A Real Inconveniet Truth

In between late night massages and  saving the planet, the prototype ecco-warrior Mr Al Gore emerges now filled with angst over his earlier choices.  He originally urged that we all switch to corn ethanol so we could burn up our food supply in our automobiles.  Al Gore admitted today that corn ethanol was “not a good policy,” according to Reuters.  "One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee", Mr Gore said.  Sure he made a mistake, but dog gone it, the reason he made the mistake was his heart was just too big and he was too compassionate.  Now Mr Gore has become a real pragmatist.  Now he says don't use corn ethanol instead use the "second generation technologies which do not compete with food".   Second generation technologies convert glass clippings into bio-fuel, ala "Back to the Future Part 2". It seems that this change of heart about fuel sources also comes with a change in his funding.  It turns out that Mr Gore is a partner in a venture capital company, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, which is now promoting, wait for it.  Yes, you guessed it the so called "second generation technologies". 
There is a great post in the Green Hell Blog that details this newest hypocrisy  from the former VP:   Green Hell Blog   http://greenhellblog.com/2010/11/22/al-gore-cries-crocodile-tears-over-ethanol/
It turns out that former VP not only likes receiving those late nigh massages, he also will administer them to the public - for a fee.

US Tax System Explained Through Beer

15 October, 2008 by Scott Nolan Smith from the site "theSkittzo" http://scottnolansmith.wordpress.com/ "I received the following in an email earlier, thought it was clever and decided to post — though it is a bit of an oversimplification. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80 total. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. 'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,'but he got $10!' 'Yeah, that’s right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!' 'That’s true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!' 'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!' The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier." While I agree this is over simplified it is a excellent illustration of our current tax system and by following the simplified illustration, anyone gets a gut level understanding of why  there is so much emotion over this issue.  And it really underscores the demagoguery of no tax cuts for the rich.

Insert your own joke here

White House Staffers Got a Bigger Raise Than You Did Last Year

Alarming Border Security Trend

The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the Tea Party are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and to agree with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night. "I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. 

When I said I didn't have any, he left before I even got a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?”

In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences,but the liberals scaled them. He then installed loudspeakers that blared Rush Limbaugh across the fields.

"Not real effective," he said. "The  liberals still got through and Rush annoyed the cows so much that they wouldn't give any milk.”

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons and drive them across the border where they are simply left to fend for themselves."  A lot of these people are not prepared for our rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a single bottle of imported drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet, though."

When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about plans being made to build re-education camps where liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR races.

In recent days, liberals have turned to ingenious ways of crossing the border. Some have been disguised as senior citizens taking a bus trip to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half-dozen young vegans in powdered wig disguises, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed senior citizens about Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney to prove that they were alive in the '50s. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we become very suspicious about their age" an official said.

Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and are renting all the Michael Moore movies. "I really feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them." an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?"

The United Nations Human Rights Council

"The United Nations Human Rights Council, a conclave of 47 nations that includes such notorious human rights violators as China, Cuba, Libya and Saudi Arabia, met in Geneva on Friday, to question the United States about its human rights failings. It heard, among other things, that the U.S. discriminates against Muslims, that its police are barbaric and that it has been holding political prisoners behind bars for years. Russia urged the U.S. to abolish the death penalty. Cuba and Iran called on Washington to close Guantanamo prison and investigate alleged torture by its troops abroad. Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, told the U.S. it must better promote religious tolerance. Mexico complained that racial profiling had become a common practice in some U.S. states.  Some of these allegations, and many more, come from Americans themselves — especially from a stridently critical network of U.S. organizations whose input dominates the U.N. digest of submissions from 'civil society' that are part of the council’s background reading."  George Russell Published November 05, 2010 | FoxNews.com. 
Here is a little reported event or discussed event.  Anyone can (and does) criticize the US, about anything they wish.  And those of us who love this nation realize it has it flaws.  We should be constantly mindful of the faults of this nation and ever vigilant to correct them.   But going hat in hand before one of the most corrupt political organizations that ever existed and defending ourselves from insane, hypocritical charges is so grating that it is almost physically revolting.  Does it make any kind of sense to defend ourselves from charges of secret prisons or torture from the Cubans or the Iranians?  Do we want to take law and order tips from Mexico; or learn about religious tolerance from the government of Indonesia? 
The absurdity of this Kafkaesque world is simply too bizarre for rationalization.  But there is a reason.  But the State Department which is sending a high level delegation to participate in this US bashing feast has a reason.  But according to the U.S. State Department, which led a delegation of high-level American diplomats and government officials to Geneva, the Periodic Review is a major opportunity for Washington to lead the rest of the world by example.
“Our taking the process seriously contributes to the universality” of the human rights process, one State Department official told Fox News. “It’s an important opportunity for us to showcase our willingness to expose ourselves in a transparent way” to human rights criticism.
“For us, upholding the process is very important.”
The same official, however, declared that the “most important” part of the process is “the dialogue with our own citizens.” 
Why would the current administration sully the honor and prestige of this great nation in order to achieve a “dialogue with our own citizens”?    When is out government ever going to figure it out that participating in charades like this, does nothing to set an example for the many rogue nations around the world? I think the current US administration is trying to make some kind of point about how everyone is the same.  But apparently, they are unaware of  the vast differences between legitimacy of the US government and the legitimacy of most the other world governments.  "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" according to the Declaration of Independence.  This is a major premise of the US government and the Western democracies, not the rest of the world and certainly not the corrupt UN.