My Beauty Best Teacher

On the right sidebar of my blog (under a 'Donate' button) I have a description of Bizarro World, also known as Htrae, which is a fictional planet in the DC comics universe. Htrae is home to Bizarro and his companions, who are ruled by the Bizarro Code, which states that you should do the opposite of everything.

For example, if a past US President was actually a forward-thinking President who embraced new technology, a resident of Bizarro world would give a speech suggesting that this President was the opposite of that. Like President Obama just did:

President Obama got a laugh out of a Maryland audience on Thursday when he mocked the Republican Party in a speech, comparing their skepticism of alternative energy to the “Flat Earth Society” in Christopher Columbus’ day and President Rutherford B. Hayes’ apparent dismissal of the telephone. But while Obama thinks the GOP is in need of a science lesson, he may need to bone up on history himself.

In mocking the GOP, Obama cited an anecdote about Hayes in which, upon using the telephone for the first time, he said, “It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one?”

But Nan Card, curator of manuscripts at the Rutherford B. Hayes Presidential Center in Ohio, told TPM that the nation’s 19th president was being unfairly tagged as a Luddite.

“He really was the opposite,” she said. “He had the first telephone in the White House. He also had the first typewriter in the White House. Thomas Edison came to the White House as well and displayed the phonograph. Photographing people who came to the White House and visited at dinners and receptions was also very important to him.”...

....“He was pretty technology-oriented for the time,” Card said. “Between the telephone, the telegraph, the phonograph and photography, I think he was pretty much on the cutting edge.”...

President Obama was suggesting that Republicans are anti-technology for opposing windmills and not supporting railroads and and for denying that the globe is rapidly rising in temperature because of actions of mankind, and attempting to make his point by comparing the Republicans of today to past backwardness. But as usual, the reality is the exact opposite of everything that he said.

The reality is that President Obama is pushing for energy sources that are older than modern oil and nuclear which he opposes, that President Obama's attempt to force us to railroads and away from cars it the kind of anti-progress sentiment that one could expect from a Luddite, and that his theories about global warming have long-since been discredited by now, and that his examples of backwardness are in fact either made-up or forward looking in reality.

One has to wonder sometimes if my crazy joke that Bizarro world is real and that residents of this world have been flooding into the United States through some sort of interworld rift is really a joke or just may be true. I struggle to explain how so much of what Obama says is just so sheer the opposite of reality- on so many issues, so many policies, and so many 'statements of fact,' on further research not only is he wrong but he has been proven to be direct opposite of correct.

I call on all good Americans to resist these Bizarro's and their Bizarro agenda, and vote Republican in 2012.

If someone has been wronged or there is some sort of problem, a personal phone call from the President of the United States can be an important piece to improved understanding of the problems and can help to get past any sort of communication issues that are out there. The office of the President is one that is filled with prestige and honor, and a phone call from him that carries the weight of that august office can go far in putting pressure on people to overcome problems or calm down inflamed emotions and right wrongs. But the President's time is valuable and important, so it understandable if his personal touch isn't applied to every situation in the form of a personal phone call and it is okay if he sometimes waits several days before talking to people who are important or who have been wronged.

The important quality for the President of the United States to have is the judgement and decision-making skills to determine who he should take the time to call and when he should decide to just sit it out and not get involved. It is important that the President have the sound judgement to focus on the important issues facing our nation and use his office and the power that goes with it to improve situations and smooth past difficult issues. It is important that the President be able to decide when to use his office to bring light to issues and focus public attention on them with a phone call.

President Barack Obama (Democrat) lacks sound judgement and proper decision making when it comes to making personal phone calls and when to make them.

On April 20, 2010, the oil rig Deepwater Horizon exploded, resulting in a severe oil spill from the ruptured well. BP, which had employed Deepwater Horizon to drill on its Macondo Prospect, immediately began to work with the a range of U.S. federal government agencies and assets to try to reduce the flow of oil into the Gulf, figure out what happened, and try to assess blame and responsibility for the large oil spill. There were a lot of moving and complicated aspects of the US government tied up in this effort, and to coordinate them and make sure that they were used properly at some point the President of the United States should have talked with top level decision makers in BP, including its CEO Tony Hayward.

But for over two months, President Obama did not talk to the CEO of BP and did not make a personal phone call to him to discuss efforts to limit the oil spill, to figure out why the oil spill happened, or to figure out how to overcome the important issues that the spill brought up. This represented an important failure in judgement and a bad decision; a phone call between the President and the CEO of BP could have resulted in more coordination between BP and the US and more understanding of how and why the accident happened, resulting in less oil spilled, less wildlife killed, and a quicker resumption of drilling in the gulf and the lower oil prices and greater economic growth that would have resulted form this. Obama eventually did meet with the CEO, but it took him over two months to do so.

In contrast, two days after radio show host Rush Limbaugh called community activist Sandra Fluke a slut, President Obama took time out of his busy day to make a personal phone call to her to "offer his support to her, he wanted to express his disappointment that she has been the subject of inappropriate personal attacks and to thank her for exercising her rights as a citizen to speak out on an issue of public policy."

