WhackyNation

Now the nutjobs have posted a thinly veiled call to action on the Daily Kos site to protest the firing of David Goldstein:

Our friends at the NW Progressive Institute have written an open letter to KIRO’s management, and have more info in this diary.

It’s hard enough to be fired.  Now his so-called friends want to embarass him nationally.

I don’t care how many emails are sent to KIRO, they just won’t do any good.  Goldy’s on the street.  Gone like yesterday’s paycheck.  Bye-bye.

This populist stunt is just going to prolong and deepen Goldy’s pain.

Besides being an embarassing ass on the air, Goldy’s show appealed to a not very valuable demographic: Liberals.  Just think how they spend their money (drugs, booze, tatooes and porn, etc.) and how little money they have.  Not a very appealing demographic for advertisers.  That’s why the future of liberal talk radio is gloomy at best.

Bill Clinton may have tripped up on himself yesterday in Denver.  Appealing to Democrats, who think themselves more pro-children than Republicans, Clinton said:

“We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.”

What?  When many in this country (and I’m not one of them) think this country is heading into recession, would the former president advocate making the recession worse?  And say that during an election cycle when his maxim in 1992 was: “It’s the economy, stupid”?

Does he think he can have more appeal to people by pandering to the global warming hysteria than causing them to fear being hurt in a depressed economy?

Maybe he understands Democrats better than I do.  Perhaps Democrats can’t intellectualize the consequences of a slowing economy so a slowing economy in the future has no relevance to them compared to imagining drowning polar bears.  Perhaps Democrats can only understand economics in the here and now so they can’t understand what it would mean to live in a worse or better economy in the future so they can’t place a value on the future.

So did Clinton make a mistake or does he better understand the subtleties of dim-witted Democrats?

The men and women in the news business, whether it’s the print or broadcast media, are accustomed to looking at daily tragedies almost casually — until something comes along like the demolition in space of the Challenger and the deaths of all seven of its storied riders.

It happened on January 28, 1986, but the memory of that terribly fateful day lives on as if it were yesterday. I remember seeing a lot of tears everywhere in the newsroom of Seattle’s KIRO-TV and Radio, and some of them were my own.

I also remember a great number of shocked, tear-filled voices on the phone from men and women who called because they suddenly needed somebody to talk to — anybody who would listen and offer condolences and some solace over what was America’s great loss.

With moist eyes, one usually spunky reporter, a young woman, who acknowledged that she had never cried before, said the space tragedy was like “the death of a dream, but that’s exactly what it must not be.” If we killed the space program of the seven deaths, she said, “it would be like spitting on their graves.”

And the rest of us who heard her understood exactly what she meant. We nodded agreement or told her how we felt. Other reporters, editors, producers, and anchors stopped everything, not really knowing why. It was as if the world had stopped turning and the hands on all clocks stood still.

To nobody in particular, another reporter said: “It feels just like it did when the Kennedys were assassinated — right here in the pit of my stomach.” I knew the feeling. Another seasoned but saddened editor said she knew why the Challenger tragedy affected Americans like few others:

“For the first time,” she said, “it was as if each of us was on the space flight — or could have been. Christa McAuliffe, the teacher, was one of us, not a trained astronaut or flyer.”

A caller who heard the news in her car said she saw other drivers crying and one pounding his dashboard in anguish. It was truly a tragic day for the nation. But eventually the tears dried and hope was restored when it became known that the space program would continue.

It had to for at least two reasons: One was that continuation of the program would be the best memorial that could be offered in memory of the seven who died. The other was that our past American history told us that our future depends upon those brave souls who are willing to take risks for the ultimate benefit of the nation.

I specially liked what President Ronald Reagan said at the time: “The future doesn’t belong to the fainthearted. It belongs to the brave.”

Herodotus, the father of history, put it this way back in the 5^th Century B.C.: “Great deeds are usually wrought at great risks.” Thus, as has happened, no greater tribute could have been paid to Christa and her six traveling companions than to continue exploration into space — and to make certain that their great risks were not in vain.

As predicted by Republican legislators, the bow-wave effect of Democrat spending will put the state in deep doo-doo in a couple of years.

