A Bad Case of the Stupids

The U.S. House and Senate are having bad cases of the stupids right now and if the party in power doesn't wise up, they'll be the party out of power. The first case of the stupids comes from their reaction to William Jefferson (D - Louisiana) having all that cold hard cash. There has been a long-standing unwritten rule that congressional offices are sacrosanct. The reason given for it is separation of powers. But if followed slavishly with no exceptions, it would allow representatives to have an untouchable base from which to conduct all manner of criminal activity. Theoretically, under this gentleman's agreement, as long as the representative kept the body in a file cabinet, he could commit and get away with murder without impunity. To people out here in the real world, this is patently absurd. And yet, rather than be happy that the FBI has possibly rooted out corruption in what is supposed to be an honorable body, they're in a flap because William Jefferson's office was searched. With a subpoena. Congress, which issues subpoenas of their own like candy, wants the right to be able to ignore one. How out of touch you must be to not realize how out of touch you appear taking a stance like that. Comity of the branches be damned, it looks like you think you have the right to be better than I. Nobody else gets to ignore lawful subpoenas and neither should the offices of a representative.

The Senate is just as tone deaf with the illegal immigration bill. They're so worried about turning off a potential voter base that they are fomenting revulsion an actual voter base: law abiding citizens. Americans (including Hispanics) want the border controlled. Then and only then should the question of what to do about all the illegals in here should be addressed. Offering illegals a smorgasbord of goodies (whether or not you call it amnesty) will just motivate more illegal immigration. This is not rocket science. That is, unless you're one of the one hundred men and women trying to curry political favor instead of do the right thing.

Republicans are running scared they're going to lose in the fall elections. If they keep ignoring the regular people they will.

How Green Is My Family?

Our latest rant against wacko environmentalism started with my mother-in-law. My mother-in-law has moved in with my wife and myself for an extended basis (read: forever) and in the room that is now hers she would like a three way bulb in her lamp. Having recently discovered the virtues of replacing incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents for people who cannot be bothered to actually turn a light off (yes, my son and wife's ears are burning), I went searching on line to see if there was a compact fluorescent replacement for the three way bulb (there is).

That's where I ran into an article about replacing the incandescent bulb with the fluorescent. No problem, there, as it is really smart thing to do. The problem is that instead of just advocating people do this, it was arguing that people should be mandated to make the change, with a punitive tax on incandescent bulbs. This is why the very changes and reforms greens supposedly want to happen are so slow in happening or do not happen at all.

Using a reel mower to mow a small yard or replacing incandescents with fluorescents are good ideas (both of which this Right Wing Arch Conservative actually does). But no one wants an idea, no matter how good, shoved down their throats. And most people resist people who think they know better than you do what's best for you. And that's where the green movement goes so horribly wrong.

It's okay to believe that people should replace their light bulbs, but why not help them see it to be in their own best interest rather than just trying to force them or tax them into the behavior you want? Taking the proselytizing approach is the route that the right tends to follow more often and it seems to have paid off.

So if you really want to change the way people interact with their environment, why not try it one person at a time.