How many people will die in order to reduce world temperatures by possibly, maybe, something a lot less than 0.05 F? Commiserations to the people of the USA.
Obama said almost nothing about climate change in the 2012 election campaign. Ain’t that the way? He can’t persuade the people to take the medicine they don’t need. Congress won’t pass it, so he’s going around the voters entirely and doing it through EPA regulations.
Rothbard and Rucker look at the toll of Obama’s EPA plan to slash CO2 emissions by a pointless 30%:
- 224,000 more lost jobs every year (U.S. Chamber of Commerce figures).
- Cost to every American household $3,400 per year (U.S. Chamber of Commerce figures).
What’s the point of electing a congress if the President rules by executive order ?
“Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., went so far as to describe it as an unconstitutional power grab.”
— Jo
——————————————————
EPA’s next wave of job-killing CO2 regulations
Unleashing EPA bureaucrats on American livelihoods, living standards and liberties
David Rothbard and Craig Rucker [CFACT]
Supported by nothing but assumptions, faulty computer models and outright falsifications of what is actually happening on our planet, President Obama, his Environmental Protection Agency and their allies have issued more economy-crushing rules that they say will prevent dangerous manmade climate change .
Under the latest EPA regulatory onslaught (645 pages of new rules, released June 2), by 2030 states must slash carbon dioxide emissions by 30% below 2005 levels.
The new rules supposedly give states “flexibility” in deciding how to meet the mandates. However, many will have little choice but to impose costly cap-tax-and-trade regimes like the ones Congress has wisely and repeatedly refused to enact. Others will be forced to close perfectly good, highly reliable coal-fueled power plants that currently provide affordable electricity for millions of families, factories, hospitals, schools and businesses. The adverse impacts will be enormous.
The rules will further hobble a US economy that actually shrank by 1% during the first quarter of 2014, following a pathetic 1.9% total annual growth in 2013. They are on top of $1.9 trillion per year (one-eighth of our total economy) that businesses and families already pay to comply with federal rules.
A U.S. Chamber of Commerce study calculates that the new regulations will cost our economy another $51 billion annually, result in 224,000 more lost jobs every year, and cost every American household $3,400 per year in higher prices for energy, food and other necessities. Poor, middle class and minority families – and those already dependent on unemployment and welfare – will be impacted worst. Those in a dozen states that depend on coal to generate 30-95% of their electricity will be hit especially hard.
Millions of Americans will endure a lower quality of life and be unable to heat or cool their homes properly, pay their rent or mortgage, or save for college and retirement. They will suffer from greater stress, worse sleep deprivation, higher incidences of depression and alcohol, drug, spousal and child abuse, and more heart attacks and strokes. As Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) points out, “A lot of people on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum are going to die.” EPA ignores all of this.
It also ignores the fact that, based to the agency’s own data, shutting down every coal-fired power plant in the USA would reduce the alleged increase in global temperatures by a mere 0.05 degrees F by 2100!
President Obama nevertheless says the costly regulations are needed to reduce “carbon pollution” that he claims is making “extreme weather events” like Superstorm Sandy “more common and more devastating.” The rules will also prevent up to 100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks in their first year alone, while also curbing sea level rise, forest fires and other supposed impacts from “climate disruption,” according to ridiculous talking points provided by EPA boss Gina McCarthy.
As part of a nationwide White House campaign to promote and justify the regulations, the American Lung Association echoed the health claims. The Natural Resources Defense Council said the rules will “drive innovation and investment” in green technology, creating “hundreds of thousands” of new jobs.
Bear in mind, the ALA received over $20 million from the EPA between 2001 and 2010. NRDC spends nearly $100 million per year (2012 IRS data) advancing its radical agenda. Both are part of a $13.4-billion-per-year U.S. Big Green industry that includes the Sierra Club and Sierra Club Foundation ($145 million per year), National Audubon Society ($96 million), Environmental Defense Fund ($112 million annually), Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund ($46 million), and numerous other special interest groups dedicated to slashing fossil fuel use and reducing our living standards. All are tax-exempt.
As to the claims themselves, they are as credible as the endlessly repeated assertions that we will all be able to keep our doctor and insurance policies, Benghazi was a spontaneous protest, and there is not a scintilla of corruption in the IRS denials of tax-exempt status to conservative groups.
The very term “carbon pollution” is deliberately disingenuous. The rules do not target carbon (aka soot). They target carbon dioxide. This is the gas that all humans and animals exhale. It makes life on Earth possible. It makes crops and other plants grow faster and better. As thousands of scientists emphasize, at just 0.04% of our atmosphere, CO2 plays only a minor role in climate change – especially compared to water vapor and the incredibly powerful solar, cosmic, oceanic and other natural forces that have caused warm periods, ice ages and little ice ages, and controlled climate and weather for countless millennia.
The terrible disasters that the President and other climate alarmists attribute to fossil fuels, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are creatures of computer models that have gotten virtually no predictions correct. That should hardly be surprising. The models are based on faulty assumptions of every size and description, and are fed a steady diet of junk science and distorted data. We shouldn’t trust them any more than we would trust con artists who claim their computers can predict stock markets or Super Bowl and World Series winners – even one year in advance, much less 50 or 100 years.
The models should absolutely not be trusted as the basis for regulations that will cripple our economy.
Contrary to model predictions and White House assertions, average global temperatures have not risen in almost 18 years. It’s now been over eight years since a category 3-5 hurricane hit the United States – the longest such period in over a century. Tornadoes are at a multi-decade low. Droughts are no more intense or frequent than since 1900. There were fewer than half as many forest fires last year as during the 1960s and 1970s. Sea levels rose just eight inches over the last 130 years and are currently rising at barely seven inches per century. There’s still ice on Lake Superior – in June! Runaway global warming, indeed.
This is not dangerous. It’s not because of humans. It does not justify what the White House is doing.
Asthma has been increasing for years – while air pollution has been decreasing. The two are not related. In fact, as EPA data attest, between 1970 and 2010, real air pollution from coal-fired power plants has plummeted dramatically – and will continue to do so because of existing rules and technologies.
For once the President is not “leading from behind” on foreign policy. However, there is no truth to his claim that other countries will follow our lead on closing coal-fired power plants and slashing carbon dioxide emissions. China, India and dozens of other developing countries are rapidly building coal-fueled generators, so that billions of people will finally enjoy the blessings of electricity and be lifted out of poverty. Even European countries are burning more coal to generate electricity, because they finally realize they cannot keep subsidizing wind and solar, while killing their energy-intensive industries.
Then what is really going on here? Why is President Obama imposing some of the most pointless and destructive regulations in American history? He is keeping his campaign promises to his far-left and hard-green ideological supporters, who detest hydrocarbons and want to use climate change to justify their socio-economic-environmental agenda.
Mr. Obama promised that electricity prices would “necessarily skyrocket” and that he would “bankrupt” the coal industry and “fundamentally transform” America. His top science advisor, John Holdren, has long advocated a “massive campaign” to “de-develop the United States,” divert energy and other resources from what he calls “frivolous and wasteful” uses that support modern living standards, and enforce a “much more equitable distribution of wealth.” The President and his Executive Branch bureaucrats are committed to controlling more and more of our lives, livelihoods and liberties.
They believe no one can stop them, and they will never be held accountable for ignoring our laws, for their corruption, or even for any job losses, deaths or other destruction they may leave in their wake.
Every American who still believes in honest science, accountable Constitutional government – and the right of people everywhere to affordable energy and modern living standards – must tell these radical ideologues that this power grab will not be tolerated.
David Rothbard is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), a nonprofit educational organization devoted to both people and the environment. Craig Rucker is CFACT’s executive director.
