The Black Republican

"Never argue with the data." - Sheen Estevez

With the argument about global warming/cooling, I got to wondering about sunspots. Since I forgot where I could see recent images of the solar surface, I Googled it. I got the Wikipedia article about sunspots. This is where I found this image. Please note that this is reverse; the most recent being on the left. Which made me wonder: has anyone overlaid the solar activity w/ global temperatures. So, I went looking for global temperature charts. Here's a global temperature chart from the U.S. Global Change Research Information Office. You make the call.

I got this essay in an email the other day. It starts like this:

Who would have thought that the opening of the brand new Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) in Washington, D.C. would be divinely ordained?

It certainly came as news to one particular Senator with a strong aversion to such a can of worms, Jim DeMint of South Carolina. In a recent statement, the Senator came down hard on the CVC, particularly the displays therein which, he claims, "are left-leaning and in some cases distort our true history."

One prominently engraved quote really has Mr. DeMint and other conservatives fuming. As it reads:

"We have built no temple but the Capitol. We consult no common oracle but the Constitution."

So, the Capitol is a temple? Last I checked it was a very expensive American Neoclassical office building. And last I heard the Constitution was one of the nation's most important political documents--which many in our current political establishment regard as a cumbersome hindrance rather than an "oracle" to be consulted.

The inauguration is still weeks away, and already they're whining. The NY Daily News has a story today about how "Bill must spill secrets" in order that Hillary may become Secretary of State. The best part about it isn't the content of the story. Most of this is just a re-hash of junk we already know about the Clintons and more evidence of how this is Bill Clinton's 3rd term. No, the best part are the comments from the left-wing boneheads, like this one from "Aloha62": "I'm really confused by this. Most people backed Obama because we wanted a different direction, particularly on foreign policy. And to just hand over the foreign policy apparatus to the Clintons is just like back going in time." Hey, you voted for the guy. You didn't expect this? Oh, I'm so sorry. No, I'm not rolling a booger, I'm playing the world's smallest violin.

Some time ago, I said that we were involved in an update to newer blog software. The upgrade went fairly quick, but it was far from smooth. In fact, all the individual entry pages, comments, and trackbacks were inaccessible. (A fact not lost on anyone who has actually tried to use the site lately.)

Well, I seem to have finally resolved the technical issues with the blog by trashing all our old templates and using a set of default pages. I thought I'd refreshed the underlying code during the refit, but apparently it wasn't as complete as I'd imagined.

In any event, we welcome back any loyal readers who might have given us up for dead, and ask for further patience while we try to figure out how to redecorate the default decor with more of a Black Republican feel.

At least you'll now be able to use the site while I work....

In reading the latest Drudge-linked story on the Franken/Coleman re-count, I noticed the link for the graphic of examples of what the hand-recounters will be 'looking for.' In summation, they'll be looking for voter 'intent'. Why is it that we reward people for NOT following directions?

If you're too incompetent to fill out a ballot correctly, why do people think you're competent enough to pick who represents you in government?

We may disagree with the current Democratic leadership on a number of issues (okay, quite possibly every issue), but like others in the conservative blogosphere, we here at The Black Republican have always believed (as John McCain put it) in putting "Country First".

The divisiveness of the last eight years - fueled in large part due to some juvenile behavior by a few on the Left after their men lost in 2000 and 2004 - must not be repeated by the Right. Firm disagreement and resolute refusal to concede our differences on principles are fine, but our opposition must be loyal to the Constitution and the political process, and a message of congratulations for the winner of last night's election is the very least we can do to show our commitment to basic courtesy.

So, in the spirit of bipartisanship, would like to extend a laurel...

and hearty handshake to our new...

First, there's this not-quite-impartial gag posted at Ace, starring Billy Dee Williams. (And MAN, is he getting old.)

That, of course, put me in the mood to root for the Empire. Which makes this post at National Review even sweeter.

