Quote

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

Monday, July 13, 2009

Fluff & Bluster

"The choice we face is not between saving our environment and saving our economy — it's a choice between prosperity and decline. The nation that leads the world in creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy."
-- Barack Obama

We will modernize more than 75% of federal buildings and improve the energy efficiency of two million American homes, saving consumers and taxpayers billions on our energy bills. In the process, we will put Americans to work in new jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced – jobs building solar panels and wind turbines; constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings; and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to even more jobs, more savings, and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain.”
- - Barack Obama

"The renewable energy economy is exploding in the United States."
- - Barack Obama


"Virginia has the potential to create tens of thousands of green jobs by 2025."
- - Governor Tim Kaine

"The clean energy industry will create good jobs that can't be shipped overseas in high-tech research, construction and manufacturing. Democrats reject the false choice between a healthy economy and a healthy environment: Green can be good for our planet and our pocketbooks."
- - Governor Tim Kaine

"[The Clean Energy Security Act] opens the door to a more secure energy future and the creation of millions of new jobs innovating, deploying and exporting to the world the new low CO2 emitting technologies that will power our energy future."
- - Congressman Rick Boucher

In today's news:
Austin's clean energy program costing more, selling less
By Marty Toohey, Austin American-Statesman staff

For the past decade, Austin's ambition to become the world's clean-energy capital has been best exemplified by one effort: GreenChoice, a program that sells electricity generated entirely from renewable sources such as wind.

Now the nationally renowned program is struggling to find buyers — the latest allotment is 99 percent unsold after seven months on the market — and Austin Energy is looking for ways to bring down the rising costs.

But those are short-term talks.

Austin Energy officials say that times have changed and that the nation's most successful (by volume of sales) green-energy program, which offers the renewable energy only to those who select it, might no longer be the best way to carry out the city's goals. It now costs almost three times more than the standard electricity rate.

"I think it's time to sit back and look at the philosophy behind GreenChoice," said Roger Duncan, the head of Austin Energy and the chief architect of GreenChoice.

Duncan said part of the solution might just be adding new wind, solar and other renewable-energy projects into the bills of all Austin Energy customers, which could increase rates for everyone.

The reason is that GreenChoice prices have risen more than fivefold since the program started. GreenChoice now would add about $58 a month to the electricity bill of an average home. [link] [my emphasis]
The rhetoric.

The reality.

I Was Wrong

I took the time yesterday to flail the Roanoke Times for its editorialists' (boneheaded) attempt to refute the argument that Obama can only reduce health care costs by forcing the rationing of care. It is, in fact, not the only way. There is another. And the Washington Post points it out. In "Health-Care Savings":
The rapidly rising cost of health care, President Obama has said, is "a threat to our economy" and "a ticking time bomb for the federal budget." So a critical test of the health reform proposals lumbering through Congress is whether they defuse that bomb. The answer, so far, is no.

What would it take to fix that system?

[C]hanges in the current, irrational system of medical malpractice litigation might help lower costs. The evidence that costs are driven up by doctors practicing defensive medicine to protect themselves from lawsuits is scant. But higher malpractice premiums are passed on to consumers. Steps to reduce the prevalence of medical errors and to lower the cost of adjudicating claims -- perhaps by finding ways to screen out frivolous claims -- could also help bend the current dangerous trajectory of health-care costs.
"The evidence that costs are driven up by doctors practicing defensive medicine ... are scant." That's a laugher. Pour a couple of drinks down the throat of any doctor and he'll tell you that that's exactly why he runs so many tests and brings in specialists for diagnostic back-up at the drop of a hat. To cover his ass against potential litigation.

But that's beside the point.

Medical malpractice lawsuits are more often than not frivolous and unwarranted. But lucrative for plaintiffs and their attorneys. And the costs of health care are driven ever upward because of it.

That needs to stop.

That can be stopped.

And, with the Democrats in control in Washington, it won't be stopped.

But here's to the Washington Post for setting me straight.

- - -

Interestingly, the Post calls on Congress and Obama to actually come up with concrete proposals that will actually reduce costs. Except for that cited above, the editorialist came up with no suggestions. Zilch. The elephant in the room that he avoided noticing? R-A-T-I-O-N-I-N-G.

Cynical, At Least

I'm reminded of a Tom Perriello (D-VA 5) quote:

This is a gift. For the first time in a generation, we have the chance to redefine our energy economy. …This is a great moment for us.”