If only the Obama administration, with that despicable creature John Holdren at the forefront, along with his neo-Malthusian fellow travellers, expended half as much time, money and resources toward the betterment of their fellow human beings instead of trying to find ever more creative ways of killing off their own economic recovery and self-sufficiency (and possibly large swathes of the population being pushed into a death spiral of ever increasing poverty and homelessness), then imagine how far we may have progressed across the spectrum of scientific, economic and humanistic endeavour, not only in the USA, but across the globe.
Never has so much money and effort been misapplied and misappropriated for the deliberate impediment of necessary progress of the human race. A government at war with its own people, and an enemy of the very people of the world who look to it for leadership.
501
I made this about 12 months ago… Its more relevant every day.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxUZq-oWGcY2TFZtdjVrMno3SG8/edit?usp=sharing
The signature irony of the new left is that it is a movement led by people who have made it in life. But can only see austerity by others as the solution to what they perceive to be the world’s problems. Almost without fail you will find those preaching the regression of industry and society are well off by any standards, have made their life from the public purse and are not threatened financially or situationally by the austerity measures they propose.
They have one basic rationale; The world is threatened by shortages and only social regression can manage those shortages. This is simply Malthusian rationalism regurgitated by people who refuse to accept the evidence of history, which clearly shows that population density and exploitation of natural resources increases not decreases human welfare. The graph Jo put up related to CO2 output and wealth could not make it clearer.
If the US wants to finish once and for all the power imbalance emerging between themselves and China, then a rush to a so called clean economy will do it. At the same time as America will be going backwards in manufacturing and technology China will continue to advance at an even faster rate.
As someone who thinks the world would be a far safer place with China as the pre-eminent super power, I cant say I care that much other than I am enjoying the entertainment value of watching the USA destroy itself in the name of nothing.
223
I agree with your observations stated in the first two paragraphs, part of the third paragraph, although China will follow a predictable path to prosperity and then a poorer cheaper labor force will rise up as the next industrial giant somewhere else.
But then:
Just curious, where in the hell do you get that idea? What analysis of history to you use to justify it?
81
Maybe Safety Guy forgot or was too young to remember Tiananmen Square 1989? Since 1989 China has become richer and more powerful – and probably saved my country from recession after the 2008 GFC. But I’m not sure the underlying mindset of the Chinese Communist party has changed that much since 1989. In fact their recent economic success will only embolden the communist party apparatchiks. We see it already in their bully like behavior over disputed Islands with Japan. In contrast the US with a far superior human rights record managed to avoid nuclear holocaust with the Soviets after 40 odd years of the cold war. The US has many faults in its foreign policy over the years but I still know which side I trust more in world affairs – and it’s not China.
70
Hi guys
Im certainly not too young for TS, Im 48.
For every instance of Chinese undemocratic behavior you would like to list, I will give you an equally questionable example from the US, if you wish to kick it off go right ahead.
China has a pretty stable record of perusing economic not military victories. When was the last time China sent a major military force into a foreign country to change its form of Government? When was the last time the US did it?
How many time has China used nuclear weapons on another sovereign nation? How many times has the US done it?
How many times over the last 50-70 years have Chinese intelligence services been accused of or proven to have interfered in the elections or management of another country? How many for the US?
Im not for a second saying China is a model for civil society. But I am saying they are no worse than the USA on almost any measure you would like to name. This myopic and backward focused assertion that the only safe world we will ever know is one where the USA pull the strings is not only provably false, its a denial of the inevitability that white folks wont always be in control. The world IS heading to an era where China, India and other Asian powers will control the planet. Bury your head if you wish, but I repeat, Im not only not afraid of that day, I welcome it.
41
I gave you a thumbs up because of the over all tone of your reply and I usually agree with what you post. BUT
Let me ask you how many US citizens through history were ordered to be murdered by their president?
I’ll leave it at that and would love to “kick it off” at the next unthreaded if you copy this whole post to the next unthreaded one.
That is a guess. Could be right, could be wrong. Whatever, it won’t be the color or race that makes it happen, nor do I agree that the “whites” are in control now.
I am a white folk. My kids are white folk. I have everything in common with the yellow folk, the brown folk, the red folk and the undecided folk.
60
Betterment of their fellow human beings is the LAST thing they want. They want to impoverish the entire country. That is not an opinion. That is an observation of his policies.
#1 – Wage stagnation – He wants to import another 12-20 million people in order to drive wages down.
#2 – Job loss – He is creating more regulations per year than all the previous presidents combined.
#3 – Increase prices – His latest EPA thing as well as his refusal to allow for drilling for oil thus increasing energy prices.
So when you stop wage growth, increase joblessness, and increase prices, what do you get?
100
Obama, like so many politicians, suffers from chronic ‘Save the World’ syndrome.
The sooner this is recognised as a certifiable and impeachable disorder, the sooner the world will be a safer and cheaper place in which to live.
This is classic champagne socialism in action, where an effete political ‘elite’, corrupted by power, prescribes poverty and misery for the masses, safe in the knowledge that their own power or money will ensure that they do not suffer from those same hardships.
And the benefit of those hardships? None whatsoever.
350
International Marxism and a new job in UNEP global government?
30
No doubt the fallout from this would (or will)flow over to Australia by way of economic decline. One is bound to wonder what motivates Obama.
140
How will this affect Australia. As we are winding down this nonsense (for now) won’t we become more competitive. With cheaper energy than our competitors, will we prosper as we can produce for cheaper?
60
I wonder if the states have the power to define CO2 as Gold which has almost zero vapour pressure so hat 30% reduction on zero is zero and thus easily attained. Unlikely bu hilarious if they can. There is some story tha a sate once attempted to define pi as three.
80
Hell, PI is three, it is the diameter and circumference that need fixing! Silly earthlings!
81
I don’t like circles anyway – they can be quite vicious, you know.
20
Vicious maybe, but harmless……….. no sharp bits .
Sort of like The WC or The PS.
20
You are thinking of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
10
Off topic I know. Mod please move this.
Australia is the best at “Australian solar plant has generated “supercritical” steam that rivals fossil fuels”
Here http://sciencealert.com.au/news/20140506-25618.html
Here we go ??
25
So bloody what? If you concentrate enough sunlight you can reach very high temperatures e.g. the now moth balled french plant at Odeillo in the Pyrénées-Orientales in France, opened in 1970 could reach 3500℃. But when converted to a solar power station it managed to generate a miserable 5MW per hour.
This is just another Gemasolar type tower station, probably generating about 50MW per hour when the sun shines. Unless they’re trying to store heat, when the 24 hour output drops to 17MW at best. In the latter case the cost of the power will be over $A400 per MWh compared with coal at $A40. And at that cost you may only get power for 270 days a year.
130
Why the claim of pressure of 23.5 mpa (3400 psi) and 570°C (1,058°F), as being supercritical? That barely makes it from a theoretical pressure and temperature, and has never been observed. However, 97% of earthlings will never realise that they have been scammed by experts!
90
It was cloudy over Newcastle today and the sun was only up for about ten hours. How long does it take to get to the minimum temperature and how long does it produce power when the sun starts to set? Best guess is that everyone should be finished using electricity by about four PM. It should be a good life working from midday to two thirty so one can get home to cook dinner before the power goes off. Yep. I can see this being another great advance in reducing us to subsistence level.
70
Here’s the original article.
http://www.gizmag.com/solar-array-hottest-supercritical-steam-world-record/32371/
00
” Supercritical steam powerplants operate at such high pressure that the latent heat of vaporization is zero; in other words, liquid water is converted directly to steam. Modifying subcritical plants to operate on supercritical steam would vastly increase their efficiency and could help significantly lower the cost of generating
solarelectricity”Precisely what TonyfromOz has been saying for years.
Incidentally, Gemasolar is Spain claims to operate at 566℃. A loud squawk from the turkey laying a small egg.
20
The USA has been “hand-bushed” by the Greenies thanks to O’barmy – I like that alias. With the USA’s already mountainous debt expect this new CO2 decree to be the final nail in the coffin of this once great nation. I think the only thing that will save Uncle Sam now is a Republican win in the 2016 Election. The Constitution says that O’barmy is not allowed to serve a 3rd term – thank god for that – he is a great orator – has charisma – but what use are those traits when your nation is going down the gurgler?
