Category Archives: Rush

Sunday Comics for March 25, 2012

Posted on by
1

Comics from the week…

I love this one because we learned from Mark Steyn how many of the attacks Obama made against Conservatives, like being members of the flat-earth society, were all fables in reality. Obama had the crowd laughing, but Steyn got the last laugh showing that in every one of Obama’s yuk yuk’s, the president was wrong. Obama’s jokes were junior high at best. For being the smartest man to ever be the president, he’s not very smart.

I’m still working on understanding Ryan’s plan… but from the gist of it, I can tell the Democrats hate it.

In other words, it is OK to call a woman a slut as long as you are donating to Obama and the DNC. But if you are on the right and you point out the sinful behavior of grad-students attending elite private colleges gone wild, that’s beyond the pale.

I liked what Rush Limbaugh had to say about this flip-flop by the Obstacle in Chief: “He’s gone from being an atheist to the pope when comes to an energy policy.” Obama has stood in the way of oil production at every opportunity. Now that he is sinking in the polls, he finally decides to be pro Big Oil.

Rush Is the Winner!

Posted on by
Reply

American Spectator has an article by Jeffrey Lord this morning stating that Rush Limbaugh is the true winner of the 2010 elections. Shortly after the coronation of Obama, Rush stood up against the anointed one and simply said that he hoped Obama failed as president. He said this because he knew, like many of us, that Obama was going to move the country in a socialist direction. If you will look around the world at the socialist countries, you will find that every time socialism is tried, it fails. Many countries, including Canada and Germany, are now trying to move away from socialism. It doesn’t work.

As Margaret Thatcher once said, “Socialism works until you run out of other people’s money.” There in lies the heart of the problem. Socialism is based upon the government running everything by taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. This doesn’t produce good results. What it means is that the rich, who are necessary for any healthy economy, quit investing in business. This hurts the economy, hurts the middle class and hurts the poor. I know the socialists is always set on saying that he is trying to help the poor, but his actions never do. They only hurt the poor by making them poorer.

The best thing for government to do is get out of the way and let the rich invest. Yes, they will get richer, and invest more, and get richer, and invest more. All the while, they are employing more people, and spending more money in the economy. The more the rich spend, the more the middle class and lower class can make ends meet. Remove that investment incentive, and it only hurts the middle class and the poor. It never truly hurts the rich, or the bozos who put forth their socialist ideas. They too always seem to be insulated from their failed programs.

But the reality is that we need the rich. We need them to invest and buy and spend and invest some more. Are they greedy? You bet. Some of them are. There are also those who are not greedy. Whether they are or not is between them and God, not them and the government. Because the government, politicians like Obama, are also greedy. So if they stand on high and condemn the rich for being greedy, let them dump that first stone on their own heads.

Please know that I am not saying that greed is good. It’s a sin and is never good. But God can still use a person’s greed to help His people live their lives. When I was in seminary, I worked for a man that was worth millions. Was he greedy? Don’t know. I do know that he was very generous with his money, and that he employed upwards of 50 people at one time.

He also provided the best health-care insurance I have ever had and the best benefits. Why? Because he wanted us to produce more so that he could make more money. In the process, this rich man provided for 50 families. There were 50 families who lived, and had good homes and good health care because this man was rich and worked at getting richer. That is how it works. Had Obama had his way, the government would have taxed the man more, taxed all our health care and guess what, a bunch of us would have been laid off, including me. That is how Obama’s socialism works. Would the man have been any less rich? Not at all. He would have been fine, but would have invested less and had fewer employees. All this to say that socialism doesn’t work and Rush Limbaugh was brave enough to point this out shortly after Obama was coronated. For this, Rush deserves kudos today because he was willing to tell us the king had no clothes.

Here are few words from American Spectator:

“I hope he fails.”

With those famous four words, uttered January 16, 2009 — only days before Barack Obama was to be inaugurated — Rush Limbaugh drew a line in the sand.

And as a result, this morning it is Rush Limbaugh who is the undisputed winner of the 2010 election. The White House is repudiated. The Pelosi-run House of Representatives, supported by the Democrats’ Congressional Campaign Committee, also deliberately targeted Limbaugh. Speaker Pelosi is, abruptly, now history. The Senate is richer by a still-undetermined number of conservatives as this goes to Internet press.

