WLO banner ad

Monday, January 31, 2011

The Al Gore Cult of Global Warming - and why they don't like nuclear power.

Nuclear power is not acceptable to the Al Gore Cult of Global Warming because it does not require state control of individuals and their energy use. A Facebook user (and where else can one get good political discussions going short of a freshman government class?) objected to nuclear power because it merely postpones a problem - storing nuclear waste - even as it solves the man-made global warming fraud problem.

As far as postponing a problem, I thought that if we don't act IMMEDIATELY on global warming, the ice caps will melt, polar bears will drown, New York, Houston and San Diego will be all be underwater in a matter of years and the oceans will nigh on boil. (You know, the standard, run-of-the-mill hysterical fear-mongering used whenever a group wants control over something).*

Doesn't it make sense to push an old lady out from the way of a bus and deal with her broken hip later? Yes, if saving the lady is what you are really concerned about. Likewise, if Al Gore Cultists are really concerned about boiling oceans, they should be out with hammers building their own private nuclear reactors in their backyards. They can deal with the waste later. They aren't building nuclear reactors, of course, because boiling oceans are mere pretext for government control.

We have cost-effective nuclear technology. (Insert gratuitous French joke here '"Hell, even the French can do it!"). We do not have cost-effective "alternative" technology like solar and wind. The fear-mongering cultists solve this problem by taking massive amounts of borrowed money and giving it away like political party favors. They have a euphemism for this transfer of wealth to their friends: they call it "investment."

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas and far more prevalent in the atmosphere than CO2. Spending billions of dollars to curtail CO2 emissions - even if well intentioned - on the equivalent of spit in the ocean is not good policy.

Mars is also warming - I'm pretty sure our factories and SUV's aren't contributing to it.

If Al Gore were around during the last Ice Age, I'm sure he would have blamed that on humans, as well.

* Conservatives use the same hysterical fear-mongering tactic when it comes to the War on Terror and the War on Drugs. But that's a different topic.

Personalized Personal Injury Service at The Williams Law Office, P.C.

If you have been hurt by the negligence of another, you probably need the services of a personal injury lawyer. The insurance company of the person that caused you injury will have a roomful of lawyers on its side. I know, I used to be one of them.

I have an experiment for you all. Call some of the law offices you see advertised on television. Insist on talking with the lawyer in the commercial, not one of his associates or paralegals. I'll bet dimes to danish to the success rate of getting through to the lawyer in the commercial is nigh on ZERO.

Call me at The Williams Law Office, P.C. The office number is 303-800-0894. If I don't pick up the phone, you will hear back from me within a business day.

Another experiment for you when you call one of the big plaintiffs' firms that advertises on TV: Ask for the lawyers' personal cell number. I guarantee you the success rate will be ZERO.

My cell phone: 303-588-2731. If I am unable to answer, I will call back posthaste.

If you want personalized personal injury representation, call me, David K. Williams, Jr., at The Williams Law Office, P.C.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Before blaming others, look inward.

Eva Sirovy wrote a poignant and personal essay in today's Denver Post about her bankruptcy six years ago and its efffect on her life still today. (See "Years later, punished by bankruptcy.") She comes across as a thoughtful, intelligent person with whom I would enjoy sharing some coffee.

Ms. Sirovy writes matter-of-factly about her poor money management skills and fesses up to making bad decisions:

Yeah, I defaulted on loans to the credit card companies, and yeah, I'm probably exactly the sort of person who shouldn't even have one of those magic pieces of plastic. It's too easy for me to forget the pain that's coming in a month or two, and spend money on things I do not absolutely need.

These decisions resulted in her bankruptcy. Now, the six year old bankruptcy has kept her from getting a bank loan to refinance her house. One might think she would recognize that this is just one more negative consequence of her poor use of credit in the past, yet something she can and will overcome on her road back to financial responsibility. But no, that is not her conclusion.

She quotes her friend who said, that for years "the banks loaned to anyone who could sign a paper . . . and now we're getting punished for their bad decisions!" Ms. Sirovy agrees: "that seems right. We're all getting punished for the banks' bad decisions."

No, Ms. Sirovy, you are getting punished for your own.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Once again, racist southerners want to secede.