He was referring to that now-infamous "climate change" bill. That "gift" to humanity intended to save the planet.

It was to him a "great moment" when he voted in favor of it.

It being a bill - a great one - dealing with great subject matter - producing a great moment - a bill he never even bothered to read.

Before voting in favor of it.

Making for a great moment in American - nay, global - history.

HE NEVER READ IT.

For the love of God.

That needs to change.

Investor's Business Daily:
Congress Needs A Read-The-Bill Bill
editorial

Lawmakers voted on the stimulus and global warming bills without having read either. Eventually they'll vote on health care legislation that could fund unrelated items. Time to end this systemic fraud.

The stimulus bill, signed into law less than a month after Barack Obama took office, reached 1,434 pages and will eventually cost the nation more than $1 trillion.

Waxman-Markey, the global warming bill, passed the House last month after Democrats added a 309-page amendment at 3 a.m. the morning before the vote, bringing that package of nonsense up to 1,200 or so pages.

Before it votes on health care, we have in mind another bill that Congress should take up. This one should be short, just a few words. It would be far more important to the future of the republic than fevered legislation establishing a public option for health care coverage or vainly trying to manipulate the climate.

This humble bill would simply require each member of Congress to sign a document saying he or she had read the legislation in full before they could vote for it.

Lawmakers should never vote for a bill they haven't read in its entirety. [link]
"This is a great moment for us," said the rookie politician. How did he know? That's what the memo from Pelosi's office said.

Great moments, Tom, are made of much more. Aspire to being great? Start by knowing what you're babbling about.

Good For Them

The ruling class here in the USA - and that would include our Congressman Rick Boucher - may have lost their collective minds when it comes to the economy and its relationship to "climate change" legislation, but the rest of the world has not.

Here's to the sane:
Hot-Air 'Consensus'
New York Post editorial

Memo to the cap-and-taxers on Capitol Hill, who want the United States to cripple its economy by "leading the way" on curbing carbon-gas emissions to halt global warming, or climate change, or whatever the term du jour is:

The Third World has no interest in bobbing along in your wake.

That's the message that came out of the latest G-8 summit in Italy, where President Obama hoped to reach a comprehensive international agreement on capping heat-trapping gases by mid-century.

Seems developing nations like China, Mexico, Brazil and India -- which are responsible for an increasingly greater share of global carbon emissions -- refused to endorse a proposal that would have them cut such emissions in half by 2050, with industrialized countries cutting theirs by 80%.

China, India, et al. understand that placing severe restrictions on their industrial output would bring their rise out of poverty to a shuddering halt -- and they have no intention of committing economic suicide.

No reasonable person would expect otherwise. [link]

No reasonable person exists in Washington D.C. anymore.

So our esteemed leadership hurtles headlong down the path of destruction and those of the expanding countries look on and say, "Sayonara, fools."

It's Come To This

At some point, the global warming proponents are going to have to be held to account for what they've done. I think we are rapidly approaching that point:
Climate change: The sun and the oceans do not lie
By Christopher Booker, London Telegraph

The moves now being made by the world's political establishment to lock us into December's Copenhagen treaty to halt global warming are as alarming as anything that has happened in our lifetimes. Last week in Italy, the various branches of our emerging world government, G8 and G20, agreed in principle that the world must by 2050 cut its CO2 emissions in half. Britain and the US are already committed to cutting their use of fossil fuels by more than 80 per cent. Short of an unimaginable technological revolution, this could only be achieved by closing down virtually all our economic activity: no electricity, no transport, no industry. All this is being egged on by a gigantic publicity machine, by the UN, by serried ranks of government-funded scientists, by cheerleaders such as Al Gore, last week comparing the fight against global warming to that against Hitler's Nazis, and by politicians who have no idea what they are setting in train.

What makes this even odder is that the runaway warming predicted by their computer models simply isn't happening. Last week one of the four official sources of temperature measurement, compiled from satellite data by the University of Huntsville, Alabama, showed that temperatures have now fallen to their average level since satellite data began 30 years ago. [link] [my emphasis]
So. After all the caterwauling, after all the dire predictions, after the insufferable Al Gore is handed a Nobel (for God's sake), statistical data show global temperatures to be normal.

May all the environmentalist whackos burn in hell for what they've done to our way of life.

Pun intended.