140
Be careful what you wish for. Obama is just an entree before the main course. He doesn’t actually run the show as some might like to think the President does, he just acts on orders, like those under him. And if you think he’s bad, the replacement will be very much like Australia changing ship midstream from a sociopath to a socialist on steroids intent on implementing a very destructive agenda for the faceless (and unacountable) few.
120
You don’t have me worried Realist but spare a thought for the poor US citizens who will be very adversely affected by this destructive “socialist agenda”. As I said before only the Republicans (in late 2016) stand a chance to rid the USA of this “socialist agenda”. Hopefully the US Electorate will have a “leap of faith in the Republicans” in 2016 – well 2016 will be a “leap year”.
90
King Geo, I think that Oblameless and many others believe the CO2 tax revenues can be used to balance the huge debt by “creative” shuffling. I personally think that is what will happen with some monies collected for “health care” as well.
The US federal budget is a black hole. What happens to the money in the black hole?
40
This is what becomes of our civilisation when the will to win and achieve is is abandoned to the socialist ideal of the politically correct and their triumphant embrace of mediocrity.
A future where advancement of enduring, economical efficiency is sacrificed by the incompetent for inefficiency and waste.
A new age where only those with an avaricious sense of entitlement and self interest become world leaders.
That sure is some F###ed up S##t right there.
170
Obama’s latest delusional nonsense will hit an already shaky economy and the poorest families will be the hardest hit.
Of course this won’t change the weather/temp/climate/SLs/ hurricanes/tornadoes/wild fires/droughts/floods/ lightening strikes etc etc at all, just ask India and China. What stupid fools they are, yet they’ll be cheered on here by the Labor and Green zombies.
120
“Of course this won’t change the weather/temp/climate/SLs/ hurricanes/tornadoes/wild fires/droughts/floods/ lightening strikes etc etc “
It may not change the actual weather but as we have learned from the corrupt practices employed today, couple to the alarmist reporting of – temperatures, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, wild fires, lightening strikes, snow, and any other weather events, and climate variation, is the important thing. And the alarmist reporting of the weather/climate events is a message the public hears and understands. The majority (97%?) of these messages are wholely politically controlled now.
These inaccurate reports are what fuels the whole scam. Without them the entire house of cards tumbles.
So enjoy your hottest year ever, because the slick politicians at Capitol Hill and their cronies certainly will.
130
Strange though that China now leads the way in efficient and cost effective diplomacy with the largest aircraft carrier ever built.
70
Is it just my imagination, or is all this carbo-phobia leading us away from coal/nukes and toward oil/gas? The whirlygigs and solar panels are just the obligatory decor, I’d say. Nobody could be serious about all that flimsy junk. This seems to be a job for the oil barons and the finance rogues we neglected to lock up after 2008.
My strong suspicion is that when they talk about that “mix” of renewables with oil/gas, what they really mean is oil/gas, from the likes of Boone Pickens and Exxon. I mean, when people get tired of wiping grime off blistered solar panels and the last creaky turbine has been carted away…what’s left is the oil/gas, right? Or am I missing something?
150
Much as the oil & gas barons would like to get rid of coal, the reality is that closing 2 or 3 major coal fired plants combined with a winter like last year would be enough to cause rolling blackouts, esp. in the NE where a lot of Democrat voters reside. That alone would give the Republicans control of the Senate and the ability to stop Obama’s plans. Whether they have the will to do so, is another question.
120
It was suggested in another thread here that some generators be shut down to demonstrate that fact. I don’t agree with going ahead with a real shut down because people would die.
However, I do believe that they should come out with an all out campaign to PREPARE for such a shut down. Giving notice to government officials, warning important consumers like hospitals and nursing homes etc. This over a many month cycle with advertizements and warnings to consumers. All whilst plant operations go through mock shutdown and mothballing procedures together with counseling to employees.
Done properly, it would be a massive public awareness campaign with significant political heft. Nobody that supports the EPA and this kind of boondoggle would survive (politically).
40
Obama turns a blind eye to the (too few) economic success stories in the USA, where European manufacturers have set up shop within the USA because of lower production costs; not necessarily due to cheaper labour rates, but certainly because the costs of energy are lower; especially electricity.
Germany had exempted its exports-exposed industries from paying the renewable energy levy, but the EU now wants them to pay penalties for doing so, as well as the “back taxes”. German industry was, despite the exemption, paying about double per MWh of electricity compared to what is available in the more attractive locations in the USA. (Definitely not in the People’s Democratic Socialist Republic of Kalifornia.)
Germany’s Green Jobs myth is precisely that; a myth. Once subsidies are subtracted, only about 30% of those in green jobs would have one. Indirectly, I suspect it’s more like 10% who would survive without a subsidy framework favouring
Plentiful, affordable energy has revived prosperity in some regions of the USA. Obama appears to be concerned that those people could potentially do without support from the government. Obama uses willing, blunt instruments such as the EPA to beat the people back into dependence, destroying their jobs and stifling their aspirations.
170
THE USUAL MSM CONCENSUS!
Barack Obama’s climate change moves put heat on Tony Abbott
Sydney Morning Herald – Jun 3, 2014
Obama’s climate plan puts pressure on PM
Sky News Australia – Jun 3, 2014
Australians Turn Cool Toward Abbott’s Climate Policy
Wall Street Journal – Jun 3, 2014
Fairfax still pushing the false China story:
5 June: SMH: Lisa Cox and Adam Morton: Climate change ‘off G20 agenda’
Prime Minister Tony Abbott has downplayed the likelihood of climate change being discussed at a G20 leaders’ summit hosted by Australia, suggesting it does not fit the meeting’s economic focus.
Asked about pressure from the US and Europe for climate to be included on the agenda for the November meeting in Brisbane, Mr Abbott said there were other international meetings that were more appropriate for discussing the issue…
Mr Abbott agreed the efficient use of energy was an important economic issue and said he would be surprised if climate change was not raised, but added: ”The focus of the G20 will overwhelmingly be our economic security, our financial stabilisation, the importance of private sector-led growth.”
***His comments followed US and Chinese leaders revealing new plans to tackle climate change…
***A top Chinese climate adviser told a Beijing conference that the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gas would put a cap on emissions for the first time in its next five-year plan, starting in 2016.
***He Jiankin, the deputy director of China’s National Expert Committee, later clarified he was stating his personal view, not that of the Chinese government…
Grattan Institute energy program director Tony Wood said climate change was ”clearly an economic issue” and should be on the G20 agenda. But he acknowledged it was a crowded agenda and there was a complicated political trade-off in deciding what was discussed…
Labor environment spokesman Mark Butler said Mr Abbott should not stand in the way of other countries discussing climate change at the G20 just because he held a different political position.
Greens leader Christine Milne said financing tackling climate change had to be on the G20 agenda. ”Our Prime Minister is so backward he doesn’t seem to understand the connection between climate change and economics.”
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-off-g20-agenda-20140604-39jdx.html
Christine Milne is toxic.
110
Pat, I’m a bit behind here. What does MSM stand for.
Christine Mine Toxic —I like that.
R-Coo- K+
51
Main Stream Media. All the lefties…
50
In Norway they are labeled “the free leftist journalism”.
20
***did this get published without the China correction? i wouldn’t know because i never see the print edition.
3 June: SMH: Tom Arup with Reuters: China plans to set an absolute cap on carbon emissions
The story created headlines around the world, with the statement coming hot on the heels of US President Barack Obama’s announcement of the most significant American measure to cut emissions to date – a reduction of greenhouse gases from coal-fired power plants of 30 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030.