A new report for the State Senate Ways and Means Committee show the state will be nearly a $ billion short for the next biennium’s budget … and $2 1/2 billion short for the following biennium.  And those are the numbers before a new state revenue forecast is released in two weeks; … and it’s predicted to be gloomy.

Now enjoying themselves in the “I-told-you-so” position, can Dino Rossi and the House and Senate Caucuses communicate the problems wrought by Governor $pendmore and Speaker Chopp-Chopp?

State spending has increased by over 30 percent these past three years.

What are the chances the Seattle media will pick up on this?

As predicted here at WhackyNation, KIRO just fired David Goldstein, the ultra-liberal-Darcy-Burner-supporting weekend night talk show host.

I know it must be hard for Goldy, and my heart actually goes out to him because he has a family to support.  But, if he wants to stick with radio, he’ll find another job.  It may be in another market.  I’ll say it again: Eugene would be a perfect fit.  Get some experience, temper the act, learn more about fairness.  You can take strong positions, but you must be fair.

David, in the big picture I think it is a shame you had to lose your job.  You needed a strong mentor to help you with your act, but I guess that’s hard to get these days working weekend nights.

Good luck and Good Night.

Brrrrr!!!!!!  Those temperatures just keep getting hotter.  Now this, from Jerusalem:

A rare snowstorm swept the Middle East on Wednesday, blanketing parts of the Holy Land in white, shutting schools and sending excited children into the streets for snowball fights.

There must not be much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over the middle east.   Guess they must need to build a few coal plants to warm up.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warns in a new report:

… global investments of $15 trillion to $20 trillion over the next 20 to 25 years may be required “to place the world on a markedly different and sustainable energy trajectory.” Today, the global energy industry spends about $300 billion a year in new plants, transmission networks and other new investment, according to U.N. figures.

But, besides being a serious drag on the world economy and progress, the greatest impacts will fall on the Third World:

In his report, Ban warned that global warming would probably affect women more than men. “The challenge of climate change is unlikely to be gender-neutral, as it increases the risk to the most vulnerable and less empowered social groups,” he said.

Annie Petsonk, a lawyer for the advocacy group Environmental Defense, said global warming will most affect poor people and minorities, because the wealthy can spend more to adapt. “Women in poorer communities are going to face greater challenges protecting their children from the spread of diseases, polluted water, water shortages and so on,” she said.

Nothing like the enviro-wackos to oppress the have-nots.  Wouldn’t this money be better spent to wipe out disease, build potable water and sanitary projects, and to educate the ignorant?

Ralph Nader, whose independent run for the presidency in 2000 cost Al Gore Florida and the election, today told CNN that he’s forming an exploratory committee for another independent run in 2008.

His move was motivated by John Edwards bowing out of the race. 

Nader said that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are “unacceptable” candidates.

“They are both enthralled to the corporate powers,” Nader said of the two leading Democrats. “They’ve completely ignored the presidential pattern of illegality and accountability, they’ve ignored the out of control waste-fruad military expenditures, they hardly ever mention the diversion of hundreds of billions of dollars to corporate subsidies, handouts, and giveaways, and they don’t talk about a living wage.”

Nader says if he can raise $10 million and attract enough lawyers to help him with his campaign, he’ll file as a third-party candidate in a month.

Isn’t this good news?

Is the newly developed branch of science, called synthetic biology, threatening to run amok or is it on the verge of one of the most remarkable discoveries known to man? Time will tell. That’s the gist of a new report in the journal, Science, and a combined article produced by the New York Times and the San Jose Mercury News.

Although couched in rather subdued terms, the report is scary. A team of scientists, led by J. Craig Venter, has come up with what it calls “life by design,” a process in which the researchers say “they have manufactured the entire genome of a bacterium by stitching together its chemical components.”

According to the Times and Mercury News,

“scientists previously constructed the complete DNA of viruses, but this is the first time it has been done for bacteria, which are far more complex.”

If that doesn’t impress you, try this:

“Synthetic biologists envision being able to design an organism on a computer, press the ‘print’ button to have the necessary DNA made, and put the DNA into a cell to produce a custom-made creature.”

