Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Earth Day

As I write this another Earth Day has come and gone. It began in Philadelphia in 1970, supposedly started by Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson and has, over the years, grown into a worldwide movement. I say supposedly because a man by the name of Ira Einhorn, a sixties radical--hippie, guru, anti-war activist and darling of the left--claimed to be the founder himself. He was at least a key organizer and MC of the first event, but was later disowned by the movement for his inconvenient killing of his girl friend, Holly Maddux. This was discovered 18 months after he had stuffed her body in a steamer trunk and stored it in his apartment. The neighbors finally complained about the smell and liquid dripping through the ceiling. Talk about an environmental issue. Ira had plenty of defenders on the left and managed to get out on $40,000 bail whereupon he promptly disappeared. In the 80s he turned up in France and avoided extradition until the late 90s when he was convicted and sent off to jail.

I would be the last to dispute that Earth Day and the raising of concern about the environment has done a lot of good over the decades. Much has been accomplished: the air and water have been cleaned up, sewage issues dealt with, spills of noxious chemicals stopped, mining waste controlled and landfills better managed. Although from the crap you see strewn along the highways and the graffiti on every flat surface in major cities (like this river in Manila), you get the feeling that not everyone has gotten the word.

I have always thought of myself as a “conservationist”. Indeed, my major in college (marine biology) fell under the supervision of the Conservation Department at Cornell. But, who doesn’t support clean air and water as well as the wise stewardship of our natural resources? I would not like to be called an “environmentalist” however. They have gone off the deep end with another agenda. As Stephen Hayward of the Pacific Resources Institute and author of the annual “Leading Environmental Indicators” states, “The environmental movement has been taken over by anti-capitalists and extremists. The agenda is now pulling down market economics, raising up central planning for egalitarian goals, forced lifestyle changes and the vilification- in hopes of eliminating- signs of wealth. Ironically, the creation of wealth allows the resources to invest in clean up.”

Indeed, the constant drumbeat that the environment is in grave danger from the left and the media has been effective. A poll commissioned by Habitat Heroes and conducted by Opinion Research found that 75% of blacks and 65% of Hispanics believe the planet will be irrevocably damaged by the time they reach adulthood. The schools have been drenching the children in eco-propaganda, laments Meghan Cox Gurdon in a piece for the WSJ (Taste Page, 4/17/09). This, she asserts, “causes stress that their smallest decision could have catastrophic effects on the globe.” [Another great article by the same author.]

She points out that children’s books have gotten in on the act. One of my favorite funny authors, Carl Hiaasen, has written several children’s books (Hoot, Flush, Scat) that feature eco-themes where young eco-warriors thwart fat, evil businessmen who damage the environment. Trite, but effective.

Mark Levin in his runaway best seller “Liberty and Tyranny” explains the motivation of the modern environmental movement in clear concise terms. He calls them “enviro-statists”. BTW, everyone should read this book… even my liberal friends (maybe especially my liberal friends). He explains a great deal about where we are and how we got there.

While the “Green” movement has followed the trajectory of many other fads and been championed to the point of nausea, the radical environmentalist have clearly gained the upper hand in promoting their agenda. Obama has loaded his cabinet with true believers starting with “Energy Czar”, Carol Browner. She served as a Gore protégé and once worked for Ralph Nader. She was also one of 14 leaders of Socialist International’s Committee for Sustained World Society that calls for “global governance”. Ken Salazar at Interior is slowly but systematically shutting down any hope of drilling for more oil. Stephen Chu, Energy Secretary and Lisa Jackson at EPA are both global warming firm believers and are actively promoting the proposed Cap and Trade legislation and/or advocating the restrictions on carbon emissions through EPA mandates.

They are not much interested in this just in from the four agencies that track the Earth’s temperatures: Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in NY, Christy Group at the U of Alabama and Remote Sensing Systems in CA. All four report that the Earth cooled in 2007 by 0.7C, the fastest drop on record. There has been no warming for the last 9 years. Last week Gore testified before Congress still claiming that the oceans will rise 20 feet and we are all doomed. Geeze, Al, get a grip. According to the latest poll, only about 30% of the US populace now believe that human activity has any impact on climate change.

