Does David Need to Pull on a Pair of Pants?

"There have been statues taken down because some on the Left find them offensive," says a Facebook poster. "Leave art alone." 

"The Left" speaking here then, I guess. I don't know if I care to weigh in on whether we tell David to at least wear a towel. But, I will say that even when was younger, I felt uneasy looking at pictures of the statue. The guy had no clothes on, and that made me feel uncomfortable. I don't know that that viewpoint cannot be considered as much of a stand of "the Right" as it is of "the Left." It is the Right who more traditionally fight against pornography. When laws are enacted against pornography, they usually come from the Right. So is Michelangelo's carving pornography or art? I would say you can consider it either way, depending on how you consider it. No doubt it is a famous work of art -- no doubt -- but the guy clearly doesn't have any clothes on. Usually, when someone is pictured without their clothes on, it's considered pornography. I'd say those who say it is pornography have a pretty good case. As to whether David needs to pull on a pair of pants, well, who's to say. But, if there are enough people saying his nakedness is okay, they have the right to have a say in the matter as much as the moralists. Our goal should be to persuade them the statue is offensive to our eyes. Then, maybe it can be moved from its prominant place in the museum to a less conspicuous spot where it is not along the beaten path of the tour.

Make Your Riches, but in the Process, You Cannot Rip Someone Off

If something is wrong, make a law against it. Worry about whether you will be able to enforce it once you have the law, but don't let your worrying about enforcing it prevent you from making the law in the first place.

You never make the second step unless you take the first.

So, consider whether we ought to take that first step on this: a law against charging more for a good or service than what it is reasonably worth. People are hurt if you charge too much for medicine. Either they can't afford it, or the insurance company is forced to pay out unnecessarily. People are hurt when military contractors charge more than is reasonable for their tanks and jets. Their executives take the profits, use them to build homes high on the hill, and . . . the taxpayer pays for it.

A law against charging more than reasonable would be, well, radical. It would be one of the most society-altering laws ever. Some would argue with that; they would say, No, societies have tried shifting income to the proletariat before -- its called socialism.

No, this is not socialism. It is not a redistribution of wealth. It is just saying, Go about making your riches, but in the process, you cannot rip someone off.

No, I'm not saying throw away the free market system; I'm just saying don't let the free market system throw away us.

Where would we draw the line? What would be considered "reasonable" profit? We might say, Let a person get rich, but not filthy rich. What would be considered "filthy rich," then?

I don't know. But, start with a law saying you cannot charge more for goods or services than is reasonable. New laws often have to be adjusted and fine-tuned -- tweaked. But, don't be afraid of making the law simply because you know it's going to need to be tweaked.

The Right to Own and Operate a Car Shall not Be Infringed

   The day may come when the electric vehicle question becomes bigger than that of abortion, bigger than that of guns, bigger than the debate of whether there is a deep state.

   The most-dominant public issue on the planet.

   The electric vehicle question has at least two factors that could drive it to become a massive public debate. One) climate change is already one of the most-divisive discussions we have. Two) There are already those who are angry with subsidies and mandates moving America towards electrics. The same people who worry the government is trying to take their guns away, could worry the government is taking their gasoline cars away.

   Those two things are the kindling sitting in the fireplace. All it takes now is a match -- a spark -- to ignite the fire. The rapid increase in EV sales we are seeing -- and will see in the next two to three years -- could torch a debate no one can put out.

   The freedom to own and operate a car may or may not become a bigger issue. But, there is reason to believe it could. Americans are attached to their cars -- their gasoline cars -- and if you come after them, that might be seen as the worst case of cancel culture yet. It's not exactly as if the Constitution says, "The right to own and operate a car shall not be infringed," but there may come a day when it seems the founding fathers words have been reworded to say that. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

Refuge, They Call It, but You Call It Invasion

 If you don't believe in immigration, you better realize how climate change will affect it. If you believe too many people are "invading" America -- coming illegally -- you might want to realize things will only get worse as the planet continues to heat.

They call them "climate refugees" -- people forced out of their countries by collapsing ecosystems, rising seas, and extreme weather. They have been called the "world's forgotten victims" of climate change.

As climate change increases, Central America is expected to become among the fastest-warming areas in the world, chasing as many as 17 million people out of their home countries. As they are forced to seek refuge, many will go to adjacent countries, but some will migrate north to the United States. One computer model suggests it won't be just 17 million, but could be as high as 30 million by 2050.

Hoards of people, swarming to get in, not wanting to take no for an answer.

So, if you don't belive in "illegal" immigration, you better believe in climate change. Because if you don't, you won't do anything about it -- and that means those displaced from the southern half of the Americas will swell as they are forced to seek their homes elsewhere.