You might even call last night’s landslide results a “Rushslide.”

BTW, for those of you who want to criticize me for listening to Rush Limbaugh, and use your liberal Shibboleth, maybe you should be a bit more open minded and actually listen to him for six months instead of snickering as if you somehow are more enlightened because you don’t listen to him. I know all you moderate Republicans are actually embarrassed when Rush comes up. But that is because he has labeled the moderate for what it is: worthless. Quit being moderates an actually stand up for something. Remember the book listing all the great moderates in history only has one page it it, and it’s blank.

Rush Limbaugh Points Out the Obvious: God Has Designed the Planet to Take Care of Itself

Posted on by
1

I love it when the obvious becomes obvious. For years, we have been told that oil, a natural product of the planet earth, was some sort of foreign substance that if it ever got into the ocean or on the earth, that it would destroy everything. Yet, the dirty little secret is that oil is not a foreign substance, and the earth is designed in such a way to take care of it when it is dispersed into the sea.

We are seeing this with the BP oil spill. It’s so bad, so destructive, they can no longer find the oil. The reason: the earth is designed by God to take care of the oil. I can’t say this enough. Oil is part of the earth. It is not the evil substance the environmental wackos on the left would have you believe. It is natural. And since this is true, the earth and sea water break it down. Yes, the oil spill was a problem and we need to clean up what we can. But what we cannot clean up, the earth will take care of the rest.

Here is what Rush said:

They can’t find the oil.  ABC News: “BP Oil Spill: Clean-Up Crews Can’t Find Crude in the Gulf — As Size of Slick Shrinks, Experts Say Oil is Breaking Up, Staying Below Surface.” Once again, I, El Rushbo, was right. You remember how hated I was when I made this statement on May 3rd?  I was insincere and I was unfeeling and I had no compassion.  “Oh, yeah. It’s just going to break up.”  Now all of a sudden I am being validated.  “For 86 days, oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico from BP’s damaged well … BP and the federal government have amassed an army to clean the oil up, but there’s one problem — they’re having trouble finding it. At its peak last month, the oil slick was the size of Kansas, but it has been rapidly shrinking, now down to the size of New Hampshire,” and it’s not even that big.

If the Gulf of Mexico is, let’s say, the Superdome and you fill the Superdome with water, the amount of oil in the Superdome is equal to a 24-ounce can of beer.  It’s infinitesimal, and it is being dissipated.  Everything I said here is true.  Oil seeps from the sea floor all over the earth and into the ocean every day.  It never surfaces.  It gets eaten alive; it gets broken down.  In fact, at the end of this ABC piece: “‘(It’s) Mother Nature doing her job,’ said Ed Overton, a professor of environmental studies at Louisiana State University.” Whoa, whoa, whoa! “Mother Nature doing her job”?  Who’s Mother Nature?  Mother Nature is doing her job?  Why doesn’t anybody ever say, “Yeah, Mother Nature is going to take care of this global warming stuff”? Mother Nature is being defeated by human beings in global warming but all of a sudden they can’t find the oil, and Mother Nature is doing just fine. Just fine.

I love it that Rush brings it back to the reason why the oil spill is being dissipated.

Okay, so they can’t find the oil.  They’re out there looking for the oil, they can’t find the oil.  They are reopening areas of the Gulf to fishing.  They aren’t gonna need $20 billion to pay people back for damages and yet they have swindled BP outta $20 billion.  The ex-CEO, Tony Hayward, who’s actually been sent to Siberia, I mean literally sent to Siberia, a BP Russian oil project, may as well be Siberia, said early on, “The ecological damage is going to be minimal here.”  He’s dead right and you pay a penalty in this country for being dead right.  You are hated, and you are despised, and you become a target.  So now BP has been swindled, shaken down for $20 billion for no reason.  There was no major destructive crisis.  The earth, Mother Nature — and to me, by the way, when I say Mother Nature’s taken care of it, who’s Mother Nature?  Mother Nature — listen to me on the left, listen to me on the left, Mother Nature, you know who it is?  God.  You spell it G-o-d. Mother Nature is God. Mother Nature is not a tree trunk.  Mother Nature is not some forest somewhere in the Amazon.  Mother Nature is the God of the Bible, the God of creation, and the God of creation taking care of all this despite our folly ’cause God loves us.

