Dan Hannon warns the EU, they are behaving badly but what he says could easily be applied to life here in the United States under Obama.
Hat Tip OpenMarket.org
(209): I just smoked a bowl alone...
34 minutes ago
The Holocene Warming a (11,600-8,500bp). The Egyptian Cooling (8,500-8,000bp). The Holocene Warming b (8,000-5,600bp). The Akkadian Cooling (5,600-3,500AD). The Minoan Warming (3,500-3,200bp). The Bronze Age Cooling (3,200-2,500bp). The Roman Warming (500BC-535AD). The Dark Ages (535-900AD). The Medieval Warming (900AD-1300 AD). The Little Ice Age (1300AD-1850AD). Recall that the Greeks survived the warmings without air-conditioners. "History," writes Plimer, "cannot be rewritten just because it does not fit a computer model with a pre-ordained conclusion."Nice.
We‘re not the "special generation," and we don't have special powers to control the earth's temperature through special one-world government plans and cap-and-trade tax scams. Indeed, the ancients, from the Egyptians to the Greeks, these "enlightened pagans," as I call them, were far more level-headed than today's tree-first Democrats.
There are many reasons why civilisations rise and fall, and in my view, thousands of stories to be told. But let's be real because certain patterns stand out more than others, from droughts and floods, to broken sexual norms and dangerously low-birth rates.
Back to the ancient Greeks though: "Greek mythology makes reference to deforestation, flooding, siltation of irrigation channels, salination and the collapse of the Sumerian city-states. Written records dating back 5000 years ago describe declining crop yields and decreasing production of wheat relative to the most salt-tolerant barley. Patches of soil turned white, suggesting salt accumulation on the surface of agricultural lands. The drier conditions made it impossible to flush salt from fields."
To my way of thinking, history undermines bad science and supports good science. Again, the Woodstock generation's thirst for specialness is way beyond narcissism.
Politics today is very similar to Hollywood. We have a President known more for his wife’s fashion and his great speeches than any policy achievements. After all, do you call someone lost without their script (i.e. teleprompter) anything but an actor? It’s all style and no substance. People pick politicians like they pick movies, based on the short version, the “trailer,” and not on the substance of the actual individual. It’s an emotional decision, based on immediate needs and not on actual principles.As always, the whole thing is worth a read.
And this, my friends, is where the conservative movement has lost the battle. Poll after poll indicates that the American public likes President Obama, but are against every single one of his actions and policies. On a broader scope, they actually are against the very tenants of the liberal agenda. The people love the trailer and the poster, but the movie itself gets two “big thumbs down.”
The Democrats pulled a great maneuver. They sold everyone a bunch of tired, old, ideas that we know won’t work as “Hope and Change.” They inflated their box office to make it seem like they had the number one film in the country. They created the “must see” movie event of the year, despite the fact that their production is lamer than the last installment of the “Police Academy” franchise.
Nonetheless, it has become an article of faith among many greens that the global poor are happier with less and must be shielded from the horrors of overconsumption and economic development--never mind the realities of infant mortality, treatable disease, short life expectancies, and grinding agrarian poverty. The convenient and ancient view among elites that the poor are actually spiritually rich, and the exaggeration of insignificant gestures like recycling and buying new lightbulbs, are both motivated by the cognitive dissonance created by simultaneously believing that not all seven billion humans on earth can "live like we live" and, consciously or unconsciously, knowing that we are unwilling to give up our high standard of living. This is the split "between what you think and what you do" to which Pollan refers, and it should, perhaps, come as no surprise that so many educated liberals, living at the upper end of a social hierarchy that was becoming ever more stratified, should find the remedies that Pollan and Beavan offer so compelling. But, while planting a backyard garden may help heal the eco-anxieties of affluent greens, it will do little to heal the planet or resolve the larger social contradictions that it purports to address.Read the whole thing because the rare sight of liberals actually telling the truth about themselves for once is a wonderful and special moment we all should share.
As the House of Representatives girds to debate the Waxman-Markey energy and global warming bill, no one seems to be asking the most important question: Just what is it for? Any honest look at the bill would show that it cannot be about reducing global temperatures, so President Obama and Congressional Democrats must be putting so much effort into it for other reasons.He ends with a plausible answer.
In all, it seems very likely that Waxman-Markey’s “cap and trade” scheme is not about cooling the planet, but about creating a new income stream for government to pay for a completely unrelated and vastly expensive new entitlement.I urge you to read the whole thing.
