blogger journalist at the WaPo in Mitt’s hip pocket points out Newt’s problems on Cap-n-Trade. And I’ll grant everyone, there’s a there there. But it’s not like the Most Favored Candidate is pristine.
Consider this from the WaPo itself (the other part of the paper not the Mitt 2012 Cheerleading section) about Mitt and global warming, “The fact that he doesn’t change his position . . . that’s the upside for us,” said one Romney adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the campaign. “He’s not going to change his mind on these issues to put his finger in the wind for what scores points with these parts of the party.”
So, like Obamacare, Mitt’s sticking with his principles…of manmade global warming.
And there’s this:
2005: Romney Endorsed Regional Cap And Trade System, Saying “This Is A Great Thing For The Commonwealth … We Can Effectively Create Incentives To Help Stimulate A Sector Of The Economy And At The Same Time Not Kill Jobs. … I’m Convinced It Is Good Business.” “Governor Mitt Romney signaled his support yesterday for a regional agreement among Northeastern states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, despite opposition from power companies and other business interests that have been lobbying the administration against the plan. In opening remarks to a clean-energy conference in Boston, Romney said the first-of-its-kind agreement, under which Massachusetts and eight other states could be required to cut power plant emissions by 2020, will not hurt the economy, as some have charged. He argued that it would spur businesses to develop clean — and renewable-energy technology to market worldwide. ‘This is a great thing for the Commonwealth,’ Romney said, his strongest endorsement of the pact to date. ‘We can effectively create incentives to help stimulate a sector of the economy and at the same time not kill jobs.’… Romney said yesterday that he had some concerns about the agreement, known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, but he endorsed this and other clean-energy initiatives by saying they would stimulate the development of technology that Massachusetts companies could sell to other states and countries, as the emphasis on climate change grows. ‘I’m convinced it is good business,’ Romney said.” [Boston Globe, 11/8/05>]
Everyone knows that Newt and Mitt bought the leftist clap-trap about the man-made part of what is also known as normal climate changes. And had Mitt gone the Pawlenty route and said, “You know what? I screwed up.” Well, I wouldn’t like it, but I would forgive it. I did Pawlenty, anyway. (What I couldn’t forgive was Pawlenty not taking Mitt out on Obamacare when he had the chance. Come. On!)
And the reason why buying this junk science was and is such a big deal is that all sorts of policy “solutions” to non-existent “problems” would cost taxpayers a lot of money. And even still, it is anyway.
We have stupid light bulbs foisted on us by stupid government regulations. We have stupid EPA regulations that are killing all sorts of potential jobs.
And the Obama administration is making it worse with folks who worked for Romney.
So, yes, Newt has a problem and so does Mitt.
Are we to pretend that these guys won’t be swayed by every wind of leftist doctrine? They’ve been swayed too much.
Too much fun. We talked Al Gore and his indulgences, The Bow, “V”, and toothless vampires.
Wanted to share this provocative tidbit from the Washington Examiner:
Both the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade energy approved earlier this year and the version just okayed by Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Democrats (Republicans boycotted the vote) contains an obscure but nasty bureaucratic provision that requires President Obama to act like Venezuelan strong man Hugo Chavez.
Here’s how: The bills require a federal declaration of a “climate emergency” if world greenhouse gas levels reach 450 parts per million. Guess what? The Pacific Northwest National Lab says it is a virtual certainty that level will be reached within a few months. The bill then requires the president to “direct all Federal agencies to use existing statutory authority to take appropriate actions…to address shortfalls” in achieving needed greenhouse gas reductions.
Ever get the feeling that you’re unarmed and being assaulted on all sides?