BTW, notice the picture above? We were told that the oil spill is the size of Kansas. Does that look like the size of Kansas to you? It doesn’t to me. It looks like the size of maybe Galveston island. That is hardly Kansas. This is what happens in the crisis-driven media. They try to tell us things we cannot verify for ourselves, except when NASA decides to release pictures of the spill from space. At that point, we can see for ourselves just how big the oil spill actually is. It’s not as bad as was reported. But that never brings in ratings.

Please don’t let Obama try to claim credit for this. If he does, know he is lying.

Rush Limbaugh is Winning!

Posted on by
6

I love this op-ed from the New York Times. (Did I just write that?) Zev Chafets is conferring the recent rebuke of Obamism in the primaries held so far to Limbaugh and his staunch efforts to bring about truly conservative candidates. As I posted below, the victories on Tuesday were not just a rebuke of the Washington establishment, but a demand for candidates that are conservative and still hold to that… er… thing we call the Constitution.

What Chafets is saying is that the victories are all centered on one man, Rush Limbaugh. Amen, and amen! If anyone deserves credit, besides all those who attended and supported the Tea Party movements, Rush is the man. He has tirelessly and relentlessly beat the Conservative drum. The MSM and the left have attacked him with every conceivable plot to try and bring him down, but he has pressed onward. For that, he does deserve credit and if we want to attribute the current and eventual demise of Obamism to anyone, it has to go to Rush.

Here are some of the things that Chafets has written, but I encourage you, to read the entire op-ed piece.

His strategy was simple. With Democrats controlling Congress, Mr. Limbaugh saw that there was no way to stop the president’s agenda. He dismissed the moderates’ notion that compromising with the president would make Republicans look good to independents. Instead he decreed that the Republicans must become the party of no, and force Democratic candidates — especially centrists — to go into 2010 with sole responsibility for the Obama program and the state of the economy. And that is what has happened.

Mr. Limbaugh was not just the architect of this plan, he was (and continues to be) its enforcer. Dissenters like Arlen Specter, whom Mr. Limbaugh disparaged as a “Republican in Name Only,” found themselves unelectable in the party primaries. Moderates like Michael Steele, the party chairman, were slapped down for suggesting cooperation with the administration. When Representative Phil Gingrey of Georgia had the temerity to suggest that Mr. Limbaugh was too uncompromising, he was met with public outrage and forced into an humiliating apology.

When the Tea Party movement emerged, Mr. Limbaugh welcomed it. The movement’s causes — fighting against health care reform, reducing the size and cost of government, opposing the Democrats’ putative desire to remake America in the image of European social democracies — were straight Limbaughism. A very high proportion of the Tea Partiers listen to Mr. Limbaugh. Sarah Palin’s biggest current applause line — Republicans are not just the party of no, but the party of hell no — came courtesy of Mr. Limbaugh. (Ms. Palin gave the keynote address at the first national Tea Party convention.) Glenn Beck, who is especially popular among Tea Partiers, calls Mr. Limbaugh his hero.

So why the lack of attention? Mr. Limbaugh has studiously refrained from claiming credit for the movement. His only intervention thus far has been to quash talk about the Tea Party becoming a third party. He wants a unified, right-wing G.O.P. in 2010, and by all appearances he is going to get it.

AS I said, read the rest of it and give thanks for men like Limbaugh, who keep conservatism at the forefront of the battle of ideas. BTW, it’s men like Limbaugh that the left really want to silence. The Left’s ideas are bankrupt, and Limbaugh defeats them every time with conservative ideology. If it didn’t, they would not try to bring back archaic ideas like the Fairness Doctrine, which does nothing more than silence debate all together.

Obama Won’t Golf with Rush Limbaugh

Posted on by
Reply

I love this. You may have heard of the story that Zev Chafets is writing a book about Rush Limbaugh, in which Chafets asked Democratic operatives if Obama would golf with Rush. The the Dems said, “Limbaugh can go play with himself.” This shows the White House lacks maturity. They are a bunch of bitter clingers… only clinging to their leftist agenda. Here is Limbaugh’s response to it.

Liberal Contempt and Texas History Books!!!

