In Part 1 of this series, we looked at problems related to NASA Funding. In Part 2, we considered how well government protects Freedom Of Conscience. Part 3 was suppose to answer a question, How The United States Chose To Begin Hostile Action Against Libya. However, due to what I hope is an inspiration, I decided to let that wait until Part 4. Here we will consider what happens when government becomes excessively caring.
An Excess Of Caring
There are times when it is better to refer readers to other sources, and this is one of those times. What follows are examples of how politicians have shown us how much they care.
Have you heard about the New Guidelines from The National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration? If the answer is no, then riddle me this:
Do you think the recommendations are more or less stringent than the old ones?
Ha ha, I know, right?
nooneofanyimport ends by comically expressing the concern that safety standards can reach the point where they become stifling.
At Maggie’s Farm (H/T to Thatmrgguy’s Blog, here), we have a post that targets government welfare programs, llegal immigration: Take down the bird-feeder. How can someone compare stopping illegal immigration with taking down a bird-feeder? You want to know? Read the post.
In ObamaCare Lawsuit: Who’s Wasting Money Now?, FAMILYFOUNDATIONBLOG.COM points to Liberal hypocrisy. The Virginia Attorney General wants an expedited ruling on Obamacare by the U.S. Supreme Court, but the Obama administration refuses to agree. What is the cost waiting?
Without such an appeal, we’re talking at least two cases in U.S. Courts of Appeals, at least another year or more of legal work and court proceedings, endless briefs and motions, travel from Washington to Richmond and Atlanta, meetings, hundreds of hours of federal government employee time and who knows what else it takes to try a case these days — only this will be two cases simultaneously, not to mention any further cases that are filed in federal district courts by other states or aggrieved parties. It’s no exaggeration to say the cost could be in the millions. That’s a lot more than the $350 it cost the Commonwealth to file its case in Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia . . . but a lot less than the $1.1 billion it will cost Virginia to implement ObamaCare. The pricelessness of the hypocrisy is passed only by the reality of the true costs. (from here)
Common Sense targets the EPA in EPA Gone Wild (AGAIN). David Skiles observes that “With the price of energy already skyrocketing in Virginia, the EPA has now decided that they want to worsen the situation by enacting new regulations on our energy producers.” What puzzles Skiles?
The purpose of the Utility MACT rules is to cut levels of pollutants being emitted from power plants. This sounds like a good idea, however this new regulation poses an interesting dilemma. In a 2005 EPA study, scientists concluded that current emissions from power plants pose absolutely no health risk to humans. If this is true, then why is there a need to increase regulations, and why now? (from here)
Here is a repeat from a previous post (here), but it’s too funny to pass up. sitting on the edge of the sandbox, biting my tongue likes the show the funny side of Liberals. It’s Official: San Francisco Stinks! is an example.
Visitors be warned: San Francisco’s big push for low-flow toilets has turned into a multimillion-dollar plumbing stink. Skimping on toilet water has resulted in more sludge backing up inside the sewer pipes, said Tyrone Jue, spokesman for the city Public Utilities Commission. That has created a rotten-egg stench near AT&T Park and elsewhere, especially during the dry summer months. The city has already spent $100 million over the past five ye … Read More
What is perhaps our greatest example of excessive caring? Freedom, by the way wonders about that in Why are Taxpayers Funding a Worldwide Labor Movement?
I’m not so naïve as to think that the US isn’t running covert operations throughout the world to push through US policy. And I know that working conditions in many nations are in need of reform.
But why are my tax dollars funding AFL-CIO operations, especially under the authority of a union thug like Richard Trumka? (from here)
Here’s something I didn’t know:
In 1996, [top-loading washing machines] were pretty much the only type of washer around, and they were uniformly high quality. When Consumer Reports tested 18 models, 13 were “excellent” and five were “very good.” By 2007, though, not one was excellent and seven out of 21 were “fair” or “poor.” This month came the death knell: Consumer Reports simply dismissed all conventional top-loaders as “often mediocre or worse.”
To be continued: Part 4, How The United States Chose To Begin Hostile Action Against Libya, will appear on Sunday afternoon.