User Profile: Wigan

Wigan

Member Since: June 08, 2011

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

  • October 4, 2013 at 7:18am

    Didn’t we already perform the experiment of looking less threatening at the embassy in Benghazi?

  • January 30, 2013 at 7:29am

    The really juicy part here is the “observed” data is probably constructed from the data set that originally showed temperature decline. AGW alarmists took that data set, fudged the numbers so they got a temperature rise, threw away the original data, and reported that as “observed”.

    They also do their stupid line drawing tricks. Draw a line that fits data from 2000-2010 and you can convince yourself temperature is declining. Where you cut off the temperature data affects where this line is. They cut it off at 1990 for a reason.

  • December 14, 2012 at 7:25am

    Rather than be satisfied with a pledge, I think we should instead push for action, and reward that. Getting a politician to sign a pledge really isn’t that much reassurance. Getting that politician to actually do something, then reward them when it occurs, is much more effective. Regard politicians as dogs who pee on your carpet. That cute look they give you when you explain to them why they need to pee outside is not enough. You need the dog to actually pee outside.

  • December 11, 2012 at 4:13pm

    If Santa hands out presents bought with other people’s money, he is a Democrat.
    If Santa hands out presents bought with Santa’s money, he is a Republican.

  • December 6, 2012 at 3:32pm

    I made the mistake this year in thinking that the presidents dismal job performance from an economic standpoint would make it very difficult for him to win. I underestimated how bad state run media is now, with outright false stories being reported across large media outlets being received and believed by legions of Obama voters. I was horribly surprised how well quid pro quo politics works now, or how identity politics trumps objective measures of job performance. I saw similar errors in reasoning in Morris and Rove. The mistake here was overestimating the intelligence of the American voter. Becks more-on trivia and Howard Stern’s man on the street interviews rather than being laughable anomalies apparently were statistically significant samplings of the Obama voter base.

    I suppose this is what you get when you leave education up to teachers union members, or you lack a media presence to undercut and undermine the state run media. Republicans face a huge task in re-educating a largely ignorant and propaganda isolated public.

    It is all very discouraging. Have yourself a Merry little Cliffmas…

    Responses (2) +
  • December 6, 2012 at 10:55am

    Kind of ridiculous calling that slugging. That was a tap, more akin to someone putting their hand on your shoulder to get your attention.

    Anthropological Global Warming (AGW) is a theory aimed at explaining world wide temperature changes. Like any scientific theory, its value is objectively measured by (a) how well it models the temperature history, and (b) how well it predicts the temperature future.

    Under (a) we have these clear failings
    -450 million years ago, CO2 was in the 1000′s of PPM (compared with <400ppm today), around 5x higher than today, and we had indisputable glacial periods of 1C cooler global temperatures
    -In the medieval warming period, there was no industrialization, and no real AGW contribution, but temperatures were warmer than today
    -In ice core samples, temperature peaks 800 years before CO2, implying temperature rises releases CO2
    -Atmospheric probes sent up into the layer of the atmosphere where CO2 is measure no temperature rise in that layer, which would occur were it absorbing heat
    -The theory itself recently "evolved" by eliminating CO2 as absorbing IR from the earth, and instead putting CO2s role as a forcing function for increased humidity
    -From 1940-1970 industrialization was strong in the USA, yet temperature was cooling and people were afraid of an ice age

    For (b) we have
    - AGW theory predicted global temperature rise from 2000-2010. The reality was the world cooled over that period.

    The theory does not fit the past or p

  • December 5, 2012 at 11:25am

    In the early days of the Tea Party movement, the emphasis was upon fiscal conservatism. They accepted everyone from whatever social position who shared this view. They were big tent on social issues, and defined by fiscal issues. The movement took off and gained huge momentum.

    Then as time went on, liberals raged against it and tried to brand its members as social conservatives, Nazis and all sorts of other things it was not. Clearly this worked as far as disinformation goes for those who derive their news from left of center sources, because if you talk to a typical lefty, they regard a Tea Party person as a rabid extreme right wing social conservative who wants to get into your bedroom.

    Democrats did this rebranding because a fiscally conservative block emerging and taking over the Republican party that is very tolerant of social views was extremely threatening to them politically.

    Couple this opposition party rebranding to various politicians piling onto the movement and steering it their way for their purposes, and we see an erosion of the fundamental message of fiscal conservatism that was the rallying cry early on.

    The way for Republicans out of this is to insist upon religious liberty. The government’s involvement in religious matters should be limited to protecting the free expression of religion, and avoiding state sponsored religion. When the Republican party pushes hard for federal bans on abortion, they drive out gen Y types. Obama exploited this.