The quick personal phone call, especially in light of his two month long wait before calling the CEO of BP after the oil spill earlier, and the fact that he would use the office of the President to call a private citizen and apologize to her for the comments of a private radio host represents a failure of President Barack Obama's judgement and decision making with who receives a personal phone call from the President of the United States. His office phone, rather than being used to coordinate the assets of the United States or figure out how to avoid oil spills in the future, was used instead to make a quick phone call to a private citizen to give official support for their views and to side with her in a controversy between her and a radio host who is trying to generate ratings.

President Obama, rather than following important events around the world and with our economy, clearly is just sitting in the White House listening to talk radio and making phone calls to people mentioned on talk radio stations. The President did not call the CEO of BP earlier about the oil spill, even though he was called many names by bloggers, radio show hosts, and comedians, further demonstrating his poor judgement and poor decision making skills.

Our nation needs someone who understands how and when and why the President of the United States should call people, and these two examples clearly indicate that Barack Obama is lacking in judgement and decision making. We need to- and can- replace him in 2012 with someone with better judgement and decision-making skills, someone who understands that the CEO of BP should have been called in two days and that a private citizen who is called a name by a radio show host should not receive a phone call from the President.

Bizarro World escapee Barack Obama (currently President of the United States) has called for an end to end $4 billion in subsidies for small companies that produce oil and gas for consumers, saying “You can either stand up for the oil companies, or you can stand up for the American people."

This latest effort to raise the costs of doing business on oil and gas companies is in response to the soaring price of gasoline in the United States, a development that will choke off the feeble recovery this nation has experienced under Obama's leadership.

Despite extensive research, it is still unclear exactly what Obama would cut that adds up to '$4 billion in subsidies', but based on past proposals Obama would likely cut out tax breaks that oil and gas companies receive for buying more efficient refining and industrial equipment, for creating and keeping manufacturing jobs in America, for costs related to repairing wells for safety, for encouraging more environmentally-friendly oil extraction, and for searching out and discovering new sources of oil.

Even though Obama pretends to support all of the stuff that the tax breaks go for, he doesn't like oil companies for some reason, and so he is going to make it more expensive for oil companies to do business in the hopes to lowering the costs of gasoline at the pump. If this makes no sense to you, you just have to think like Barack Obama and remember that up is down, good is bad, successful is wrong, laziness is a virtue, higher costs to produce somehow make a product cheaper, and demonizing others is okay if you're doing it but wrong for others to do.

President Obama though does not demand an end to all subsidies- only for an end for subsidies for companies that he personally does not like. Obama practices crony capitalism, whereby companies that give him political support in the form of campaign contributions get large subsidies, and companies who give money to his opponents (like the Koch brothers) are demonized and attacked. In the game of political power, President Obama intends to win so that he and his family and supporters and friends can benefit financially. Oil and gas companies oppose him because they want to provide cheap energy for poor people and manufacturing while making profits that are then distributed to shareholders and investors and they see Obama's policies as running counter to these ideas, and for their opposition Obama attacks them. So-called 'green companies' on the other hand cough up money to him and so receive substantially greater subsidies.

To wit, from John Hinderaker at Powerlineblog:

As the graph shows, in terms of per unit production, solar and wind companies receive considerably more subsidies than oil and gas, making support for these 'green' industries considerably more expensive, and thus wasting valuable resources like time and money that could have been spent curing cancer or building flying cars. It is not efficient or resource-usage friendly to support solar and wind energy, and yet Obama does, because executives and employees who run and work for these companies provide him with considerable campaign finances, which he then uses to maintain power for himself and redirect greater sums of money to his picked friends in those industries.

In this coming election, the left-wing that has seized control of your parent's Democratic Party is going to try to make this election about how Romney is successful, about how Santorum has good moral values, about how conservatives want people to pay their own way in the world, or about how some people make money providing cheap and efficient energy. They are going to make these things into bad things, and then make you feel bad if you write that they are actually good things, and they are going to pressure companies and individuals to say what the political power wants them to say. You are going to have to ignore all of this, and instead vote against tyranny- you need to vote Republican in the coming election and send Barack Obama back to Bizarro World where he belongs.

A painting featuring silverware may lack the lustre of actual silver. Silver heirlooms look like costume jewellery; a silver shield resembles a plastic toy. How can the artist capture the true essence of silver in oil paint?

Mistakes in Painting Silver, Platinum and Aluminum Objects

• Using a tube of premixed grey for all the silverware, such as Paynes Grey or Davy’s grey, resulting in a lead effect rather than the brilliance of silver.
• Mixing black and white for the greys featured in the silver objects.
• Darkening colours within the silverware with black.
• Illustrating the silver objects as having flat areas without subtle tonal shifts.
• Insensitivity to colour temperatures within neutrals, resulting in a painting that lacks depth.
• Perceiving highlights in silverware as white shapes, resulting in the appearance of white bits of paper stuck on the objects.
• Using silver metallic paint designed for gilding for the oil painting in the hope it will emulate the lustre of silver or a similar shiny metal.

