Worcester County Freedom Trail

An interesting piece on a March 2-4, 2008 global warming conference from Dr. Thomas Sowell, one of the great economic and philosophic minds of our times, on Townhall.com:

It has almost become something of a joke when some “global warming” conference has to be cancelled because of a snowstorm or bitterly cold weather.

But stampedes and hysteria are no joke — and creating stampedes and hysteria has become a major activity of those hyping a global warming “crisis.”

They mobilize like-minded people from a variety of occupations, call them all “scientists” and then claim that “all” the experts agree on a global warming crisis.

Their biggest argument is that there is no argument.

A whole cottage industry has sprung up among people who get grants, government agencies who get appropriations, politicians who get publicity and the perpetually indignant who get something new to be indignant about. It gives teachers something to talk about in school instead of teaching.

Those who bother to check the facts often find that not all those who are called scientists are really scientists and not all of those who are scientists are specialists in climate. But who bothers to check facts these days?

A new and very different conference on global warming will be held in New York City, under the sponsorship of the Heartland Institute, on March 2nd to March 4th — weather permitting.

It is called an “International Conference on Climate Change.” Its subtitle is “Global Warming: Truth or Swindle?” Among those present will be professors of climatology, along with scientists in other fields and people from other professions.

They come from universities in England, Hungary, and Australia, as well as from the United States and Canada, and include among other dignitaries the president of the Czech Republic.

There will be 98 speakers and 400 participants.

The theme of the conference is that “there is no scientific consensus on the causes or likely consequences of global warming.”

Many of the participants in this conference are people who have already expressed skepticism about either the prevailing explanations of current climate change or the dire predictions about future climate change.

These include authors of such books as “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years” by Fred Singer and Dennis Avery, and “Shattered Consensus,” edited by Patrick J. Michaels.

This will be one of the rare opportunities for the media to hear the other side of the story — for those old-fashioned journalists who still believe that their job is to inform the public, rather than promote an agenda.

The subtitle of the upcoming conference — “Global Warming: Truth or Swindle?” — is also the title of a British television program that is now available on DVD in the United States. It is a devastating debunking of the current “global warming” hysteria.

Nobody denies that there is such a thing as a greenhouse effect. If there were not, the side of the planet facing away from the sun would be freezing every night.

There is not even a lot of controversy over temperature readings. What is fundamentally at issue are the explanations, implications and extrapolations of these temperature readings.

The party line of those who say that we are heading for a global warming crisis of epic proportions is that human activities generating carbon dioxide are key factors responsible for the warming that has taken place in recent times.

The problem with this reasoning is that the temperatures rose first and then the carbon dioxide levels rose. Some scientists say that the warming created the increased carbon dioxide, rather than vice versa.

Many natural factors, including variations in the amount of heat put out by the sun, can cause the earth to heat or cool.

The bigger problem is that this has long since become a crusade rather than an exercise in evidence or logic. Too many people are too committed to risk it all on a roll of the dice, which is what turning to empirical evidence is.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich issued the following statement about the passing of William F. Buckley, the father of modern conservatism:

Before there was Goldwater or Reagan, there was Bill Buckley.

From writing books, to creating, leading and sustaining National Review Magazine, to his 33-year run as the host of Firing Line on television, Bill Buckley became the indispensable intellectual advocate from whose energy, intelligence, wit, and enthusiasm the best of modern conservatism drew its inspiration and encouragement.

It was not until William F. Buckley, Jr., founded National Review Magazine in 1955 that the tide began to slowly turn for conservatives. National Review was a lonely voice of conservatism in an overwhelmingly liberal establishment.

Buckley began what led to Senator Barry Goldwater and his Conscience of a Conservative that led to the seizing of power by the conservatives from the moderate establishment within the Republican Party. From that emerged Ronald Reagan.

Bill stood up to defend freedom as a positive value of greater moral worth than either the state and the elite, and over time his work had a transformational impact on the quality of American politics that continues even today.