Despite predictions from government and private sources that draconian restrictions on carbon emissions will result in huge increases in electricity and energy costs with concurrent job losses, the Administration persists in promoting their “renewable energy” (Solar and wind. Nuclear does not count even though it emits no CO2) program. Conservative estimates show that electricity prices will increase by 30% by 2020 and 101-120% by 2030. Job losses come in at 1.5 million by 2020.

Obama touts Germany as the poster child on how we should employ a renewable energy program. OK, let’s take a look.

Alex Alexiev in a NR article (“Green Bubbles Bursting”) points out that Germany achieved 15% of their electricity needs from renewables by offering that source seven times the wholesale price from conventional producers. Electricity prices went up 38% in one year. (2006-07) This, of course, does not include the infrastructure cost borne by the government. Part of the problem of renewables is the intermittent nature of the wind and sun. (News flash: the sun does not shine at night). These sources need to be backed up by conventional, usually gas fired, plants to provide energy to the grid.

There are other examples of European countries trying the green route but seeing the costs and irrationality, are now backing off. In Spain, another example cited by Obama, the Universidad Ray Juan Carlos calculates that for every “green job” created by their renewable program there were 2.5 jobs destroyed elsewhere in the economy.

There are also significant signs that Europeans have cast off their anti-nuclear hysteria and are planning on relying on nuclear energy for their future. Sweden has changed course, as has Italy that plans to get 25% of its future power from 8 new nuclear reactors. Great Britain will build 10 new reactors and even the Ukraine, site of the infamous Chernobyl disaster, plans 11 new reactors by 2030. Poland, Finland, Bulgaria and Romania are either planning or building new reactors. India plans to go from 3% to 45% nuclear with 40 new reactors, China plans a seven-fold increase and Japan wants to double from 30% nuclear.

Meanwhile, here in the USA nuclear is off the table while the agenda remains controlled by the hysterical environmental lobbies. Even as the Republicans timidly promote nuclear they know their suggestions fall on deaf ears. The primary tool of the environmentalists is litigation and the “citizen lawsuit provisions” of environmental law allow well-funded groups to bring lawsuits in the public’s name. They can and will hold up any project that does not fit their narrow theology.

A few Democrat Senators have been getting cold feet over the Cap and Trade legislation. As Duncan Currie points out in his NR piece, “Robbing Bismarck to Pay Boston”, many states get most of their electricity from coal fired plants, from a high of 97.8% in W. VA to 85% for many Midwestern states. Some states like CA get none or nearly none. These Senators realize that their states will be disproportionately impacted. Not good for re-election to vote for this turkey. The recent decision by the EPA declaring CO2 a hazard to health is meant to browbeat these reluctant Senators into line. Senator Boxer recently declared that if the Senate does not pass C & T, she would urge the EPA to act to regulate carbon.

Just what we need: economic and energy policy by fiat.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Tea, Sir?

If you get all your news from the networks--ABC, NBC, CBS, otherwise known as the Main Stream Media, or MSM to those of us gamely holding the right flank--you might have missed that about one million pissed off citizens showed up at “tea parties” around the country on April 15th, tax day. You might have missed it because the MSM tried to pretend it wasn’t happening.


If a handful of Cindy Sheehan’s Code Pink fruitcakes set up somewhere for a peace protest or fifty lesbian bikers decided to ride down the streets of Fargo to promote gay marriage, the media would be all over it. Not this though. It didn’t fit with their liberal mindset and their mission to do no harm to the Obama Administration.

Although this was truly a grass roots movement inadvertently set off by an impromptu rant by CNBC’s Rick Santelli, and demonstrated coast to coast resistance to the policies being promoted by President Obama and the Democrat Congress, the MSM decided it was not news worthy. CNN and MSNBC, long since having given up any pretense of being anything but cheerleaders for Obama, ridiculed the event calling the participants “tea baggers”. This term, I later learned referred to a homosexual act. I hate to admit this since I have gone to college, been in the Navy and attended several county fairs, but I was unfamiliar with the term. Google to the rescue.