It means millions -- literally millions -- of immigrants will be forcing their way upon our borders.

Refuge, they call it. But you call it invasion.

(Index -- Climate change info)

Don't Squander Away the Full Potential of that Nice Little Electric Car

 Get rid of the carbon emissions created by electric vehicles -- all of it! And, if you are going to do that, you will need to get rid of every coal-fired power plant in America, and every power plant that relies on natural gas.

Yes, what they say is true -- the bit about how the EV relies on carbon power plants for lithium, for other minerals, and for the the milling and construction of the vehicle. 

   And, when the EV runs out of power? You plug it in for a recharge. And, of course that means the EV is dependent on those carbon-spewing power plants  all over again. The electric energy pumped into the battery too often comes from coal-fired plants and from natural gas power plants. No, no emissions come out the tailpipe of the electric, but that doesn't mean no emissions enter the air as a result of our wonderful and lovable electric car.

   Lot's do. Way too much.

   Did you know that sweet little modern creation known as the EV causes roughly 60 percent as much carbon emission as the old, mug-ugly gasoline-fed car? See, when you factor in the mining for lithium and other minerals, and when you factor in the energy needed to forge the metals and built the car . . . 

   Yep, that ups the carbon footprint of our precious electric -- drastically. A study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (known as MIT around these parts) reveals that while a gasoline-powered machine causes about 350 grams of C02 per mile over the life of the car, an electric-powered toy -- if I can call it that (because it's so fun to play with) -- requires 200.

   And, yes, that means the electric is all the way up to about 60 percent of the carbon footprint of the gas-o-haul. 

   We are wasting so much of the progress we are making in converting to electrics if we don't also convert to green-energy power plants. Solar and wind production must be drastically increased.

   Otherwise, it's two steps forward, but one step back. Otherwise, we are negating half the work we are doing in switching to electric vehicles. Wasting it; squandering it. The little car will never be clean until  the power plants it relies on are also clean.

(Index -- Climate change info)

A Room Divided by Two, Is a Room of Democrats and Republicans

    An old harp I play tonight, the one about division, about playing one side of our population against the other. About us joining in, to our foolish destruction.

   The only things that are certain are death and taxes -- and discord among Democrats and Republicans. The frenzy and hatred between these two survives all the plagues, wars, depressions, natural disasters, and murders the evil forces of the deep can pour upon society.

   To the forces of the deep, this is their diadem, their holy grail: Hatred -- Division. It is the force that destroys society and diminishes men. Peace was never achieved in a room divided by Democrats and Republicans. For all the hailing of the two-party system there is the ignorance of what it has done.   

The Trade of Nations Becomes the Peace of Nations

   Peace: if the world wants it, it should think seriously about more trade between nations. Trade with nations we aren't friendly with -- China, particularly comes to mind and Russia is in the mix. Free trade reaps economic benefits, but there's also this byproduct: peace.

   Two nations both benefiting financially are less likely to go to war. It's not a hard rule, of course. But, yes, they are less likely. We invest our money in a lot of things, and peace should be one of them. 

If China Can Do It, Why Can't We?

   So you viewed the YouTube video "Most Affordable Small Electric Cars You Can Buy" and scrambled to find where you could buy one. 

   You can't -- not if you live in the the U.S. of A. While much of the world has discovered how to make an inexpensive vehicle, it seems to have escaped and eluded us Americans.

   Skip down the list on that video until your eyes pop out as you see a price you can afford: 10) Honda e, $30,000; 9)Nobe GT 100, $29,000; 8) Volkswagen E-Up, $27,000; 7) Smart EQ Fortwo, $23,900; 6) ElectraMeccanica Solo, $18,000; 5) Toyota C-Plus, $16,000; 4) Microlino; $12,000; 3) Renault Twizy, $9,700; 2) Citroen Ami, $6,000; 1) Wuling HongGuang Mini EV, $4,500.

   While some of the brands on the list are found in the U.S., their inexpensive EV models are not. Yes, it's a list that is two years old (2021), and brands that have been absent the U.S. market are now coming to these shores -- perhaps due to California's mandate that every brand sold in that state must offer a growing proportion of EVs.

   

   But, you have to wonder why low-priced EVs are so much more abundant elsewhere in the world than they are here. Don't buy the argument that a cheap EV cannot be produced. Next time someone tells you that, tell them about the Wuling Mini, and how it sells for but $4,500 in China. Are the China folks just smarter than us? And, tell that back in the '70s, an inexpensive EV was, was, and was produced in America. The CitiCar from Sebring-Vanguard, a Florida company, sold for $2,700. Mind boggling. That's about ten times less than any full-electric now on the market. There are those of us who would buy those cars if only they were widely available.