The Science journal did not specify what the “creature” would be, but that should be enough to scare hell out of the rest of us.

In what could be described as an understatement, the article added this caution:

“There are concerns symthetic biology could be used to make pathogens or that errors by well-intended scientists could produce organisms that could run amok. The genome of the smallpox virus can in theory be synthesized using the techniques reported since it is only about one-third the size of the genome manufactured by Venter’s group.”

At least the Venter team has acknowledged that it must overcome many hurdles before the “life by design” is realized. It added:

“The team has yet to accomplish the next — and biggest — step. That would be to insert the synthetic chromosome into a living microbe and have it ‘boot up’ and take control of the organism’s functions.”

If the team succeeds in “the next step,” the article continued, “it would be considered by some to be the creation of the first synthetic organism. The failure to achieve that tempered the reaction of some outside scientists.” Typical of the comments by those outside scientists, was this reaction by George Church, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School:

“Right now, all they’ve done is shown they can buy a bunch of DNA and put it together.” But David Magnus, director of Stanford University’s Center for Biomedical Ethics, said this: “What it might mean for the future is incredible. We just need to make sure we stay on top of the pitfalls.”

So what does it all really mean? Only time will tell. And all this time we thought the real “life by design” was cloning. What we want to know for sure is that these synthetic biologists don’t create some kind of terrible virus or creature that can’t be controlled.

Anyone who may have doubted that the New York Times, once the epitome of objective journalism, had slid sharply to the Left and Liberal philosophy can now remove all doubts. The Times has come out strongly in favor of Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party’s nomination in the presidential race.

In a pitiful attempt to indicate that it balances the political scales, the newspaper also said it favored John McCain among the Republican contenders — but it revealed its Leftist hand conclusively by saying McCain

“was the best of a flawed G.O.P. field with which the Times’ editorial board had strong disagreements.”

How low the once mighty New York Times has fallen. As a former editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which once used the Times’ news service, I was proud of the fact that, back in those days — the 1960s and 1970s — the Times was regarded as a Conservative newspaper, but its reporters covered the news carefully and without any political prejudices.

In fact, I was so proud of our association with what was then regarded as America’s leading newspaper that I once consented to pose for a promotional ad praising the Times’ fair news service and its middle-of-the-road editorial policy. The ad appeared in many newspapers and in magazines. How I wish I could take that one back!

As if to placate some critics, the Times’ editorial board’s announcement included this telltale quotation concerning McCain and its clear disdain for all the Republican candidates:

“McCain is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe.”

Implicit in that quotation and in the Times’ bitter denunciations of President Bush has been the newspaper’s hate-Bush editorials — as well as the slant against Bush that has been noted in the newspaper’s news columns and in its stable of pro-Liberal columnists, who dominate its syndicated service.

The questions that should be asked concerning the Times are these: What happened at the newspaper that caused it to desert its once-sacred devotion to objective journalism and veer sharply to the Left and into the domain of political Liberalism? And when did it happen?

Colleges, universities, and journalism schools and their teachers once revered the New York Times substantially because it had always espoused honest, middle-of-the-road journalism — and, above all, fairness in reporting the news and in demanding that its reporters never permit their political prejudices to shape their reports.

With close to 90 percent of America’s daily newspapers following suit and turning to the Left and Liberal philosophies, is it any wonder that surveys across the nation have been indicating a severe fall-off in circulation and advertising? The public obviously has not been fooled by the gradual deterioration of the once-mighty American press. And, as one who devoted 55 years of his life to the news media, I am simultaneously disappointed and ashamed.

The Democrats can smell the pork.  Now they want to give more money away to Social Security recipients and income earners.  The bill is up to $156 billion.

Frankly, I am surprised by President Bush.  His stimulus package appears knee-jerk and ineffective.  The IRS, which will be in charge of the rebates of up to $600 for individuals and $1,200 for couples, says it can’t get the checks out much before June … when they will be too late to stimulate anything but the votes for incumbants in the Fall elections.

If lawmakers really want to stimulate the economy, why don’t they make the Bush tax cuts permanent and forget the rebate scheme?

