en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/778643 Comments by GuyNoir http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/12/01/gm-willing-to-buy-back-chevy-volts-may-recall-entire-fleet/#IDComment231401023 When, as economists call it "allocation decisions" (what is bought and sold) are controlled by a large, powerful institution as opposed to many individuals making the decision with their own hard-won resources, then the economy is LESS EFFICIENT. There is no more obvious example than this. What is sad, is that a large minority of the populace has no idea that this is true, and will not pay attention even to obvious examples like this one. What's more, this same part of the populace will not examine the science of alternative energy, opting to make the issue a "matter of faith", as opposed to hard, engineering decisions. Fri, 2 Dec 2011 01:02:15 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/12/01/gm-willing-to-buy-back-chevy-volts-may-recall-entire-fleet/#IDComment231401023 http://tv.breitbart.com/historian-shouts-down-congressman-at-hearing/#IDComment228127306 Did anyone notice that the Chair of the hearing Committee seems to have a problem pronouncing words in intelligible fashion? "Foo-Pah"? [The expression is from French "Faux Pas" (false step) and the first word has a very long "O" sound...no OOOH at all]. Then, rather than use the pronunciation of "Comity" with the same long "O" vowel, which would make the term completely clear for the audience, he uses some other pronunciation, legitimate or not, which makes us hear "Comedy". Is the "Ah" sound really the best pronunciation? I wonder about these people. A lot. Sun, 27 Nov 2011 17:32:30 +0000 http://tv.breitbart.com/historian-shouts-down-congressman-at-hearing/#IDComment228127306 http://biggovernment.com/ginadathan/2011/11/27/bold-leadership-versus-political-parasites/#IDComment228123012 In California (the home state of Villaraigosa, Brown, Lockyear, Newsom), we already have term limits for legislators. And, as you wisely mention it results in a game of "Political Musical Chairs", and therefore assures that someone, with NAME RECOGNITION, is eying almost any post that is coming up on the next ballot. These people are career politicians because THEY ARE GOOD AT IT. What we need to do is be BETTER VOTERS. Why do we never focus the attention on ourselves as voters? Why are we not delving even deeper and deeper into the backgrounds of the candidates? Sun, 27 Nov 2011 17:17:24 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/ginadathan/2011/11/27/bold-leadership-versus-political-parasites/#IDComment228123012 http://bigjournalism.com/pjsalvatore/2011/11/26/sound-bite-for-the-day-chris-matthews-admits-media-is-left-leaning/#IDComment228118538 It would be nice if we could get you on as a writer for MSNBC, but I think they might not want this level of candor. Sun, 27 Nov 2011 17:01:26 +0000 http://bigjournalism.com/pjsalvatore/2011/11/26/sound-bite-for-the-day-chris-matthews-admits-media-is-left-leaning/#IDComment228118538 http://bigjournalism.com/pjsalvatore/2011/11/26/sound-bite-for-the-day-chris-matthews-admits-media-is-left-leaning/#IDComment228117582 So, what about this video (which you improperly tagged when you included your own colon character...) of Bob Schieffer interviewing Ron Paul, indicates that the "media's bias is to whatever opinions the establishment holds" (let's not even get into the awkward grammar of that statement). Certainly it is obvious the media is biased, but let's examine the video for a few minutes, eh? Reporter Schieffer is obviously dumbfounded that candidate Ron Paul would bring back the troops from Japan, and South Korea, and says so during forming his questions for Paul. He goes on to express the same incredulity when asking Congressman Paul about closing Education, Commerce, Interior, FEMA and other agencies. He is curious as to what will take up the things that all these agencies DO? [so, apparently, he has never even thought for a minute that these agencies largely run programs that shift resources away from taxpayers and to agency "selected" other businesses, and people in the country; in short--"transfer payments"] . So, what do you call someone who so favors a large government that they would not even CONCEIVE of a leaner organization? I'd say that today's "liberal" means favoring larger, more agency-driven (i.e. Executive Branch) solutions to problems. A journalist might bemoan how this program or that has become "wasteful" or ineffective, but they never question the premise that a solution is only as far as the best-run, best-funded Federal agency. They will act astounded when you suggest that the Federal Education department is not assisting in the process of education. So, that seems to SUPPORT the notion that CBS, and this show seem leaning Leftward. Pretty easy to figure out, really (it is why "Big Government" is a web site). During the recent decades we have seen a rise in the number of agencies (Education was formed, DHS was created, earlier EPA, and in the fifties what became HUD). This is the best indicator of the general trend that started in 1933. When you look at the (Google this:) "Wiki Control of Congress" page and graphs as EVERYBODY should do, you see that this year in the early thirties is when the Red shifted out of Washington, and the Blue became the hue. Sun, 27 Nov 2011 16:58:06 +0000 