Tyler Cowan has a mystifying post over at Marginal Revolution about global warming. He seems to believe that climate skeptics have it in for the developing world. Nothing could be farther from the truth. One of the main reasons I and my colleagues oppose "aggressive action" on global warming is because it misallocates resources so badly that it actively harms the developing world, and locks them in poverty by ruling out their fastest route out of the state. Here, for instance, is Indur Goklany on the subject:The world can best combat climate change and advance well-being, particularly of the world's most vulnerable populations, by reducing present-day vulnerabilities to climate-sensitive problems that could be exacerbated by climate change rather than through overly aggressive GHG reductions.(Emphasis added.) The fact is that international development is the best way to combat global warming. Or do we really want to reduce the rest of the world to the level of Haiti and Somalia? I submit that that amounts to "aggression by alarmism."
I note also that Tyler isn't getting an answer to his question about what the Waxman-Markey Bill is actually supposed to acheive in terms of climate. That's because, as Chip Knappenberger has shown, using the U.N.'s own models, it achieves virtually nothing by itself, but at great cost. It represents, therefore, a hostage to fortune, or, should I say, to China.
You will not see this heart-stopping photo on the front page of the NY Times, nor on the lead story of the major news networks. The protestors at Montebello High School took the American flag off the school's flag pole and hung it upside down while putting up the Mexican flag over it. (*See pictures below*)
Other Western intelligence services regard the Obama administration with contempt and rising concern, an officer of the DGSE, France's military intelligence agency, told my friend Jack Wheeler (the real life Indiana
Jones) last week.
"All of us in our little community are worried -- us, our friends in Berlin, London, Tel Aviv," the DGSE officer told Jack. "It is not like the barbarians at the gates. It is every barbarian horde in the world being told there are no gates."
And now, let us praise (and continue to praise) those extraordinary grassroots civilians who organized yesterday’s rally in Times Square against Radical Islam and those 300-500 people who came and stood in the driving rain to listen to the words of Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and Christians, direct and indirect victims of Islamic terrorism, enslavement, and persecution, who came together to stand against a common global enemy.Read all about this virtually unreported event in Times Square here.
But the bottom line here is that Obama demonstrated very poor judgment in using Geithner for this particular attack. I don’t know why he did this.
Last but not least, the President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people’s money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous. Yet, somehow I don’t think the hedge funds will be following ACORN’s lead and trucking in a bunch of paid professional protestors soon. Hedge funds really need a community organizer.Now read the whole thing here.
Business Insider reports that more than one Chrysler senior creditor has corroborated Thomas Lauria’s allegation that the Obama administration threatened them with public attacks if they didn’t surrender their contractual rights. One of their sources says that the Obama team comprises some of the worst “ends justify the means” people he’s ever encountered (via HA reader Geoff A)
I have been remiss in posting this, but here is CEI president Fred Smith's remembrance of Jack Kemp. CEI doesn't go in much for recruiting distinguished fellows from the ranks of Congress or administrations, but we made an exception for him.
The president called Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee in for a little chat this morning about the "cap-and-trade" energy tax. The so-called moderates on the committee appear to have caved already, getting a couple of tiny concessions on other items in the bill. So it looks like they'll vote the bill out of committee, despite the extra energy costs of $2000 or more it will impose on their constituents. Of course, the Senate doesn't look like it will make any moves on increasing energy prices this year, so the question has to be asked why the president was willing to spend political capital on this. The answer is probably that the cap-and-trade tax is actually a vital part of the president's healthcare plan, in that it will provide the revenues to pay for the plan. So it is important to get that principle established now. The next step comes with the Blue Dogs and other energy-state Democrats. It will be interesting to see how close to the fire the president holds their feet.
I am bemused by the idea that freedom and order are somehow at odds with each other. The whole history of Anglo-American conservative thought is about what we call "ordered liberty." The concept pervades Burke's writings, for instance. Today, I am unaware of many libertarians who despise the Rule of Law, and the idea of them as longing for some lawless state of nature replacing all traditional government is a mere caricature. In some ways, the current calls from certain parties on the Right to reject the central importance of liberty is a reversion to pre-enlightenment days, when liberty was thought of as a Bad Thing because of its role in the fall of Athens and Republican Rome. Those who need a refresher course in what ordered liberty means could do no better than start with John O'Sullivan's Hillsdale College lecture on the subject. If they remain unconvinced, perhaps they should call themselves what they really are — Tories.