   Yes, you have to wonder if the government should mandate that if any brand wants to market in the U.S., it has to offer an EV for less than $10,000. You have to bend Big Auto's arm, so bend it for the inexpensive EV. Open up that part of the market -- we're ready for it.

(Index -- Climate change info)

They Need Life's Lessons, and Love

 The question comes across Facebook: Should prison be focused on punishment or rehabilitation?

It should be on reforming the prisoner. But, that is not to say punishment should be absent. The prison should be a place of training, a place of learning, a place where their families are brought in and they are taught how to treat them. You need to rebuild him or her (the prisoner), not just address the crime they committed, but who they are as a person. You pretty much need to take them as if they were children, and teach them everything from manners to how to fend for themselves financially without resorting to crime. And, the prisoner -- everyone of them -- needs to experience love. Those who work with them need to include those who are focused on loving them. Love changes more people than a set of ankle bracelets.

Also, there should be an element of graduation, not just time served. If the goal is to rehabilitate them, not just punish them, then release them when they show they are a changed person, not just when they have been punished. 

How can a person that has never been habilitated be rehabilitated? asks another person on the Facebook thread.

Good point. Many of them grew up without being raised. Nobody taught them what manners were, or what right and wrong is. Go in and teach them from the start, teaching them as if you were a parent and they were a child. Don't just address the crime they committed, cover everything that makes them a good person. They committed one crime, but their character has a number of things that need corrected. You can't remove one crime unless you correct the whole of the person. Many of them also grew up without experiencing much love. Love them, then. Teach them that they do have value. Don't treat them as trash, treat them as treasures. All that said, punishment is still in order. But, help them understand why they are being punished.

The Bigs Protect Themselves, and When They Do, Take Them Out

   Legislation sweeps across Arizona, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, New Hampshire, and Florida -- efforts to ban or repeal ranked-choice voting, close primary elections, stop voters from signing petitions for new parties, make it harder for independents to run for office, and block alternative parties from being on the ballot.

   "State legislatures are continuing to wage a war against electoral reform and independent politics," says an email from the Forward Party, "cementing a two-party system that prevents competition and inevitably leads to dysfunction." 

   All the more reason to take them down. When power perpetuates itself, it is too much power. When it entrenches itself -- making it so it cannot fall out of power -- that is when it should be taken out of power. Parties protect themselves, and sometimes when they do, there is a loss of freedom. And, when there is, the people need to protect themselves from the parties. 

The Attack on the Skies by the Chlorine Folks

   Now, I must wonder if a company out of Salt Lake has been -- maybe still is -- one of the bigger causes of ozone depletion.

   See, all ozone depletion takes is for chlorine and bromine atoms to make contact with the ozone up there in the stratosphere. The bad-guy atoms then attack the ozone molecules and massacre them -- one chlorine atom can destroy 100,000 ozone molecules.

   We've got a Utah company, US Magnesium, that produces chlorine. It's a byproduct when you take magnesium chloride and electrolyze it into magnesium oxide. And, make no mistake, US Magnesium is -- or, at least has been -- a major player in the release of chlorine into America's skies. Back in 2003, U of U professor Cynthia Burrows revealed that in the Year 2000, US Magnesium released 42 million lbs. into the skies -- 90 percent of the US total!

  That would make US Mag not just one of the major players, but perhaps the most responsible party of all.

   In a few years -- 2008 -- the Environmental Protection Agency came along and slapped US Mag into a Superfund site. I don't know if the atmospheric chlorine was part of the problem, but I know years and years later, all the issues that had US Mag on the Superfund list had not been resolved.

   I don't even know for sure if  the chlorine that was leaking from US Magnesium's plant was even reaching the stratosphere. Chlorine gas is heavier than air. The stratosphere is miles up there. How does it -- being heavier than air -- even get up that high?

   Regardless of the ozone issue, though. That chlorine gas is harmful. It gets in your lungs, causing lung edema. It blurs your vision. It blisters your skin. It burns your eyes. It damages your body tissue. 

  Well, here's a little update on the story. At the end of the past legislative session, State Rep. Andrew Stoddard and State Sen. Kirk Cullimore steered legislation through at the last minute that makes it easier for the state to address US Mag's halogen emissions -- going after the bromine and chlorine emissions. That action came just as a study was released showing US Mag was responsible for 25 percent of the air pollution in northern Utah. Did you catch that? -- 25 percent! And you thought your car was causing all the problems.

  The group o2 Utah was behind that bill. We owe them a big thanks.

(Index -- Climate change info)

    Okay, there's the patient in the hospital bed and the child in the womb; what do they have in common?

   The patient? Quite often, he (or she) is so incapacitated, they can't even get out of bed -- and certainly not out of the hospital. No, until the patient is whole and healthy, they won't be going home. If you discharge them early, well, that could mean death. While there, the patient can be dependent on the hospital for just about everything.