This is not the first time Bush has disappointed fiscal conservatives.

China issued a severe weather warning on Monday for large swathes of the country already reeling from transport havoc and power shortages caused by the heaviest snowfalls in decades.

Read more …

Amazingly, Bill Gates’ remarkable foundation has taken a big step toward what amounts to adoption of an idea I’ve been trying to promote for several years. In addition to pouring millions into the eradication of AIDS and other diseases occurring principally in African nations, the foundation has now granted $350 million in an extraordinary effort to boost farm productivity in poverty-stricken areas of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.

By great coincidence, it is the first step in the program I have tried to persuade our federal government into establishing. My proposal is for the U.S. to end all foreign-aid programs and to replace them with my Foster Nation plan. Under that plan we would select one underdeveloped Third World nation at a time and make it a Foster Nation.

We would then send to each nation selected several of our best minds in the fields of agriculture, industry, education, the professions, and every other field in an effort to vitalize their economies and raise their standard of living. Our representatives would help them find and utilize their natural resources, improve their farming and industrial programs, and do the same for their schools and all the professions.

The U.S. would save billions in foreign-aid funds, most of which are frittered away through faulty administration. At the same time, we would be helping to feed millions, as the Gates Foundation grants are now doing. But even more important, by raising the standard of living in each of the countries aided, we would be eliminating the people’s desire to flee to another country — most often the U.S.

The Gates program, directed by a foundation fellow named Rajiv Shah, is already at work “introducing new seed varieties, irrigation, fertilizer, training for farmers, and access to local and international markets,” as the Seattle Times has reported.

“In the poorest countries, 65 percent of jobs are in farming. Yet Africa’s share of food production is shrinking and the number of people who are hungry is going up — in sharp contrast to improvements in the rest of the world.”

In an astounding statement, the Times’ article reported that

“in sub-Saharan Africa, more than 200 million people are hungry or malnourished — one third of the population.”

As could have been expected, the Gates plan has drawn criticism from certain quarters. Some of that criticism has come from environmentally extreme quarters and is based on the notion that the Gates program is market-driven and that its farming procedures are going to wreck the environment in the downtrodden countries.

What malarkey! It seems the extremists would rather see millions starve than to help them revitalize their lives and their economies so that their standard of living could begin to rise toward the standards in the First World nations.

I’m hoping that the U.S. will take a cue from the Gates venture and adopt my total Foster Nation Plan, which is a great improvement over our ongoing foreign-aid programs. Although better farming would help feed the poverty-stricken nations, they also need new industries, better school systems, improved medical and dental programs, and all the rest.

Editors of Costco’s monthly magazine, Costco Connection, asked me and others to write a comment for its February issue on whether our system of nominating a President should be left as is or should be done in a single national primary in which all citizens could vote. Here’s the comment I wrote and which appears in this month’s magazine:

“In a little more than two centuries, our system of electing a President has progressed from the sublime to the ridiculous. With all the states scrambling for national attention with their own brand of caucuses, conventions, or other methods of nominating candidates, they have muddied up a process that was once honorable and simple.

“If we could somehow cast aside the politicos and let the general public take charge, we could return to the Age of the Sublime. And we could do it with a relatively simple process, which is this: Suspend all present primary methods and schedule a single, NATIONAL presidential primary on the same date in all 50 states!

“Is the public ready for a national primary? Most certainly. Poll after poll, including those conducted by CBS and the New York Times in recent years, have indicated that at least 70 to 72 percent of the people are not only ready for it but are actually demanding it!

“We must ask why so simple a solution is not even being considered by party officials in any of the states. The answer, also simple, is that the major parties in the states want their own presidential primaries because they treat them as some sort of “world series of politics,” a selfish game that gives them imagined political power and attention.

“The present scrambled system of 50 disparate caucuses or primary elections to select candidates for the highest office in the land makes the election of a single leader an almost laughable way to make that choice. Furthermore, the scramble to be first in the presidential derby extends the campaign’s length beyond reason.