Once again, there is strong southern sentiment to secede from the country. When will these racists learn? Secession means nothing but the oppression of minorities.

What? .... The secession is in Africa?.... The south of Sudan wants to secede from the rest of the Sudan?.... Are you telling me there are reasons other than a neo-Confederate belief in slavery to support secession?


My bad.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

The "war on drugs" is the conservatives' version of the progressives' "war on poverty."

Neither war can be won.

Both wars exacerbate the problem it tries to solve.

Both wars create massive, monstrous and corrupt government agencies.

Both wars have wasted gazillions of dollars.

And neither group has the ability to recognize their abject failure.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Subsidized school breakfasts in Colorado.

And so the squealing begins....

The State of Colorado is facing over a $1 billion budget shortfall. Services must be cut. Services will be cut.

It is basic math.

A plan to end subsidized breakfast for some public school students is among the suggestions. The Denver Post is aghast. Its lead editorial today declares that the "Least among us deserve better." The Post says "there are other places to cut." Of course, they do not name any of these other places.

Likewise, letter writers proclaim their nobility in criticizing the plan.

I suggest the Post and other self-proclaimed champions of the downtrodden, at the very least, suggest where to cut instead of merely saying "don't cut here!"

Friday, January 21, 2011

An incredibly dumb statement on the floor of the House of Representatives.

George Miller, Democratic Representative from California, had this to say on the House floor in defense of Obamacare and against the House vote to repeal it:

Has anybody, any family in America, any single mother, any spouse, any child, any grandparent, met a more bureaucratic system than the American health care system? There is no more bureaucratic system!


Everyone has been run around the block by their insurance company, it’s something they all share. It’s almost the problems they share with their cable company. Not quite, it’s not as dramatic here. Because this is life and death, this is the security of your family, this is whether or not you can change jobs, this is whether or not your children will be protected, this is whether or not your parents will be able to afford the prescription drugs. Because that is what this legislation enables and gives the freedoms to American families to have. Repeal, we’d go back into the clutches of these bureaucrats spread across the world.


Nobody wants to go back there, ladies and gentlemen. They’ve been there for 50 years and health care costs have gone up faster than any other segment in our economy. Faster than anything you can imagine. Faster than a speeding rocket, faster than a speeding airplane, faster than Superman. Health care costs have gone up because of the insurance bureaucracies.

This may be one of the most asinine statements made in D.C. Ever. I know that is a high bar, but Rep. Miller managed to clear it. Here is how:

1. He rails against the private insurance bureaucracy. He fails to recognize that the private insurance bureaucracy is the product of massive government regulation and mandates.

2. Obamacare forces people to buy private insurance, the same system he lambastes. He therefore denounces the very system that he wants to force people into.

The mind boggles.

Friday, January 14, 2011

John Fox wasn't "fired" from the Panthers.

In a front page article today, Denver Post sports writer Mike Klis says new Bronco coach John Fox "was fired 10 days ago by Carolina owner Jerry Richardson."

No, he was not. Fox served out the duration of his contract with the Panthers. It was not renewed.

Monday, January 10, 2011

If Palin is responsible for the AZ shooting, is Jody Foster responsible for the shooting of Ronald Reagan?

The quality and tenor of political discourse is a fine subject to discuss.

But to suggest it had any connection with the Arizona shootings is akin to suggesting Jody Foster had something to do with the shooting of Ronald Reagan.

Sunday, January 09, 2011

On the state of modern political discourse.

In the wake of the horrible tragedy in Arizona yesterday, many commentators of all persuasions have speculated on the political beliefs of the shooter.

As if it mattered.

Based on the videos he posted online, the man was not able to put together a coherent thought. Why should anyone give a whit about a madman's political beliefs?

The answer, of course, is to make political points out of a tragedy. Too many modern politicians and their lackeys in the press feel obligated to exploit every tragedy for their own political gain.

That is obscene. It is indecent. It should not be countenanced by the fair-minded.

A common refrain is that today's political discourse is too violent, that it dehumanizes those "on the other side," and actually encourages violence among our most unstable.

I have no quarrel with criticizing violent imagery. I have criticized sports writers and commentators for an overruse of military metaphor: "They are in a battle out there," "the offense really needs to step up its aerial attack," "another bomb from way downtown!"

