Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Compare & Contrast 

A "Senior Administration Official," speaking on Obama's planned Afghanistan troops draw-down, on a June 22nd conference call:
In terms of General Petraeus, I think that, consistent with our approach to this, General Petraeus presented the President with a range of options for pursuing this drawdown. There were certainly options that went beyond what the President settled on in terms of the length of time that it would take to recover the surge and the pace that troops would come out -- so there were options that would have kept troops in Afghanistan longer at a higher number.

That said, the President’s decision was fully within the range of options that were presented to him and has the full support of his national security team.
Marine Lt. Gen. John Allen, Obama's replacement for Gen. David Petraeus as head of coalition forces in Afghanistan, at his June 22nd nomination hearing before the Senate Armed Services committee:
[Sen. Lindsey] GRAHAM [R-SC]: The option that the country has chosen through President Obama is to withdraw 10,000 this year, all surge forces gone by September. Is it fair to say, General Allen, that was not one of the options presented to the president by General Petraeus?

ALLEN: It is a more aggressive option than that which was presented.

GRAHAM: My question is, was that a option?

ALLEN: It was not.
Conclusion: The Obama Administration ignored the military's advice about Afghanistan then lied about it.

(via reader Warren)

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Headline of the Day 

From the June 28th Daily Mail (U.K.):
Green 'stealth tax' to encourage wind farms and nuclear power will hit poor the hardest

A green 'stealth' tax to encourage new wind farms and nuclear power plants could push tens of thousands of households into fuel poverty but do nothing to reduce emissions.

The carbon floor price, announced in the March Budget, could even end up giving climate policies a 'bad name', the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) has warned.

To be introduced in 2013, the tax is intended to encourage investment in low-carbon energy -- and raise billions for the Treasury.

Under the existing rules, energy companies must generate a fixed amount of green energy every year, or else buy permits to pollute on the open market.

The new tax kicks in if the cost of these permits falls too low. From 2013, the ‘floor price’ of a permit needed to emit a tonne of carbon will be set at £16, rising to £30 by 2020.

The higher cost of electricity will be passed on to household and business customers with energy-guzzling industries hit hardest.

But the IPPR, a centre-left think-tank, says that householders, many of whom are already struggling to pay their fuel bills, will also suffer. It estimates that 30,000 to 60,000 more households will be pushed into fuel poverty -- defined as spending more than 10 per cent of your disposable income on heat and light.

The think-tank also warned that the UK scheme could lead to lower carbon permit prices elsewhere in Europe -- and so do nothing to ease pollution.

Andrew Pendleton, IPPR associate director, said: 'The carbon price support scheme risks giving energy and climate change policy a bad name because it will do nothing to reduce carbon emissions while piling more cost on to the shoulders of already hard-pressed consumers in the UK.'
I can't tell if this is good news, or just the British version of Mort Sahl's parody NY Times headline.

(via Global Warming Policy Foundation)

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Program Notes 

I'm returning to work today, not full time. Still somewhat painful, and though the surgery apparently was successful, about half my Drs say it is unlikely to be "the cure"--i.e., that there's something else still going on.

I may start blogging next week.

Friday, June 17, 2011

Program Notes 

I'll be off for at least a week for the reasons previously mentioned.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

QOTD 

Steven Hayward testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight, May 25, 2011:
[T]he international diplomacy of climate change is the most implausible and unpromising initiative since the disarmament talks of the 1930s, and for many of the same reasons; that the Kyoto Protocol and its progeny are the climate diplomacy equivalent of the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 that promised to end war (a treaty that is still on the books, by the way), and finally, that future historians are going to look back on this whole period as the climate policy equivalent of wage and price controls to fight inflation in the 1970s.
See also the Heartland Institute's James Taylor in Forbes.

(via Powerline)

Those Crazy Canadians 

Just when I held out some hope for our northern neighbors comes this:
Bureaucrats have added insult to injury for a corn farmer south of Montreal whose fields have been damaged by near-record flooding.

