can create a job and that's just what he wants while lying about it. Wake up America.
Wait, I thought Obama just said in a WSJ piece the he was going to reduce regulations. Relax, I'm sure we have nothing to worry abvout (choke!)
It appears the Democratic party is tied to the
dying union sector. The flourish of public sector unions is a last gasp of a downward spiral.
Where is the future growth of unions and the money their leadership passes along to the Democratic party?
Bankruptcy of state and local govts is coming in some form.
It will deal a crushing blow to public sector unions.
Gee. Why would he do that? Why would rush, full speed ahead, to push Socialism and Marxism down our throats? Why is it that, every move he makes, enriches his FRIENDS? ("We must reward our friends and punish our enemies.") (He really has all of the Marxist cliches down, doesn't he?)
Why doesn't he see, that everything he does, CRIPPLES the Private Sector?
The Health Care Mandates. The Higher Taxes. The New Regulations. The Moratorium on Drilling for Oil and Natural Gas. The Revoking of already approved Leases for Coal Companies. Cap and Trade via the EPA. Card Check via the NLRB. The Cancellation of the Constellation Rocket System.
He knows exactly what he's doing. He is fulling the DREAMS FROM MY FATHER. He is implementing his Father's dream, for America. A Country his Father HATED. His FATHER. A Marxist Muslim, who abandoned his family, (Typical Black Man) and Died DRUNK, in a Kenyan gutter.
"I swear to Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, from all enemies, both Foreign and DOMESTIC."
Ladies and Gentlemen. I give you the DOMESTIC ENEMY that our Forefathers KNEW, would someday show his face. His coming has been foretold. And not just by the Founders.
"And I saw the BEAST rise from the Sea. And he was given a 'MOUTH' to speak Haughty and Blasphemous words. ("We are the ones we've been waiting for.") And he was allowed to exercise authority for forty two months." Revelation 13-5.
Same guy. Different Prophecy.
This is the guy. And if he's gone, come JUNE 2012, then you'll know that it's already too late.
Why not offer on-line subscriptions and save on postage and paper?
Nothing is going to happen to turn around the business climate in America until Obama is voted out of office in 2012 - and God help our country if he is not. That said, there are two steps that Congress should take immediately to reign in the out of control regulatory bureaucracy. Step one is a law requiring Congress to affirmatively approve each and every new regulation before it becomes binding. Step two is a law that sunsets every regulation every ten years, requiring Congress to debate them and vote on whether to reauthorize them. Only that would restore us to the balance that our Founders had in mind when they drafted our Constitution.
Much like "stealth jihad" is more insidious and in many ways more dangerous than violent jihad, Obama's "big government by back door" may prove more damaging than anything he can get through Congress.