What do the PUSH Coalition and PETA have in common besides catchy acronyms? They’re shakedown artists extraordinaire. Over at Big Government, Mary Grabar has an excellent exposé on PETA (whom I’ve written about for Pajamas Media before). Here’s a bit of what she finds:
But as the corporate representative finds himself fending off charges by PETA, PETA may be profiting from donations and business deals with his competitors. For example, PETA on its website discourages supporters from attending the Ringling Brothers Barnum & Bailey Circus; it encouraged them to protest its Denver show on September 29, 2009, for alleged animal cruelty. In 2002, PETA president Ingrid Newkirk and several colleagues reportedly hectored families attending the circus in Savannah. Then, PETA targeted MasterCard for sponsoring the Circus and encouraged supporters to send their cut-up credit cards back to the company. Ringling Brothers spokeswoman Amy McWethy, disputing PETA’s claims of animal cruelty, pointed to the company’s licensing by the USDA under the Animal Welfare Act, open access to visitors and inspectors, and an elephant conservation center that harbors retired Asian elephants and contains the largest herd of the endangered species outside of Southeast Asia. A July 28, 2009, press release on the website claims that the PETA undercover video was “deceptively edited.” McWethy says the partnership with MasterCard was for a limited duration, but PETA claimed in 2004 that their pressure led to MasterCard’s decision to end the program.
MasterCard competitor, Visa, however, offers a PETA credit card that donates one percent of all purchases back to PETA. Visa, furthermore, is a sponsor of the 2010 Winter Olympics, the very same organization that PETA targets as one of its ten prominently displayed “campaigns” for cruelty on its homepage—as it does Barnum and Bailey. The link emblazoned with the Olympics logo leads the visitor to a page that tells him to “urge the Olympic Committee to help end seal slaughter.” Visa also has relationships with other companies whose practices conflict with PETA’s stated mission: the Kentucky Derby, Omaha Steaks, Nine West shoe company, and PETCO (against whom it waged a campaign several years ago).
It’s not about the poor, persecuted pets, it’s about pockebooks and power–PETA’s. PETA is like all the rest of the leftist-grievance exploiters: they want to radically change America to a place where all living things are equal. You, a human, are equal to Fido who is equal to your potted plant who is equal to that roach you just killed. No one is better or worse. No country is better or worse. Etc.
At PETA’s own website, there’s a hilarious post about Iams, the dog food maker, being cruel because, wait for it, they test the food with dogs to see if dogs will like it. PETA does endorse V-dog, though, which is a Vegan dog food ostensibly fed to…dogs. No dog testing though, so I’m guessing eating dog vegan sucks as bad as being a human vegan. How much money does PETA get to endorse V-dog? I’m guessing that it’s enough to not inspire too much curiosity on PETA’s part.
Businesses need to stop caving to these hypocritical crazies. PETA, like all these groups, is about empowerment–their own.
New Podcast: Environmentalism’s Toll On The Poor, Foreign Policy Chaos & Should Someone Running For Office Have A Voting Record?Tuesday, September 29th, 2009
Phelim McAleer joined me to discuss his new movie “Not Evil Just Wrong“. We talked about how environmental policy hurts the poor the worst. It’s a fascinating discussion.
Then, I talked with Steve Schippert of Threatswatch about Obama’s handling of Afghanistan and the new threat in Iran.
Finally, John Hawkins and I argue about whether people should vote if they’re going to run for office: Hello Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina. Which side did he come down on? It might surprise you, but I can tell you here and now…he’s wrong!
Great music suggestion by Moe Lane of Red State and more!
Here come Barbara Boxer and John Kerry to unsave the day and destroy the world. Just a bit:
What Barbara Boxer and John Kerry have crafted is yet another payoff to cronies couched in world-saving terms. It’s a pay-off to California. It’s a pay-off to environmentalist wackos. And, it’s all based on flim-flam science.
Americans need to know how bad this all is for them. This bill, along with health care and card check will kill the American economy. It is not without irony that I write this post the day that Angela Merkel of Germany wins in a landslide on tax cuts. The German people see the mistakes they made and move away from them. American liberals, filled with hubris, believe that somehow their grand plans will be different. They’re right. If they enact these bills, America will be worse off than the worst European socialist state.
Please go read the whole thing. I talk about what it will do for taxes, the economy and who gets paid off and why. And it’s all based on b.s. science.
Podcast: Chuck DeVore On Environmentalism Gone Wild [Hello Cap-n-Trade], I.O.U.’s, Prison Release & Other California Craziness–Like Barbara BoxerThursday, August 20th, 2009
Don’t look now, but while the citizenry wrestles over the notion of Health Care legislation and what that all means, a big (literally bigger) pile of odious legislation sits in committee waiting to enslave Americans with taxes and limited lifestyle: Cap-n-Trade. To understand just how awful Cap-n-Trade is, one only has to look at California to catch a clue.