Posted on by
Reply
Liberal Contempt
I was reading a Rush Limbaugh’s site how one caller got through to their Senator and Congresswoman and how he was treated with utter contempt.  I think the basic problem these people have in Washington is that they are the ultimate en-titlists. They believe they should be treated as royalty, but they should be the ultimate servants. We are not sending these boneheads to Washington in order to make them kings. They are to be OUR servants. You can see this royalty problem especially on the left. To even question them brings out their ire, as if, “how dare we question the left and their motives!” Remember Joe the Plumber when he asked Obama about his intentions as president?
Here is the conversation from Rush’s show yesterday:
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Jim in Rapids City, South Dakota, you’re next on the EIB Network.  Hi.

CALLER:  Hey, Rush, I was able to get through to my Democrat Senator, Tim Johnson, yesterday, as well as our Democrat only congresswoman, Herseth Sandlin, and in both cases I was treated to a little contemptuous, young intern who’s basically talking from talking points and trying to school me as to what I should be saying and what I should be doing.  It was amazing.  And I’m an RN, I’m someone who’s been in the field and I was able to rebuff every one of their talking points.  One of the talking points from Johnson’s aide was, “It’s no different than buying car insurance.”  And I said, “Excuse me, I don’t have to buy a car, I’m being forced to buy health insurance if I move or change my position.”  And his point was, “Well, you know, that’s the way it is.”  And I said, “Tim Johnson bills himself as a moderate, fiscal conservative.  What is fiscally conservative about this health care, Obamacare?  I don’t understand it.”  And I raised this question as I left.  “We will boot both of these people out as being frauds.  They bill themselves as Blue Dog Democrat centrist fiscal conservatives.  There is nothing fiscally conservative or constitutional about what these people are doing.  They’ve tied their boat to this radical administration and I seriously have doubts.  This vote is taking them far, far to the left, and they’re afraid to do anything.  And I only say, hey, get some religion and jump ship and admit you’re wrong.”  And that was kind of where I left it.  But I was treated with such contempt.  And here I’m a guy who’s been in nursing –

RUSH:  Well, you know what?  I’m glad it happened to you because you’re looked at with contempt by these people every day, and you finally got to experience it firsthand.

CALLER:  We’re all going to experience it firsthand.  If we get treated to health care the way we get treated to the DMV and post office, wake up America, this is not –

RUSH:  America has awakened.

CALLER:  Well, I don’t know what to say. I’m at a loss for words because I’m so frustrated, Rush, and I’m sure you are, too, and you do a great job of maintaining your composure –

RUSH:  Well, yeah, we’re all frustrated, but I’m glad you had the experience.  By the way, I need to ask you a question.  Are you saying Ken or Tim Johnson?
`
CALLER:  Tim Johnson.  He’s the fellow who, sadly, had a stroke and –

RUSH:  Yeah, yeah.  You didn’t talk to him, right?

CALLER:  No, I talked to his aide.

RUSH:  Yeah, you talked to some intern who’s got talking points front of him, and if they’re still using this auto insurance argument, those are requirements from state to state to state.  It is not a federal government requirement.  If that’s what they’re using — and they’ve tried using that as an analogy for months on this now — it’s empty; it’s full of holes; it’s specious.  You’re right to have told this guy, “What you’re doing is unconstitutional.”  There is no allowance for the federal government to mandate that any citizen buy anything and then fine them and put them in jail if they don’t buy it, which is what this bill does along with many other disastrous things. 
I’m so mad about this that if someone said we should throw them out using force, I would be willing to support it. The left is totally ignoring the Constitution. To pass this bill without the votes in completely un-Constitutional. No, I don’t want to trust in the Supreme Court to overthrow this bill. I would rather see our state legislatures vote to remove us from the union, and start over with the same Constitution and punt D.C.
Texas Textbooks
BTW, did you see that the board of education in Texas voted to actually have history books that included men like John Calvin, Thomas Aquinas and even Jonathan Edwards. Edwards has been featured in the past. But we were only given his sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” and told that this was the warp and woof of the Puritan tradition, along with the Salem Witch Trials. Never were we given any view of he Puritans other than the fact that they were harsh on sinners, and were all unacceptable.
It wasn’t until I was in seminary that I actually began to read the Puritans. They truly have a lot of offer despite my former seminary professor’s claim: “I love the Puritans, but they have very little to offer to today’s culture.” That is a quote from Lanier Burns. Sadly, all I can say is that Burns has never read the Puritans if that is his assessment of them. Many of them wrote about Biblical truth. Biblical truth is relevant in all cultures because it is biblical truth. We do not make it relevant for our culture, it’s relevant because it’s God’s word.
I also never heard of Thomas Aquinas until I got to seminary. But then he only warranted a brief mention. Yet, his thought, from what I understand, helped form our government as well. It’s good to know that the people of Texas are fighting back against the liberal high jacking of our school systems. It has taken far too long, but I’m glad it has finally come to pass.
I liked what Chuck Norris had to add… 
Noah Webster, the “Father of American Scholarship and Education,” stated, “In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government, ought to be instructed. … No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.”