http://bigjournalism.com/pjsalvatore/2011/11/26/sound-bite-for-the-day-chris-matthews-admits-media-is-left-leaning/#IDComment228117582 http://biggovernment.com/cburgard/2011/03/19/california-gold-httpwww-youtube-comwatchvhbq064qsxdq/#IDComment136141047 Consider that India has plans in effect now to provide 30% of all it's nation's energy by the use of Thorium Reactor technology. These reactors do not produce anywhere near the amount of waste as typical Uranium / Plutonium reactors, and they "eat" weapons grade materials, or spent nuclear waste as fuel. They CANNOT go critical, and therefore are vastly safer than the kind of reactors presently in use. What's even better they are more difficult to use to produce weapons material, and are considered to be a likely way to produce easy to implement small reactors for use in many locations (a "regional" reactor system). Thorium is absurdly common in nature and comes out of the ground nearly ready to "rock and roll", needing little processing. There is no need to quest for miracle sources of power, while we can use reasonable, and currently developed power sources which are vastly safter, and more plentiful than our existing power sources. These methods are scientific soundness in use, and are practical. There have even been government movements to encourage exploring greater use of Thorium reactors. Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:11:51 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/cburgard/2011/03/19/california-gold-httpwww-youtube-comwatchvhbq064qsxdq/#IDComment136141047 http://biggovernment.com/cburgard/2011/03/19/california-gold-httpwww-youtube-comwatchvhbq064qsxdq/#IDComment136140067 RIGHT NOW...the USA is the world's THIRD LARGEST PRODUCER of oil. It is places and deposits just like that in the Santa Barbara bay which allow that to be true. There will always be a certain amount of oil seepage, and it will only be worse if we do not remove oil from its deposit sites under ground. I personally do not believe that having extremely expensive oil is going to help with alternative fuel development, and I like to point out that much of petroleum winds up in things like rubber, plastics, synthetic fibers, and fabrics, and millions of other things that have nothing to do with it's use as energy. Why do we not think of fabrics, plastics, medicine, and high tech components when we think of oil and petroleum? Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:04:34 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/cburgard/2011/03/19/california-gold-httpwww-youtube-comwatchvhbq064qsxdq/#IDComment136140067 http://biggovernment.com/ironman/2011/03/11/the-minimum-wage-and-job-loss-from-2006-through-2010/#IDComment134227857 Apparently not. In college Econ 101 or 102 (can't remember which, but I remember the material), we learned that a minimum wage normally results in job losses. The jobs the law affects are often those held by teenagers in their very fist jobs. The example given was that of a kid hired to retrieve umbrellas from a beach, and to put them away in the beach resort clubhouse. This means that first time jobs are harder to get. This also affects inner-city youth, because often those low wage jobs are a way they can prove themselves as being "workers", and not "gangbangers". These jobs are not a "constant", but rather a stepping stone to better job positions over time. All blown now, because of over-reaching, intrusive government. Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:34:52 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/ironman/2011/03/11/the-minimum-wage-and-job-loss-from-2006-through-2010/#IDComment134227857 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/04/jon-stewart-rips-keith-olbermann-and-msnbc-to-pieces/#IDComment126078743 Of course all this kind of stuff is weak as a general proposition. Of course the idea of "doing this right", assumes that Stewart is going to be able to deliver funny lines while negotiating a maze of complex thoughts and concepts he probably could never remember, or internalize. Olbermann is so twisted in so very many ways, and the things he has said and done are so far removed from reality, that a complete re-run of all the ACTUAL news during his tenure is the only way to "skewer" the man. That would be awkward, and Stewart could never deliver the lines. I have to content myself that at least there is some humor here and a bit of balance. There is none to be found elsewhere. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 05:12:39 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/04/jon-stewart-rips-keith-olbermann-and-msnbc-to-pieces/#IDComment126078743 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/04/jon-stewart-rips-keith-olbermann-and-msnbc-to-pieces/#IDComment126078196 People like Ed, and probably most of these other media folk NEVER do their own tweeting. That is something much more likely done personally by someone like Breitbart, or Malkin. So Ed's tweet means the twenty-something person hired to do Ed's tweets could not come up with anything better to say, and probably does not really understand what the heck is going on here. I find this kind of stuff from Stewart actually kind of funny, because he is on ground that he really knows. The stuff he does about conservatives sounds as though he has maybe one or two conservative friends that he "humors", because he has known them for years. He does not have a clue as to why conservatives believe as they do. But he CAN be funny some of the time. