God Save America

By Alan Caruba

Those of us who grew up in the 1940s and 50s almost universally look back on those days with great fondness. Born into an era that saw the end of the Depression and living as children through World War II, we were nonetheless somehow shielded from it by parents who took care to ensure that these calamities in the world did not take from us the sheer joy of being young.

By 1945, America emerged from the war as one of the world’s recognized superpowers, plunging immediately into the Cold War with the Soviet Union, a totalitarian regime that, like all Communists, promised a worker’s paradise and delivered a new form of serfdom.

We grew up with school drills in the event of the “bomb” as America helped rebuild Europe, guarding it against the Russians. While the grownups tended to these matters, we kids were treated to television shows free of the salaciousness of too many of today’s programs.

One could not be a teenager in the 1950s and not be aware of the great concern regarding the infiltration of our government by Communist spies and sympathizers. Decades later, thanks to the revelations of the Venona intercepts of Soviet communications with those spies, we learned just how thorough the infiltration had been and how many sympathizers worked at the highest levels of our government. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, it turns out, was right.

In the end, by standing firm against the Soviet Union the United States and its allies would see its end. Its threat has been replaced by a resurgence of a particularly evil Islamic fanaticism and now, as there were then, those of a liberal frame of mind are telling us not to meet it on the field of battle and everywhere else it threatens Western civilization.

Click to read more …

By Alan Caruba

Let’s understand a simple fact. You cannot squeeze any more energy out of a gallon of gasoline than already exists. If you mix it with an additive which itself provides less energy, what you get is less energy.

So, when Congress passed a so-called energy bill in mid-December that demanded more “fuel efficiency” by a measure of forty percent, requiring that automobiles be built to get 35 miles per gallon in 2020 as opposed to the former mandate of 25 mpg, it was essentially telling American auto makers to start making cars out of paper mache or something so lightweight that the driver and passengers will have to be extracted from a crash with a sponge.

Then, too, there’s a strange notion that 300 million Americans, some of whom have been known to drive cars and trucks, are somehow going to be able to “conserve” their way to “energy independence.” You can’t save or conserve the energy in a gallon of gasoline or any other fuel. You either use it or you don’t. If you don’t use it, you better find another way to get to work or anywhere else.

Democrat Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer of Maryland, said the energy bill will cut demand for foreign oil and promote non-fossil fuels that will reduce greenhouse gases linked to global warming. This is worse than just being stupid, this is dangerous nonsense because (1) there is no global warming and (2) one way to reduce the importation of foreign oil is to encourage the discovery, extraction, and refining of the oil sources that are known to exist in and offshore America.

Does the new “energy bill” permit for drilling and extraction of the millions, perhaps billions, of barrels of oil in Alaska’s ANWR? No. Does the new bill encourage the exploration for oil and natural gas off the nation’s continental shelf on our vast east and west coasts? No. Did it give the oil companies any tax breaks to build the billion-dollar refineries the nation needs? No. Did it encourage the building of nuclear plants? No.

Click to read more …

by Robert E. Meyer

As often occurs, a letter to the editor in a local paper prompted this piece. The writer of the letter attempted to showcase President Bush's hypocrisy regarding his veto of the embryonic stem-cell legislation, and his Iraq policy. The writer complained that Bush claims to be a defender of innocent life (the inalienable right to life as outlined in the Declaration of Independence) as it concerns the stem-cell debate, but that he takes innocent life because he is responsible for the civilian deaths in Iraq.

But equating a veto of the embryonic stem-cell research bill to deaths in Iraq, labors on the top two false assumptions.

First, this writer along with others of his persuasion assume that the casualties in Iraq, whether civilian or military, are willfully the product of the president's wishes, and ultimately have nothing to do with national defense.

The president has a constitutional mandate to defend the U.S. from its enemies. Unfortunately, that often involves the tragic deaths of military personnel who have sworn to uphold that very Constitution–a lesser of two evils scenario.

Secondly, we have a contingent of people who are convinced that embryonic stem-cells are necessary for break-through research simply because they are theoretically more versatile (are thought to have a greater variety of therapeutic applications). Such a conviction is more a philosophical position, informed by functionalist and utilitarian priorities, than it is a factual scientific conclusion.

Click to read more …

By Alan Caruba

There have been many times in his long public career when I have wondered whether Al Gore is just plain stupid or, as the British say, barking mad.

At some point, his neighbors and fellow Tennessee citizens must have concluded Gore was intellectually defective because, in his run for the presidency in 2000, he failed to get that State’s plurality. Maybe it had something to do with that long, long, long kiss he gave Tipper before accepting the nomination of his party? That was bizarre.

Click to read more …

By Alan Caruba

In the 1970s, as a public relations consultant, I helped introduce a new pesticide to the American market. More specifically, to the pest control industry as it was not available for use by the public. It was called “Ficam” and, after having undergone the costly Environmental Protection Agency registration process, it was quickly and widely used by pest control professionals, not just for its capacity to eliminate cockroaches and a variety of other pest insects, but because it was applied with nothing more toxic than water.

For two decades this pesticide thrived. I wrote case histories of where it was used in hotels, casinos, restaurants, and theme parks, as well as in homes and apartments. The pest control profession embraced it and there never was a single case of it causing any hazard to those who applied it or benefited from it.

I never found out why, but for some reason the EPA demanded that the manufacturer re-register the product and the decision was made that would be withdrawn instead. It was just too costly to prove what everyone already knew. It worked wonders protecting people against the diseases and property damage a wide variety of insect pest species cause on a daily basis.

Click to read more …