In 1789, during the same time when the First Amendment was written, then-President George Washington signed into law the Northwest Ordinance, which states, “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”

Does anyone not know what the term “forever” means? Can any member of the SBOE or any other state board of education be penalized for agreeing with America’s Founding Fathers?

Maybe we should require our students to actually read the Constitution, and pass tests concerning it’s content, along with what the framers wrote about it. I know I couldn’t pass a test on it right now, given our deficient educational system. But I guarantee, grade me on the curve with the rest of the citizens of our public education and I would score in the upper percentile. 
Norris closes out his article with the following:
My personal warning to educational tyranny and tyrants is this: It’s best not to test or mess with Texas. If you thought we fought hard for the Alamo, wait until you see what we can do for the right to educate our children. You can hide behind your No. 2 pencils, but our branding irons will find your tail sides.

Amen, and amen!

Go Colts!

Posted on by
Reply
Just for the record, I’m hoping the Colts dominate the Saints. Now, given my track record, and my wife’s constant reminder, the team I usually pull for, usually loses. That shows you my track record is dismal. I think that is why, in God’s providence, I’m an Aggie, and an Astros fan. As far as the NFL, my team were such losers they left the state of Texas and now reside in Nashville under an assumed identity. They are part of the NFL’s witness protection program. Some people call them the Titans, but given their track record in the Super Bowl, they are the Oilers in spirit and results.

I don’t have a lot vested in the Colts winning. I just like them more than the Saints. I don’t get into all that “who dat” garbage coming out of New Orleans. I know, in certain circles it’s trendy to say. But I’m not into trendy. Given that, and the fact that I like Peyton Manning, I am pulling for the Colts, 38-14, over the Saints. It will probably be much closer than that, but that’s my pick.

BTW, the Hutch, a friend of Rush Limbaugh’s that picks the winner every year on Rush’s show, picked the Colts to win, especially if the Colts defense shows up for the game. Read about it here.

Hubris-Laden Charlatans

Posted on by
Reply

That is what Thomas Sowell calls the president and his claim that the new health care proposal will not add a single dime to the deficit. Obama’s claim is a joke. This is what Sowell is pointing out, that really doesn’t need to be pointed out. Anyone who knows anything about how our government works, knows that there will be fraud, waste, and excessive prices because of the new legislation. There is no way around it. That is what the government does best.

Here is part of what Sowell writes:

To tell us, with a straight face, that he can insure millions more people without adding to the already skyrocketing deficit, is world-class chutzpa and an insult to anyone’s intelligence. To do so after an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office has already showed this to be impossible reveals the depths of moral bankruptcy behind the glittering words.

Culture of Corruption by Michelle Malkin FREE

Did we really need CBO experts to tell us that there is no free lunch? Some people probably did and the true believers in the Obama cult may still believe the President, instead of believing either common sense or budget experts.

Even those who can believe that Obama can conjure up the money through eliminating “waste, fraud and abuse” should ask themselves where he is going to conjure up the additional doctors, nurses, and hospitals needed to take care of millions more patients.

If he can’t pull off that miracle, then government-run medical care in the United States can be expected to produce what government-run medical care in Canada, Britain, and other countries has produced– delays of weeks or months to get many treatments, not to mention arbitrary rationing decisions by bureaucrats.

Obama can deny it in words but what matters are deeds– and no one’s words have been more repeatedly the direct opposite of his deeds– whether talking about how his election campaign would be financed, how he would not rush legislation through Congress, or how his administration was not going to go after CIA agents for their past efforts to extract information from captured terrorists.

