Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Stress Relievers 1940s Style


Sleep shop to mad scientist to convertible houses. 

One question: Why are the kids in the front seat when the mother is in the back?

Okay, one more: Do you think Dr. Laird is medicated?

I'll have to try that forehead wrinkle remover exercise.

Monday, May 14, 2012

The Dissemblance of Fragility Tributes

Choosing words carefully not to offend,
Giving less weight to ideas than intend,
Dancing past meaning so each can pretend,
Conflict semantics - not decisive end.

Calling on memories when thoughts had merged,
Sharing and daring, relationship surged,
Prickly points poked but were too quickly purged,
Dearer than different - tolerance urged.

Teetering tenuous bridge of false hold,
Wanting to save what appeared to be gold,
Letting go one end and watching it fold;
Realized in rubble, disvalues all told.

Fearing once fondness forever then lost,
Hiking the hit by remitting the cost,
Cabled connections since tease to be tossed.
Wreckage is wrought from fragility not frost.

Slated with shallow words cried round the lands,
Fated, one tower falls in spite of hands.
Sounded lone truth, one reality bands,
Founded on bedrock, that fortress still stands.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

America vs. Clean Energy

What happens when the heavy hand of over-regulation conflicts with the forceful push of subsidized industry? When the first is the preservation of the very symbol of America and the second is the current Administration's love affair with "clean" energy development -- the eagle buys it.
“These proposed changes will help facilitate the responsible development of renewable energy and other projects, while conserving bald and golden eagles by requiring key conservation and monitoring measures to be implemented,” said Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe. “We are committed to monitoring the impact of projects on eagle populations over the life of the permits to ensure these measures are effective.”

From what I gather in the supporting documents*, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has some avian protection policies that are onerous on those trying to develop clean energy projects.  Therefore, the permits allowing a "non-purposeful take" of eagles are going to be extended from five years to 30 years -- for the good guys, of course.

I am certainly in favor of having real costs of project development considered under any proposed law; the problem here is that this became a concern ONLY when the regulations negatively impact an administration favorite.

Here is a fascinating look at the clash between environmental regulations of the past rearing their ugly heads on the future. Published in 2007 in the Energy Law Journal, the article clearly states that the avian protection regulations, which were fine when they impacted only other industries, are now dogging the wind energy industry. Therefore, something must be done!

The laws that regulate impacts to avian wildlife in the United States are colliding with renewable energy policy and promotion in the United States.  In particular, wind energy systems and the industry as a whole have grown to a scale that wildlife impact issues, long in background, have come to the forefront. Chief among them are avian impacts.  Yet the very problem of avian impacts is complicated, if not created, by other federal and state policies and laws that have not been adjusted to reflect current energy policy favoring renewable energy.  [emphasis added]

While it's difficult to qualify, let alone quantify the unintended consequences of regulations, it is becoming easier to see that we are all the victims of the whims of an overactive and overabundant bird of prey known as the federal government.


*The USFWS Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act page has a link to the permitting process and the Act: neither of these links work. Found full Federal Register publication of proposed changes here.

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Cracked


What some of us want—those who aren’t blinded by a lot of bullshit persiflage thrown up to mask the idea that rich folks want to keep their damn money—is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America.

I found this statement to be the best in Stephen King’s recent diatribe.

And what, pray tell, is it that Mr. King thinks makes America, America? According to his essay he touts the equalization of income wrapped in a sash of fairness regarding income tax: rich people should pay more taxes because they are rich. This bears an eerie resemblance of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” rather than what I understand to be essentially American: the right to one's own life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; equal under the law.  

I’m afraid that in addition to many f-bombs, Mr. King has dropped the context.

I can't comment on the tax code itself, because let's face it . . . it's __________(insert Kingly adverb here) inscrutable. However, encouraging Americans to not only accept, but request that more eggs be forcibly extracted from the governed and put in the Big Basket of government just insures a nation of useless, runny, cracked eggs. And while I am aware that there are those who would try to convince me that you can’t make an omelet without first cracking a few eggs, I'd still prefer to eat my own hard-boiled egg rather than forced to consume a communal omelet, thank you anyway.