He was a wonderful friend, a great patriot, and a lively human being. Callista and I are praying for him and those who loved him. He will be missed.

I just finished reading The Making of the American Conservative Mind:  National Review and Its Times. A great story about one of the greatest minds of the 20th century.

This from the Lyme Disease Association, a grassroots organization focused on Lyme disease education, prevention, and raising research dollars.

The new IDSA guidelines published in October 2007 by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) are already causing patients to be denied treatment for chronic Lyme disease. The guidelines have recommended against any long term treatments, listing numerous specific antibiotic classes not to be given, listing alternative treatments and even supplements not to be offered to Lyme patients. Clinical discretion has been removed from treating physicians. We ask that you, your families, and friends across the country sign this petition immediately. Lyme treatment is at stake.

Sign the petition here.

This is a strange, political fight between Lyme literate MD’s (LLMDs) and the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA). There are a number of IDSA leadership members who’ve become infected with Lyme and are now seeing LLMD’s on the sly, receiving long-term antibiotic treatment themselves…because, more often than not, that’s the only thing that works.

Shame on these hippocrates who think it’s more important to “go along to get along” than to do what’s right by the untold millions who are suffering from Lyme Disease. The CDC reports that about 20,000 Lyme cases are reported each year. They estimate another 200,000 cases go unreported…each and every year!

Lyme is a devastating disease, as are the 10+ co-infections that often inflict themselves on the victim from the same tick bite. I was just reading about the emotional roller coaster many of these people are on. See this article on one of the dozens of symptoms: Lyme rage.

Thanks to Rep. Karyn Polito (R-Shrewsbury) for this update on the FY 2009 state budgeting process. And kudos for her continued support of cities and towns. Now if only Gov. Patrick would follow through on all the promises he made during his campaign. Everyone remember “I promise to lower your property taxes”?!?

It’s that time of year again, when the legislature begins the Commonwealth’s budget process. The first step in this process involves the determination of projected revenue for the upcoming fiscal year. State law requires that the Secretary for Administration and Finance shall jointly develop a consensus tax revenue forecast for the budget for the next fiscal year with the House and Senate Committees on Ways and Means on or before January 15. The Fiscal Year 2009 consensus tax revenue estimate is $20.987 billion, representing revenue growth of 3.8% over the Fiscal Year 2008 estimate of $20.225 billion.

The agreed upon 3.8 % growth is a conservative revenue estimate. Notwithstanding an economic outlook dampening consumer and business confidence, in January 2008, our state’s Department of Revenue (DOR) collected $2.201 billion, up $148 million or 7.2% from the same monthly period last year. Total tax collections were $87 million above the January monthly estimates, due largely to greater than anticipated income tax estimated payments. Specifically, January 2008 income tax collections totaled $1.659 billion, up $229 million or 16%. This level of revenue may be a positive sign, but also could be aberrational.

With the Governor and legislature both projecting modest revenue growth, now is not the time to fund new programs (as suggested by Governor Patrick) but instead to maintain existing levels of spending and to strengthen the relationship between state and local government. As the Assistant Ranking Minority Member of the House Committee on Ways and Means, I am currently participating in a series of public hearings across the Commonwealth to better understand our state’s spending needs. I understand that the new health care insurance requirements will utilize more revenues than anticipated, which we will need to address first and foremost. Health care analysts underestimated the number of uninsured and eligible for free care by $147 million, which we must accommodate for in our Fiscal Year 2009 state budget.

Our FY ‘09 state budget must also prioritize state aid to cities and towns. I hear time and time again, that without a better state-local partnership, cities and towns are being forced to cut spending to a point where we are compromising our quality of life. I have fought consistently to increase and protect funding for municipalities. As a co-sponsor to House Docket 2632, I am calling for full reimbursement of $450 million in lottery aid to cities and towns, which aid had been div erted to the state general fund. I am also urging legislative leaders to reject Governor Patrick’s attempt to use a $124 million cut in local aid to pressure the Legislature into approving his proposal to bring casinos to Massachusetts.

