snapped shot

Apparently, this childhood taunt is a fitting depiction of European bureaucrats, who are busy trying to ban incandescent bulbs throughout the European Union. Of course, in typical Enviro-nazi fashion, the ban is being pushed without much of a valid reason. To wit:

• The "Compact Fluorescent" bulbs which the European Commission is pushing are no more efficient than incandescent ("standard") light bulbs over a long period of time
  
• "CF" bulbs can't be placed in enclosed light fixtures, microwaves, refrigerators, etc, which makes them somewhat of a hassle for homeowners
  
• The "non-steady" light put out by the "CF" bulbs takes longer to reach full strength, and after it does, it produces a flicker that is noticeable for a large portion of the population
  
• These "environmentally friendly" bulbs are manufactured using mercury vapours, which are already considered "environmentally unsafe" in a landfill, and thus requires an expensive recycling process
  
• It's been said that the life of a CF bulb is shortened significantly if it is switched on and off regularly, in the same manner as a "standard" incandescent bulb

Of course, if Europe wants to bankrupt itself in the name of some ill-defined and unreachable "principle," who am I to say that they should stop?

Is Al Gore dodging taxes in his little "Carbon Credits" purchase? After all, that is usually what they call it when you transfer a portion of your assets (i.e., money) overseas to a company that you control, isn't it?

Quite the defender of the poor and oppressed, ain't he?

(Update: Alright, so it took me a while to get just the right title. It's early! Gimme a break!)

Update again: The plot thickens! (Much like Al's waist line. Conspiracy?)

Hypocrisy:

Bible-thumpers and non-religious right-wingers have found common ground in many ways—kneejerk nationalism, the belief that might makes right, the worship of cartoonish masculinity—but it's safe to say that they have very divergent opinions on sexual ethics. Or, more succiently [sic], the fundies aren't going to be f**king in public anytime soon. If you are a religious wingnut, the main way you demonstrate your Sexual Dominance by having a cringing Stepford wife follow you around. But there's no reason to think that Bolton is a born-again, so why not just bully his wife into sex acts that scare and upset her?

"Not" Hypocrisy:

The very notion that Gore is a hypocrite when the issue is something that has nothing to do with personal virtue and everything to do with collective action just goes to show how badly it f**ks people up when religion and politics get intertwined. This also shows the profound difference between the right and the left's version of when government interference is justified.

Kinda like when you went after Ted Haggard for his lack of "personal virtue," huh?

Here's a little hint, Amanda: You didn't see a single one of us "wing-nuts" lining ourselves up like dumb, idiotic lemmings to defend Haggard against the cries of hypocrisy from the Left, because (and I'm only speaking in my own capacity here) we agree that the charge is valid. Nevermind that his aforementioned lapse of "private virtue" had nothing to do with his public (and "collectively-acting") ministry, if I may borrow a page from your Bible of Defending Bill Clinton.

And they say that radical environmentalism is not a religion... Obviously, all of these shrill leftists who are SHOCKED! and APPALLED! that those of us on the right would have the sheer audacity ("Like, Ohmigod?") to call Al "The Boreacle" Gore a hypocrite seem to have forgotten their own shrill cries of hypocrisy over the years.

The shoe really does hurt when it's put on the other foot, doesn't it?

Quoth Napoleon Dynamite, "Idiots!"

The Boreacle uses more electricity in one month than the average American family uses in a YEAR?


Update: The Boreacle Responds. I say, so what? One would think that having a low gross "carbon footprint" would be more important to an environmentalist than a low net footprint that's offset by a mere transfer of "dollars," no?

See also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here (ROFL!!), and here.

Okay, so I've mentioned before that I don't believe that the Weather Channel does weather at all any more, but this story (h/t BizzyBlog) is just ridiculous.

Memo to The Weather Channel: Take a hint from your name.