   And, how does that compare to the child in the womb? Well, in one word, Ditto.

Legacies Are Lost When Births Are Taken

   If abortions were universal, there would be no humanity. To suggest that it would be wrong to completely wipe out human life on earth, but it is okay to eliminate some life, is an interesting concept. Those who are pro choice would suggest there are differences of circumstances between when you allow a fetus to reach birth and when you decide to cut it short, and each situation should be considered individually.

   No, we should not cut short all humanity, but cutting short some is justified, would be the argument.

   So, we eliminate only some of our posterity, but not all of it.

  I do not say there are not times for abortion, but I do suggest each of the unborn will become a person of value if we let them be born. Each one of them will become a treasureable part of humanity. And my thought is, we should allow as many of them as we can to progress toward birth. Each one of them will create their own legacy, if allowed to be born. Legacies are lost when births are taken. Societies lose those who would have been precious parts of their families and friendships. 

   

Toy Guns Can Be Recalled, but not Real Ones

   Did you know firearms are not subject to recall by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? They never have since Michigan Congressman John D. Dingell, who sat on the National Rifle Association's board of directors got an provision added to the CPSC creation legislation that prevented it. 

  As The Trace, a news service covering weapons in America, reports, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has imposed recalls of candles whose flames burn too high, fleece pajamas that cut infants, and classroom chairs with loose welding. "But the Commission has never ordered a recall of a firearm, even if the weapon explodes in someone's hand or spontaneously fires a bullet -- because it has never had authority to do so," The Trace reports.

  Thus is the power of the NRA. And, we will wonder if the assumption that the Second Amendment's decree that Congress shall make no law that infringes on the right to bear arms has anything to do with this.

   The Trace story reports that when Dingell introduced his amendment, "He met little resistance. The sole legislator to oppose Dingell's amendment was New York Democrat Jonathan Bingham, who during deliberations on the bill, took to the House floor with a toy gun in his hand to argue Dingell's exemption should be repealed: 'This (toy) pistol will be covered under the provisions of this bill,' he said. 'But, if this were the real McCoy, if this was something that could blow up in your face and kill you or with which you could kill other people, it would not be covered. I suggest that this is a topsy-turvy arrangment.' "

Give the Babies Liberty, or Give Them Death

   Let's discuss liberty and the unborn who seek it. You've heard of Patrick Henry's quote, "Give me liberty or give me death." Well, this gives that new meaning. The unborn either receive their liberty, or are relegated to their death. 

   Oh, don't get me wrong; the unborn surely must welcome the walls called a womb. Prison? No, they don't look at it that way at all. The walls of a womb are different than the walls of a prison. These walls are for protection. These walls are for nurturing. These walls are for comfort and care.

   I mean, babies do cry when they first get out, right? Ever seen a newborn come out giggling and giddy?

   But, I still say there's a factor of liberty. When faced with the two options Patrick Henry offers -- liberty or death -- they surely want liberty.

   And, it is the mothers who can offer them that. It is the mothers -- by not choosing abortion -- who can set them free.  

Guns Don't Kill, Ammonium Nitrate Does

  Before we go about gun control, we need to get a handle on ammonium nitrate. Ban it, where we can; regulate it where we can't.

   Guns don't kill, ammonium nitrate does. Okay, they both can contribute to death, but have you ever seen such large numbers in gun violence as there are in ammonium nitrate violence? In 1995, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols purchased 2 ton of the substance from a farm supply store, mixed it with racing fuel, and blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City -- killing no less than 168 people. How many mass shootings kill 168?

   But, that's nothing: a 1947 fire on an ammonium nitrate-carrying ship docked in Texas City, near Galveston, set off a series of explosions and fires that killed 580 -- still the deadliest industrial accident in American history.

   Here's one where the numbers are more in line with mass murders: in 2013 (April 18, to be exact, so we are coming up on the anniversary), a fire broke out at a fertilizer plant in West, Texas, carving a crater 75 feet wide and 8 feet deep, registering equivalent to a 2.1 magnitude earthquake -- and killing 15 people. 

  It doesn't matter that these ammonium nitrate tragedies are few and far between. When they do happen, the death count can be high. And, the U.S. has done little to mitigate them. How about banning sales to anyone who cannot show the ammonium nitrate will be used for farming? How about setting standards for the storage? 

   It only happens once in a blue moon, or once in quite a few blue moons. But, when it does, it blows you all the way to the moon. 

Gun Goes Off on Its Own

    This time, the gun itself did pull its own trigger. Yes, that old inanimate object, the gun. Yes, it pulled its own trigger. Actually, there were more than 100 cases of the guns pulling their own triggers.