And how IS California these days? Well, the air is cleaner, which is nice, but unemployment is approaching 15-20% generally and nearly 40% in the agricultural industry. In addition, taxes are going up, prison populations are being released, I.O.U.s are being given, and the state has a prohibitive cost of living associated with less jobs.
Can you say misery?
And yet, the very elements that made this mess, sit in the Cap-n-Trade bill. That bill, by the writers admission, will cause unemployment to increase. There is a provision for more welfare to be paid for those who would be put out of work. It’s a mess of a bill, that would make failed California the model for the nation.
Chuck DeVore talks about all of these problems and the solutions. One solution is to start voting conservatives into office. Barbara Boxer wants to visit upon the nation the Great Depression circumstances now in California. She needs to go.
Chuck DeVore will be challenged in the primary by Carly Fiorina. Voters need to look closely at this woman. Fired from HP, fired from the McCain campaign, not interested enough (or too worried about the political implications) to make a stand and vote, Ms. Fiorina has a couple things the Republican leadership love: money and name recognition. Since America is not yet a Fiefdom, it would seem that ideals and character should matter too. I hope California voters pay attention to this race.
Listen to it all on the podcast. It’s informative.
Melissa’s show can also be found on RFC Radio every Monday and Wednesday night at 10:00 pm Eastern.
— Also, don’t forget to check out our other shows on Take That! —
It’s tough taking these people seriously. This speech by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
Incheon sounds like a Pentecostal pastor at an over-heated Tent Revival:
“The downside is equally dramatic.
If we fail to act, climate change will intensify droughts, floods and other natural disasters.
Water shortages will affect hundreds of millions of people. Malnutrition will engulf large parts of the developing world. Tensions will worsen. Social unrest – even violence – could follow.
The damage to national economies will be enormous. The human suffering will be incalculable.
We have the power to change course. But we must do it now.
As we move toward Copenhagen in December, we must “Seal a Deal” on climate change that secures our common future. I’m glad that the Chairman of the forum and many other speakers have used my campaign slogan “Seal the Deal” in Copenhagen. I won’t charge them loyalty. Please use this “Seal the Deal” as widely as possible, as much as you can. We must seal the deal in Copenhagen for the future of humanity.
We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet.”
Why not carry a sandwich board around the public square with the words, “World Ending! Get Right With Gaia!”
Where has Al Gore been? Like a bad penny he turned up on the news yesterday. So, the topic of the show covered environmentalist wackos, demands for Henry Waxman’s birth certificates, getting into the spirit of reporting your neighbor, or even better, your elderly mother, and the tactics the Palins will take against their enemies in the blogosphere and press. Hope you’ll download it!
If there’s a guest you’d like me to have on the show, or a topic you’d like covered, email me at email@example.com.
Melissa’s show can also be found on RFC Radio every Monday and Wednesday night at 10:00 pm Eastern.
So those super-sophisticated buoys all over the ocean are spitting back data, but scientists who are emotionally attached to their flimsy global warming theory are in denial of the facts:
So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys’ findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters’ hypotheses, must be wrong.
In fact, “there has been a very slight cooling,” according to a U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interview with Josh Willis at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a scientist who keeps close watch on the Argo findings.
Willis insisted the temperature drop was “not anything really significant.” And I trust he’s right. But can anyone imagine NASA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the UN’s climate experts — shrugging off even a “very slight” warming.
A slight drop in the oceans’ temperature over a period of five or six years probably is insignificant, just as a warming over such a short period would be. Yet if there had been a rise of any kind, even of the same slightness, rest assured this would be broadcast far and wide as yet another log on the global warming fire.
Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. “It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming,” Willis told NPR.
Yeah, you know, like when you put your car into reverse you are causing it to enter a period of less rapid forward motion. Or when I gain a few pounds I am in a period of less rapid weight loss.
I’m sorry, but my forebrain is finding their lamebrain and clearly irrational attachment to a theory that’s being contradicted by solid data very humorous. Let’s not get confused by the facts, scientific people, it might interfere with big, fat research grants from a now-friendly and true-believing, less skeptical, and scientifically-unattached administration.
Oh, it’d be truly gut-busting if I didn’t pay taxes that will go to supporting stupid scientific advances that solve problems that don’t exist.