Several things have to be agreed upon before you root for the Empire. (Which, I know, sounds like heresy, but if you hear out Jonathan Last and take some creative assumptions, it really does work.) First, you have to assume that while you're continuing to suspend disbelief in the rest of the movies, you don't suspend it for political sub-text as well. The Rebel Alliance is a bunch of (small-d) democrats because we want them to be. If you toss that out and assume nothing is assumed, then Last's premise begins to hold water.

Following on with that, you have to remember that despite Lucas's preamble, this galaxy really isn't that far from the laws of right and wrong. Meaning, that very little in this universe is pure evil and pure good. If you accept the premise that there are good liberals and bad conservatives (or, for our friends on the left, corrupt Democrats and "compassionate" Republicans), that the greatest form of government the world has ever known is (as Churchill so famously put it) merely the best of those ever tried, and that the burden of moronic bureaucracy and vote-selling graft is at least as bad as our democratic virtues are good, then you have to realize that the movies we're watching are not quite so black-and-white as Lucas tries to make them.

If the Rebels aren't necessarily all that great, can the Empire really be all that bad?

(Come to think of it, maybe my son has a good reason to be playing an Imperial in Star Wars Galaxies....)

I had an opportunity on Monday evening to catch Mark Levin's show live. After the first break, he had a clip of Barack "The H-Word" Obama stating the that the US Constitution "...reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day..." Those of you who are Obama supporters: answer these questions that Levin proposed: "What's flawed about the Constitution?" "The president's job is to uphold the Constitution. If the President thinks the Constitution is fundamentally flawed...then how can he uphold it?"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122480934587765107.html

http://www.getliberty.org/content.asp?pl=37&contentid=37#Legitimacy

Believe it or not, we could see the end of the Global Warming myth, and unlike the myth itself, we don't have to wait 50 or 100 years to hear the result.

A Canadian scientist has developed a climate model that ties together sunspots, cosmic rays, the ozone hole and climate change, and he predicts one of the largest ozone holes we've ever seen will appear over Antarctica this month, not as a result of CO₂ emissions or pollution, but because the sun is hitting us with an unusual amount of cosmic rays right now.

The model has already predicted the drop in global temperatures that's causing the priests of the Church of Global Warming to scratch their heads. If the sunspot theories keep making predictions better than the anti-homo sapien crowd can, maybe just maybe we can get more scientists out of the closet they've hid themselves in trying to avoid the Inquisition.

Ace of Spades (who may or may not be in Gabriel Malor's basement).

Seems Slick Willy is sticking it to Barack on the latter's economic demonizing, and I... well, let's just say Bill Clinton isn't my least favorite person in the world right now, and I don't hate him for it.

This is just between us, okay?

In a long-overdue move, I've updated our blog software in the hope that we can cinch up some security issues we've experienced in the last few days. Comments and individual entry pages are down at the moment, and some images aren't working, but I'm working to get everything back up to par as soon as possible.

Sorry for any inconvenience, especially to the other contributors.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122265271552084331.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

Call me crazy. Tell me I'm crying "Wolf". Far more eloquent people have addressed this trend, but I find this single video is the most disturbing of all:

Obama campaign cracks down on misleading TV ads

If you are a Bush-hater and are concerned about the loss of Liberties under the Patriot Act, I would hope that this video would give cause to wonder about what we may be looking forward to in an Obama administration.

Just to drive the point home, take a moment to read Let's not overlook Signs of Liberty.

Under the Patriot Act you are allowed to express your opposing views in public. Under the Patriot Act you are allowed to disagree with your government. Under the Patriot Act you are allowed to publish or air ads to point out the contradictions of your opponent. All of this without fear of retribution from your government.

Each president recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. With what you know now, would Mr. Obama hold true to that oath?

Update: I was just trolling the comments over at Ace when I found a new hero, Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri. Apparently he got wind of Obama's tactics and issued a scathing press release. Read it here.

This is just too funny not to post. And there is nothing really that needs to be added except to draw attention to the name of the Star Trek episode that inspired the comparison, and to make another; The Washington Post - their name is Mudd. (I also love the reference to 'prat' in that link. Seems... appropriate.)

Found this at NewsBusters, who found it at Best of the Web.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178554189155003.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/18/the-new-digital-brownshirts/