Nobrainer’s Think Tank

“Does that mean I’m visionary? You betcha,” [Gingrich] said

Rehashing old sci-fi ideas is real visionary.

Can we relegate this flabby hunk of whale shit to “Celebrity” Apprentice where he more rightfully belongs?

He’s right, you know:

There are some in congress right now who would rather see their opponents lose than see America win

They’re called Democrats.

Guess which of my favorite Senators has, once again, re-added me to his spam lists? Go ahead, guess!

Per USA Today, Obama “stressed that ‘no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here.’” That’s good to know, but is he implying that, at least at some times over the last two years, the single party in charge, was dictating? If he is implying that, he is correct, but it still seems like something odd to say.

I also found this paragraph to be cringeworthy:

[Obama] is seeking “the right balance” between new regulations to make sure that companies are treating customers fairly, and “making absolutely clear that the only way America succeeds is if businesses are succeeding.”

I wouldn’t exactly say the business environment is great right now. So it shows the extent of the Great One’s rectal-cranial inversion that he is even worried about this balance at this point. Heaven forbid we end up with lower unemployment at the risk of some of us facing an overdraft fee.

I read this AP article this morning, and it brought to mind an exchange from the movie Trainspotting. In it Sick Boy details his grand theory. The exchange ends thusly:

Renton: So we all get old and then we can’t hack it anymore. Is that it?
Sick Boy: Yeah.
Renton: That’s your theory?

So the article was about health care.

The budget office concluded that premiums for people buying their own coverage would go up by an average of 10 percent to 13 percent, compared with the levels they’d reach without the legislation. That’s mainly because policies in the individual insurance market would provide more comprehensive benefits than they do today.

For most households, those added costs would be more than offset by the tax credits provided under the bill, and they would pay significantly less than they have to now.

That’s the fucking plan? That’s the savings? The savings plan is to force prices higher and say they’re lower by adding further complication to the tax code via new credits? Brilliant!

Geezus. It’s 9AM and I’m so ready for a Guinness.

As you may have no heard, the IPCC made a bit of a booboo.

When I read the article the first time, I thought this was astounding.

Dr Lal said: ‘We knew the WWF report with the 2035 date was “grey literature” [material not published in a peer-reviewed journal]. But it was never picked up by any of the authors in our working group, nor by any of the more than 500 external reviewers, by the governments to which it was sent, or by the final IPCC review editors.’

However, that may not quite be the truth.

However, an analysis of those 500-plus formal review comments, to be published tomorrow by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), the new body founded by former Chancellor Nigel Lawson, suggests that when reviewers did raise issues that called the claim into question, Dr Lal and his colleagues simply ignored them.

I mean, who would want an influential body like the IPCC to be truthful or responsible anyway?