***But later, Reuters quoted Professor He as saying a decision had not been taken by the Chinese government to pursue an absolute cap, and it was his personal view…
http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-plans-to-set-an-absolute-cap-on-carbon-emissions-20140603-zrwpj.html
4 June: WUWT: China Denies U-Turn On CO2 Emissions
“It’s not the case that the Chinese government has made any decision. I’m not a government official and I don’t represent the government.” – Professor Jiankun He, director of the Low Carbon Economy Lab of Tsinghua Universtiy and deputy director of the National Expert Committee on Climate Change, 3 June 2014…
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/04/china-denies-u-turn-on-co2-emissions/
50
Chinese media happy to go with the Botkin story! print this, ABC/Fairfax:
5 June: South China Morning Post: Howard Winn: When it comes to earth’s climate, change is normal
Those convinced that human-induced global warming is going to bring an end to the world as we know it would do well to read the testimony by Dr Daniel Botkin, Professor Emeritus, Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara.
His testimony was given to the US House Subcommittee on Science, Space and Technology, which was examining the 2014 report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
He adopts a refreshingly dispassionate and clear approach to a controversial subject that is usually couched in highly charged emotional terms.
Botkin has been publishing research on theoretical global warming, its potential ecological effects, and the implications for people and biodiversity since 1968.
In his testimony, he says he approached the subject as a scientist but laments that in recent years “the subject has been converted into a political and ideological debate”…
Botkin acknowledges the world has been going through a “warming period driven by a variety of influences”, but says this is not unusual, and contrary to the characterisations by the IPCC and the White House National Climate Assessment, “these environmental changes are not apocalyptic nor irreversible”…
Commenting on the warming period and the current plateau, where the earth’s temperature has not changed for the past 17 years, he says: “The rate of change we are experiencing is also not unprecedented, and the ‘mystery’ of the warming ‘plateau’ simply indicates the inherent complexity of our global biosphere.
“Change is normal, life on earth is inherently risky; it always has been. The two reports, however, makes it seem that environmental change is apocalyptic and irreversible. It is not.”
He draws attention to the weakness of the climate models…
http://www.scmp.com/business/article/1525535/when-it-comes-earths-climate-change-normal
60
***Eleanor Hall being UNDIPLOMATICALLY AGRESSIVE!
3 June: ABC World Today: Obama expected to ask Abbott to put climate change back on G20 agenda
ELEANOR HALL: The Prime Minister Tony Abbot will meet the US president in Washington next week, and politics watchers in the US say there is virtually no chance that the issue of climate change and the new targets that the president announced today won’t be raised.
The Australian Prime Minister is also likely to come under more pressure from Barack Obama to put climate change back on the agenda of the G20 meeting that Australia is to host in November.
David Waskow (director of the International Climate Initiative) is climate analyst from the World Resources Institute…
DAVID WASKOW: This is a major step forward in US climate policy…
ELEANOR HALL: Now president Obama is meeting the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott next week in Washington; trade and strategic issues are on the official agenda, but is there any chance the president won’t raise this?
DAVID WASKOW: Well, I think it’s likely that president Obama will make clear that he and the United States have a strong commitment to taking action on climate change. He gave a speech last week at the US military academy at West Point, pointing out that this is one of the most significant national security and global security challenges that we face going forward and so he has made abundantly clear that he sees it as something that the United States has to address, but that also requires a global solution and requires global action…
ELEANOR HALL: The US president has already indicated that he wants climate change on the agenda of the G20 meeting that Australia’s hosting in November.
***How DIPLOMATICALLY AGGRESSIVE would it be to refuse to include an agenda item that had been requested by the president of the US?…
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s4017645.htm
UNBELIEVABLE, ABC!
80
ABC/Guardian shilling for the Insurance industry?
5 June: ABC AM: Some insurance premiums could almost double due to climate change: report
By business reporter Pat McGrath
Consumer group Choice is warning the cost of home insurance could almost double in the decades ahead with predictions extreme weather will become more common.
It has commissioned a study looking at the effect of climate change on the insurance market and has found insurers are rejecting customers deemed too risky…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-05/insurance-premiums-in-many-areas-could-almost-double-due-to-cli/5501988
5 June: Guardian: Helen Davidson: Homebuyers must factor in climate change, warns Australian watchdog
Consumer and climate experts say extreme weather could raise insurance premiums and lower property values
The organisations said the lack of information from governments and insurance companies was leaving homebuyers and owners at risk.
“Councils should be providing better information about historical climate data about whether a property is at risk, and what they think about some of the future risks might be,” the Climate Institute’s chief executive, John Connor, told Guardian Australia.
“And there are some basics, such as the full range of hazard mapping, that we know some local governments have got and which should be publicly available. But they’re not,” he said…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/04/home-buyers-must-factor-in-climate-change-warns-australian-watchdog
80
Nice resume Pat. Funny how the ABC, Fairfax and Guardian all omit to quote that readily available data that shows SLR slowing and hurricanes fewer etc. I’m wondering why journalists who knowingly deceive their readers are not guilty of something. I do note the Press Council has chastised the Toowoomba Chronicle for being biased for reporting only one side of a local issue; the construction of a private airport. Surely the same would apply to the climate reporting of the ABC when it is expressly chartered to provide unbiased information.
I often have this day dream of cloud funding a court case to challenge the biased reporting. I’d also like to know how much of the ABC’s super funds are tied up in Green energy projects or related investments.
70
For a more complete list of Obama’s non-democratic actions and an exposure of the incredible fraud that is the USHCN temperature data, just go to Steve Goddard’s excellent site at Real Science.
110
Truth seeker, definitely a good link to follow. Should we ask Jo to re-blog on the subject?
I wonder what wily Willy Connolley has to say about it……
30
Absolutely. Also I have left a message in WUWT Tips and Notes about it. After all land stations are close to Anthony’s professional heart, so to speak.
30
Yeah its funny how “think of the world we leave the children” only works one way as a fear campaign piece.
No one talks about the world children will inherit from parents who are second and third generation unemployed.
So we can assume (if you accept the alarmist perspective) that a world with massive income disparity, widespread unemployed and working poor who cant afford to run their air conditioners, will be preferable to warm sweaty middle classes with average western lifestyles. But on the bright side, they wont have to run their air conditioners because the world will be 2c cooler?
Nice theory……. if your barking mad.
100
CO2 isn’t .04 of atmosphere . It is.0004 percent
64
Brian,
It is 440 ppm = 0.00044 = 0.044 %
90
Gees .. are we up to 440ppm..
Wonderful..:-) No wonder the biosphere is expanding so rapidly
Keep going !!!
I’m an environmentalist..
I LOVE TREES !! 🙂
71
But I don’t like noxious weeds…
hence my comments to the WC.
51
Hi Brian, 400 parts per million IS 0.04 parts per hundred OR 0.04 percent.
Cheers
Ron
R-COO- K+
30
As Truthseeker says it’s 440 ppm = 0.00044 = 0.044 %
Also be aware that, as per IPCC documentation, human activity does NOT make the majority of that or the rise in CO2 level.
Apparently our miniscule input, 0.01% (approx), is what will cause nature to go to a full over the ‘tipping-point’ catastrophe.
30
“Then what is really going on here? Why is President Obama imposing some of the most pointless and destructive regulations in American history?” “The President and his Executive Branch bureaucrats are committed to controlling more and more of our lives, livelihoods and liberties.” My emphasis. The agenda is very clear. Good questions, with complex answers.
The U.S. is well past the point of functioning as a republic adhering to it’s democratically based Consitution. And the owned and politicised MSM are part of the problem, not even remotely part of a solution to the decidely undemocratic state of affairs progressively unfolding. Public opinion is so easily brainwashed, either by religious dogma or political doctrine (or a combination of both): the outcome is the same, sheeple following in the dust of footsteps from others in front.
Due in part to lazy thinking from dumbed-down minds and the incessant MSM brainwashing, it’s difficult for most to see behind “Alice’s” looking glass into real the world today, but it’s certainly no Wonderland, let alone a Green utopia that lies behind. It’s difficult for most to believe their government would do this so it’s largely ignored or easier to be in denial that it’s happening.
