"Cowed" By Regulations

Have you ever wondered what big oil and dairy farms might have in common? Neither have I.

When it comes to regulatory practices, it seems they have quite a lot! According to The Wall Street Journal , the EPA is demanding dairy producers conform to something called the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure program. The name alone sounds expensive, doesn't it? Actually it more aptly applies to oil and natural gas operations close to bodies of water. This I can understand.

What does it have to do with dairies? Well, it seems the EPA has discovered milk contains animal fat, a non-petroleum oil. Therefore they must prepare and implement an emergency management plan which is to include the training of first responders, probably farm hands, in clean up protocol plus build containment facilities.

I expect we're going to have a lot of dairy farmers crying over spilled milk! It adds insult to injury considering the requirements they already face to mitigate their cow's methane production!

Does it make you wonder how much milk must be spilled to become an environmental threat?

Mr. Obama made light of redundant regulations coming from a multitude of agencies concerning the salmon industry during his State of the Union speech. He didn't mention just what those regulations might be. If he doesn't know, he should. The EPA is also one of his.

At least when you see the price of a gallon of milk matching the price of a gallon of gas, you'll know why. Government regulation.

Not to mention the poor cows. How is the farmer to afford to feed them? Beef is bad for you. Milk is an environmental hazard. The lowly cow may be the first species ever to become extinct due to government regulation.

Watch out sheep. There is oil in your wool! And pigs! Talk about oily fat! Ham, bacon...don't you dare send drippings from your cooking to the land fill! It could leach into ground water.

Funny, we actually pay people to come up with this stuff. Stick a fancy word on a dumb idea, like "regulation", and suddenly it's sacrosanct!

As the article says, you can't make this stuff up. Yet...someone, in our government, did!

Giffords ~ It's Time To Move On

I am deeply sorry for the tradgedy that befell Gabrielle Giffords.  I couldn't be more pleased that her recovery thus far seems remarkable.  Other than that I'm getting tired of hearing about it as if she were some sort of fallen diety. She is not.  She's a Congresswoman from Arizona who, before the shooting, few, outside Congress and her state, were even aware of who she was.  It's time to move on.

One of her fellow Democrats, Loretta Sanchez, D CA, even went so far as to suggest she should be removed from the Armed Services Committee until (and if) she recovers from her injuries.

It seems some were outraged at the suggestion, saying it was bad for morale while she was recovering. Why?

It is expected it will take months, if not years, for her to recover. The full extent of her injuries aren't even known at this point. Especially those relating to her thought processes.

One arguement was to hold the seat open because  Republicans have the majority and one vote more or less would be meaningless. What kind of logic is that?

What it does do is deprive her constituents of representation. Do they deserve better? I think so.

I am aware that members of both houses stick around way past what is considered prudent. How many times did you see Strom Thurmond or Robert Byrd wheeled in for a vote? Considering their physical condition you had to wonder what their mental condition was. Did they fully comprehend what they were voting on or were they reacting to well placed instruction?

I ask first if that is how Gabby's collegues would want to see her should she recover only partially, and second, what would she herself want. Would she want her constituents to go without representation?

It would be the mark of her as a politician. The trouble is she is not yet able to say. And no one knows when she will be.

Wrestling With The TSA

Finally someone with stature has had enough of the "highly trained" screeners  of the TSA. Former professional wrestler and Governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura has filed suit against the TSA for invasive pat-downs. I've often wondered why someone of note hasn't stepped up before.

When Janet Napolitano recently visited Israel and witnessed their security procedures she told us they wouldn't work here because we have too many people passing through our airports. It wouldn't, of course, have anything to do with the fact our screeners are anything but highly trained and we won't profile.

I'm thinking we could probably get those figures closer together if the TSA would accept documentation verifying metal implants that the fancy dan machines don't seem to recognize,  exclude the infirm and elderly and young children, including babies in arms. They might also worry a bit less about the obese they were complaining about. Why is it they prefer fondling genitals rather than a roll of fat?

Let's face it. Our homeland security just doesn't do the job. No reports are released about the number of actual terrorists that have actually been caught with these methods. My guess is none. I also wonder if they are funding all this nonsense with the goods they confiscate or do the agents get to take home the good stuff. Throwing it out seems a terrible waste, but then that's because it belonged to we the people, not the government.

I hesitate to mention it, but one can still cross the border into Canada and return home without having to go through a body scanner or suffer through a pat down. I would think any "terrorist" with a wit of sense would find this the preferable way to enter the country!

Airport searches really don't work. Fences and walls along our southern border do not work. Cameras do not work. Drones won't be any better unless there are feet on the ground with authority to arrest illegals. The government seems not to want to supply them.

Oh, yeah. Posturing doesn't work either. I've heard profiling done by "highly trained" professionals works in some countries. Do the numbers passing through really matter?

It's still my "right" to think it might not. I wish Mr. Ventura success. Maybe he should make it a class action suit.

Palin ~ Like Bees To Honey

I remember not too long ago Donald Trump said he'd consider a run at the Presidency if Sarah Palin runs. So far both are on hold. Today we learn Rudy Giuliani is considering tossing his hat in the ring once again ~ for the same reason!  Is this a case of opposites attract or likes repel?

It's getting close to time to announce.  Fund raising is already in full swing.  Obama has thrown down the gauntlet as far as expected money is concerned.  One billion dollars! An obscene amount for a election during this time of need for fiscal restraint. An obscene amount for an election anytime!

No matter.  All three of them can afford it. You see, they work in the private sector and have made their own success.  Pity the poor politician like Tim Pawlenty who's ambition is hampered by that alone plus having somewhat of a low key personality. He'll pale by comparison in a debate!

There are a hoard of other wannabes on the Republican side.  Familiar faces like Mitt Romney and  Ron Paul. Yawn.  Newt Gingrich can probably out talk all of them but he's too expedient.  Michelle Bachmann?  I wonder how Sarah would feel about that!

As a friend commented over lunch a few days ago, admitting we're likely to have Obama for a second term, "Who else is there?  Really."

A good question to which I have no answer.  Rather than agonizing over what to me, at least for the moment, is obvious,  it's time to turn my attention to keeping a balance to the Presidency in the House and Senate.

Meanwhile I'm going to sit back and watch what I imagine will be spectacular political theater.  Theater of the absurd.

Why Bother Concealing Weapons?

There was a tidbit I came across this morning about North Carolina Representative (R) Renee Ellmers planning to carry a gun to public events. Her colleague, Representative (D) Heath Shuler has, according to his staff, been doing so for some time.

I'm not sure this solves anything. I got to wondering what circumstances would cause me to unholster a weapon. I drew a blank.

Had Gabby Giffords been carrying, it would have done her no good. When someone walks up to you, puts a gun to your head and fires you don't even know what's happening, what's more have enough of your wits to draw and fire faster. Nope. It wouldn't have helped.

As for Shuler and Ellmers, and others who probably follow suit, I wonder what their fear level may be. A heckler? Someone walking towards them? Without a weapon in sight shooting them would be inexcusable. A person in the crowd? The chances of seeing them first - slim. Even if so, could those standing around said person be missed in a take down effort? Maybe if one is a sharpshooter. I doubt either are that good.

If we're going to act like it's the old west where everyone wore guns on their hip, perhaps that's what we should do. Wear your gun fully visible. Seeing it, no one would know your level of proficiency, but they would know you are armed. That should serve as a deterrent of sorts.

There is another alternative. If you're so afraid of your constituency, either don't run for office or be sure you have a trained security contingent working the crowd. Even that would not have helped Gabby.

Unfortunately bad things happen to good people. Arming ourselves will not prevent it. Ever.