    Responses (3) +
  • October 16, 2012 at 4:01pm

    There is no way Rice said what she did for days and days without White House approval. Hillary’s argument that the president is not responsible for day-to-day operations in embassy security is a distraction from the clear cover up story the WH did put their stamp of approval on, if not create in its entirety. Had Obama came clean and said something like “we deferred to the State Dept recommendation that increased security would cause diplomatic issues in Libya” and had done so early on after the event, I might be more inclined to believe that the secretary of state was at fault here. But because they deliberately covered up the incident to make it appear less inflammatory and fit the narrative of success they were peddling at the DNC, there is cause for concern with the president. Obama is arrogant and believes he is infallible, and therefore blames everyone else around him when his policies fail. As this goes on, expect to see Valerie Jarret or Axelrod get the blame so the big O can still be blameless.

  • October 16, 2012 at 3:53pm

    I am in the middle of reading Dick Morris’ “Screwed” in which he devotes a large section to China. Morris argues many things regarding China such as (1) free trade is not so free requiring US companies to partner with Chinese companies and transfer their trade secrets to the Chinese partners just to access to the market, and (2) China uses trade deficit dollars to buy US dollars to increase demand on the US dollar and keep it high with respect to the Yuan, which makes Chinese goods cheaper, and widens the trade imbalance. Until Jan 2011 China would then use dollars to buy treasury bonds, owning more and more of our debt.

    Morris argues that consumer demand in the US is flat, but the stimulus projects are aimed at priming the pump and upping demand, when in fact all they do is send money to China via the trade surplus. So we borrow money from China to stimulate jobs in China.

    This battery company, built on stimulus dollars is being gobbled up by a Chinese auto parts maker, where all those secrets financed by taxpayer funds will now be theirs at no R&D cost to China. Not only is our stimulus program wasteful, but it also goes to bolster our enemy in the undeclared trade war with China.

  • October 16, 2012 at 7:22am

    Sure would be great if transcripts were available for those of us in situations where watching the video is difficult.

  • September 20, 2012 at 7:25am

    You know, that 2nd flag looks like an electoral map, with the liberal pacific northwest going Dem, and the rest going Romney.

  • September 17, 2012 at 8:23am

    Before the RNC, ABC/WaPo had a poll with Romney 47%, Obama 46% with a sampling of 32% Dem, 22% Repub. I was able to get some sense out of it by doing the following- assume Republicans vote 100% Romney, Democrats vote 100% Obama, then solve for how the Independents broke. I got something like 65% of the Independents were breaking for Romney. Then I took the 2008 turnout (39% Dem, 32% Rep) and got a 1% or so win for Romney, and then I used the 2010 turnout (35% Dem, 35% Rep) and see Romney with a 55% to 45% Obama victory. Turnout is everything and it is clear the MSM who is carrying water for Obama are making this seem closer than it is to encourage Dem turnout.

  • September 13, 2012 at 3:02pm

    If you really believe that freedom of speech is essential to freedom and liberty, then you have to support free speech, even when it is offensive. You dont have to agree with what they say, but you must support their right to say it. If you have freedom of speech, you will hear and read things sometimes that you do not like. Those who defend free speech know that there is someone, somewhere, that will find what you say offensive, and demand censorship of you. By standing for all free speech, you protect your right to speak freely, and thereby remain unfettered by others.

    Google should stand for free speech, for to cave into censorship in some regions only sets precedent to impose censorship in other areas, and censorship limits content. Search engines are necessary in an internet of wide and varied content, but, if all that is fit to print is Mao’s red book, well, you don’t need Google to navigate that.

  • September 7, 2012 at 3:08pm

    Just wrapped up the Man-With-No-Name trilogy last night with my son. We started going through them all the night after the convention. He had no idea who Clint Eastwood was.

    It was great seeing the creativity coming out of Clint during his routine. At times I thought his age was going to get the best of him, but he would finish with something brilliant. It was really sad to see how the libs began age discrimination with him in response to the routine, attempting to brand the Republican party as a party of old white men.

    The empty chair was apt, and I have loved seeing the empty chair contest photos (favorite is the chair with the golf club on it).

    The Democrats get great mileage out of how they fight stereotyping, discrimination and hate, yet the stereotyping, discrimination and hate they spewed towards Clint for being an actor who dared be Republican stamps LIARS on the Democratic party for all to see. This was reinforced recently by the John Stewart skit that skewered DNC conventioneers on their claims of being a loving accepting party by showing them frothing at and stereotyping RNC conventioneers as ignorant bigoted hicks. I think this is a new tact to take- keep pointing out lefty hate every time you see it, to draw attention to it, and possibly over time make the public discourse more civil.