The problem with the last point is that the silver metallic paint will appear a dull grey if the painting is positioned where no reflections occur.

Art Techniques for Painting Silver

Differentiating between silver and grey is a common pitfall when it comes to painting silver objects. Both silver and grey do indeed contain similar colours, as both contain greys and monotones. The difference lies in the colour mixes used for the neutrals and the tonal contrasts.

What Colour is Silver?

In order to capture silver effects in oil paint, the artist must look for other colours other than grey within. This means looking for colour temperatures in neutrals, as some will be warmer than others. This is why I never use just black and white or a pre-mixed grey pigment to express silver objects. In fact, silver can contain definite hues, including violets, crimsons and earth colours. As a guide, the following colour mixtures can be used to render silver objects in a still life. Listed from the largest by proportion first:

• Warm highlights: white, a little burnt sienna and ultramarine.
• Cool highlights: white and a little pthalo blue.
• Warm neutrals: ultramarine, white and a little burnt sienna.
• Cool neutrals: white, pthalo blue and a little burnt umber.
• Warm darks: burnt sienna and ultramarine. Permanent rose can be introduced for depth.
• Cool darks: pthalo blue and burnt umber.

Art Techniques to for Painting Silver Jewellery and Ornaments

To capture smooth metallic effects in silver objects such as tankards and dishes, apply the oil paint via a soft sable and brush out tonal and chromatic divisions. Glazing is a great technique for achieving a high finish. Apply the first layer of paint opaquely, aiming for reasonable accuracy in the silver object(s) depicted. Don’t worry if imperfections remain but smooth out brushmarks. Once this first layer of paint is dry, apply another layer of paint as a translucent layer with the aim of perfecting the first layer, smoothing out tonal gradations and adding depth to colours. If necessary, apply a third glaze once this second layer is dry.

Glazing is great for attaining sharply defined edges to reflections and highlights. But you can also use impasto effects on the highlights to add punch to the appearance of the silver object.

Painting Technique for Detail in Silver Jewellery

Intricate detail which is often apparent in silver artifacts such as jewellery or embossed surfaces can be emulated by applying a base colour beneath the detailed area. This base colour should be a ‘mean’ colour which might be a pale neutral or blue-grey. Once this area is dry, ‘illustrate’ the detail on top, beginning with the highlights to prevent colour contamination from a neighbouring dark colour. Work into the mid-tones with a progressively darker colour mix. Finish off with the dark areas. Use a fine sable throughout. Remember to keep looking for colour temperatures within neutrals, some of which might contain a little violet, others, blue. Reflections from neighbouring bright objects will provide focal points to compete with highlights.

How to Paint Silver Objects

Capturing the lustre of silver in oil paint means looking not only for bright highlights, but also subtle hues within neutrals, some of which will be warmer than others. This means putting away premixed grey tubes of paint and black. I used ultramarine, burnt sienna, burnt umber and pthalo blue, as well as white. Glazing is great for achieving a high finish for smooth metallic effects, although impasto techniques can be used for bright highlights and bright reflections.

Painting Techniques for Still Life Art

How to Make Gold look Like Gold
How to Paint Glass
Glazing Technique with Oils
I can't paint reflections in my still life
How to Paint Tomatoes

The artist trying to convey metallic effects with oil paint may be disappointed if brass ornaments or gold jewellery resembles dollops of mustard in the still life painting. How can the artist get gold effects in painting?

Problems with Painting Gold Jewellery

How to Paint Gold

A still life setting featuring gold objects such as jewellery may appear tarnished or plastic-like due to misconceptions about the colour gold, causing the artist to use a lot of yellow, orange or ochres. Such idealistic concepts about the colour gold may be indicative by the following notions and practices.

• Having the subconscious idea that all gold is basically yellow, yellow-orange or ochre.
• Reaching for any yellow pigment at hand for mixing gold colours.
• Darkening yellow with black or dark brown to achieve dark tones in gold.
• Mixing white with yellow to represent highlights in gold.
• Giving sharp outlines to gold objects with the aim of making them stand out, resulting in a cutout appearance.
• Using bright colours throughout the gold object such as yellows, oranges and ochres with the aim of conveying brilliance.
• Going overboard with white highlights to imply sheen.
• Applying gold metallic paint designed for gilt onto the gold objects in the still life.

Oil Painting Techniques for Gold

In order to make gold look authentic, the artist must forget about gold’s ‘local’ colour (yellow-brown), and instead think about how gold actually looks. A bright-coloured object does not necessary exclusively comprise bright colours. In fact, the secret to recreating the brilliance of gold lies in juxtaposing bright colours against sombre hues. Gold can contain such dour colours as dark green, dark grey or midnight blue.

