Comment to H2oreuse

I submitted this comment to J's blog here:

At the least, it is clear that regulation is expanding fast and occupying all the available space on this planet.

No, J you are wrong. Regulation has long since taken up the all the available land, now the seas, and since the 1970's the UN regulates the use of space, including outer space. I'm not making this up either. The UN regulates the use of outer space, including other planets and beyond. From the wikipedia article on the Outer Space Treaty:

The treaty explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet, since they are province of mankind. Art. II of the Treaty states, in fact, that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means".

If I remember right, a state claiming a piece of territory is the first step in allowing private parties to own land in a territory. The Puritans claimed Massachusetts, and their new government proceeded to recognize land claims made by the settlers. Without the ability of a state to claim a territory (Israel, New England, New Spain) settlers can't obtain title to their possessions. Because of the previous private investors can't finance the development of space; it is considered the common property of man, and therefore belongs to no one.

Even more damning is the Moon Treaty which was rejected by all space-faring states:

#...the Moon Treaty is an international treaty that turns jurisdiction of all heavenly bodies (including the orbits around such bodies) over to the international community. Thus, all activities must conform to international law...

# Bans altering the environment of celestial bodies and requires that states must take measures to prevent accidental contamination.
# Bans any state from claiming sovereignty over any territory of celestial bodies.
# Bans any ownership of any extraterrestrial property by any organization or person, unless that organization is international and governmental.
# Requires all resource extraction and allocation be made by an international regime.

I think "international regime" means the UN or an organization controlled by it.

The UN has since introduced the Law Of the Sea Treaty (LOST) which is like the Moon Treaty, but has not been ratified by the United States.

As long as the UN exists there is nowhere to run, they have even regulated space.

Comment to Al-Fin

This was a comment I posted to a post by Al-fin here:

The coming hyperinflation may destroy the US power grid. Locally, Arizona Public Service has been on financially shaky ground and has requested a rate hike in order to maintain its credit rating.

I foresee a few possible outcomes for APS, and by extension much of the private electrical grid:

1. Operating on a cash basis, requiring a sudden increase in rates, which may not be approved by the state corporation commission.

2. Temporary blackout lasting less than two weeks.

3. Blackout lasting longer than two weeks, which would cause damage to the generators here in AZ, and would possibly permanently reduce the capacity of the system here in AZ.

4. Failure

5. Some combination of 1-3 while being absorbed by SRP, the public electrical district that serves the eastern half of the metro area. In fact, the Obama depression may make it easier to nationalize businesses that are ailing due to the previous credit bubble and the current downturn. Whole sectors of the economy could be acquired on the cheap.

One thing is certain, since APS owns the grid in the western half of the Phoenix Metro Area, which is poorer and browner, I foresee a massive increase in electrical theft, with such theft protected either by gangs or by payoffs to APS employees. Electrical theft is a tradition in Mexico, and much of Latin America.

Arizona will fare better than California, since we are a net exporter of electricity, while California is a net importer. When the Federal government goes bankrupt all politics will become very local, and AZ may cut off California's supply of imported electricity and maybe even imported water.

I shudder to think what would happen if California had a complete grid collapse, with no power to pump fuel in pipelines, or to run the states extensive irrigation system.

Response to David Davenport

This is my response to a question posed to me in the comment section of iSteve.blogspot.com.

The Reformation and prior to that the Great Schism have been black eyes for the Roman church for centuries, black eyes that it seeks to reverse. The church has been reaching out to Protestant and Orthodox churches for at least the last century in the spirit of ecumenism, and for the last half century those lost sheep have been reaching back. But why wouldn't the RCC accept that these churches are separate and be happy that all, or at least some, propagate the gospel to the lost? Because the Catholic church views salvation differently from your local Evangelical church. The Evangelicals seek to get every person to hear the Gospel and make a decision, preferably for Christ. Whereas, the RCC sees communion as the defining mark of salvation, and as such seeks to have as much of the world receive communion as possible. This is why the Vatican is constantly harping over whether baptisms by various mainline Protestant denominations and Protestant state churches are not in accordance with Vatican policy and therefore may not be valid.