Emphasis added. Obama words mean nothing. As Joe Wilson so elegantly put it on the floor of the chamber during O’s speach, “You lie!” And Wilson was right on the money. Obama is doing nothing but lying so that the government can take over our health care.

Hopefully, it will fail, and fail soon. We don’t need the lies of this administration. For more, here is what Rush had to say on the issue:

You want a summary of the lies? He lied about only 5% of Americans being forced to the public option. Not true. He lied about the money he would drain from Medicare. Not true what he said. He lied about end-of-life decisions which comes down to rationing. He lied about coverage for illegal aliens, on and on and on, having attacked and lied throughout this thing. He then claims he wants to work with Republicans with whom he has not met since April. He claims to be nonpartisan, above the fray. Now, Joe Wilson, congressman, South Carolina, this is what happened at one point during the speech last night.

OBAMA: There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This too is false. The reforms — (crowd rumbling) the reforms I am proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

WILSON: You lie! (crowd rumbling)

OBAMA: It’s not true.

RUSH: That’s Joe Wilson, a congressman from South Carolina, a freshman. That was a blatant lie. I’m going to tell you something. One of the things that’s really irritated me all morning and last night was listening to Republicans, even after Wilson has apologized, and I wish he had not, but he’s apologized and even after he’s apologized, members of his own party are all over television denigrating him, “It was bad decorum.” Folks, can I tell you what is happening here? This speech last night and this administration is not your average presidential administration. This is not a garden party. This is not a lecture at Harvard or any other University. We are in the process, we are in the midst of an administration that is trying to totally tear down the institutions and traditions that have made this country great. He is lying, President Obama is, from the moment he opens his mouth until he ends the speech. I was shouting, “You’re lying,” throughout the speech at the television. You’re lying! It’s a lie! Joe Wilson simply articulated what millions of Americans were saying. This is a beanbag.

I agree with Rush. I wish Wilson would have stuck to his guns. He was the only one speaking the truth that night.

Round Up!

Posted on by
Reply
Just a few things around the web worth looking at.

Rush Limbaugh – The first is part one and two of Sean Hannity’s interview with Rush Limbaugh. I challenge any liberal that comes to this page, I only know of one, to watch both videos in their entirety.

Part One

Part Two

Ann Coulter — Nails the left and their outcries about the death of late-term abortionist George Tiller. In her article, 49 million to 5, she writes the following:

So in a country that is more than 50 percent pro-life — and 80 percent opposed to the late-term abortions of the sort performed by Tiller — only five abortionists have been killed. And in a country that is less than 0.5 percent Muslim, several dozen Muslims have killed thousands of Americans.

But the killing of about one abortionist per decade leads liberals to condemn the entire pro-life movement as “domestic terrorists.” At least liberals have finally found some terrorists they’d like to send to Guantanamo.

Tiller bragged about performing 60,000 abortions, including abortions of viable babies, able to survive outside the mother’s womb. He made millions of dollars performing late-term abortions so gruesome that only two other abortionists — not a squeamish bunch — in the entire country would perform them.

Kansas law allows late-term abortions only to save the mother’s life or to prevent “irreversible physical damage” to the mother. But Tiller was more than happy to kill viable babies, provided the mothers: (1) forked over $5,000; and (2) mentioned “substantial and irreversible conditions,” which, in Tiller’s view, apparently included not being able to go to concerts or rodeos or being “temporarily depressed” on account of their pregnancies.

In return for blood money from Tiller’s profitable abattoir, Democrats ran a political protection racket for the late-term abortionist.

This is the point of the post where I don’t comment on what should have happened to Tiller. The unjust death he imposed on thousands and the death he suffered are not equal. His killer was far more gracious towards him, than he was towards the thousands of children he brutalized.

NOT that I’m for vigilantism, but alas… God’s will was done.

Nukes for Iran, but Not for Us — IBD had an excellent editorial on the irony of the administration’s policy to allow Iran to be nuked, but not us.

We prattle on about nuclear power being costly and nuclear waste being a danger without a safe place to store it even as we shut down Yucca Mountain, a perfectly safe place to store it. We place all sorts of regulatory and environmental impediments in its way.

Why is nuclear power a viable energy source for Iran but not for America?