Try not to get visually railroaded by bright colours, particularly yellow. Seek out neutrals and sombre colours within the gold objects. Highlights in gold seldom contain yellow, but cool pales such as powder-blue, eggshell or light grey. Only the smallest amounts of neat white (or yellow, if it can be perceived) are often needed to illustrate highlights in gold.

Look for opposing colours in the gold object; in the case of yellow or orange this will be any colour in the blue spectrum; violet, azure or indigo. Similarly, look for cool neutrals.

Look for unlikely colours in the gold object. I have often seen olive green, mauve and indigo in gold objects. Under certain lighting conditions, gold objects may exhibit no yellow, orange or ochre whatsoever. Believe what the eye sees as opposed to reaching for yellow, orange or ochre by automation.

Mixing Gold Colours in Oils

Prior to embarking upon a painting featuring bright objects such as gold, apply a neutral-coloured underglaze onto the art surface. Applying a bright or light colour straight onto a white art surface will make the colour appear darker than it actually is.

Before applying the bright colours or highlights, look for sombre colours in gold. This means neutrals, greys blue-greys and blue-greens. Similarly, look for cool colours within the highlights.

Look for definite hues in darks, such as blues and violets. Don’t darken the colour of gold by a mixture of yellow/orange and black, as this will result in dirty colours.

Don’t overdo it with bright colours, for yellows, oranges and ochres will often exhibit a modest ratio of the gold object. Even the smallest flecks of bright colours and highlights will provide great focal points for the gold object.

Apply the highlights and the brightest colours last. I will apply the paint thickly in these areas to make the highlights stand out from the art surface.

What Colour is Gold?

The following colour mixtures are ideal for capturing gold jewellery, ornaments or artifacts, although other colours can be seen. Remember to keep looking.

• Warm highlights: white with a dab of burnt sienna. A smidgen of cadmium yellow can be added if a yellowish hue is apparent.
• Cool highlights: white with a dab of ultramarine and burnt umber.
• Warm mid-tones: burnt sienna, a little cadmium red and white.
• Cool mid-tones: burnt umber, a little ultramarine and white.
• Warm darks: burnt sienna and ultramarine. A little cadmium yellow can be added for an additional yellow cast.
• Cool darks: Burnt umber and ultramarine. For extra depth, a little pthalo blue and permanent rose can be added.

Art Techniques for Painting Gold

Glazing is an ideal art technique for achieving smooth, metallic effects in oil paint. Glazing entails applying a thin, translucent layer of oil paint and working on top once the glaze is dry. Soft sable brushes and any oil medium, such as linseed oil or Liquin can be used to thin the paint into glazes. Once mixed into a translucent consistency, apply the paint for an effect like tinted glass.

Strategic use of impasto can also be used to make highlights stand out literally from the art surface. I do this by applying white neat from the tube.

Working dark to light will increase visual awareness of tones and bright colours found in gold. Sketch the composition via chalk onto a black art surface which has been overlaid with black acrylic paint (or a very dark colour). Apply the dark tones first off, working to the mid-tones, then to the light tones and finally the highlights.

How to Paint Gold Objects in Oils

Rendering gold objects convincingly entails discarding preconceived notions that gold contains lots of yellow and plenty of highlights. Using gold paint will only give a dirty yellow appearance if there are not reflections. Gold in fact can contain lots of sombre hues, even in highlights, which can be blues, greys, ochres and violets. Use bright colours sparingly and don’t overdo the highlights. Dong so will only make the gold object look more like costume jewellery. The secret is to pay extra notice to neutrals and sombre hues before the bright colours and highlights.

Tips on Oil Painting Techniques

How to make glass look like glass
My silver objects look like lead
Why are my colour mixes dirty?
All about oil painting mediums
Glechniques in oils
Demonstration on painting toys

In 2008 in my post Obama Intends on Bankrupting all Coal Producers in the US I wrote:

Check out this clip. In it, Obama tells the interviewer that he intends to put in place government policies that will bankrupt anyone who wants to build a coal power plant, and progressively ramp up pressure on coal producers already there in the hopes of bankrupting them too. He clearly states this as his goal as President- to bankrupt coal producers.

Look, a lot of people in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Colorado, or Wyoming work in the coal industry. He is telling you he intends to take your job away.

Look, a lot of our energy in this country is produced by coal. Obama is telling anyone that uses any energy at all that he intends to drive up the price of it. Combine this with his anti-drilling stances for oil, and get used to an economy that is starved for energy- high inflation, low growth, unemployment, and bad times.

The beauty of being a conservative instead of a liberal is that my predictions are usually correct more often, and 4 years ago I predicted exactly what would happen after our nation elected someone who was opposed to life, opposed to liberty, and opposed to the creation and protection of property- high inflation (maybe?), low growth (yup), unemployment (yup), and bad times (yup).

And President Barack Obama (Democrat) has followed through with his stated intentions- via the Gateway Pundit I read this anecdotal evidence that his personally-run agencies are systematically implementing rules and regulations that have caused at least 3 coal-fired plants in West Virginia to close, causing loss of jobs, higher energy prices, more people on food stamps, and more Democrat-dependent voters:

Ohio based FirstEnergy Corporation announces it will close three coal fired power plants in West Virginia by this fall. The closings come directly from the impact of new federal EPA regulations.