At base the RCC sees itself as the only valid church and Protestant as infidels who must also be saved, just like the heathens. You may think this is laughable, but the RCC has lasted almost 2000 years and as a bureaucracy seeks to expand its power and personnel the way all bureaucracies have through the centuries, so working incrementally over the centuries is no problem for the RCC. Now that most mainline and state Protestant churches have walked away from God and the Reformation thay no longer have a reason to exist except as a way to maintian tradition, deliver communion and confer status on their members as belonging to a church that their family has belonged to for generations. The mainline Protestants here in the the US are already behaving the exact same way the RCC does here in the US, such as:

1. Queer clergy
2. Entrenched liberalism (social justice)
3. Enabling the Mexivasion (Lutherans in America)
4. Loyalty to the Democratic party
5. Weekly communion
6. Giving weekly communion to MP reprobates the way the RCC gives communion to Ted Kennedy

Now on to my evidence that the state churches and the MPs are reaching back to the Vatican:

1. The Archibishop of Cantebury has befriended the Roman church and if you look at his bibliography on wikipedia you will find he has written the following books:

a. The Dwelling of the Light—Praying with Icons of Christ
b. Ponder These Things: Praying With Icons of the Virgin
c. Essays Catholic and Radical

Any minister that writes a how-to book on worshipping Pagan idols of wood and stone, has no relationship to God, or Reality. If the head of the CoE has walked away from God, then so has his church, which therefore serves no purpose. If the CoE serves no purpose, then those members who want communion will go back to Rome to find it.

2. The Orthodox churches of Europe are beginning to return, beginning with allowing each other to receive communion at each other's churches. The next step is forming common national dioceses.

3. Here in America most of the mainline churches and many of the Protestant churches are part of

ecumenical organizations, most of which have the RCC as a member. As I stated earlier with the CoE,

as these churches rot further, the conservative members will join the RCC, usually the Latin Mass division, the others will be in communion with the mainstream, liberal wing. The Rcc belong to Christian Churches Together

In addition the United Methodist Church sees itself as part of the Holy Catholic Church. wiki

The Joint Document on Justification (wiki) was a joint document issued by the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation. The document was also
adopted by the World Methodist Council.

I've read a lot of comments today about homosexuality and gay marriage and wanted those of you who think that we social conservatives are winning to see the future that our children are living in.

The long term goal of our media and the homosexualists is make every man in America gay the way they mainstreamed girls kissing at parties, and later Ellen. Now these same social degenerates are doing the same thing with boys and men kissing.

Look at these pages I found by googling "emo boys kissing":

one two three four

If you, my gentle reader, take the time to click on any of these posts you will see young boys of high school age kissing each other in public and at parties the same way girls were kissing each other at parties just ten years ago.

The media and schools of America are actively working to destroy this country.

Demographics of the 2008 election

Religious breakdown of voters using polls in the weeks leading up to the election:

Obama-McCain
74-22 Jews link

50-28 Atheists & Agnostics link

50-34 Latino Protestants PDF
In 2004 Bush carried 63% of the Latino Protestant
vote, this a major reversion to the mean

49-41 White Catholics link

49-45 Mainline Protestants link

25-68 Evangelicals link link

The Barna Research Group did its' own polling defining Evangelical in strict terms, instead of allowing respondents to self-identify. The BRG poll results are somewhat different from other poll data and are thus noted but not included in the data. link link

The tables below are from a blogpost on Steve Sailer's iSteve blog.
Votes by race:

---------------------Obama------McCain-------Other

White (75%)	43%	55%	2%
African-American (13%)	96%	4%	N/A
Latino (8%)	67%	31%	2%
Asian (2%)	63%	33%	4%
Other (3%)	66%	31%	3%

A Republican can't win with just 55% of the white vote. Bush got 58% in 2004 and won, but only 54% and lost the popular vote in 2000. And the bar keeps inching up every four years.

And here's the famous Gender Gap, which CNN lists first out of all demographic measures:

Vote by Sex
---------------------Obama------McCain-------Other

Male (47%)	49%	49%	2%
Female (53%)	55%	43%	2%

And here's the not so famous Marriage Gap:

Vote by Marital Status

---------------------Obama------McCain-------Other

Married (66%)	46%	52%	2%
Unmarried (34%)	65%	33%	2%

So, Obama did only six points better among women than among men, but he did 19 points better among singles than among marrieds.