The municipal budget process is underway, and final budgets are being approved at a local level without confirmation of state school funding and local aid numbers, which is wrong. I have continue to advocate for an Early Aid Resolution between the Governor and Legislature to make final state aid figures available to cities and towns earlier in the budget process. A budget is a reflection of our values and priorities as a citizenry. While I applaud Governor Patrick for maintaining a commitment to the newly organized Chapter 70 school aid formula in his budget, which resulted in increases in school a id to both Shrewsbury and Westborough, I do not support funding new programs before fixing current needs, specifically municipal aid. New proposals such as universal Pre-Kindergarten, full-day kindergarten, and free community college may sound good, but we must focus first on adequately funding school aid, special education, and special education transportation, a growing unfunded burden for school districts across the Commonwealth.

I assure you that I will advocate for a reasonable, fair and practical state budget with a strong commitment to our cities and towns. The House Ways and Means Committee will release its budget recommendations in the coming weeks, and official budget debates will likely commence at the end of April. When the House of Representatives concludes its debates, the budget will be sent to the Senate for its deliberations. Any differences between the House and Senate budget recommendations will be resolved by the Conference Committee before being sent to the Governor for his input.

You can expect the legislature to debate corporate taxes and consider other new revenue sources like increasing taxes on cigarettes. In my view, in order to responsibly balance our state budget, we need to establish priorities and control spending. We must use the revenues we anticipate collecting wisely rather than asking our already over-burdened families, seniors and businesses to pay more. Balancing our budgets with restraint and priorities is the most prudent course of action for our state.

Nice to finally see some military support in California. Last week, the San Juan Capistrano City Council issued a resolution opposing the city of Berkeley’s opposition to  military recruitment efforts. Way to go, SJC!

From the resolution:

Be it resolved that the City Council of the City of San Juan Capistrano does hereby condemn the Jan. 29, 2008 actions of the Berkeley City Council, which moved to ban a Marine Corps Recruiting Station located in the City of Berkeley, and further expresses its wholehearted support for the U.S. Marine Corps and all of our Armed Forces.

Be it further resolved that the City Council of the City of San Juan Capistrano encourages its residents to support and embrace our U.S. Marine Corps and all of our armed forces, which serve to protect us in times of peace and war. Our Marines have a long history of defending our nation. Marines believe in our country, and the City Council of San Juan Capistrano believes in them.

[signed] Joe Soto, Mayor

Well said!

Where in heavens did the state find the people who are serving in administration at UMass Amherst? Apparently they spent a significant amount of time this week ducking from the UMass Republican Club who had a beef with a rather graphic  sex display in the college union.

The controversial posters, put up by the Radical Student Union Office (yes, that’s  what they’re called), depicted safe sex tips for homosexual men. I have no problem with safe sex tips for consenting adults, but I do have a problem with pornography being displayed in a public area that’s frequented by children…in this case, by 4-10 year olds who are on campus for daycare.

This from UMass  Republican Club President Brad DeFlumeri:

While I am the President of the UMass Republican Club, we will not tolerate such blatant offensiveness on taxpayer property. The Administration’s failure to act swiftly, while not surprising, is overwhelmingly troubling on many levels. For example, Dean of Students and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Joanne Vanin was scheduled to meet with me today at 2pm to discuss the matter but cancelled the meeting via her staff about a half hour before we were to sit down. I was advised by her staff that the meeting was nothing more than a “routine appointment.”

Complaining about the indecent display of pornography on taxpayer property to a high-ranking administrator who made over $150,000 last year is much more serious than a “routine appointment.” Joanne is one of a plethora of UMass administrators who took home over $100,000 last year and have been conveniently either “out of the office”, “on vacation”, “home sick”, or otherwise “unavailable” this week while I have been seeking out UMass higher-ups to combat the indecent display of pornography on public property.