The U.S. is leading the world into a very dark place geo-politically, encompassing all three “bottom lines”: social, economic and environmental. But it’s those behind the screen of government and its agencies that pull the strings of the army of muppets, from the President and “owned” congressmen/women down to the lowliest of bureaucrats. The U.S. is now what some call a “corptocracy”, or kleptocracy, owned and run by the ultra wealthy according to their collective business model. Exporting their version of “democracy” to the world is akin to bringing food aid laced with bubonic plaque: it’s not very “nation building”.
Climate change (aka Wealth Change), other Green agenda, trade “partnership” treaties and a host of other agenda are just progressive implementation of a global business strategy, where mega-transnational corporations, some being larger in wealth than many nation states, are increasingly dictating their demands to most nation states, as to how their countries are to be run. The EPA and other agencies in the US (and the equivalent in other countries) are simply bureaucratic fronts enforcing the increasingly less hidden agenda of the 0.1% of the so-called “1%”, on the 99%. Unfortunately, what used to be called a conspiracy is no longer. Destroying an economy is a way to then own and control it; that’s what hot, cold and monetary wars aim to achieve. At the core (for the U.S) is retention of the US$ as the global currency, and/or replace it with something equivalent. Without that happening, the US will be a basket case country. But before that happens, watch the empire games ramp up several notches.
Crippling a nation’s economy might seem like an economic loss to oligarchs, but when you already print money out of air, buy and sell countries through paid-for politicians and others, and manipulate the stock and commodity markets on a daily basis, from individual livelihoods up to the economy of a nation, it is, to them, like petty cash. The agenda is to end up owning all of what’s important, to control every nation they can under their hidden control. Manipulate the circumstances to bankrupt any entity, then buy the capital assets for cents in the dollar: Profit lies in the value of the purchase price. An effective way to transfer wealth.
What better way to keep the masses distracted by pricing the normal (not “ordinary” as some politicians like to use to talk down to everyone else) person and business, down and out, to destroy the middle class and create a low base poverty line class? Enforced by greenie run government agencies implementing Agenda 21 and a host of other controls over people’s lives. When will the saying, “you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time”, start to kick in? Or is that simply too much to hope for?
90
In the Great Depression, the 0.01% club (cartel) engineered the artificial inflation of stock prices far beyond the net worth they realistically represented, then strategically pulled the collective rug out from newbie investors playing the market on credit, then for the piece de resistance, threw pennies into the game (J.P.Morgan especially) to reinflate the stock only to collapse it again and again, like shaking sand out of a towel at the beach. Then, their stooges in congress enacted a series of budgetary faux pas that extended the crisis from 1929 out to beyond the outset of WW2 (FDRs “Fair Deal” policies most conspicuously).
The current situation bears more than passing resemblance to these strategies just morphed into a different form, with the same inevitable consequence. It is called wealth concentration, where rich billionaires lose a million or two, but those with little wealth to speak of lost “only” hundreds or thousands, and therefore lost everything. The ensuing fire sale of everything that wasn’t nailed down for pennies on the pound meant those that lost a couple of million could now buy up 30 or 40x what they could before, so their real wealth (purchasing power) went up, not down. Deusenberg’s for a fiver, Long Island Mansions for a song. Brother can you spare a dime?
70
Very well described. As I remember, the quote is “You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.” However, we seem to have added “You can fool enough of the people enough of the time.”
30
Obama is Holdren’s puppet. Holdren is a eugenicist out to cull half the US population and put the rest into Amish-style subsistence farming.
60
OMG! Would the last person leaving the USA please turn the lights out – Oh! wait a minute they’ve already been turned off. Please Tony A don’t visit this on Australians.
50
An article I recently read suggested that a key motivation for Obama and his climate acolytes in their recent EPA manifestation of outright derangement was to the place America in a position of moral authority, to wit
The moment the poltical elite start babbling ‘moral authority’ it’s time to consider the hills. This is the phenomenon highlighted in the interesting film with Bill Maher entitled ‘Religulous’. In this film, unquestioning faith and belief permit the suspension of reason, justifying any insane human behaviour.
The parting shot the film offered was, as I remember:
“Grow-up before it’s too late.”
The child-like, risk averse, hyper-regulated society in which we presently live, the one in which governments and police have become in loco parentis , is just possibly about to lose its innocence.
40
Let us hope so! I hab for sale many many, used but resharpend pitchforks. For you my really good friend, an excellent deal!
30
Old topic.. but Tol rips Cook a new one !!
11
Does that make it an even dozen ?
21
I say, let’s have some perspective on this, eh!
This new edict from the EPA has a start date of 2005, and they want to reduce CO2 emissions (but only from the electrical power generation sector, really just coal fired power) by 30% on those 2005 figures.
Let’s actually pretend this can actually be achieved, which it cant, but hey, let’s do the exercise anyway.
CO2 emissions from the electrical power sector in 2005 were 3.8 Billion tons.
So by 2030 then, a 30% reduction comes in at a new emissions total of 2.66 Billion tons, a reduction of 1.14 Billion tons.
They are already part way there, having cherry picked the year of greatest emissions, 2005, and now here we are in 2014, 9 years after the start date, and the reduction so far comes in at
Man, that’s a phenomenally huge total. Bravo. I say again Bravo.
One large scale coal fired power plant, (you know, those new USC coal fired plants being constructed at a huge rate in China, and other places around the World) will burn 7 million tons of coal a year, for a CO2 emission of 20 Million tons of CO2.
So then, let’s take that reduction in the US over the next 16 years ….. 16 years.
One Billion tons of CO2.
Umm, that’s the emissions from 50 of those new plants.
China has slowed down a little now on their construction, now around one new plant coming on stream every ten days or so.
They are building them in India.
They are building them in Africa.
They are building them in the Gulf States.
They are building them in Germany.
So 50 new plants.
Around 8 or 9 Months worth of new plants.
So, America cuts back in 16 years.
Elsewhere that 16 year cutback is totally negated in 9 Months, then the next 9 Months, then the next 9 Months, and on, and on, and on.
You have to laugh.
Tony.
91
“You have to laugh.”
Well.. have a good chuckle, at least ! 🙂
20
Damn, left out the all important reduction to date, just before that bravo comment there where the sentence doesn’t end.
The current reduction is around 100 Million tons ….. and that’s in the last 9 years which leaves the U.S. with only ONE BILLION tons to go.
While coal fired plants have indeed closed, tiny plants all having reached their use by dates of 50 years plus, they have been replaced in more than their totality by Natural Ga fired plants. So three steps forward, one and a bit steps back, hence only 100 Million tons reduction so far.
Tony.
70
How about weep in dispair.
20
“How about weep in despair”
I’ll save that until Lab/Green are back in.
While Tony Abbott is there, there may just be a vague hope.
41
One motive for Obama’s push might be a desire to forestall a rerun of 2000, when a Green spoiler candidate cost the Democrats the election.
Another motive might be the pressure he was under by Green lobbyists to make COP 2015 a success–and possibly also suck China into the madness–by having the US take a leadership role.
A third might be his desire for a statesmanlike “legacy” accomplishment.
A fourth may have been a desire to fulfill the conditions a green billionaire had set in order for him to donate $50 million to the Dems this year.
A fifth might be to fulfill his 2008 campaign promise to make electricity rates skyrocket.
A sixth might be his desire to avoid being attacked by Greens for his do-little stance, which would weaken his perceived authority.
Etc.
40
7. He’s been successfully propagandized into becoming a believer by his advisors—which is helped along by his tendency not to listen to critics on the other side.)
8. There’s no downside. He’s not worried about any consequences of being wrong, because he knows he’ll be able to say, “who can blame me for accepting the scientific consensus?—I was just being prudent.”
20
At what point do we “stick a fork” in the USA and declare it’s done?