The plants to close are Albright Power Station, Willow Island Power Station, and the Rivesville Power Station. The company says 105 employees will be directly impacted.

The three plants produce 660 megawatts and about 3-percent of FirstEnergy’s total generation. In recent years, the plants served as “peaking facilities” and generated power during times of peak demand for power.

The plants operated under subsidiary Monongahela Power. Mon Power recently finished a study of unscrubbed coal fired plants in the system to determine the potential impact of the most recent environmental regulations from EPA. Company officials determined the EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) made it unfeasible to retrofit or continue operating the three plants.

“The high cost to implement MATS and other environmental rules is the reason these Mon Power plants are being retired,” said James R. Haney, regional president of Mon Power and president of West Virginia Operations for FirstEnergy.

Let's not lose sight of these decisions made by the President of the United States that have adversely affected our economy- he'll try to confuse us, attack his opponents, and will point to signs of economic growth (companies that either fought through and past Obama's policies or companies that gave political support and cover to Obama and were rewarded with loans and support), but the reality is that policies that he implements and tries to implement still are bad for America.

There is a choice though in 2012- between President Obama and more of these sorts of policy decisions and the Republican nominee (whomever it is) who will not put in place these sort of EPA policies that force industries to go bankrupt. Let's make the right choice in 2012.

Here are my notes and thoughts as I watched President Barack Obama's 2012 State of the Union address:

