Walter Williams notes a disturbing proposal in California:

Quote:

---

Last December, President Bush signed an energy bill that will ban the sale of Edison's incandescent bulb, starting with the 100-watt bulb in 2012 and ending with the 40-watt bulb by 2014. You say, "Hey, Williams, what's wrong with saving energy, reducing our carbon footprint and stopping global warming?" Before you get too enthused over governmental energy-saving efforts, you might ponder what's down the road.

The California Energy Commission has recently proposed amendments(.pdf) to its standards for energy efficiency. These standards include a requirement that any new or modified heating or air conditioning system must include a programmable communicating thermostat (PCT) whose settings can be remotely controlled by government authorities. A thermostat czar, sitting in Sacramento, would be empowered to remotely reduce the heating or cooling of your house during what he deems as an "emergency event."

---

Did you catch that? The government controlling your thermostat? Won't happen here?

Quote:

---

You say, "Williams, you must be mad. All that would never happen." That's the same charge one might have made back in the '60s, when the anti-tobacco movement started, if someone predicted that the day would come when some cities, such as Calabasas, Calif. would outlaw smoking on public streets. Back in the '60s, had someone predicted that there'd be bans on restaurants serving foie gras; citations for driving without a seatbelt, that the government said would be unnecessary if cars had airbags; and school bans on kids having peanut butter sandwiches in their lunchbox, I'm sure people would have said that would never happen.

---

Are you OK with the government controlling your thermostat? Banning foie gras, transfats, smoking not only in pubic places but in homes, banning fireplaces? If you are fine with any of these please tell me why...

No, I'm certainly not happy about it; the problem began when people started turning moral issues into health issues and vice-versa.

I have 2 cords of fire wood stacked . They will have to pry my wood from my cold dead fingers.. . wait... that doesn't sound right.. . :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I have 2 cords of fire wood stacked . They will have to pry my wood from my cold dead fingers. ....................................... wait ...that doesn't sound right. ... :D

---

Um, no that sounds like an invitation, lol.

Bush and the band of bandits are at it again.

They will have to pry the french fries from my cold dead...

Nah, that's not right either.

Anyone here doubt why I am so strongly against gun control? THIS is fascism. We are seeing it take place here in our country. It is simply a matter of time before so many of the rights that we hold dear are taken away from us that life becomes untolerable, and we begin to rebel against it. And being Americans, used to these freedoms, liberties and rights, we WILL rebel. And when that happens, the government will wish to stop us... through any means necessary. That means we will have to be able to prevent them from doing so... through any means necessary. THAT is the reason that we have a Second Amendment: to prevent ourselves from losing our rights and liberties, and to fight against the forces of those who would take them from us if they could.

Put simply, without the 2nd Amendment, we have no way to defend the REST of the Constitution from those who would usurp it, both internal and external.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Bush and the band of bandits are at it again.

---

Oh, so Bush is behind the California Energy Commission's proposal to have the power to control your thermostat, banning foie gras, transfats, smoking, fireplaces? San Fran, the place that banned smoking, wants to ban fireplaces, offered same sex marriages, home of San Fran Nan - the place whose city supervisors called for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney - really has Bush pulling the strings?

That seems like a little much, honestly. I think people should be able to set their heat on whatever they want, after all, they are paying the bill, not the government.

And they day they outlaw my fireplace will be the day I move elsewhere, lol. I save so much money by using it instead of a furnace. I plant trees and have been since I was a little kid. I recycle, use low-flow toilets, and so on. So, I don't think burning some firewood is a crime for me.

I think part of being free is being free to make decisions that not everyone may like. As long as we aren't injuring another person or causing harm to them, then I think what you do is your business. I don't think the government needs to tell us what we can set our heat on. It's almost like whoever made this law thinks people are too dumb to do what they need to. I think people would respond better if it was a suggestion, not a mandatory thing. Maybe a tax break for people who use the controlled thermostat, or something. I'm not even saying I would support that.

What is that saying? "A man's (or woman's) home is his(her) castle." If you pay for the house or pay rent, then it is your business how you heat it or whether you smoke in it.

That's just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Put simply, without the 2nd Amendment, we have no way to defend the REST of the Constitution from those who would usurp it, both internal and external.

---

That's why I proposed Mike Adams for Attorney General. To please the left he has resolved "to help the cause of gun control in America by purchasing only one gun per month in 2008." :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Oh, so Bush is behind the California Energy Commission's proposal to have the power to control your thermostat, banning foie gras, transfats, smoking, fireplaces? San Fran, the place that banned smoking, wants to ban fireplaces, offered same sex marriages, home of San Fran Nan - the place whose city supervisors called for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney - really has Bush pulling the strings?

---

Last December, President Bush signed an energy bill that will ban the sale of Edison's incandescent bulb, starting with the 100-watt bulb in 2012 and ending with the 40-watt bulb by 2014.:)

But then I really meant it as a joke.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Last December, President Bush signed an energy bill that will ban the sale of Edison's incandescent bulb, starting with the 100-watt bulb in 2012 and ending with the 40-watt bulb by 2014.:)

But then I really meant it as a joke.:D

---

Well you know someone has to believe he really is behind it all ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peggyhill

I think part of being free is being free to make decisions that not everyone may like. As long as we aren't injuring another person or causing harm to them, then I think what you do is your business. I don't think the government needs to tell us what we can set our heat on. It's almost like whoever made this law thinks people are too dumb to do what they need to.

---

It hasn't passed yet, and I doubt if it does - but you never know. But I think you're right in that some of these people do think we aren't smart enough to take care of ourselves so government should. And some just think the rest of us are idiots for not seeing their superior point of view so it needs to be forced on us.

Quote:

---

I think people would respond better if it was a suggestion, not a mandatory thing. Maybe a tax break for people who use the controlled thermostat, or something. I'm not even saying I would support that.

---

People often do respond, especially when it affects their bottom line. Natural gas got so expensive I had to buy programmable thermostats to keep the bill manageable. Gasoline has gotten so expensive we do drive less. Even the most serious global warming skeptics and anti-environmentalists start to see the waste in tossing all those newspapers out, the need to conserve water, etc. But like Elliot said they're going to keep pushing until the people rebel...

Quote:

---

What is that saying? "A man's (or woman's) home is his(her) castle." If you pay for the house or pay rent, then it is your business how you heat it or whether you smoke in it.

That's just my opinion.

---

Amen, sister. :)