40
Just thinking!
This is politics!
Predicting climate a hundred years ahead is child’s play compared to predicting politics a week or so ahead.
As somebody said a long time ago. “A week is a long time in politics”.
As was said to my brother and myself on a farm lawn amongst a couple of dozen Montana grain farmers, “America is a collection of little countries who use a common currency”
In short there is a huge range of peoples and attitudes and even cultures within America.
How they each react to Obama’s dictates using his control of the EPA remains to be seen but I suspect that it won’t be at all pretty in many, many parts of the USA.
I also suspect that the Americans who are so proud of their individualism will react very strongly in many states with the consequences that Obama’s EPA will only be able to physically implement their agenda in fairly limited areas.
States might decide to legislate to set up their own EPA’s [ some already have their own EPA’s ] and legislate to maintain their coal fired generators but confine the power from those generators to their own state and any adjoining states that come on board with comparable legislation.
Which of course leaves a lot of selected Obama / democrat supporting states in the dark and cold quite literally.
[ Certainly this is what one German state did when German regulations were on the point of forcing a large coal fired generator to shut down with probable serious local power shortages .
In the end some common sense penetrated into the German bureaucracy and the problem was resolved, so much so that Germany is now flat out building new super critical coal fired generators including the highly polluting Brown coal or Lignite powered generators ]
Which leads to the completely unpredictable future political outcomes once the Americans can get through the angst and strife and close to civil war that Obama in his self delusional hubris at his own power and importance has most likely triggered.
Another certainty is that the political backlash against the Democrats will be severe if Obama just keeps right on driving ahead
Then we have to look at the future of the increasingly radical left wing so called environmental organisations who are up to their eyeballs in this and are in cahoots with the left of the Democratic party. They are making themselves an extremely obvious future targets for some seriously vengeful actions from a lot of quarters after Obama is gone either early or until his term is served out .
They are now moving into the third generation of activists and officials since their formation and that old German saying needs to be borne in mind “Clogs to clogs in three generations”.
If Obama goes down politically over his dictatorial power grab he will probably take the entire environmental movement as it is today down with him. Those coming into power in the American political system will be looking for scape goats and who better than very wealthy organisations that did their damnedest to shut down industry, put workers out on the street and lied and fulminated their way into power and then abused that power to the serious detriment of the whole of the America Nation and the American people.
And don’t forget again as one old Aussie WW2 soldier said to me; “the bloody Yanks are a flag waving bunch” ie ; they are very obvious in their pride as Americans and don’t take kindly to somebody even from within their own ranks putting America down in the eyes of the world.
All this makes a nice excuse to go after those environmental outfits and chop them right down to size by imposing taxes and company standard reporting and the full legal responsibility for any and all their activities and actions to be placed onto their executives.
Perhaps the one sure thing that will come out of this Obama personal hubris based political power driven debacle will be that it doesn’t matter how good you reckon you might be in accounting for every factor, in politics it rarely if ever over time, turns out the way anybody predicted or even guessed at.
You are dealing with human beings, mostly those in politics who figure they are just a smart and competent as you are and if you get shunted then they could do your job a lot better than you are doing.
And That is Obama’s big weakness,
He has competition, lots of political competition and it now has an excuse to go after him big time.
A lesson that a very dumb and arrogant Obama and his running dogs in the environmental outfits and media are likely to re-discover all over again in the next few months..
The American EPA when it was set up in the USA was placed under Executive [ presidential ] control to ensure it would not become a political tool or football of Congress and the Senate.
There are some very good lessons for Australia in this American debacle.
As we know from the Republican debate here in Australia a good percentage of Australians want to ditch the British Royal connection. Completely understandable considering the prospects of having that idiotic Charlie [ thats being very polite indeed ] on the throne and as the titular head of the Australian Commonwealth.
However Charlie even at his worst and thats saying something, could barely lay a finger on Australia’s social, cultural and political heritage despite him one day becoming the titular head of our nation.
And from first impressions the next lot of Royals might be cut from a good deal better quality material so the post dingbat Royal Charlie period might include a much higher level of respect for the next generation of Royals
The alternative is a Republic Presidential system somewhat like America.
As we see in the USA at the moment, it will take immense political and very destructive politically actions to counter or better, to force the elected as President by popular vote Obama to retreat from his current position before serious harm is done to the American economy, it’s social structure, it’s political structures and it’s standing as the leading nation in the world community.
Whereas here in Australia under the parliamentary system we have, including Governor Generals and the British Royals as the titular heads of Australia, when everybody got good and fed up with the leadership we had, the politicians took upon themselves the role of changing leaders to a more publicly acceptable leadership.
And it was all done in a bloodless coup without having to dispose of any popularly elected President [ which provides the legality basis for Obamas anti energy agenda driven moves, ] as each and every one of such Australian leadership changes over the period since Federation under our present system has done.
And thats a lesson each and every Republican / Presidential type government supporter should heed very carefully.
Will I be right in any of this ?
I seriously doubt it for unlike the climate alarmists my chicken entrails powered predictive computer can’t foretell the future beyond the next few seconds, if that!
90
ROM:
a republic in Australia is inevitable, as its ‘virtues’ and ‘advantages’ can, and will be, be exaggerated. Fortunately the Republic Movement has done a lot of good by delaying it for decades.
People don’t seem to realise that the system is balanced – one of the Governor General’s tasks is to dismiss the PM. e.g. If the PM dons a cocked hat and announces that he will invade NZ, the GG can sack him.
If the GG dons a cocked hat and announces he wants to invade NZ, the PM gets the Queen to sack the GG.
If King Charlie appears in a cocked hat waving a sword, he gets a long holiday in Highbury and a Regency takes charge.
Under the proposed scheme if the PM decides (hat or not) to invade NZ, the GG can’t say no, because the PM will just sack him and replace him with someone more biddable e.g. Peter Slipper. So the PM becomes close to a dictator; and neither his party or the opposition can say no because they will be replaced as well.
If we want a Republic in Australia we have to make substantial changes to the Constitution. Personally I favour the Swiss approach; they haven’t invaded anybody, even NZ, for hundreds of years and most Swiss can’t even name their president.
31
I’ve been watching Alex Jones for about a year and although I figure he’s a bit of a self styled shock jock, evangelical, selling vitamins type of guy theres something to what he says about the blatant bastardy of the Obama admin. Stefan Molyneux, much more philosophical, atheist and sensible nails it.
30
Under President O’Barmy, the Krazy Kats are stepping up the pace of de-industrialization and ruination of America. In the UK, there is a real fear the Millipede will lead the Labour Party to an insane victory over common sense at the General Election.
All this is very good news for the Chinese who are standing by to manufacture any obtuse device with which the West thinks it can generate Stone-Age Energy, The Chinese, Japanese and Koreans will ably assist their competitors to stab themselves in the back. They, themselves, however will not be crippling their economies with these obtuse devices. There are no massed ranks of ;windmills; on show in Japan, Korea and China. A recent two month visit confirms this. The East Asians have more sense than to do such foolish things. They do not despoil their sacred landscapes with such horrors, but will happily ship them to fools who want to do so with them.
Fortunately in Australia, Scepticism has triumphed and July may see the repeal of vast slabs of CAGW legislation rolled out by the Labour Party four years ago. What we need now are suggestions for the rusting, mostly idle ranks of windmills rushed up in response to lavish subsidies.
Someone should point out to O’Barmy and the Krazy Kats that the temperature of the Earth has been stable for 18 years 8 months…..no…..that;s been tried!
30
I hope what Australia is doing is contagious. We need a dose of that common sense.
40
i’m not interested in the bolt/turnbull fight. they can fight their own battles.
however, i picked up on Turnbull launching Parliamentary Friends of the ABC with Clive Palmer et al days before Bolt wrote about it.
***when i excerpted the following article on Jo’s “Yale” thread on 29 May, the disclaimers about Turnbull’s membership were NOT in the article.