“Since the final election is held on a single day in November every four years, why in the world can’t the presidential primary also be scheduled on a single day close to the final election, say in August? Think of the saving that would be in campaign expenses and the amassing of huge political treasure chests. And, perhaps most important of all, consider that it would bring an end to the public’s weariness over months and years of political ads, speeches, and political blarney.”

I’m anxious to know how many readers of the Costco magazine agree with me or with those who believe the system should stay as is, with each state deciding when it should schedule a primary.

MaxRedline does a good job this morning putting the global warming hysteria-fad in context of other hysteria-fads during the baby boomer’s years:

Global warming: it’s all your fault and we’re all gonna die.  It’s been getting lots of press, of course, and nowadays politicians are joining Hollywood actors in deciding the “science” of Global warming.  At this point, science has largely been removed from the discussion, which despite US restrictions regarding the blending of church and state, has now become in essence a New Religion.  The language invoked among media and in governmental circles is clear in its theological dogma:  those who dare to disagree that global warming events are entirely or largely due to human causes are routienly labeled as “deniers” or as “unbelievers”; transforming the issue from a scientific discussion into a purely religious battle.

I like MaxRedline’s insight that that labels “deniers” and “unbelievers” are idioms used in religious dialogue, and not scientific dialogue. 

Furthermore, MaxRedline makes a case that the global warming religion has so infiltrated US politics that scientists and climatologists “who wish to probe the claims set forth by the adherents of the religion” are routinely denied award grants.   Worth a read.

Lord knows the United States has enough major political reasons to exit the United Nations, but now it has an alarming, additional set of reasons — numerous cases of fraud and other crimes involving U.N. staff members and other representatives from many countries.

In a startling report from the New York headquarters of the “Useless Nations,” the Washington Post has reported a flock of instances concerning the misuse of millions of dollars in graft, fraud, rewards of fabulous gifts, and other gross misuses of funds to buy favors.

The skullduggery has been brought to light by what has been called a “bulldog task force” of investigators, led by Robert Appleton, a former U.S. federal prosecutor. For two years he has led the unit, whose proper name is the U.N. Procurement Task Force. Appleton has about 20 international investigators on his staff.

According to the Post’s report,

“The alleged crimes include bid-rigging of multimillion-dollar contracts for fuel, food, and helicopters; petty bribery, and millions in overcharges. Corruption is not unique to the U.N., Appleton said in an interview, but the U.N. is in some sense unique because of its geographical breadth. It’s at risk for a lot of reasons.”

Caught in the web and charged with “an unprecedented number of misconduct findings” are 17 persons serving as staff members of the U.N. Their thievery led to the conviction of a procurement officer “who steered more than $100 million in contracts to a state-owned company in India.”

Appleton and his staff have been so proficient in their investigations that some of the major companies are demanding that he himself be investigated and removed from office. A diplomat from Singapore has charged that Appleton’s work is like that of the Spanish Inquisition and that it trampled the due-process rights of an Indian noted as a money launderer.

Credit Paul Volcker, former Federal Reserve chairman, for hiring Appleton and setting up the Procurement Task Force. It was Volcker whose investigation uncovered the U.N.’s massive, criminal $64 billion-dollar oil-for-food program that startled the world just a few years ago.

Also caught in the web of crime by Appleton’s staff was former Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son, Kojo, who were directly involved in the giant procurement fraud. And just last year, the Task Force unveiled the chicanery of Nishan Kohli, the Indian executive, who, the Post said, “secured more than $100 million in contracts for an Indian state telecommunications company by lavishing U.N. officials with gifts.”

It was no surprise that several underdeveloped nations criticized the Task Force and the U.N. General Assembly “for initiatives pushed by wealthy countries but not for anti-poverty projects favored by poor nations.” Their complaints could be interpreted as an appeal for “some of the loot”!

We should get out of the Useless Nations, and the sooner the better. And we should hire Appleton to see to it that America’s interests are protected and that any of the scoundrels pursing fraud, graft, and all the rest against U.S. interests be apprehended and jailed.

KIRO’s weekend night talkshow host, David Goldstein thinks I want him fired because he’s a liberal.

Nonsense.  Liberals have their place