This is completely unacceptable by any measure, and I, as a student-leader and state taxpayer, personally demand more from my university’s very well-paid leadership.

A Rally for Decency was held last night on campus with a good turnout. Today, here’s the story from the Administration. This from Channel 22 news:

Administrators at UMass Amherst have ordered that a controversial sex education display be taken down.

A student group, the Radical Student Union, put up the pamphlets in their office window featuring safe sex tips for gay men featuring some graphic images.

That led to a protest by the College Republican Club, who demanded the pamphlets be taken down, and who put on a decency rally outside the student union.

Member Alana Goodman said from the podium, “If the RNC wants to continue promoting this kind of behavior, fine, but keep your pornography out of my student union.”

In fact, the university decided that’s what should happen, directing that the pamphlets be taken down. The university said the brochure display “May be offensive to people who encounter it while walking in the corridor of a public building.”

Good work, UMass Republican Club!

Now that the Republican Party has its presumptive nominee, we can look forward to liberal media outlets, including those that recently fawned over and endorsed John McCain, displaying their true colors.

From The New York Times:

Early in Senator John McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.

A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.

When news organizations reported that Mr. McCain had written letters to government regulators on behalf of the lobbyist’s client, the former campaign associates said, some aides feared for a time that attention would fall on her involvement.

Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity.

It had been just a decade since an official favor for a friend with regulatory problems had nearly ended Mr. McCain’s political career by ensnaring him in the Keating Five scandal. In the years that followed, he reinvented himself as the scourge of special interests, a crusader for stricter ethics and campaign finance rules, a man of honor chastened by a brush with shame.

But the concerns about Mr. McCain’s relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest.

Here’s a bit of useful data for those who are interested in maintaining a two-party system here in Massachusetts. This from the MassRootsGOP blog:

On Tuesday, Feb. 5, 496,171 people chose to vote in the Republican primary. How terrific was this? Well, for starters, there were only 486,000 registered Republican in Massachusetts at the start of the year!

The last Presidential primary in Massachusetts in 2004 was uncontested, and the turnout was much lower than usual, as 73,793. The increase from 2004 to 2008 was a whopping 574%! And because thousands of Independents voted in our primary (we won’t know the exact number until local communities report to the Secretary of the Commonwealth), we will almost certainly see an increase in the number of registered Republicans in Massachusetts, too!

The Democrats also saw a large increase in their primary, so we cannot take this for granted: However, we can read it as a clear sign that people want two party competition in our state, and that primaries not only decide on who our nominee will be, but also build our party at the grass roots level.

The Berlin Wall fell, the Space Shuttles launched, pharmaceutical companies created life-saving medications that have extended our lives by decades (and saved my own at an early age from life-threatening asthma)…

Mrs. Obama has the potential to become a liability for her husband in his run for President because statements like the following will not be taken lightly by the general voting population. This from Michelle Malkin:

At a speech in Milwaukee this week on behalf of her husband’s Democratic presidential campaign, Mrs. Obama remarked, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”

Newsflash: The Obamas did not invent “change” any more than Hillary invented “leadership” or John McCain invented “straight talk.”

We’ve lived through two decades’ worth of peaceful, if contentious election cycles under the rule of law, which have brought about “change” and upheaval, both good and bad.

Like Michelle Obama, I am a “woman of color.” Like Michelle Obama, I am a working mother of two young children. Like Michelle Obama, I am a member of the 13th generation of Americans born since the founding of our great nation.

Unlike Michelle Obama, I can’t keep track of the number of times I’ve been proud — really proud — of my country since I was born and privileged to live in it.

Here is a great video from the The Center for Small Government. They’re the ones who’ve put the “end the income tax” question on the ballot for November 4th.

They raise some good questions in the video, like “why can’t we see where our tax money is being spent?” Other states have open book governments. But not Massachusetts! We’re special, you see. We require corporations to file incredibly detailed reports about where their money comes from and where it goes. But the government can continue to grab and spent completely unsupervised.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kWOCyLQLHiQ