In a tremendous achievement for personal liberty and mobility, the Indian micro-car, the Tata Nano, has sold 200,000 units in just eight weeks. As these cars will be replacing the "informal car," hand-built from whatever mechanical parts a poor Indian can lay his hands on, I expect Ralph Nader will be celebrating the massive increase in safety involved. As for our friends in the environmental movement, what will they think? "On your bike," I should imagine.
Atlas Frowned [John Derbyshire]
A friend in the hedge fund biz sent me this on Friday. I didn't get the chance to read it on Alan Colmes' show. Identifying information removed.
Hey John — Would you like a sound bite from one of those evil hedge fund guys for Colmes' show tonight? How's this: "As a professional investor I'd have to be out of my skull to partner with this government on anything."
This administration has made it quite clear that they can't be relied upon to honor contracts or legal precedents and if I can't know what the rules are before the game starts then I'm not going to play. Hedge funds aren't like the banks … we haven't failed. We aren't beholden to the taxpayer to make our way. We have contractual and fiduciary obligation which we will honor. People pay us to make them money not to meet a political goal. So Obama had better think long and hard before he tries to bully us like he did the banks, or try to tell us that "he's the only thing between us and the pitchforks."
Also, Geithner and Obama have been saying that they plan on balancing the budget once the crisis is past. The press may believe that twaddle about how he'll do it by "making things more efficient," but we in the hedge fund industry aren't so stupid. We've looked at the numbers and know what he's planning to do. I know dozens of people who are already putting the legal structures in place to move their companies and themselves offshore and away from the grip of the tax man. These are some of the smartest most dynamic people in the world and they'll have no trouble staying ahead of the kids from the short bus over at the IRS.
So unless Obama wants to run out of "other people's money" a lot sooner than he expected, he had better keep some people around to pay the bills. And if he keeps demonizing the productive and saying that it's their responsibility to let him spend their money on the unproductive, then we'll all be gone. I'll be working my 14 hour days is Bahrain or Singapore, and Obama can go suck eggs. He needs the productive classes a lot more than the productive classes need him.
On the plus side, at least my [offspring] will be able to get a decent education.
No Greater Sacrifice [Marc Thiessen]I just made my donation, how about you?
I attended an amazing dinner Friday night for No Greater Sacrifice — a group that raises money to provide full college scholarships for the children of our fallen heroes in the war on terror. The guest of honor was Gen. David Petraeus, who received the 2nd annual NGS Freedom Award and gave a moving speech.
The wife of fallen Marine aviator Garrett Lawton spoke lovingly about her husband’s sacrifice. He flew combat missions in Iraq and was killed by an IED on a mission with a special forces unit in Heart province of Afghanistan. NGS is funding scholarships for the sons he left behind, Ryan and Caden, ages 5 and 6.
The father of Army Staff Sergeant Daniel “Sparky” Wagoner also spoke. After terrorists attacked Iraqis working at a radio and TV station in Diyala province, Daniel worked around the clock to rewire the station and get it working again so Iraqi journalists, Sunni and Shia, could broadcast a message of freedom, reconciliation, and democracy. He was killed by an IED. The Iraqi journalists he helped traveled to Washington to pay tribute to him, to thank America for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, and to thank the family he left behind for his sacrifice. It was one of the highlights of the evening. NGS is funding a full academic scholarship for Daniel’s 3-year-old daughter Diana. You can see a video about his story here.
In just the 14 months since its founding, NGS has raised half a million dollars in scholarship funds. And they have just launched a new campaign to ask 8 million Americans to give $10 each. If every American gives this small amount, NGS will be able to raise $80 million — enough to fund scholarships for every child of every warrior who gave his or her life in the war on terror.
This is about the best cause I have ever come across. NGS uncompromising in their support not only for our troops, but also for their mission. And they are making sure that every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine going into combat knows that, if the worst should happen, America has their back — and we will provide an education for their kids.
If you want to know more, go to the NGS website. And share it with a friend.
Obama is pressuring the some 20 "speculators" who are holding out to accept the crumbs that he's offering. But there is more here at stake than the money immediately involved. As George Schultze, managing member of Schultze Asset Management, a hedge fund, told The Wall Street Journal, "This is about contract and bankruptcy law, and upholding agreements -- which is important in the grand scheme of things."SNIP
More broadly, if lenders know that any deals they strike can be overturned by a president who, like Langella/Nixon, can do things that are otherwise illegal because he decides "they are in the interest of the nation," they'll raise the price they charge for their money -- and not only when lending to the government.
Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”Charming.