• All of the conversation on the channels prior to the address centered on how this address is going to be used as a way to launch the President's re-election bid and as a taxpayer financed campaign speech. I've been watching these things for years and although past incumbents running for re-election have used this speech to speak about all their accomplishments, President Obama appears to be the most brazenly partisan in using this speech as a campaign speech.
• I found a list of past 'special guests' who have been invited by the President- Lenny Skutnik in 1982 (saved passanger from drowning plane), Sammy Sosa in 1999 (relief efforts in Dominican Republic and home run chase), Hamid Karzai in 2002 (Afghanistan President), Julie Aigner-Clark in 2007 (founder of Baby Einstein)... and now Warren Buffet's secretary in 2012 (prop to use to try to bring up point of taxing the rich more). Whereas once President's (both Republican and Democrats) celebrated people who had done things, President Obama celebrates someone who has called on other people to do more things (pay more money) and yet has no real accomplishments of her own (no offense- I'm sure she is a fine person).
• It was amazing and wonderful to see Congresswomen Giffords there- she has made such a great recovery and I wish her the best on her future.
• President Obama begins with his foreign policy accomplishments, which he can take credit for, although he should share this credit with George W. Bush, who put in place the foundations and background for many of these accomplishments (the pull-out in Iraq, the groundwork for catching Osama, drones and catching terrorists in the War on Terror, etc).
• Obama next suggests that private citizens should be more like the military and act as soldiers for the state. Citizens should stop fighting one another, stop disagreeing about the direction of the nation, stop pushing for their individual rights and liberties, stop trying to keep their property and the fruits of their labor, and instead citizens should serve the state, citizens should put aside their differences and just follow orders, and people should give up their wealth and property to the state so that it can redistribute it to those people who it favors. This all sounds vaguely familiar and has strong echo's of fascism in it, although I could sugar-coat it if you'd like.
• In 2008, the 'house of cards collapsed'- banks made loans they shouldn't have (which he pushed for a community activist), regulators didn't do their jobs (which they were not held accountable for), bonuses were paid to these banks and government agencies (to which they were never held accountable for)... he is on the wrong side of the ledger here- he was pushing for the collapse and after the collapse did not hold those people accountable.
• "State of the Union is getting stronger"- as if the mounting US debt is to be ignored and we're all just to pretend that trillions of dollars in my children's spending is not damaging the foundations of our nation and creating a time-bomb that will destroy America.
• President Obama says that he can't get anything done without control of every single aspect of our political system- he decries the 'obstructionism' of the GOP controlling one single house of Congress. No one- no one- should ever be elected President who says that he can't get anything done unless he has total power- that is bad for America and bad for democracy.
• "What is happening in Detroit can happen in other industries"- what happened in Detroit was that the auto companies were bailed out, costing taxpayers $80 billion in loans, debts forgiven, pensions guaranteed, and other loans. GM made $6 billion last year in profits- taxpayers should get that back, plus the next $74 billion in profits, and then we'll claim success in saving a company at no cost. Imagine if he were to bail every unprofitable business out at massive losses to taxpayers- what would that sort of economy look like?
• Proposes new tax on multi-national companies, to be redistributed to companies that 'hire here in America'- some sort of new loan to be administered by Obama officials based on conditions that he'd set. The increased taxes on MNC's will be sure to be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices on goods and services, causing inflation and hitting the poor especially hard. Why does Obama hate poor people so much?
• "We brought trade cases against China at over twice the rate as the previous administration"- but the Chinese just laughed at us because Obama bowed to the Chinese President and begged to borrow trillions more of their money so that he could blow it on his wasteful spending. It's nice that he's suing China though- I'm sure that's employing lots of lawyers.
• President Obama is mystified on why employers don't hire workers- perhaps if he would have had some sort of a job at some point in business or in the private sector or in some sort of productive economic enterprise he'd know that increasing regulations, fees, requirements, red tape, and the such encourage employers not to hire.
• Obama proposes starting a temp agency company... with taxpayer money. This government financed and supported company will compete with all of these Michigan companies.
• Obama is right- good teachers like me matter, and also he's right that teachers like me are attacked all the time- I'm bashed by liberals and progressives who call me all sorts of names. The President's other education policies are pretty- they are nice words that mean nothing since the federal government isn't supposed to be involved in education in any way other than making sure that there is equality in education for different races and sexes (Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965).
• It is almost as if the right answer to everything that Obama says is the opposite of what he says. He says that it is wrong for taxpayers to be giving illegal immigrants a paid education and then sending them home at the end- he suggests we should make these people here illegally citizens after investing all that money into them, while I kind of think that taxpayers shouldn't be investing money into people here illegally. Get a work or education visa or something to stay here or pay your own way.
• President Obama attacks inequality in pay between mean and women in work- that's right Obama, tear this straw man up! That straw man can't fight back- I suggest he go after those who want children to work in coal mines next!
• I followed this line... "need more bullet proof vests... computers chips... innovations... industries... energy..." what???
• President Obama claims that our nation needs an "all out all of the above strategy"- it's double-speak though, because in his next line he clarifies that this strategy means less oil, less natural gas, less coal, and less drilling. His 'all of the above' strategy is going to include additional fees, regulations, and rules on companies that he doesn't like. So, in summary, he is pitching a "some of the below strategy".
• On to exploding batteries discussion... Bryan (the guy Obama referenced) used to build luxury yachts, but when government policies that Obama supported (he wanted a higher tax on yachts) destroyed Bryan's company and industry, Obama was there to throw taxpayer dollars at him to get him restarted building taxpayer subsidized wind turbines, and now Obama is some sort of 'good guy.' He's the bad guy in the story, kiddies. Holland-based Energetx Composites LLC, you just got mentioned by Obama in his State of the Union address- that's the kiss of death.
• Proposed more small fees and regulations and burdens on businesses... I missed what sort of scheme it was supposed to pay for in order to be 'budget neutral'.
• I'm caught up now... "we need smart regulations"... "we need rules"... these rules and regulations "make the free market more free"- LOL. Did he just say "I've ordered thousands of federal agents to spend thousands of man-hours to search for useless regulations that waste taxpayer money"- I must have heard this wrong. He's moving on though to proposing new rules and regulations- I guess he was done with the part about getting rid of regulations and rules after he threw the joke out there. Listening to him talk, I feel like he's a joke of a President.
• Someone add up how much all these regulations, agencies, bureau's, rules, and investments are going to cost America... I'll have to look at the transcript, but I'm pretty sure all he does is to propose these things without any sense of cost. A man (or woman) could spend a hundred years undoing all the damage that this guy is doing to our Republic.
• "The recovery is still fragile"- but earlier he said the "State of the Union is getting stronger"- let's square this round issue, folks.
• Did you know that President Obama has cut the deficit $2 trillion? And not raised it $5 trillion like what really happened? BIZARRO WORLD!
• Let's not forget this people- President Obama hates people earning millions and wants to go after them and confiscate their income redistribute it to people making less. Those who are already wealthy can keep it, those who are on the bottom might like it, but there will be no more moving between classes in Obama's America. This guy wants to slap class systems on us and turn our nation into the rich- those who already made their wealth and who have connections with government- and the rest of us poor. "You can call this class warfare all you want" he says- it's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare. It's class warfare...
• The partisan divide is getting worse every year he says... especially over the past 3 years. It must be George Bush's fault or something, right? Or maybe it's because you President Obama are the most bitterly partisan figure in the history of our nation and is tearing our nation into serfs and masters. President Obama attacks running a 'perpetual campaign'- but yet he is the worst offender in this, running continually for office in a way that no President in history has ever done, running campaign commercials a year in advance of the general election, and even trotting out his wife to make frequent partisan attacks.
• He just said-"With or without this Congress I will keep implementing laws and putting in place policies that I want, but if Congress went along with what I was already doing it would give me cover and get us all involved." This guy is a bully and a dictator. Maybe I heard him wrong though; I'll go back and re-read the transcript, maybe I got it wrong.
• The speech must be coming to an end- after spending a couple minutes in the beginning to address our military and veterans, we're now going to end with a couple minutes at the end about the military and veterans- I though think that the military shouldn't just be props in Obama's game of 'we're all in this together' meme; maybe he should talk about military programs in the body of his speech that he wants to cut or increase, about what he's been doing as commander-in-chief, etc. The military is not simply there to make Obama look good. "No one thought about politics on that day" Obama says- but yet the photo of Obama in the war room was staged. Nice words Obama, but in your mouth, they are just words, merely words.
• President Obama says that as long as we are all commoners, living like peasants on the land, serving our masters like serfs, than our nation will be strong. He said 'common' several times at the end- but private property, liberty, and protection of life wasn't mentioned.