Martin Reid says he's been forced to buy a fishing licence to remove carp that are swimming in a metre of water on his flooded-out fields.

He says he bought the permit to avoid the problems he faced the last time he was forced to remove fish from his flooded farmland. In 1993, Reid was fined $1,000 for illegal fishing.

"My father and I . . . were charged by Fisheries and Oceans Canada," Reid recalled. "We were jointly responsible for having caused the death of fish for reasons other than sport fishing."

Reid says the fine will jump to $100,000 if he's cited a second time.
So how do authorities justify the regulation? Obviously, to protect the farmers:
A spokesman for the provincial natural resources department defended Ottawa's decision.

"The idea is to help farmers," said Jean-Philippe Detolle. "The licence was issued to reassure them they won't be fined."
(via Small Dead Animals)

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Legislation of the Day 

Introduced by State Senator Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles), California Senate Bill 432 would add a new Section 6714 to California's labor code covering hotels, mandating:
The use of a fitted sheet, instead of a flat sheet, as the bottom sheet on all beds within the lodging establishment. For the purpose of this section, a "fitted sheet" means a bed sheet containing elastic or similar material sewn into each of the four corners that allows the sheet to stay in place over the mattress.
A violation of the provision would be a misdemeanor. The bill passed the Labor and Industrial Relations Committee in May.

Business groups oppose the proposed law. But, for the hotel workers union, it's not just about protecting the public from the horrors of ill-fitting sheets. Rather, the union has a creative reason for supporting the bill--they say housekeeping staffers can throw out their backs lifting heavy mattresses. According to a union rep quoted in the Daily Caller:
[Workplace injuries for housekeeping staffers] isn’t just necessarily from changing sheets. We’ve seen high instances of repetitive motion injury and that comes from the bending and the lifting. That stuff’s been documented by OSHA, it’s been documented by us, by ergonomics experts, by loads of people. This isn’t stuff that we just, like, pulled out of our ass.
More proof that California is the ne plus ultra of the Nanny State.

(via reader Warren)

QOTD 

Assistant Village Idiot:
In a comment likely to offend just about everyone, I dislike Sarah Palin for just about the same reasons I dislike Barack Obama. She intentionally touches on cultural symbols as substitute for content. I feel more comfortable with Obama's symbols, and certainly, most of the people I know hail from crowds that would be Barack-symbolic rather than Sarah symbolic. But either way, both draw their support from people who really want a full-out culture war -- with the other side defeated, humiliated, enslaved. And both are sure that this is exactly what the country needs. Do you think we need more presidents who ride motorcycles and shoot wolves, or more presidents who are embarrassed to be Americans in front of Europeans? Would you rather be a Lilliputian or a Blefuscuan? [NOfP note: Gulliver's Travels reference]. . .

Both "Obama" and "Palin" still show up as red-line misspellings in my blogger dictionary, and I ain't a-gonna change it by adding them in. My own little petty protest.
The comments on his post are worth a read.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Newspaper Article of the Day 

From the June 12th New York Times:
F.B.I. Agents Get Leeway to Push Privacy Bounds

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents, allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention.

The F.B.I. soon plans to issue a new edition of its manual, called the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, according to an official who has worked on the draft document and several others who have been briefed on its contents. The new rules add to several measures taken over the past decade to give agents more latitude as they search for signs of criminal or terrorist activity.
Just imagine the uproar had this been done during the Bush Administration.

(via reader Warren)

Photo of the Day 

Last week, enviro-zealots protested in front of the White House. The New York Post snapped this photo:



caption:

Q'orianka Kilcher, known for her role as Pocahontas in the film "The New World", protests at the White House in Washington.