   What? has AI gotten into our guns and started shooting people?

    The suspect in this case is the SIG Sauer P320, and turns out it is just a matter of faulty engineering. "The number and frequency of injuries are strongly suggestive of a design flaw versus a human performance error,” one expert told The Trace. “What we’re seeing is highly unusual.”

  More than 100 instances were uncovered in which the P320 went off on its own. 

I Almost Become an Abortionist -- but, then . . .

   Okay, I just got onboard with abortion -- kind of, sort of, in a way. . . . well, not quite. 

   A baby becomes viable outside the womb at 24 weeks, so how about allowing abortions at that point? I know the practice of abortion traditionally goes the opposite way: If you are going to abort, abort early -- say before week 20.

  But, there's always room for change, innovation, and throwing a monkey wrench into the way things are done. I come close to saying, do it -- then back down. If an ultrasound and everything else indicates the baby can survive well outside the womb, then allow the abortion. 

  Did you catch that? I said if the baby can survive. Only then can you abort it. Since a full-term pregnancy is not complete until 40 weeks, this allows the baby to be born up to 16 weeks ahead of schedule. I call it a "living abortion." And, if the parents don't want the baby, it can be taken in and adopted by someone who does. 

  Yes, there's already a practice in place that is somewhat like this. There are already "born-alive" laws in some places -- laws that say if the baby is born alive, you have to take care of it. This would be a lot the same. 

  Then, I run across another piece of information. If the baby is not allowed to go all but full-term -- if a c-section is performed at like week 39 -- the new-born might have health complications either at birth or later in life.

   Sounds to me like the fetus is not fully viable at 24 weeks, after all.

Judges and Jails Are Something We Need a Lot More Of

    Judges and jails are something we need a lot more of. 

    I went to the bank today. Tried to withdraw $3,000. Was told my account did not have that much. I ask what withdrawals there had been. I was told there was $100 that someone had taken -- and the name of the person was right on the transaction. 

   That made it easy. When I reported the crime, the officer told me the person would be arrested . . . but also told me she would be in and out of jail in a hurry. I asked why. Was it because our courts are too jammed and our jails are too packed?

   Yep. 

   To me, bank fraud is no small deal. It's a serious breach of the law. To tell me that our system has not the time nor the space to deal with it tells me a lot -- it tells me we have a grave and humongous flaw in our judicial system.

   Not a minor one, a major one.

   If the courts and prisons need more money to handle the load, we should jump to give it to them. While everybody is running around discussing important issues, this one is being ignored? This one is about as large as any of them. If your system of laws is collapsing, it becomes pretty important to address that. Both the courts and the prisons should be screaming at our legislators to give them more money.

   And we, as the populace, should be no less silent.

For Some, This Will only Add to the Vocabulary of Dirty Words

   Ever wonder what Bill Gates is up to these days? I mean, that guy who dropped out of college because he and a buddy had started the then-little-known Microsoft? Yeah, what happened to him?

  Well, he became a dirty word to a lot of conservatives. I guess you know that. Then there was that time he quickly lost to world Champion Magnus Carlsen in a chess game billed as a match up of the world's two smartest people (I had to throw that in). Yeah, that guy -- what became of him?

  This is the guy who in 2015 predicted a worldwide pandemic would hit -- and we wouldn't be ready for it. He was already unpopular by then. Don't know if that's why he didn't get much credit for that.

   Smart kid, but he got envolved with trying to stop climate change and that's about when things really went south as far as his reputation was concerned. Being associated with the fight against climate change is not exactly the kind of thing that makes you popular.

   So, the young kid -- not so young now -- started a company called Breakthrough Energies. It's just one of the things he has done since leaving Microsoft, but one of the most interesting. What, you've never heard of Breakthrough Energies?  Here you know what Microsoft is, but have never heard of this other company he's also throwing his heart into? 

  Well, we'll just have to correct that. Repeat the words "Breakthrough Energies" ten times to make sure you got the words in your head, then go ten more times, adding "Bill Gates" each time,  just to make sure you are making the association. 

 Word is, the reason Gates pushes climate change solutions is that he stands to make a profit, since he's invested in renewable energy companies. So, is this "Breakthrough  Energies" just another way for him to turn a dime (or a couple billion of them)? 

  He started it in 2015 with a bunch of other people you probably wouldn't appreciate -- guys like Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg, Richard Bransom, Mark Zuckerberg, Tom Steyer, and, uh, well, George Soros. Now you are really hating this company, right?

   I don't guess they have board meetings, but if they did, I don't guess there would be a more powerful board room anywhere in the world. 

   Anyway, Gates invested $2 bil in the new venture. But, the idea wasn't to make money, it was to make change -- save the planet. That might not be an idea you're too thrilled with, but its what he and his buddies were up to. Go ahead and see a demon behind every curtain, but I'm betting it just isn't so. 