UPDATE III: Thank you for linking to this article The Western Experience, The Bitter Americans, and others!

Until 1980, the United States was the world's leading producer of uranium, but today there are only three operating uranium mines left. This may have been due to the fall in uranium prices, which hit a low of $7.92 per pound in 2001. But with the price climbing to over $50 today, there is renewed interest in mining uranium, which is essential to powering nuclear power plants and important for national security- and it gets even better, because there are still considerable deposits of uranium in the United States, including fairly large deposits that were discovered in northern Arizona over recent years.

Uranium mining leads to cheaper nuclear power which leads to cleaner domestic energy production and a better environment- its just the sort of win-win-win scenario that only someone like Barack Obama could reject.

Via RadioViceOnline:

Last week, without much media attention, President Obama, this time via Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, put the nix on certain uranium mining on federal lands in northern Arizona. Sadly, this too, is political pandering, as, apparently nuclear power is as toxic to the left as is coal and oil power. And, per this fiat, the land in question is off limits to uranium mining for the next 20 years.

Let’s look at the process. The Bureau of Land Management is in charge of analyzing whether uranium mining is good or bad for the environment in this area. It found that the

mining would have ‘no direct impacts’ on protected wilderness areas. The impact on drinking-water supply in the Colorado River was also found to be ‘negligible’... The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the northern Arizona parcels [withdrawn from mining] contain uranium that, mined to capacity, would generate enough electricity to power Los Angeles for 154 years.... [t]he land bureau’s impact statement estimates that [the administration's decision] will cost the region $160 million in average annual economic output…

Northern Arizona currently has an unemployment rate of 17%. But, then again, Arizona in general, and northern Arizona in particular, is “red”. Let me suggest an ugly Presidential thought- "I’m not going to win Arizona anyway, so, it makes more sense to appease the left and perhaps pick up some votes."

One of the earlier actions undertaken by the Obama administration was to put in place bans on mining for a range of precious resources. It was bans such as these that have delayed the recovery in our nation and led to tens of thousands of Americans losing their homes and jobs- and even if the economy revives over the next couple months that does not take away from the fact that policy actions such as bans on mining hurt Americans lives, liberty, and property.

One such ban was a ban on mining for uranium in northern Arizona, which was originally put in place for 2 years so that officials could study the situation further. Obama officials were hoping that their meme that energy mining was destructive and bad and wrong would be proved true and so they could stop mining permanently, but then when the report came back that the mining wasn't in any way bad, they just shrugged their shoulders and banned it anyways.

And the cherry on to- President Obama then has the audacity to argue that they did this to SAVE JOBS and ENCOURAGE ECONOMIC GROWTH, and that now he is going to campaign on this theme- that by stopping the extracting of valuable resources he actually made our nation more wealthy; that by stopping thousands from being employed to extract these minerals he created more jobs; and that he has protected the environment even though the environmental impact from the mining was declared to be 'negligible' by liberal bureaucratic agencies which were likely pressured by Obama administration officials.

This double-speak, hypocrisy, and lying is characteristic of this administration, and the quicker it is gone, the quicker its actions can be reversed, we can begin to safely and responsibly mine valuable minerals, produce cheaper domestic energy, lower the costs of electricity for poor people, and help the working man to get ahead.

In July 2008, TransCanada announced a $7 billion expansion to its Keystone pipeline system, calling the project the the Keystone XL project, which would build a 3,200-km pipe linking Alberta’s oil to refineries in Texas. The line is expected to handle 590,000 barrels of oil a day and would take about a year to build. Three years ago the plans were communicated to the State Department, which failed to move quickly and efficiently to implement the plan and bring jobs and energy to our nation (timeline details).

Then the Obama administration came in, and there was a long delay when nothing got done- no work was put into the project, no reviews were done, and nothing happened for several years. Starting in the summer of 2010, Republicans began to put increasing pressure on the State Department and the Obama administration to do approve the pipeline project or begin the approval process or redesign the pipeline or anything- and yet the months go by and nothing more happened.

Then in December of 2011, the Republicans attached to the payroll tax deal a provision that forces President Obama to decide within 60 days whether or not to approve the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. The deadline runs out on February 21, 2012- which is in another 35 days or so. President Obama instead decided today to instead reject the proposed pipeline and turn down all the jobs and money and income and cheap oil, blaming Republicans for his rejection, saying that there was now too little time left to review the project and change its proposed route.

Follow this story on memeorandum, and you can see for yourself what really happened here- Obama did not put in the work and time and effort to get it done.

