Based on a recommendation from Justin I’m changing things up a little this week…we will return to my regularly scheduled format next week.

This week however I am asking that you do some math in addition to determining the country.

The following country is to the same scale that China was a few weeks ago. 1 inch = 780 miles.

Name the Country:


Now for the math:

Knowing the country, if I would have placed it on my blog my traditional way it would have been approximately 3.5 inches long. What would the scale for that map have been? Your accuracy should be to the tenth of a mile.

*****UPDATE******

I nearly forgot...last weeks country was....QATAR!

This week is tough...I give it a 12 out of 10.

Just a few weeks ago it was reported (and justifiably downplayed) that there had been an error in reporting of hottest years on record. At the time it had been reported that 1998 was the hottest followed by 2006. Well an enterprising man (Steve McIntyre) pointed out that the numbers were incorrect and that NASA had made an error. This error put 1934 as the hottest on record followed by 1998, 1921, 2006, and 1931 respectively.

Well just to make sure that that correction has been properly buried the Science Reporter from the AP, Randolph Schmid, ignores the recent data and still reports on an article published by NOAA that ignores the correction and tries to sell the average temperature of 2006 and 1998 as being caused by man.

So I guess that if they ran the same simulations for 1934, 1921, and 1931 they would find that man caused those temperature increases too, right?

I’m not quite sure which spouse will be sleeping on the couch but I’m quite sure that they are not speaking to each other much right now!!!

From The Smoking Gun: Honey, You're Under Arrest

Nevada sheriff's deputy busts his wife (also a cop!) for DUI

You can tell you are a political geek when you look at James Carville and Carl Rove and think that they are pretty cool.

Did anyone catch Rove on either Rush or on Meet the Press?

What did you think of his analysis of Hilary?

Personally I think Rove did what Rove does best…points out the flaws of the opposition in a public setting. This then sets the opposition into a quandary. Do they correct the flaw and thereby admit that it was truly a flaw or do they ignore the flaw and allow the other side to take advantage of the issue?

Rove is genius when it comes to this tactic. Hilary has to now either defend herself against what Rove exposed is her weakness – Health Care – or simply ignore the attack and hope that the Republican contenders don’t beat her up with the topic.

Simply inspired!

H/T to Fred at Real Debate for this one.

Do you see anything wrong with this photo and caption?

Here is the photo:

Here is the caption:

An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house following an early coalition forces raid in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City. At least 175 people were slaughtered on Tuesday and more than 200 wounded when four suicide truck bombs targeted people from an ancient religious sect in northern Iraq, officials said.

Let me give you a small hint…The modern military has a tendency of shooting ammunition not throwing it!!!

From The Washington Times Editorial:

The hottest year: 1934?

It was never supposed to be a trick question. Which year is the hottest on record?Depending where one looks, there are three different answers: 2006, 1998 or 1934. Until last week, the answer was supposed to be 2006, but it might have been 1998. Now, citing corrections of faulty data, NASA says it was actually 1934. The National Climactic Data Center disagrees; it still says 1998.

The differences are a matter of tenths of a degree Celsius, which might seem to diminish the significance of the corrections. Except that unusually warm years in the 1920s, 1930s and 1950s are themselves only a few tenths of a degree Celsius away from the purportedly dangerous hot temperatures of the present. Only one thing is certain: The political debate over global warming has rushed far ahead of the science.

Here's what we know: The National Climatic Data Center reported in mid-January that 2006 was the hottest year on record. Then, in May, it revised the numbers, concluding that 1998, in fact, was the hottest on record. NASA's old numbers echoed that last contention. But last week, it emerged that NASA had quietly restated its numbers, without fanfare or so much as a press release, after a blogger pointed out faulty methodology. Now, per NASA: 1934 is hottest, followed by 1998, 1921, 2006 and 1931.

The media coverage amid this confusion has been execrable. Last week's Newsweek purports to take readers inside the world of "Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine" without mentioning that the global-warming alarmists are even better funded, in some cases with government support. Naturally, Newsweek is not very interested in the recent data restatement.

Here's another hysteric, The Washington Post, in January: "Last year was the warmest in the continental United States in the past 112 years," read its front-page story, "capping a nine-year warming streak 'unprecedented in the historical record' that was driven in part by the burning of fossil fuels, the government reported yesterday." Funny, but we thought "unprecedented" would require an absence of, well, precedents, such as the 1920s and 1930s. These years were similarly warm decades, like the present.

Alas, when the source of data that prompted this story, the National Climatic Data Center, adjusted its numbers in May, The Post did not correct its shrieking January story. Nor has The Post yet bothered to report NASA's latest data restatement. Instead, on Friday, we get: "Did Global Warming Cause NYC Tornado?"

If we cannot get through 2007 without a data restatement so fundamental that it dethrones the "hottest year on record," we should not keep hearing angry intonations that "The debate is over." The debate is not over — not if such basic climate data is so disputed.

This is a question that comes up every year when we do the State GOP Resolutions. My answer is ultimately yes they matter a great deal.

Resolutions are the current thoughts of the party. They are a road map for our elected officials to follow based on what we as grass root members would like to see. When you compare the resolutions of both parties you will see the differences.

Kay at Blue Racine was kind enough to supply the link to the Wisconsin Democrat’s 2007 Resolutions that were passed at this year’s state convention.