   Breakthrough Energies invests in the startup of companies to provide nuclear fusion, large-capacity batteries, and microbe-generated biofuels. 

   Well, there's the story of Bill Gates and Breakthrough Energies. Some of you will appreciate hearing it. For others, though, it just adds to the vocabulary of dirty words. 

Some Simply Shouldn't have Guns

   "There are individuals out there viewing -- and that includes some of you media -- that want to blame the one thing that has no ability or capacity to commit the crime itself, and that's the gun," Marion (Florida) County Sheriff Billy Woods said today as some murder suspects were arrested. "These individuals committed the crime."

  Don't blame the gun, blame the person.

  But then, the sheriff undercut what he had just said. "These juveniles shouldn't even possess a handgun, but they did," he added.

  This is just the point: There are those who shouldn't have guns: those with mental illness, those who are making threats, those who are hostile towards their spouses  . . .

   And, yes, juveniles. If not all of them, a lot of them.

  Now, here's the argument gun advocates come up with at this point: The Constitution doesn't draw limits. It doesn't say some can have guns and others can't. If we take guns away from some, it's a slippery slope, and soon we'll be taking guns from everyone. 

 But, have you noticed how we have already taken guns away from one group -- felons? Hardly anyone is suggesting that is wrong. Isn't that a slippery slope, also?

 There are simply some people who shouldn't have guns. And, we can see that -- or should. Sheriff Woods is right, those juveniles should not have had guns.

 Next up, gun advocates might argue that if we make it illegal for violent spouses and mentally disturbed and wayward teenagers to get guns, that won't stop them. They'll get them anyway. The teens the sheriff was talking about stole the guns. 

  That doesn't mean you shouldn't make it illegal for them to have them, though. The first part of enforcing a law is having a law. You don't abdicate going after those who shouldn't have guns because you know you are going to fail. They need to be stopped and you at least try to stop them from having guns and from using them.   

Not on Every Corner, but just 50 Miles Apart

 About the time you are ready to thank the Utah Department of Transportation for its plans to put up 18 electric vehicle charging stations, you notice they are getting the money from the federal government.

Thank them anyway. Thank them both. 

This falls in the why-didn't-I-think-of-that category. It's a great idea: place charging stations all across the state, no more than 50 miles from each other. Suddenly, that notion that you can't drive an EV on a trip -- because there's no place to charge it -- well, that great fear disappears. 

Oh, and quit worrying about how long it will take you to charge -- a half hour, tops. The average car should gasp in a 100-mile charge in about a dozen minutes.

The UDOT stations will be funded by something called the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program -- at an estimated $1 million per site. Don't ask me why it will cost so much -- seems something is wrong there. 

Oh, and the unfolding world of EVs gets even better. Though it seems like 18 sites is enough, Rocky Mountain Power is going to come along and plant another 20 charging stations along the highways and byways, all in different locations from the UDOT ones. No federal funding there, so Rocky Mountain Power customers will pay 27 cents per kilowatt hour during peak hours and non-customers are going to pay 45 cents. 

The Rocky Mountain chargers will get you back up and running in about five minutes. Can you handle that?

If it seems all your excuses for not buying an electric vehicle are tumbling down, that's about it. First, with EVs now having been on the market long enough for a resale market to grow -- I bought a nice little 2016 Fiat today for $10,000 -- you can no longer say they are too expensive.  

And, as soon as these new charging stations are up and running -- it's a federal program, so every state is getting them -- you'll just have to quit complaining about how EVs are only practical if you don't plan on leaving down.

(Index -- Climate change) 

Thursday's Interview with Matt Taibi Leaves Twitter Files in Shambles

MSNBC's Mehdi Hasan, while interviewing a journalist who Elon Musk chose to see and release the Twitter Files, pointed out three errors that undercuts the whole narrative that Elon Musk was forwarding. 

This is not a small thing -- or shouldn't be. Nor should it be just a small note in the news. The Twitter Files were all the rage when they were released. If something comes along discrediting them, this, too, should be covered. 

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi's reporting in the Twitter Files claimed the Election Integrity Project was funded as a response to the government dropping its proposal for a disinformation governance board. “It wasn’t," Hasan said, facing Taibbi with the facts. "It was formed two years earlier. You suggest it was government funded, even though during the 2020 election you’re covering, it wasn’t.”

Hasan then confronted Taibbi with other mistakes he had made. “You say they labeled 22 million tweets as misinformation in the run-up to the 2020 vote -- they didn’t. They flagged 3,000 election misinformation tweets for labeling, so you were only 21,997,000 off.”

