Better Banter

Catching upon some of James Delingpole's work for The Telegraph in which he notes the industrial blight that is about to be unnecessarily perpetrated upon the people of Wales in the form of wind turbines. Beautiful countryside will become disfigured, for the purpose of gaining an unreliable energy source. When you think of how many people live on an island as small as the U.K, it's remarkable such tracts of virtually unmolested land exist at all. But they do, and we'll mar them in the name of being green. Of course, the irony of this is that we can't drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge because if it's "pristine-ness." That the actual area where oil will be extracted is possibly the ugliest natural place on planet earth, that no human being would ever willingly venture there were it not for oil, that the entire industrial footprint would be the size of a medium-sized airport seem not to matter to these zealots who seem to think that  all

Well it's 2011. That means it's time to start seriously talking about 2012, no? Jay Nordlinger at National Review makes a good case for John Bolton. I can't say I can disagree with anything about the man; I do question his electability. Still, why not latch onto this guy during primary season instead of anybody else? When Palin and Huckabee are mentioned as possible strong candidates, I shudder. Probably because I believe it. I read something interesting the other day about the two strains of candidates emerging in the Republican primary season: ideological and managerial. Palin heads up the ideological wing and thus has huge Tea Party support. Romney heads the managerial wing and gets more traditional (and RINO) support. The managerial type is going to be more apt to get crossover milquetoast votes... those same voters that switch back and forth depending upon which way the wind is blowing. However, I think the ideological side can attract votes too, if it's positione