29 May: SMH: Matthew Knott: Malcolm Turnbull launches Parliamentary Friends group to defend ABC
(PHOTO CAPTION: TURNBULL AT CENTRE OF big “F” Friends plus Jim Spigelman & Mark Scott)
Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull gave a passionate defence of the public broadcaster in a speech to the 50-plus attendees, who included Senate powerbroker Clive Palmer. Mr Scott and ABC Chairman James Spigelman also attended the event…
***Despite supporting the group at the launch, Mr Turnbull’s office said the minister is not an official member of the group.
“He’s a small ‘F’ friend of the ABC,” a spokesman said.
Western Australian Labor MP Melissa Parke and NSW Liberal MP Craig Laundy are the co-chairs of the group. Nationals MP Bruce Scott, Greens Senator Scott Ludlam and independent Senator Nick Xenophon are the deputy co-chairs…
Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said he would campaign against any move to axe the program, tweeting: “Peppa’s is one snout we are happy to have in the ABC trough.”
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-launches-parliamentary-friends-group-to-defend-abc-20140529-3963d.html
now, with the PM out of the country, we have this:
6 June: Age: Attacks on Malcolm Turnbull have been linked to a reshuffle of the Abbott ministry
Heath Aston and James Massola
At the same time, some of Mr Turnbull’s allies are privately blaming the Prime Minister’s office for intervening to stop a succession of high-profile appearances on the ABC since the budget…
But questions linger over the strength of the relationship between Mr Turnbull and the Prime Minister after Fairfax Media revealed Mr Turnbull had not gone ahead with four slated appearances on the ABC.
In an interview on the ABC’s 7.30 on Thursday night, Mr Turnbull said he didn’t have “any plans, any desires, any expectations to be the leader” of his party again…
***However when asked directly about his leadership ambitions, Mr Turnbull said he “didn’t think there is any member of the House of Representatives who, if in the right circumstances, would not take on that responsibility”…
Some of Mr Turnbull’s allies are privately blaming the Prime Minister’s office, which vets all media appearances.
A Liberal Party source said possible changes to the ministry were behind the instability…
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/attacks-on-malcolm-turnbull-have-been-linked-to-a-reshuffle-of-the-abbott-ministry-20140605-39lzc.html
Fairfax can kill off what’s left of their readership if they like, that’s their business.
however, the ABC should be shut down. as bad as the BBC is these days, there’d be hell to pay if they played the political games we have been seeing at the ABC.
40
[…] How many people will die in order to reduce world temperatures by possibly, maybe, something a lot less than 0.05 F? Commiserations to the people of the USA. Obama said almost nothing about climate change in the 2012 election campaign. […]
10
i’ve been digging this stuff up while waiting for the women’s semis at Roland Garros, so i’m off to watch play now, but would mention i have a comment in moderation.
two final pieces before i go. SBS make no mention of Turnbull being a small “F” Friend in the following, tho he is obviously a big “F” friend of SBS, given his prominence in the PHOTO:
30 May: SBS: Stephanie Anderson: Peppa Pig and politicians come together as ‘friends’
(GIANT PIC, FEATURING ONLY MALCOLM TURNBULL, THE PIG & DOGS)
Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has led the launch of a new parliamentary lobby group to advocate maintaining a well-resourced ABC.
Mr Turnbull addressed the crowd at the launch of the group, which his Liberal colleague Craig Laundy will co-chair…
Mr Turnbull also joined the cause, posting on Facebook that he would “lead the charge to save her bacon”…
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/05/30/peppa-pig-and-politicians-come-together-friends
meanwhile, the women at News Ltd. can’t get Julie Bishop’s name right, but can describe Turnbull as “ARTICULATE”:
5 June: Australian/Herald Sun: Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull in on-air brawl
Ellen Whinnett and Jessica Marszalek
PHOTO CAPTION: Minister for Communications Malcolm Turnbull during Question Time in the House of Representatives in Parliament.
The only bright spot for the Government was the respite it provided from debating the merits of the May 13 budget, which Mr Turnbull acknowledged was “unpopular”.
In parliament’s Question Time, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten accused Mr Turnbull of “trying to sell his own credentials’’ instead of the Budget’s and Ministers Christopher Pyne and ***Julia Bishop frantically tried to wave on another question before Mr Turnbull could answer.
But the ***articulate former lawyer sprang to his feet and batted away the question, broadly defending the Budget by attacking Labor and their economic legacy
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/communications-minister-malcolm-turnbull-in-onair-brawl/story-e6frg6n6-1226944923825
THE MSM’s POLITICAL GAMES IN THE RUN-UP TO THE VOTE ON THE CARBON TAX REPEAL WOULD SUGGEST A CONCERTED ATTEMPT TO REPLACE THE PM WITH THE MINISTER FOR GOLDMAN SACHS, THE SMARMY, REJECTED TURNBULL – TO SALVAGE THEIR CAGW SCAM/SCHEME?
give thanx for the Internet.
10
Not many will believe Dinesh D’Souza when he proposes that Obama is on a personal crusade to reduce his country and if possible, all of western civilization to something so economically and militarily impotent that it can no longer oppress anyone anywhere. He dare not let this be known but everything he does fits with this agenda. He is, as D’Souza calls him, the last anti-colonialist. Never mind that there is more harm being done to his precious Kenya by Islam, which he appears to favor, than by anyone else.
He does not care how much harm he does or who it harms. But were this openly known his party’s support as well as the support he needs from millions of people would evaporate. Unfortunately for him his approval rating just dropped to 40% because of his handling of the
prisonerhostage exchange in which the Taliban got back five of their top terror planners, 4-star generals all, and we got back a deserter. To Obama this deserter is a trophy he wants to be proud of getting home. But to anyone with any good judgment at all the whole thing is such a bad deal that even Senator Diane Feinstein, Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a rabid leftist, is jumping on him.The man is bluffing his way along, throwing out favors to the Democrat base that supports him and paying any real attention only to his personal agenda.
You can see easily whether I’m right about him or not by just watching what he does instead of paying attention to the words out of his mouth, which by now are so much of an insult to the intelligent in America that no one believes him but the fools who depend on him for a handout. It is no surprise that, failing to get Congress to act, he’s going it alone, violating the Constitution and black letter law in the process.
As he sees his approval and support going down the drain he’ll become even bolder in pursuit of his personal agenda. You can argue the new emission standards any way you want but it will boil down to what Obama wants — reduction of his country’s economic clout in the world.
And at present, no matter what he does, no one will step in and stop this president made king in his own head. And if he was to be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, who would remove him if he simply said, “I’m staying and there’s nothing you can do about it?”
All this is a repeat of things I’ve said before. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck and goes quack quack, then it’s a duck. No one should be surprised that Obama looks and acts like a duck. But nearly everyone is always surprised.
110
And at present, no matter what he does, no one will step in and stop this president made king in his own head. And if he was to be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, who would remove him if he simply said, “I’m staying and there’s nothing you can do about it?”
===========================================================================
Upon conviction, Joe Biden becomes President and has control. Ol’ Joe is arrogant enough to call in the Marshall’s Service and have him dragged out. Of course, the race riots will make for interesting times.
30
Roy, I think you nailed it. I hope more people believe what Dinesh D’Souza is saying.
20
For the hundredth time, Obama is NOT ruling by executive order: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
by my count, that puts him miles behind many other presidents, including his predecessor.
This rhetoric is designed to make people believe Obama has far more power than he actually does and koolaid drinkers everywhere are gulping it down. Half of country seems to be dying to start a civil war (which at least half the blogs in the country are seem to be hoping for, as well as numerous public figures—if you can’t win an election or get someone in office, just start shooting. No, that’s not the Dems saying that.). People are so easily duped into believing Obama is powerful it’s amazing. No wonder global warming is selling. It’s curious, though, that skeptics don’t seem to even check on politics and the rhetoric. Virtually every provision by Obama is tiny in scope or comes into play in 15 years. It’s all smoke and mirrors and it’s incredible the number of people who are inhaling and believing wholeheartedly. (I can overlook persons in other countries not understanding this, but American?)