Finally, Hasan noted that Taibbi claimed “the EIP was partnered with the government Cybersecurity Infrastructure Agency -- CISA -- to censor Twitter.” But, Hasan said, Taibbi had mixed up the government agency, CISA, with a nonprofit, private firm, the Center for Internet Security.

That's a pretty substantial mistake.

Faced with them, Taibbi was forced to acknowlege all three of the mistakes.

And, with Taibbi confessing the these glaring errors, a good share of the Twitter Files reporting falls apart.

Give Bicyclists Their Own Set of Roads -- All Across Town

Give the bicycle its own transportation grid, it's own set of roads and bridges and tunnels. 

All across town.

Maybe in places you run the bicycle paths right alongside existing city streets, but when you can, run the bike trails beside canals, through parks, and across open areas. There's already a bike path along the Jordan River. Expand it. Widen it where necessary. Give northbound traffic one lane and southbound another -- just like there is for cars.

Take away all the stop-and-go intersections. Create tunnels and bridges and on ramps and off ramps to keep the cyclists going uninterrupted all the way to the end of their commute. Well, almost all the way to the end of the commute. The north-south and east-west paths might be a couple miles apart, so eventually the bicyclist has to spill out into the city streets to complete the journey. When you can -- especially downtown, since that is a big destination -- give the cyclists dedicated lanes so they don't have to worry about cars coming up from the rear and smashing into them. We love our bicyclists, right? so we anxiously want to preserve and protect them.

 "Unfortunately, no cities in the U.S. have yet built a network of bicycle lanes that are large enough to analyze," says Taylor Reich, a senior research associate at the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP).

This would change all that. Big time. Do this and you become the bicycling capital of the country. Do this and you take a step forward in transportation by taking what some would think is a step back. Bicycle transportation might seem to be something being swept into the past, but don't let it be. 

Instead, let it sweep us into the future. 

(Index -- climate change info)

Let's Change Our Infrastructure to Accommodate Cyclists

Of course the environment -- not to mention our health -- would be better off if more people were riding bicycles. But, there's one little problem with that: 'Tis not safe to be a bicyclist these days. Fatal bicycle accidents are outstripping all other traffic-related deaths. The problem is -- if I can use a big word (but one that everybody knows) -- infrastructure. The highways and byways and city streets were created for cars, not for bicycles. 

Bluntly, what that means is if you share a lane with a car, you share your body with a casket.

Reflect on this, though: The Bureau of Transportation Statistics reports that 52 percent of all trips in the U.S. are less than three miles. and almost 60 percent of the trips are under six miles from the person's home. 

Sounds like a job for a bike, right?

And, could this ever put a dent in greenhouse gases. The studies show carbon emissions would dip 12 percent if only 15 percent of the car trips were instead made by e-bikes and peddle bikes. Ride for your health and save the environment at the same time. Bicycles leave bicycle tracks, not carbon footprints. 

But, lest we forget, there is that little, little problem of infrastructure. The guess here is that we ought to devote more attention to giving the bicyclists safe passage. Don't make them share the road with cars that will kill them; dedicate full lanes to the bicycles. 

Oh, this is where a quote from Utah Sen. Mitt Romney comes in. The issue is a national topic right now, what with federal legislation being proposed for more bike lanes. Mitt doesn't like that -- thinks it's stupid. "Removing automobile lanes to put in bike lanes is, in my opinion, the height of stupidity," he told Insider this week.

Adam Ismail with Jalopnik is quick to counter what Romney says. "When you create more lanes for car traffic, what you get is more car traffic. This isn't theory -- it's the reality of induced demand, and there have been far too many examples of it globally for anyone involved in this conversation to feign ignorance about it."

Ismail probably ought to go a little easier on Romney. Romney is not feigning ignorance. It is quite normal not to have heard of the studies.

At any rate, back to what Ismail has to say: "If anything, creating bike lanes encourages some drivers to ride a bike instead, which takes cars off the road, which reduces emissions."

One thing, though, that should accompany restructuring our infrastructure so bicycling can be a bigger component: mass transit. Not everyone can hop on a bike. Some of us are not physically sound enough. Those of us in that category need to have the option of hopping on a bus, not a bike. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

If You Frame it that Way, They Won't Like the Solutions

    All the climate-change folk want is to take away your freedom. That's the way many climate-change solutions en up being framed.

   And -- to be sure -- it's an effective way to kill those solutions.

   "(They) want you to get out of your pickup truck, out of your SUV, out of your home in the suburbs where you can have a backyard with your kids," Sen. Tom Cotton warned Fox News viewers last year.

   "There is widespread suspicion on the right today that liberals want to take away their way of life, Tim Carney of the conservative American Enterprise Institute told Insider. "This idea that the left knows there's only one right way to live, it's the way that we want to live and we're going to force it on you. That is in the background of the mind of every conservative."