What cut ups Olbermann and the folks over at MSNBC are! And, thanks to them we have enlightened million of otherwise ignorant youngsters around the country on this important piece of gay trivia.

The Democrats, of course, poo-pooed the whole thing, calling it a Republican inspired non-event. Nancy Pelosi said it was not a grass roots movement but an “Astroturf” event. Amusingly, this term originated with David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign manager and advisor, who routinely ginned up non-movements to deflect and confuse his opposition. It reminds me of Hillary and her “politics of personal destruction” charge when she and her cohorts actually invented the practice. Pelosi went on to make herself look even more foolish by saying the people involved were all “rich people trying to get out of paying their taxes”.

These “tea parties” were not about simply taxes any more than the original Boston Tea Party was about the British Tea Tax. It reflected a real and growing concern that the policies of this Administration and Congress were leading the country in a dangerous, socialist direction with massive spending and intrusion in the economy. Democrats were quick to spout the campaign fallacy that 95% of Americans are getting a tax cut and, in any event, no one’s taxes had been increased. (Yet.) Everyone knows tax increases are coming, although the Dems hope that delaying them until after the 2010 elections will keep them in power.

I believe these protests also indicate a growing concern about Obama. Although he, like Clinton, schedules an event daily to keep him as the lead story on the evening news, there have been some disquieting indications that BHO may not be the messiah everyone hoped. A few examples:

· Bad mouthing the USA in Europe. (We are arrogant?)

· Bowing to the Saudi King.

· Sucking up to the Iranians.

· Firing the head of a public company (GM).

· Appointing a tax cheat as head of the IRS.

· Saying he supports the 2nd Amendment but quietly pushing for gun restrictions.

· Pushing a huge carbon tax to finance the takeover of the health care industry.

· Jetting around on Air Force One (he calls it his “cool ride”) and living the luxurious life. (Hauling his wife’s hair stylist and make up artist on AF-1 to Europe. Flying in a pizza chef from St. Louis. Flying to Chicago for Valentine’s Day. Lavish parties in the White House.) These are not great examples for the leader who moans about the financial circumstances of the electorate. (Let them eat cake?)

· Talking about nuclear disarmament while North Korea is firing rockets and re-starting their nuclear program and Iran keeps those centrifuges humming.

In a curious coincidence, while the tea parties were getting fired up, the “Washington Times” unearthed a confidential Department of Homeland Security document sent out to the FBI and law enforcement warning them to be on the lookout for “right wing extremists”. You might be surprised to learn that if you are an opponent of abortion, an advocate of state’s rights, a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, object to high taxes or are a returning military veteran, you are a potential threat to the security of the USA. The government thinks they better keep an eye on you just in case. That’s comforting.

This amazing pronouncement comes on the heels of the same DHS wizards proclaiming that henceforth the word terror will be banished. Terrorism will now be dubbed “man caused disasters” and the war on terror will now go by the newspeak term “overseas contingency operations”. I feel safer already knowing we won’t be offending any terrorists and keeping an eye on those dangerous pro lifers.

The big losers in this tea party protest business is the MSM who have further damaged the remaining shreds of their claim to credibility and the Democrat Party. Once again, and in explicit fashion, the leaders of Congress have demonstrated their distain for the American people. The question remains whether the voters will turn out in 2010 and throw a lot of these fools out of office.

Fox News covered the events extensively and I think are big winners here. It’s all the more reason for the Democrats to push hard to shut Fox and talk radio the Hell up.

Monday, April 13, 2009

‘Til Death Do Us Part

The other day while spending some time in the “contemplation room”… the place with all the porcelain equipment… I got to wondering how many years the leaders of Congress have served. This is the kind of stuff that bubbles to the surface of my brain when suitable reading material is not near at hand.