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 05:07:13 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/04/jon-stewart-rips-keith-olbermann-and-msnbc-to-pieces/#IDComment126078196 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/12/exclusive-alan-dershowitz-defends-sarah-palins-use-of-term-blood-libel/#IDComment121115905 I very much doubt this kind of division within the Democratic Party represents a fundamental split. The history of Democratic politics tells me that they value political success as much or more than does the Republican Party. Perhaps a way of comprehending the Democratic approach as opposed to the Republican approach, would be to view Democrats as those who value votes as opposed to those who value being philosophically correct. Remember that the Democratic party tolerated conservative Southern "Dixiecrat" politicians and voters in large numbers BECAUSE it helped them win offices. As organized crime began to control many of the large unions in the USA, Democratic political animals began to develop an uneasy working relationship with the very dangerous folk that peopled organized crime in the early and middle twentieth century. Perhaps it is right to be concerned that someone of great political ability and maturity may come along to galvanize the Democratic Party. That kind of thing can happen. But that might mean leaving: The ends DO justify the means, but you simply cannot admit that....it would not be good "politics". [this could well be the motto of the political group I'm discussing]. What can conservatives do given these circumstances? 1. Do not give in. Be relentless in our efforts. 2. Call out the various libels, and outright lies that fall around us. Insist that we use only high quality info. 3. Do everything we can to gain greater and greater influence in the world of political power. 4. Bring to office principled and mature politicians who understand the importance of their actions. Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:11:57 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/12/exclusive-alan-dershowitz-defends-sarah-palins-use-of-term-blood-libel/#IDComment121115905 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120657137 The statement was worded very awkwardly. I'd say that SOME parts of government CAN be essential, and important to protect (e.g. the fire department is important; police forces are important; military important, dept of educ. NOT important). The problem is that MASSIVE government spending on socially corrective programs (USDA, EPA, Education, large parts of HHS) are generally a drain upon an economy. Tue, 11 Jan 2011 06:55:53 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120657137 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120656770 You have struck "pay dirt"! The employer of a public sector union member is not the elected official, or the working manager of the government department. The employer is the entire citizenry of the jurisdiction in which they work. This citizenry is not given to opportunity to bargain with the union, or directly affect the outcome of the negotiations. FDR had it right....there are very special circumstances which should disallow any involvement in unions at a public sector place of employment. Doubtlessly, the military is exempted for just the same reasons, with added caution because of the control of weapons of war, and of war fighting forces. Tue, 11 Jan 2011 06:52:12 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120656770 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120656167 Well put, except the usage of the term "piers". You mean to use "peers". That is the term for people from the same background, or co-workers, something of that ilk. "Piers" refers to several, long, usually wooden, structures built out over water. Since that is a valid spelling, spell check will not find this kind of substitution. Your point is a good one. Children definitely need to role of an adult. There are many flaws in John Dewey. Tue, 11 Jan 2011 06:45:37 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/#IDComment120656167 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/in-defense-of-inflamed-rhetoric/#IDComment120443111 As I was watching Sheriff Dupnik's comments on C-SPAN, I had to shudder. It seemed to me that this guy was acting like a foolish, small minded, politically naive person. Here he was ratcheting up the rhetoric himself by attributing the violence to the tone, or material in the media. How foolish! There have been harshly worded statements in media publications going back way beyond the time of John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson (who had choice words for each other, If I understand right). Does this guy recall having heard the nursery rhyme: "Sticks and stones can break my bones....."? Open borders. Sanctuary City. Trim the 1st Amendment....how foolish is this guy? When is he up for election? Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:10:11 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/in-defense-of-inflamed-rhetoric/#IDComment120443111 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/06/gop-issues-first-oversight-letter-to-justice-department/#IDComment119937809 A letter is just the start typical in the world of lawyers, regulators and politics. I like to think of these things in terms of what they would be like if the roles were reversed. What would be our concern if a couple of thugs, at least one holding a police baton, dressed in para-military garb was lingering menacingly in a mostly African-American neighborhood, and that set of thugs was white? This seems easy to me. I would want that person charged with violations of the election codes. This kind of mental exercise serves as the litmus test for whether a wrongdoing has occurred. Obviously, a wrongdoing occurred at this polling place. We pay these people to investigate and make charges against these miscreants. Go do your job! Fri, 7 Jan 2011 01:12:43 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/06/gop-issues-first-oversight-letter-to-justice-department/#IDComment119937809 http://biggovernment.com/dloos/2011/01/06/new-york-citys-no-show-seiu-snow-jobs/#IDComment119936368 It seems to me that the entire concept of having unions interposed in the relations between employees and governmental entities makes no sense at all. What entity should be able to obey the laws if not a government? This means that governments should, by their very nature, be unable to abuse their relationships with employees. The natural recourse that any abused worker would have is their own representative or senator. This would apply for State and Federal employees. For a city worker their city councilperson ought to do. Having unions in this area is a source of endless abuse, with no benefit whatsoever to the actual workers in their daily working lives. Fri, 7 Jan 2011 01:00:59 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/dloos/2011/01/06/new-york-citys-no-show-seiu-snow-jobs/#IDComment119936368 http://biggovernment.com/rbidinotto/2010/12/27/how-to-cultivate-a-food-crisis/#IDComment118312372 Good call - either utterly ignorant or a Troll, or perhaps BOTH. We have already eaten GM foods for decades, since most food we eat are man-made strains of existing crops. Every animal we eat is not identical, as a GENETIC FACT, when compared with their ancient ancestor. Why? Because man BRED the newer animal in order to achieve Genetic Modification. This fear of GM is a lot like the earlier fear of Flying Saucers, or of sixty foot tall men or women who were exposed to "Atomic Radiation" (cue - hushed intake of breath!). People basically express their ignorance in fear, having no real basis upon which to understand the radical innovation now affecting society. Rather than study up enough to actually understand, they fly to whatever political group makes the most assuring sounds, "to their fearful mind". So far the only people that I've seen proposing controls on what food we can eat are (wait for it.....) LIBERALS (the first lady comes to mind as a recent example...) So go eat whatever causes you the most comfort. Avoid those nasty GM foods, even if it means paying much more for your food. In this country you are still free to choose. Tue, 28 Dec 2010 01:41:56 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/rbidinotto/2010/12/27/how-to-cultivate-a-food-crisis/#IDComment118312372 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2010/12/15/l-a-parents-pull-the-trigger-on-school-choice/#IDComment116008511 I tend to agree, but I'd have to note that home schooling and private tutoring do not seem to be a solution which fits every one, or we would have seen a complete removal of all kids from all large school districts. Apparently, some parents simply do not feel that they could do this, or that they would have success. In areas like Compton there are many one-parent families that are struggling with a low paying job, just to pay the electric bill and put food on the table. So, while home schooling is great and has great results for those who do it, we can still welcome this incremental change. I do not think a student who is behind for a few years is doomed to never make it back out of the rut. History is full of students who started out poorly but wound up as high achievers (Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein come to mind). Wed, 15 Dec 2010 19:06:28 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2010/12/15/l-a-parents-pull-the-trigger-on-school-choice/#IDComment116008511 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2010/12/15/l-a-parents-pull-the-trigger-on-school-choice/#IDComment116006072 You nailed it CR. This is only a step in the right direction. Elimination of "feel good" (i.e. there are no winners and no losers) principles, "mother nature love day" (kids KNOW that they are being fed crap when an aging hippie comes in and sings songs about the environment) and similar things, with substitution of the "three R" style training would be a good next step. READING WRITING and ARITHMETIC are the foundation upon which things like LITERATURE, HISTORY, MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE are built upon. Much of the curriculum problems seem to me to be like the "New Math" of the 1960's. Attempts by "great thinkers" to rejigger something that actually worked fine, but which these elite experts had determined needed complete change. One might be led to believe that no one ever succeeded in math prior to this great "innovation". That is not true. In fact "New Math" was basically a failure and abandoned in favor of traditional training within roughly ten years. Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:50:15 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2010/12/15/l-a-parents-pull-the-trigger-on-school-choice/#IDComment116006072