As Powerline's John Hinderaker observes:
The thing about this photo is that the dumbest element isn't the misspelling. It is the silly idea that "corporate greed" is "destroying the planet." Corporations aren't greedy. They have a legal duty to try to make money for their shareholders, and they do so in a wide variety of legal ways. I don't know how, specifically, this particular dim bulb thinks "corporations," which is to say all of us, are destroying the planet, but I suppose it involves drilling for petroleum so we can drive cars rather than riding in horse-drawn buggies, or mining coal so that when we flip a switch in our home or office, a light will go on.
Interestingly, the actress just had charges dropped after chaining herself to the White House gates last year, and supposedly was banned from the area.

(via Maggie's Farm)

Monday, June 13, 2011

Compare & Contrast 

President Obama toasting the Queen at Buckingham Palace, May 24, 2011:
[I]t is a great honor to join you again in this great country as we reaffirm the enduring bonds between our two nations and reinforce this special relationship. . .

Our alliance is a commitment that speaks to who we are. As Winston Churchill said on a visit to the United States, "Above all, among the English-speaking peoples, there must be the union of hearts based upon convictions and common ideals." . . .

Ladies and gentlemen, please stand with me and raise your glasses as I propose a toast:

To Her Majesty the Queen. For the vitality of the special relationship between our peoples, and in the words of Shakespeare, "To this blessed plot, this Earth, this realm, this England."
President Obama speaking to Parliament in Westminster Hall, May 25, 2011:
I come here today to reaffirm one of the oldest, one of the strongest alliances the world has ever known. It’s long been said that the United States and the United Kingdom share a special relationship. . .

We share a common interest in resolving conflicts that prolong human suffering and threaten to tear whole regions asunder. . .

We do these things because we believe not simply in the rights of nations; we believe in the rights of citizens. That is the beacon that guided us through our fight against fascism and our twilight struggle against communism. . .

Let there be no doubt: The United States and United Kingdom stand squarely on the side of those who long to be free.
Organization of American States press release on the 41st meeting of the OAS general assembly, June 8, 2011:
On the topic of the Malvinas Islands, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and Worship of Argentina, Héctor Timerman, asked the member countries to support Argentina’s claim. . . He then urged the member countries to support his country "with the conviction that your voice will have to be heard, because, in embracing this cause, you will be the voice of those who forged our history."
Approved by the 41st OAS general assembly, with the support of the United States, Draft Declaration on the Question of the Malvinas Islands (AG/DEC. 67 (XLI-O/11)) [Word document page 6-7], June 7, 2011:
It has not yet been possible to resume the negotiations between the two countries with a view to solving the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgias and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas . . .

REAFFIRMS the need for the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to resume, as soon as possible, negotiations on the sovereignty dispute, in order to find a peaceful solution to this protracted controversy.
No Oil for Pacifists, April 3, 2010:
Siding with Argentina in this dispute is nuts--Falkland Islanders are overwhelmingly (95 percent) British subjects, and repeatedly have rejected Argentine citizenship/sovereignty: they have "nothing in common with Argentina -- culturally, linguistically, historically or politically." And current Argentine President Ms Fernández de Kirchner "hasn't shrunk from playing to anti-American sentiment around the region."
Nile Gardiner in the Telegraph (U.K.), June 8, 2011:
It is hugely disappointing that the Obama administration has chosen once again to side not only with the increasingly authoritarian regime in Argentina, but also with an array of despots in Latin America against British interests. Mrs Clinton should be reminded that 255 brave British servicemen laid down their lives in 1982 for the freedom of the Falkland Islanders, who are overwhelmingly British, following the brutal Argentine invasion.

The sovereignty of the Islands is not a matter for negotiation, and Britain will never give in to threats from Argentina or its tyrannical allies in places such as Venezuela. The White House recently declared that Britain remains America’s most important ally. Now it should live up to its words by supporting Washington’s closest friend and partner on matters of vital British interest, including the future of British subjects living in the South Atlantic, whose only wish is to remain free under the protection of the Union Jack.
Some "special" relationship. As reader OBH commented on another occasion, just another "week of that very special Obama® Brand Foreign Policy."

(via Ed Morrissey via reader Warren)

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Program Notes 

Don't know how much I'll write before surgery--but this blog may be light for a week and absent for the week after.

