People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Boucher's Global Warming Bill - We Learn More

The Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee fill in some of the holes:
Lost Jobs, Soaring Energy Costs Can’t Deter Democrats from Advancing Radical Global Warming Plan

Washington – House Democrats used political muscle and party loyalty on Thursday to ram through an anti-global warming bill that opponents caution could cost a family of four $2,937.38 a year.

“We have legitimate and serious concerns about the redirection of our energy policy in America, which is the foundation and bedrock of our free market economy, the most productive and the largest in the world,” said U.S. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the committee’s ranking Republican. “A third of the world’s GDP is based on the United States economy and that economy for over 150 years has been based on a free market allocation of resources in the energy sector. This bill makes fundamental changes in that basic philosophy.”

Cost analyses of the bill vary because hard information on it had been scarce, but few disagreed that the legislation will cost working people billions of dollars through devices intended to force people to stop using energy by making it dramatically more expensive.

“One estimate puts its price per family of four at $29,373.85 over 10 years,” Barton said. “Another estimate is that it will raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation, and boost gasoline prices 74 percent and natural gas prices 55 percent.” [link]
56 Republican amendments were rejected so as to get the legislation out of committee and on to a House vote before anyone is actually able to read the 946 page monstrosity. Said John Sarbanes, a Democrat from Maryland, “We can’t afford to stop this forward progress."

Getting it passed is the goal. Understanding its dire implications would only be a hindrance.

Your Democratic Congress at work.

Get out your checkbook. $29,374. And your utility bills to almost double. To keep the planet from warming 2˚. And the kicker? The bill won't even accomplish that ...

May God have mercy.

Fuzzy Logic

The Bristol Herald Courier editorial board comes out four-square in favor of Rick Boucher's energy bill this morning (see "Energy Compromise A Great Step Forward"). But the logic behind the glee makes me wonder just where their brains are. Get this:

Still, it has its opponents, who suggest that Americans will see increased power bills ranging from $1,600 to $3,100 a year.

The obvious truth: Energy costs will increase due to new environmental safeguards in the bill, but no one truly knows by how much.

Translated: "We haven't a clue what will be the result, so we're very supportive of the legislation."

These guys should run for Congress, where they'll fit right in.

They've Learned Their Lesson

After embarrassing themselves the last three years in a row, predicting a devastating hurricane season before each of those years began (after Katrina destroyed New Orleans in 2005), only to realize a virtually non-existent hurricane season in all three, the gurus who predict the weather decided they'd taken enough of a beating:

Government Weather Officials Predict Average 2009 Season

Way to read the headlines, fellas.

How Frustrating

I read this New York Times headline - "A ‘Freer’ Cheney Makes Case ..." - and thought it would be about a freer Dick Cheney making the case yesterday that Bush's fight against terror was effective, but no. It's about Dick Cheney doing battle with the Bush administration. Past tense.

Silly me.

But then this is the New York Times.

Quote of the Day

From Obama's speech yesterday that touched on waterboarding:

"First, I banned the use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques by the United States of America."

In fact, the United States of America quit deploying those methods years before Obama came into office. But it sounded nice.

Quote of the Day II

Dick Cheney:
Our government prevented attacks and saved lives through the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which let us intercept calls and track contacts between al-Qaida operatives and people inside the United States. The program was top secret, and for good reason, until the editors of the New York Times got it and put it on the front page. After 9/11, the Times had spent months publishing the pictures and the stories of everyone killed by al-Qaida on 9/11. Now here was that same newspaper publishing secrets in a way that could only help al-Qaida. It impressed the Pulitzer committee, but it damn sure didn't serve the interests of our country, or the safety of our people.

Quote of the Day III

Dick Cheney:
In top secret meetings about enhanced interrogations, I made my own beliefs clear. I was and remain a strong proponent of our enhanced interrogation program. The interrogations were used on hardened terrorists after other efforts failed. They were legal, essential, justified, successful and the right thing to do. The intelligence officers who questioned the terrorists can be proud of their work and proud of the results, because they prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people.
Same link.

Quote of the Day IV

Dick Cheney:

By presidential decision, last month we saw the selective release of documents relating to enhanced interrogations. This is held up as a bold exercise in open government, honoring the public's right to know. We're informed, as well, that there was much agonizing over this decision.

Yet somehow, when the soul-searching was done and the veil was lifted on the policies of the Bush administration, the public was given less than half the truth. The released memos were carefully redacted to leave out references to what our government learned through the methods in question. Other memos, laying out specific terrorist plots that were averted, apparently were not even considered for release. For reasons the administration has yet to explain, they believe the public has a right to know the method of the questions, but not the content of the answers.

Same link.

Quote of the Day V

Charles Krauthammer:
If hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue, then the flip-flops on previously denounced anti-terror measures are the homage that Barack Obama pays to George Bush. Within 125 days, Obama has adopted with only minor modifications huge swaths of the entire, allegedly lawless Bush program.

Of course, Obama will never admit in word what he's doing in deed. As in his rhetorically brilliant national-security speech yesterday claiming to have undone Bush's moral travesties, the military commissions flip-flop is accompanied by the usual Obama three-step: (a) excoriate the Bush policy, (b) ostentatiously unveil cosmetic changes, (c) adopt the Bush policy.
"Obama in Bush Clothing," Washington Post, May 22, 2009

Our Senator Becomes The Butt Of Ridicule

From the Wall Street Journal:
Then there is the voluble Jim Webb, who in January said Mr. Obama had offered a reasonable timeline in ordering Guantanamo closed in a year. But now the Virginia Democrat opposes closing Gitmo anytime soon while observing to ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday that "We spend hundreds of millions of dollars building an appropriate facility with all security precautions in Guantanamo to try these cases. There are cases against international law." That was the Bush Administration's point all along.
"Bush's Gitmo Vindication," May 22, 2009

If Obama's Fuel Economy Standards ...

... have you buying one of these ...

... and you drive it up my driveway ...

... I'll shoot you.

Going Where No Man Has Gone Before, Dude.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

I'm searching for the right word as I read this ... But I can't seem to grasp it. Hmm. What is it?
Sign change could lure customers off highway
By April Wright, Galax Gazette

Tourists coming to Galax this summer may get better directions to attractions off the beaten path of U.S. 58, if city council decides to implement a permanent off-premises signage program.

That would direct traffic flow to food and lodging establishments located more than 100 feet off of East Stuart Drive/U.S. 58, council members discussed during Monday's meeting.

But for now, this trial program will be limited for the next six months to two businesses— New River Trail Cabins and Bogeys, both of which requested such signs — until the language for the ordinance can be developed.

If the city opens this program to all businesses located more than 100 feet off the main road, “we would have a forest of signs,” said Mayor C.M. Mitchell. “For now, I think we should limit it to the two businesses that have established an interest.”

“We should approve this on a limited basis and see if it makes a difference,” said Councilman John Garner.

According to City Manager Keith Holland, signs can not exceed 9 square feet and must be mounted to Virginia Department of Transportation standards. Signs can not have any exterior or interior lighting.

Businesses would be responsible for the costs and would pay ... [link]
Hey, what a neat idea. Businesses can advertise along the highway in an attempt to lure travelers to their establishments in hopes of selling something. Why didn't anyone think of that before?

Oh. Wait. Now I remember that word I was struggling to recall ...


Still a good idea after all these years. You go, fellas.