  • September 6, 2012 at 2:33pm

    Mr. Freemarket-

    I remember as a kid being entertained by In Search Of, one episode of which claimed to have found timbers from Noah’s ark, which, according to carbon dating, were consistent with the time period in question. Stone age civilizations leave arrowheads etc for us to find long afterwards. I won’t quote it here, but it seems like the prevailing sentiment is there is no archaeological evidence, see

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephites

    and scroll down to the “Archaeological evidence and disputes” section. Is the “wood based civilization” argument that you cite widely held by Mormons, or is that your theory? I am just trying to understand.

    P8triot- in that time period there were a lot of people pushing quackery and things that in hindsight seem strange from a modern scientific perspective. For instance you have dowsers, people who believed magnetic fields cured headaches, a huge range of folk medicines that have since been demonstrated to primarily work based upon the placebo effect. Houdini was debunking various spiritualism frauds. I lump these guys into the category of snake oil salesmen. I don’t see people with seeing stones these days, and have seen no objective proof of their efficacy, although I have seen some interesting stuff with dowsing.

    The Mormons I have known have been good people, admirable in the ways they comport themselves and live. I just never got good explanations for the above stuff, and it has always bugged me.

  • September 6, 2012 at 10:49am

    If you wiki Joseph Smith, there are many rather disturbing facts there regarding the founder of the Mormon faith
    1. Joseph was a treasure hunter who would put seer stones into his stovepipe hat, then look at the reflections in the stone to find the treasure
    2. In 1823, Smith claimed to be visited by the angel Moroni who told him where to find lenses made of seer stones and the golden plates, the source of the text of the book of Mormon. He claimed an angel prevented him from removing the plates from the hill.
    3. In 1826, he was brought before a court on charges of “glass looking” and pretending to find lost treasure
    4. Smith purportedly translated the Egyptian characters on the golden plates into the book of Mormon by peering at it with seer stones, in which he would put the plate in the stove pipe hat, put the stone on top of it, and put his face into the hat to peer at the words.

    It appears from the above that the prophet of the church of Mormon was a snake oil salesman type involved in a lot of bunk stuff. How much faith do these facts surrounding the book of Mormon give adherents of the Mormon faith to the authenticity of the book as being from divine sources?

    The other big question I have is the tales of advanced pre-Columbian civilizations that were supposed to be in North America in the teachings of the faith have not been born out by archaeological digs. How do adherents square this absence of corroboration? There are many archaelogical digs supporting old

    Responses (5) +
  • June 13, 2012 at 5:08pm

    It follows the usual lefty pattern:
    -come up with some noble reason that requires urgent action
    -make the argument that the problem is so urgent it justifies restriction of liberty
    -set up a massive government body populated by lefties to oversee this process
    -use this as precedent to repeat the process for some other noble reason

    Anthropological Global Warming (AGW) is junk science. Our planet had CO2 levels 10x higher than today, and during those periods, temperatures 1 degree cooler (see paleoclimatology, around 450million years ago). AGW is big science funded by governments, which has a lot of hubris and grows unchecked. Those lefties who get really romantic about the notion of living in tents as a hunter gather society with no industrialization view AGW as proof positive that technological advancement is evil, and man is a blight on the planet. Combine these fruitcakes with a big science block that has snowed the average person on AGW, and you have a climate in which politicians see it as advantageous to pander to AGW.

  • May 29, 2012 at 2:41pm

    If Obama thought serving as a herald for Satan would get him better poll numbers in purple states, well he would unravel those barbed banners and sound the horns of hell. His support of this issue is nothing more than political expedience. The real ethical matter with this president is how his morals are so flexible as to be redefined on a daily basis. His actions are more consistent with amorality.

  • May 29, 2012 at 2:38pm

    One justification lefties use to justify cigarette taxes is that when an individual chooses to smoke, they impose additional costs on the public health care system (Medicaid, Medicare), and it is therefore the government’s prerogative to recuperate those costs by taxation. The logical error is assuming the necessity of the nanny state. Were each person to pay for his/her own health care, they could smoke at no cost to others. This is the inevitable pattern of the Nanny State, where the government gets their foot in the door with a benefit, then claims that due to costs they have rights to regulate behavior. You either whole heartedly object to the Nanny state and demand return to individual freedom and responsibility, or forever fight these kind of state controls on individual behavior. This is the price of the Nanny State.

  • May 29, 2012 at 2:29pm

    Sounds like an honest mix up rather than an anti-veteran policy. You have to support Wal Mart wanting solicitors to register and receive approval to conduct business on their private property.

    Responses (4) +