We know the current President is a little short in the experience department, but what about the Congressional leaders? And perhaps more importantly, what sort of experience outside of politics do they have?

Once again I tip my soggy cap to the Internet. I set my chubby fingers to work on Google and came up with some interesting statistics. I picked 20 well known leaders in Congress who are committee chairmen or simply well known. They are:

Joe Biden (Of course, he’s now VP and no longer in the Senate but hey, it’s my list.)
Robert Byrd
Ted Kennedy
John Dingell
Henry Waxman
Nancy Pelosi
Harry Reid
David Obey
Pete Stark
Pat Leahy
Chris Dodd
Ed Markey
Carl Levin
Richard Durbin
Steny Hoyer (Unknown but, Majority Leader)
Chuck Schumer
Daniel Inouye

Yeah, I know. These are all Democrats. But, they are in charge now. I’m confident many politicians on the other side of the aisle have similar backgrounds except, of course, all on my list are liberals.

The average amount of time served in federal office for the above list is 36.5 years. This does not include time served in elected office in their state legislatures. Robert Byrd, for example, has served 50 years in the Senate, seven years in the House and before that, 13 years in the West Virginia Senate. Harry Reid, the current Majority Leader only served 27 years in the House and Senate, but logged 15 years before that in the Nevada House. Hoyer only has 28 years in the House but did 15 years in the MD Senate first. John Dingell, the longest serving member of the House, has been re-elected every two years since 1955, two years after he graduated from Georgetown Law School.

These folks have spent virtually their entire working lives in the surreal world of Washington politics having their egos and bank accounts burnished and far removed from the day-to-day struggles of the average taxpayer. Chuck Schumer, who has 28 years in Congress and 6 in NY state government, never worked a single day outside of elected office. Only one (Pete Stark) has any business experience and only a few ever worked at a job in private enterprise at all except as lawyers. Of the 20 on my list all but two are lawyers. If you’ve ever wondered why Congress cannot bring itself to stop the runaway tort problem in the US, there’s your answer. They are all lawyers themselves.

The primary job of Congress is to spend money to run the government and to levy taxes to pay for it. Of course, over the years these professional politicians have come to believe that they can dictate nearly every aspect of our lives. From telling us how to educate our children to what labels must be on cereal boxes, from forbidding us to pray in schools to how fast we can drive, from how far a car must go on a gallon of gas to who can own a firearm, the politicians want to manage everyone’s life. And, with the above group in control, they want even more power. They want to tell corporations how much money they can pay their executives, what kind of toilets and light bulbs we have to use and how much carbon dioxide we can exhale. They want to take over and run major industries like banks and auto companies.

The question in my mind is: are these guys that smart? OK, nearly all graduated from law school so they must be smart. Well, Joe Biden actually graduated from law school so maybe that’s not a good test. Anyway, smart is not enough in my mind. How about a little practical experience?

Let’s face it, their primary objective in life has always been to get re-elected and they’re obviously pretty good at that. About 95% of them get sent back for another kick at the can every election cycle. Over the years they’ve re-giggered the Congressional electoral districts to create “safe” districts through gerrymandering to insure that either a Democrat or Republican automatically gets in. And, let’s not forget their control of the purse strings garners them substantial contributions for their campaigns. Think earmarks.

The current crop of Democrats in control wants to take it a step further. They already have the union, environmental and black vote locked up, but now they want to get as many people as possible on the government payroll and dole. They would also like to give amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants who will likely vote for Democrats too. If they succeed you can pretty much bet the farm that they will be in control for generations to come. If you like the way Germany and France operate you might be happy with that development. On the other hand, you might want consider that the power of the US military backed by its industrial and technological vibrancy has been defending the socialist democracies of Europe against tyranny since WWI. Who’s going to do it when the US can’t?

And don’t kid yourselves; with all their social commitments, increases in government and anti-business policies, the US won’t be able to afford to be the protector of freedom for much longer.