But to suggest violent metaphor and dehumanizing language is a problem unique to modern times is simply incorrect.

In the 1800's, British Prime Minister Benjamin Disreali said of his political rival, William Ewart Gladstone, "If Gladstone fell into the Thames, that would be a misfortune, and if anybody pulled him out that, I suppose, would be a calamity."

Giles Strachey, a British writer who died in 1932, said of David Lloyd George, a politican, "My one ardent desire is that after the war he should be publicly castrated in front of Nurse Cavell’s statue."

Abraham Lincoln received a letter from a citizen that said, "God damn your god damned old hellfired god damned soul to hell god damn you and god damn your god damned family’s god damned hellfired god damned soul to hell and good damnation god damn them and god damn your god damned friends to hell."

Violent discourse is not new.

Even beyond mere rhetoric, we have historically had actual violence between our political leaders. In 1856, Congressman Preston Brooks beat Senator Charles Sumner with a cane on the Senate floor. In 1804, the sitting Vice-President, Aaron Burr and former Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamiltion, engaged in a duel. Hamilton died as a result of a gunshot wound from the Vice-President.

We no longer have beatings in Congress or duels between national political figures. The suggestion that we are somehow more violent than ever is untenable.

As usual, too much of our modern, mainstream commentary is unconcerned with history or facts. It is more concerned with exaggeration, fear-mongering, and of course, a need for more government control.

Saturday, January 08, 2011

The war on reefer vs. the liberty movement.

According to the Denver Post, "[s]tate law enforcement officials . . . have broken up an alleged marijuana-trafficking organization that was using Colorado's medical-marijuana laws as cover." (See "Marijuana growers create smokescreen for trafficking ring.")

As "law-and-order" types revel in their pointless little "victory," I ask small-government types to consider:

How much tax money was spent on this?
Where else could that money have been spent?
What could you have done with your share of that money?
How much money could the state make by taxing the sale of marijuana?

It is hypocritical to profess a belief in individual liberty, limited government and personal responsibility and at the same time advocate the use of government resources - and force - to stop marijuana growers.

The war against marijuana is based on the belief that individuals should not have liberty, that big government is necessary to impose public policy for the "common good" and that people are too stupid to be personally responsible.

Is there any other conclusion to be drawn except that a belief in criminalizing marijuana is antithetical to the liberty movement?

If not, please help me understand.

Thursday, January 06, 2011

Thomas Jefferson on those useless paper phone books we all throw away.

It is the time of year when several unwanted, large phone books covered with refrigerator magnets start arriving on our door steps.

Some say the government needs to step in and stop the waste of the unwanted delivery of phone books. You may have heard the indignant refrain: "There oughtta be a law! We need to BAN the delivery of these unwanted and wasteful phone books!"

Surprisingly enough, however, no government action is required.

As the ad salesmen for the phone books continue to pitch their delivery numbers when they call on local business owners, the potential ad buyers will say:

"Yeah, you deliver a gazillion phone books, but none of these people you deliver to actually LOOK at the books. Most just throw them away the same day you deliver them. (The more environmentally-minded will, of course, recycle them). In any event, they ain't being read. They ain't bein' looked at. I'm not going to spend my ad budget on your soon-to-be-extinct, useless paper phone books. I'm sorry, but I have an appointment with a Search Engine Optimization guy, followed by a Google Ads and Facebook advertising expert coming over now. Please excuse me."

The paper phone book will soon be in the same category as the eight-track tape.

Until then, I'll deal with throwing them away. I do not want the government banning them or mandating some "opt out" process overseen and administered by the Department of Unwanted Phone Books, with accompanying regulators and a schedule of fines and penalties for those that try to skirt the ban or regulatory scheme.

Picking them up off our front porch and throwing them away is annoying. It is inconvenient.

Surprisingly enough, Thomas Jefferson had something to say on the topic of unwanted phone books. He said, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."

As usual, he was right.

Postscript: A Facebook commenter noted that she did not want people leaving litter on her property. Fair point. I responded thusly:

"Fair enough. Trespassing and littering laws already exist. It is up to you if it's worth the hassle of enforcing the existing laws."