Donny Deutsch on The Big Idea had an excellent show on Creativity. I caught about half of it and will check the TV listings to see if it will be replayed later this evening.
If you’re going through life putting one foot ahead of the next, you need to watch this evenings show. It appears the gist of the show is available on this web page, although I haven’t picked through it.
The pigeon can be creative, how about you?
Additional explanation on the pigeon experiment and human creativity here.
In New York City cigarette are now $4.25/pack. That seemed outrageously high so I went to the original article and the tax is 2.75 state and 1.50 city.
As economist extraordinaire Craig Newmark asks, “Guess what happens” ?
Don’t mess with Miss Tennessee, she’s packing heat. A Daddy’s girl to boot.
Put the oil executives on trial for having the audacity to question him and his merry group of believers.
It’s very frustrating when you’re the smartest man in the room but you can’t convert everyone. When that happens to liberals, the next stop is the US legal system.
I suggest Mr. Hansen quit NASA and get out and earn a real living. More than likely he’ll follow in Al Gore’s footsteps, make a lot more money and emit tons more greenhouse gases.
The IBD editorial concludes…
Those who refuse to be browbeaten, though, are in danger of seeing their careers ruined or, perhaps someday, sharing a prison cell with the oil executives Hansen wants to try.
Criminalize dissent: That’s one way to ensure the debate is over.
Hansen’s comment is revealing. It’s the sort of declaration made by a desperate man trying to hang on to his declining relevance.
Hansen knows the climate of fear he has stoked is receding as more people start to see through his nonsense. He’s just trying to stir up some storm clouds.
Where will that lightening bolt hit?
I found the link to the Fox news video report on the Salim/Marshall adverse possession case on the landgrabber.org website. You can view the video here.
After watching that video, it’s hard to take at face value Bill Hollander’s statement in his letter to the editor that said…
In order to avoid another such unpleasant incident the Salims have
essentially ceased using their own back yard for the past two years.
Perhaps it’s an issue in the winter time, but in the spring and summer this seems quite doubtful. It sure seems that the Salims have an extraordinary desire for privacy that shouldn’t be expected in such a densely populated area.
asks the poster over at Blog the Rockies. There’s also a comment by Susie Kirlin regarding the meeting this Wednesday which I “stole”.
Susie Kirlin said at June 13th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Hello,I really enjoyed your funny commentary on the ridiculous ruling these Boulder judges have recently made.
I am sitting here with Dana Marshall, the latest victim of a land grab and we thoroughly enjoyed your article.
We are organizing a group, tentatively named Boulder Property Rights Coalition and are having our first meeting to organize a protest of the high handed court decisions and the fact that the new law can still be abused. It will be at the Boulder Public Library Main branch, Boulder Creek Room on July2nd at 7-9pm. Any further questions…..call Dana at 303-444-3343. Please spread the word to anyone who cares about property rights.
I hope it is OK with you to post this on the website.
Here is Dana Marshall’s story, from her point of view, over at Landgrabber.org. I have not read the whole story as I don’t have time this morning (there’s a lot there in very small font!), but of what I’ve read/scanned, this part stuck out…
2) The judge may be overloaded and uninformed regarding the intricacies of the particular case and relevant precedent law. As in my case, the judge was appointed at the last minute and probably did not have adequate time to prepare and review the case. The previous magistrate and judge were aware that, at first, the adverse claimants had tried to get my property by representing to the city that the fence belonged to them. Then they attempted to manipulate the survey results. Then they switched to a claim of adverse possession. Then, unable to support the 18 year continuous requirement for predecessors, they flip-flopped to acquiescence- which fails as a claim. It fails as a claim, due to the requirement that common ownership dictates that acquiescence in boundary changes must be recorded in the deed or at least memorialized in written form. A further problem arises because neither my immediate predecessor in title, nor my neighbor to the west (whose fence is also involved), would agree that they ever acquiesced to the plaintiff’s use of their fence as the boundary. Edwin McConnell (referred to as “Old Mac”), the original owner of the plaintiff’s property also owned my property; introducing a problem of commonownership. So there’s a little problem with acquiescing to oneself. Acquiescence requires two people to be in agreement. Finally, when none of the plaintiff’s claims worked very well, they tried to have the trial continued in order to explore the possibility that a mistake had been made by the city surveyor when the corner markings downthe street were re-monumented to make way for city improvements.
All bold, italics and coloring are mine.
It sure appears that the Salim’s kept “throwing ideas” at the court until something finally “stuck”.
and further down is this statement…
One judge should not have the discretion to give your property to
someone else simply because another party wants it. Give me a jury trial any day.
So why wasn’t there a jury trial? Obviously there’s a reason.
More later, I’ve got other things to do for now. I plan to go to the meeting on Wednesday. Since the early 1990’s Wednesday is my usual beer drinking evening. That said, I think giving up beer for one Wednesday to attend the initial meeting of the Boulder Property Rights Coalition is a small sacrifice that I’m willing to make.
.
Perhaps, just perhaps, more regulation isn’t the answer to everything. That would be news to our lawmakers and the local Boulder governing bodies.
That’s what the Brit’s believe.
It surely is in Boulder, to not only raise taxes but the overall cost of doing business.
Ray Davies birthday today. A nice writeup over at Power Line.
This has been floating around the web, so I doubt you “read it here” first. enjoy.
Impeach Bush over tomato’s says Lou Dobbs. Sign up Kacinich and it’s a done deal.
I gave up on Lou when he couldn’t read the top ten stock quotes without screwing up multiple times. That was a LONG time ago.
Someone else agrees with me on the privacy issue.