There is still time left to review and change the route- oh, at this point it wouldn't be easy, and it might take a lot of work and time and effort, but there is still over a month to get it done, and an active and hard-working and intelligent President could get a task like this done. There was still time left to review the project in December and change the route- even though Obama said that it would take exactly a year to finish a review process like this meaning he'd be able to make a decision right after the November 2012 election- but at that time, the administration did not accelerate the process and put in the hard work to get the project up and working.

There was time left in the summer of 2010 to do the review process and change the route- and do in the the year time-frame that Obama suggested that it would take. That means it would already be approved and construction begun by now; perhaps it would even be finished and transporting cheap energy from our friend from the north right now, lowering gas prices and helping poor people heat their homes more cheaply during this cold winter. But Obama did not do anything in 2010, except talk and hem and haw, and demonstrated that rather than put in the hard work to square the pipeline project with his supposed environmental concerns, he instead would just dither and do nothing.

President Obama had ample opportunity to act on this project and compromise and build an environmentally safe pipeline that would bring considerable jobs and money and wealth to America while meeting environmental concerns- but he didn't. He spent his time over the last month (December 2011 to January 2012) in fundraisers, on vacation in Hawaii, and campaigning all around the nation. He didn't get the project done- make some phone calls, bring people together, and hammer out an environmentally friendly pipeline project.

The rejection of the Keystone Pipeline XL project demonstrates more so than anything how lazy, incompetent, and unqualified President Obama is for the office of the President of the United States.

Friedrich von Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom that (via wikipedia's entry, which serves my purposes here) centralized planning is inherently undemocratic, because it requires "that the will of a small minority be imposed upon the people." The power of these minorities to act by taking money or property in pursuit of centralized goals destroys the Rule of Law and individual freedoms, making the individual "more than ever become a mere means, to be used by the authority in the service of such abstractions as the 'social welfare' or the 'good of the community'" In both socialism and nazism he saw "the increasing veneration (of) the state, the admiration of power, and of bigness for bigness' sake, the enthusiasm for "organization" of everything (we now call it "planning") and that inability to leave anything to the simple power of organic growth."

President Obama increasingly uses the state to plan out society, acting in an increasingly autocratic way, imposing his will and the will of his small minority of elites on the people who is supposed to be serving. In his own words he states this as his goal- he says “I refuse to take ‘No’ for an answer” as he claimed new powers for himself in making recess appointments while Congress was not in recess; he has already explained that “where Congress is not willing to act, we’re going to go ahead and do it ourselves,”; the co-chair of Barack Obama's Transition Team, Valerie Jarrett, even said that "Obama would be ready to rule on day one." President Obama sees his role in our political system as our ruler; and if he is the ruler that makes us his serfs and slaves.

And it is not just his words which indict him as an autocratic tyrant who wishes to make us his serfs- it is his policies as well. Increasingly he is centralizing the distribution of wealth under his personal authority- turning TARP into a slush fund from which he can bail out favored industries; using stimulus funds to reward favored industries and give loans to his pet projects; and spending through the general budgets massive amounts of funds that are poorly tracked and accounted for. And his policies almost always involve transferring wealth from those who he personally does not like- the rich, oil companies, health care companies, banks, people who live in suburbs- to those people who he favors, by means of policies such as higher tax rates, more progressive tax rates, higher license and permit fees, increasingly regulation, pressure through the media, or cap and trade schemes.

President and his supporters in the media and in various blogs de-humanize people and their lives, arguing that the time they spend laboring in corporations makes them lesser, that the corporations and companies that they invest their time and effort in are 'not people', and that those people in the heartland of America are lesser people as well- racist, uneducated, unenlightened, and clinging to their guns and false religion.

Liberals and progressives cannot refute this argument- their solution to every problem facing society is 'more government', as if government can do only right and never wrong through its actions and inactions. The solution for Obama and Democrats is always to do more- to control people more, to take away more of their wealth and property, and to restrict their actions more. Their supporters in Occupy Wall Street rail against bailouts while Democrats and President Obama bails out banks, auto companies, green industry, and any other failing enterprises, unwilling to let the market act in creating more efficiency of resources and effort. He pushes for bigger and bigger industries, centralized under increasingly smaller cartels- like health-care exchanges or regulations like Dodd-Frank.

Troll through liberal and progressive blogs, and you will see this is the case- they argue for more control of your life, liberty, and property by smaller and smaller numbers of people who act in increasingly autocratic and undemocratic ways.

Throughout history, there have been two groups largely battling it out for control of society- those people who believe that they are better than you and should make decisions regarding your property and life and choices, and those people who believe that they are no better than anyone else and shouldn't make decisions for others regarding their property, life, and choices. Today, the Democratic Party is the party of control, judgement, elites, and Masters, and the Republican Party isn't- oh, I'll give you that it isn't the opposite, but it sure is a heck of lot better than the Democratic Party. And so your choice in 2012 becomes more clear- vote Democrat for Masters and Serfs, or Republican to block this vision.

Read The New Authoritarianism to see how this inspired my own take, and be sure to order and read your very own copy of the Road to Serfdom.