Obama has power only because you folks gave it to him. Stop watching the shiny object in the mirrors and pay attention to the tiny little guy behind the curtain pulling strings. He’s a pathetic, incompetent person with lots of money and toys living high at the expense of the American people. Con artists can do that—only so long as people believe the lie.
33
You are correct. He is ruling by illegal dictate. Which is worse. At least executive order has a basis in law. His illegal actions do not.
50
The executive order was intended to allow the president to run his executive branch of the government and, as his oath states, be sure that the laws are faithfully executed. It was not intended to allow him to circumvent those laws. But at the moment it appears that federal department heads and managers simply take their cue from comments Obama makes and then take action accordingly. That appears to be the way the IRS scandal got going. It appears to be how our ambassador to Libya was murdered. The president wants it to be that way so let’s cooperate and make it that way. I’ve seen that happen in the business world. It’s no surprise in politics or government.
60
Just a clarification. It does not. Congress is the enabler for letting him get away with illegal acts.
20
Phil,
In the beginning, yes. But that stage has passed into history. Even if the House and Senate pass a bill to stop things Obama is doing and can manage to override his veto, who will step in and actually stop him? Congress has no enforcement arm and neither do the courts.
Therefore Obama is king because he can be king.
Notice I said can, meaning ability to do it, not permission. There is always a level where if those in power are corrupt and dishonest, there is no recourse. And the three branches of the U.S. government are at that level. Nothing exists to look at what they’re doing except the citizens and they are asleep or afraid. I’m afraid for that matter.
God help us if anyone resorts to violence to stop him. He has long ago prepared for that. The Department of Homeland Security was ready made for him to use.
20
They are still the enabler. They have the power of impeachment. Yet they refuse to use it even though the courts have deemed his actions to be illegal. Congress tried to usurp the power of the presidency in the post Nixon years. Now they are ceding their power to that branch of the government. The old saying “if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem” holds still.
10
Phil: Yes, they have the power of impeachment. As previously noted, no president has ever been convicted via impeachment. The first half-black president of the US is going to scream “racism” and you know the very ignorant people in this country will believe it. Plus, there’s not way at this point to get a Democratic senate to actually act against Obama. Perhaps if things change in November, it could happen. I doubt it though. People long ago ceded their rights to those who scream “racist”. Persons who are not white have free run of the place. I agree that Congress is part of the problem, but until they figure out how to impeach the “First Black—not really, but we call it that—president”, they have no solution. Letting the Democrats run about like spoiled children screaming and ranting ever louder does seem to be taking a toll.
It’s a tricky thing—no one stopped this decades ago when it was possible and not so painful. Instead, everyone just kept hoping it would go away as the population became more and more apathetic and uneducated. Not a good plan.
10
@Sheri – I do not disagree with anything you said. And with the willing MSM, they will get skewered. But NOT doing anything is condoning it. And we did not elect them to win popularity contests but to do a job. A job they are shirking out of fear.
I do not care if Obama is the first martian to rule the earth. If he is above the law, we have no law. And that is how it is now.
10
I agree that we basically have no law right now—I wish I had an answer as to how to get around the race problem. It probably seemed so cool to elect a “black” president. No one really considered the possible outcomes with that. I certainly agree the MSM is very much culpable in this. They decided they would just prop up a lawbreaker, even though in the past they tore presidents apart. They are much to blame for the mess and definately shirking their jobs. The sad thing is, people would probably be watching news more if the media wasn’t such a lap dog.
10
Obama is sure enough screwing up everything he can. It’s not the number of executive orders, it’s their content. It’s not necessarily what comes from Obama. It’s from the EPA, the FCC, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, Department of Education, the State Department, …
We are in deep trouble with this man at the helm, Sheri.
Now if you want to argue that he’s not the only one to fear, I’ll listen to that. Holdren, for instance, is no more a science adviser than I’m a climate scientist. Holder is no more an attorney general than I am. And so it goes. These are people politically driven by an ideology that is ruining us. We need to be rid of them. If blogs all over the Internet are beginning to look like a revolution it’s because what’s happening is hurting people and will hurt even more in the future. The people who do the work that keeps this country going are getting angry. They don’t like the attitude they see in DC. Can you blame them?
You are right about this, however.
But I’m not one of those who’ve been conned any more than you are. And maybe for the first time in five and a half years some of those who’ve been conned are beginning to realize it. It’s certainly time for it.
50
I was using “you” in a generic way. My bad—I really must stop that. However, you are right, people are starting to look away from the shiny object and peek behind the curtain. Obama himself, in his desperation to raise his popularity may be his won downfall. He keeps going further and further off the reservation.
I agree, too, that Obama’s little followers just take their cue from listening to what Obama says and go from there. I believe Obama uses that to distance himself from the mess. However, in the prisoner release debacle, he seems to have no one to blame this on. Bad choice for a guy already under the magnifying glass.
31
“Obama’s little followers just take their cue ”
Sheri, they are doing what he appointed them to do. If they were not, he would replace them.
10
Agreed—they are doing what he wants them to and will replace them if they don’t. Makes them “good” little followers and very scary people.
10
Indeed yes! His worst mistake by far. Yet he still tries to excuse it, smear the men who were there when this deserter ran away and know exactly what was going on, all to deflect criticism from Barry Hussein Obama any way he can.
With approval in a downward spiral he is still King Obama and we are his subjects, like it or not.
And I don’t like it. I fear him greatly but I’m determined not to be intimidated by him.
10
The Chamber of Commerce figures have been debunked – going to them for facts is like citing The Australian for scientific information. Ideologues don’t do science, statistics, or anything objective at all.
04
Goodbye America.
Thanks for coming!
10
Too much fuss about Obama. He’s just another American politician who made it to president. Of course he’s a liar, a crook, and a war criminal, but so were most of his predecessors, and I expect no improvement in his successors.
Get on with the science.
21
Not a single predecessor of Obama would have traded 5 Taliban 4-star general equivalents for any number of American soldiers held captive, much less for one who is emerging clearly as a hostage rather than POW. He was already far more corrupt and plain old inept than any predecessor and is now worse than ever because of this trade.
You should comment only after knowing what the facts are.
10
Just as an historical reminder, Clinton “upgraded” North Korea’s nuclear plants (leading to North Korea now claiming to have nuclear missiles), Carter had the Iranian hostages, LBJ was reportedly a bully and tyrant and Roosevelt gave us the “New Deal” (which really wasn’t a deal at all). There have been truly bad presidential actions in the past and there will be in the future. Roosevelt had the media cooperation that Obama has. Carter was as incompetent. You can argue that Obama is incompetent, scary, evil, whatever, but as far as corruption and ineptness goes, there’s plenty of competition.
10
True, Sheri. However, you can find worthwhile things those other presidents did, probably even Carter. But what worthwhile thing has Obama done. Even the search for bin Laden was in progress before Obama took office. And there is a belief within classified circles that the actual mission was started without Obama’s permission or knowledge and then he was dragged off the golf course to the Situation Room to watch it happen. I can’t verify that but I have seen the claim, complete with details and some high up names.
The claim by Obama that he ordered an all out search for bin Laden when he took office doesn’t match the Obama personality — too cautious in what he does militarily lest he make some group of supporters angry at him.
10
With Carter, I actually can’t think of a thing while in office. He was great with Habitat for Humanity afterwards.
Perhaps the contribution of Obama is to show everyone just how out of control things can get when one emotes instead of thinks.
10
It is akin to trading Babe Ruth for a draft pick – that has already admitted he is a junkie.
10
Should have sent Obama to the Taliban instead.
30
Not a fair trade. It would take 10 obamas to equal one lousy deserter.
30