Curmudgeon blogger RC Lloyd over at the Daily Camera propagates Representative Peter DeFazio’s position that…
…oil companies are currently sitting on 10,000 leases and permits holding a 20 year supply of potential petroleum given the nation’s current usage. He further indicated that the oil companies are not drilling because its not in their best interest, at this juncture, to produce more oil.
No critical thinking is necessary, so RC concludes…
This Republican buzz is another prime example of framing an issue to support an extremely biased and jaded agenda. If the Administration can convince the American public that current prices at the pump are due to a ban on drilling then they are able to escape the accusations of speculation, price gouging and profit taking. Were it not for a single voice in the person of Representative DeFazio they might just get away with it!!!
Rep DeFazio, Mr. Lloyd and the people they influence are the target audience of a column in todays Wall Street Journal authored by Red Caveney of the Amerpican Petroleum Instittue. One key highlight…
In reality, a lease is simply a block on a map, with no guarantee that it contains any resources. If all of them did, one could simply pay for the lease, haul in equipment and start pumping oil. But that only happens in fiction.
Unfortunately, many Democrats and Big Oil company haters live in that fictional world.
A few other salient points. Leasing is expensive..
However, until the actual exploration is complete, a company does not know whether the lease will be productive. If, through exploration, it finds there is no oil or natural gas underneath a lease – or that there is not enough to justify the tremendous investment required to bring it to the surface – the company cuts its losses by moving on to more promising leases. Yet it continues to pay rent on the lease, atop a leasing bonus fee.
In addition, if the company does not develop the lease within a certain period of time, it must return it to the federal government, forfeiting all its costs. All during this active exploration and evaluation phase, however, the lease is listed as “nonproducing.”
There are additional reasons oil companies just don’t bring in the equipment and start drilling because…
Obviously, companies want to start producing from active fields as soon as possible. However, there are a number of time-consuming steps to be taken before they can do so: Delineation wells must be drilled to size the field, government permits must be obtained, and complex production facilities must be engineered and installed. All this takes considerable time, and during that time, the lease is also listed as “nonproducing.”
Because a lease is not producing, critics tag it as “idle” when, in reality, it is typically being actively explored and developed. Multiply these real-world circumstances by hundreds or thousands of leases, and you end up with the seemingly damning but inaccurate figures our critics cite.
It’s called exploration for a reason…
As I’ve often said, the first step in our business is called “exploration” for a reason. Exploration is time consuming, very costly and involves a great deal of risk. Importantly, you see neither a drop of usable oil nor a cubic foot of natural gas while it is going on. But it is absolutely essential, and there is nothing “idle” about it. Without the exploration that took place years ago, less domestic oil and natural gas would be available today to meet consumer demand.
The United States needs oil from it’s shores for a number of reasons…
1. Alternative energy sources are going to take time to develop
2. We’re much better off keeping our dollars in the United States, for two reasons: 1). I’d rather pay the domestic oil companies instead of Middle Eastern companies. 2). It’s better for our fiscal health to keep our money within our borders.
3. It’s hard to determine the psychological factors that effect the price of oil. The United States increasing oil production is a good thing, especially since we are a major consumer. It’s the responsible thing to do.
Whats Up with That exposes a short lived CBS story about earthquake intensity and global warming.
His conclusion…
In my opinion, CBS News has no credibility left. This opinion is qualified by: I’ve been to CBS in New York to do work for CBS Newspath, and spent 25 years on TV at two CBS News local affiliates. I’ve been associated with CBS News during my entire TV Meteorology career. I trusted it at one time.
It’s one thing to screw up a story, it happens. But it is quite another to falsely attribute the source, and then to remove the story with no notice or retraction or recognition of the error whatsoever.
Accurate science reporting, particularly in stories attributing almost anything to “global warming” in the mainstream media has been woefully inadequate, but this is pure incompetence on the part of CBS.
You can run but you can’t hide.
Rachel takes on the crop circles and examines look at the comments.
Investors Business Daily ponders what in the world the Democrats are thinking. Led by Maxine Waters and Maurice Hinchey they want to nationalize/socialize big oil. Maxine’s insightfulness lead to this statement…
“Well, I can see that this congresswoman is going to favor nationalizing the oil companies, and making sure the prices go down.”
Hinchey recently added this bit of insight.
“We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets into the market.”
And it appears the Democrats are rapidly becoming the party of nationalizing big oil…
What’s especially shocking is these two extremists no longer seem out of step with what used to be a centrist Party.
Don’t take our word for it. A Rasmussen Poll released Tuesday showed that 37% of Democrats think nationalizing the oil companies is a good idea. Only 32% disagreed with that.
Of course, the oil companies have been prevented from drilling where the oil is by the Democrats that want to Nationalize them. You can’t make this stuff up.
What’s ironic about this nationalization mania is that government, specifically bad decisions made during decades of control by Democrats, is to blame for our current energy woes.
Whether it’s their failure to build nuclear power plants or oil refineries, their refusal to drill for our plentiful oil, their reliance on market-destroying price controls or their absurd belief that windfall profit taxes will somehow bring us more energy, Democrat-led Congresses have failed us over and over again.
They’ve demonized oil companies for the very thing they themselves are responsible for — namely, destroying the link between higher prices and increased output of energy that would naturally occur in a functioning free-market economy.
June 21st, when else! Find out more about Altona Grange here.
click to enlarge (applies to all pictures)
Here’s the sign outside Altona Grange…
The Grange is at the intersection of Nelson Road and North 39th Street. Not sure if this would be called the front or the back of the Grange, but the picture is taken from North 39th street.
This picture is from the other side. One would tend to call it the “back” except this is where the entrance is.
Close up of the sign with some type of logo.