Now for those of you that know me I just love this type of stuff. I read every one of their resolutions and I believe I will be spending a great deal of time going through them and comparing them to the GOP resolutions.

I think that it is important for people to understand that while the Democrats talk about helping all they really want to do is tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend. (You’ll think that is funny once you read resolution 07-FA-07)

Since I want to analyze the resolutions lets start with the most obvious: repeats. The Democrats have a total of 46 resolutions (10 of which were proposed from the floor); there are 2 resolutions on global warming; 2 resolutions on ending the war in Iraq; 6 resolutions to impeach the President and/or Vice President; 2 resolutions to repeal the USA PATRIOT Act; 4 resolutions on Campaign Financing; 6 resolutions claiming support for “universal health care.”

The GOP had zero repeat resolutions. (link)

From the looks of things the Dems just got lazy. They decided that the work needed to review all of the redundancy in the multiple resolutions was just too much and that it was easier to just pass them all. Unfortunately for them if an undecided voter were to read through this (like that would happen for either of the parties resolutions!) they would quickly come to the conclusion that these people have nothing to offer but the beat of the drum.

Last quick note on this will be to look at the number of Democrat resolutions that require taxes to be increased…nearly 50% of them are tax increase resolutions! Remind your friends and family the next time they mention their tax bills!!

I’m sure some of you are waiting for this week’s math problem…well you are going to have to wait until I get an answer to last week’s problem.

Solve for x, y, and z:

3y + 9 = -3x/2

2x – y – 3z = -17

6z – 8x + 4 = 32


I’ll help you a bit:

For one of the equations you will solve for z.
For another equation you will solve for y.
In the last equation you will use substitution.

I have to say that I am not too surprised that the following people are out --

CNN.com: GOP hopeful Tommy Thompson abandons presidential bid

Tommy is a down home folksy type of guy…someone you might like to hang out with around the backyard keg…not really the guy you’d want in the White House! I wish Tommy all the best and still hope that maybe we can convince him to run against Russ Feingold….now that would be a race worth watching!!!!

AP: Karl Rove to resign at end of August

While Mr. Rove is considered “the architect” he has also been a lightning rod. Democrats have made Rove the most hated man in the GOP and I have great respect for the guy because he has not let that disrupt his ultimate job…getting Republicans elected. Unfortunately Republicans and Conservatives don’t see eye to eye on everything as was made abundantly clear in 2006.

Mr. Rove has done his part and now he can sit back and wait for the next big fish. Unfortunately for Mr. Rove the Democrats will see him coming from miles away this time.

Good luck Tommy and Karl.

Just when we were beginning to think that space was going to be the new frontier.

8/2/07
CBC: Russia plants flag staking claim to Arctic Region

8/9/07
BBC: Canada PM asserts Arctic claims

8/10/07
AP: Denmark maps Arctic Region in claims race

I wonder where the US is in all this mess. Where is our claim to the Arctic? Are we going to allow all these other countries quibble over the region and not get our share? Is this just a shameful ploy by the Russians to create an issue where none exists?

And in case you miss the old space race…China is coming on strong. They first launched a man into space in late 2005 and are setting sites on their first space walk in 2008. Today China has a new claim…

Reuters: China to map "every inch" of moon surface: report

My wife and I attended the State Fair yesterday and had the opportunity to look at both the Democrat and the Republican booths and we noted a couple of unique items related to the straw polls offered by both parties.

First off the Republicans were using the straw poll as a mini fundraiser asking for participants to contribute a quarter for their vote. No one was turned away if they didn’t have a quarter but it was a great idea. We did not note anything like this at the Democrat booth.

The second thing that jumped out at us, and the most startling, was the way the poll was being conducted. Republicans used solid containers to conceal how others had voted, while the Democrat’s used see through containers that exposed the vote for everyone to see. Now this might not seem that strange but when you consider that human nature is to side with a winner the Democrat poll is going to be slanted.

What do you think…should we know how the majority is voting before we vote?

If I hear one more liberal jump on the band wagon trying to pin the terrible event that occurred last week in Minnesota on Republicans I’m going to really hurt someone!

Here are the facts that most liberals don’t want to face:

• In our $2.7 tillion Federal Budget we spend only 1.7% on Highways and Mass Transit
• We spend 20.5% on Social Security – in case you were wondering that would be an entitlement program!
• 12.7% on Medicare – or in other words socialized healthcare for the retired
• 7.1% on Medicaid – or socialized healthcare for the poor

I was on another site today and I noticed that there are still a lot of people out there that would love to see term limits placed on Congressman. This is an issue that is debated as a resolution every year for the GOP.

I for one believe that there are term limits in place already…they are called elections. Every 2 years for your Representative and every 6 years for our Senators we have to head to the polling place to cast our votes for these people. If you believe that the elected official is a bum then you really have to work hard to oust that person from their seat. It can be done. Incumbency is not a guarantee for reelection but it is definitely an advantage.

Placing term limits on legislators I believe is redundant. They are one of many, meaning that their vote does not count more just because they have been there for 2 dozen years. A Freshman Senator’s vote counts as 1 out of 100 just like Ted Kennedy’s.

Arguments for Executive offices’ can be made and I usually agree with those.

In a time when it is hard to find good Congressman why would we want to put in place a system that would only ensure that there is fresh blood in the seat every so many years versus ensuring that we vote for and elect good quality candidates.