   So, many come away thinking that the reason bicycle lanes are being encouraged is that the Deep State wants to rip you out of your SUV and land you on the seat of a bicycle. "We're going to force it on you," as Cotton puts it. 

   As long as the solutions are framed as conspiracies to take away your freedom, many people are going to reject them. It's a spin that isn't true, and a take that isn't right, but it's a good way to kill a lot of climate change solutions.  

(Index -- Climate change info)

As Cute of a Car as You Will See -- Why not Market It?

   It's as nice-looking of a car as you will see, a little solar-powered cutie built back in 2014 for racing across Australia.

   Why not sell it, make a production model and let the public buy it? Now, there have been many cars built for and raced in the World Solar Challenge before and since, but it is that little car from 2014 that caught my attention. It competed in the Cruiser Class, which was for cars offering passenger seats and being street legal.

   Yeah, you got it: Cars that were practical-enough to be sold to the public.

   The ThyssenKrupp PowerCore Sun Cruiser, built by students of Bochum University in Germany, finished second that year, but its style and looks suggest it could have been a first-place seller if only someone had marketed it. 

(Index -- Climate change info)

The Sahara is a Paradox

   When it comes to climate change, the Sahara Desert is one of the most vulnerable places on earth. Already one of the most extreme weather location on earth, the changes only exacerbate. Whether it is scorching the land, parching it dry to the center of the earth, or flooding it with a summer's monsoon that returns vegetation and save lives, you never know what will happen. 

   The Sahara acts as a paradox of climate change, wrote Britannica. You never know if the green desert will be a winner of climate warming in the long run. It is a land difficult for scientists to model.

   "Out of Africa," as a movie was once titled? The war and droughts that have ravaged much of the continent -- not just the Sahara -- are reaping death and starvation. Our eyes must turn to that part of the world. As we live in our own comfort, we have need to consider the affairs of the poverty-stricken on the other side of the world.

(Index -- Climate change info)

Utah Takes a Huge Step Forward on Climate Change

   Perhaps it took the prompting of President Joe Biden to help reach the decision, but Utah just took a huge step towards meeting the world's climate change standards.

   Big step.

   Read this whole thing and we'll tell you how Bill Gates plays into it. But, first, let's start with Friday's breaking news. PacifiCorp, the parent company of Rocky Mountain Power, let it be known it will hasten the closure of its coal-fired power plants -- it will shutter them. Yes, the deadly coal plant -- producing more greenhouse gas emissions than any other single source. Yes, the dreaded coal-fired plant, which at one time emitted 50 percent of the mercury that filters into our air -- and 75 percent of the acid gas. 

  Before the announcement, PacifiCorp had planned on running the Huntington plant right up to 2036, and the Hunter plant all the way to 2042. Those closures wouldn't have jived with the Paris Agreement's goals of cutting carbon emissions 50 percent by 2030 and reaching net zero in emissions by 2050.

   When you've got the whole world to rely upon, how do you get everyone on board? What if Utah had opted not to do its part? This state is just a small part of the pie when it comes to global greenhouse emissions, right? So, maybe Utah could just slack off and everything would be fine, right? 

   Well, along came Joe Biden and that Inflation Reduction Act, offering $27 billion to willing clean energy and climate projects. Now, perhaps the state was planning all along to move up the retirement dates for its coal-fired plants. But, if Utah was fudging about doing it's part, that changed. You might fudge on doing your share without some enticement, but slap the enticements down and -- in order to get your fare share of them -- you suddenly jump on board. Money changes everything. 

   "Of course," said Gregory Todd, director of the Utah Office of Energy Development, "this conversation is happening in part because of the extreme agenda of the Biden administration's (Environmental Protection Agency). 

   So, that plant in Huntington that wasn't to close until 2036? And the one in Hunter that was to stick around all the way to 2042? Now they are both set to come offline in 2032. And, in the mean time, PacifiCorp plans to tamp down on the emissions from the power system it has serving six states, slashing greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2050.

   Now we're inline with the Paris Accords' standards.

  Of course, PacifiCorp is going to have to replace that power with some other form of energy. PacifiCorp expects to increase its wind and solar energy fourfold by 2032. Nuclear power? Small nuke plants will be born in place of the retiring coal plants. 

   And, that's where Bill Gates comes in. In 2021, Gates and PacifiCorp announced plans to build the TerraPower nuclear plant in Kemmerer, Wyoming. Since the Kemmerer plant is further along than the ones to be built in Huntington and Hunter, PacifiCorp will be watching it as it begins bringing the Utah plants online. Plus, the plants will share the same grid. So, Gates becomes involved in the grid serving Utah.

(Index -- Climate change info)