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Headline of the Day 

From the June 8th The Register (U.K.):
Farting Death Camels Must Die to save the world!
No, really: it's a proposal by a company called Northwest Carbon, for an Australian government program called the Carbon Farming Initiative. The CFI is "a carbon offsets scheme to provide new economic rewards to farmers and other landholders who help the environment by reducing carbon pollution."

As the The Register reports:
An Adelaide-based entrepreneur has hit upon a novel method of fighting global warming: he intends to exterminate Australia's vast population of feral camels by means of gunfire from helicopters and jeeps, so preventing the beasts from unleashing a deadly planet-wrecking miasma of greenhouse gas from their rumbling guts.

The idea is that the War On Dromedaries would be paid for -- and indeed, turn a profit -- by selling government carbon credits issued on the basis that a dead camel cannot be emitting methane by means of belch or trouser cough. . .

[The company] calculates that each of the feral dromedaries roaming Australia's mostly desolate interior belches or farts out no less than 45kg of methane each year, equating to a thumping tonne of CO2. On average, each camel assassination will prevent the equivalent of 15 tonnes of carbon emissions.

The resulting certificates . . . could easily be traded for enough money to cover the costs of blasting the dromedaries from helicopters or 4x4s and disposing of the bodies, which could perhaps be sold for pet food.
The Australian government currently is considering Northwest Carbon's suggestion, and hopes to decide by July 1st.

"Kill a camel for Gaia." Animal rights activists may object, but I can't wait.

(via reader Warren)

Compare & Contrast 

New York Daily News June 4th editorial:
A chilling Internet video confirms what has long been suspected: Al Qaeda terrorists are eager to launch a gun-fueled rampage against Americans -- and they know just how to do it.

Spotted on jihadist forums, the video shows American-born Al Qaeda fighter Adam Gadahn almost cheerily urging followers to action:
America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle without a background check and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?
We don't say this often about Al Qaeda types, but: He's right on the facts.
No Oil for Pacifists May 2008:
Automatic weapons are classed as machine guns under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b), and outlawed for civilian sale in the U.S. (see 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(4)(o)(1)), since 1986.
(via The Corner)

Friday, June 10, 2011

QOTD 

From the New York Times:
No American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won a second term in office when the unemployment rate on Election Day topped 7.2 percent.
As a reminder, the current unemployment rate is 9.1 percent and rising. It's been above 8 percent since 11 days after Obama took office.

(via Instapundit)

Blowing the Wisdom 

When Senator John Kerry was the Democrat candidate for President, I called his proposed foreign policy "as decisive as Jimmy Carter." I said it was both wrong-headed and unworkable--and filled with flip-flops.

Kerry has stayed true to type. In January 2010, he said Syria was "committed to peace." Last May -- two weeks after President Obama renewed sanctions against Syria -- Kerry went to Damascus and met with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad--apparently at the request of the White House. Indeed, the Senator visited Syria at least six times over the past two years -- and has been a "key supporter of Mr. Assad."

In January, Syria began retaliating against protesters, killing over 1100. The government also shut down Internet access.

As recently as March, Senator Kerry still predicted Assad would embrace reform--but last month finally performed an "about face" and abandoned his support for the regime. Kerry now claims he never harbored any illusions about Assad. Heck, even the Arab press now rates Assad worse than "the Zionist entity" (Israel).

Bob Dylan famously asked "how many deaths will it take till he knows/That too many people have died?" For John Kerry, the answer, my friend, is over a thousand.

(via reader Warren, via Best of the Web, Ed Morrissey)

Thursday, June 09, 2011

Euro's End? 

Greece is in economic free-fall, and default could fracture the EU and doom the common currency. In the Telegraph (U.K.), Andrew Lilico predicts the process:
- Every bank in Greece will instantly go insolvent.

- The Greek government will nationalise every bank in Greece.

- The Greek government will forbid withdrawals from Greek banks.

- To prevent Greek depositors from rioting on the streets, Argentina-2002-style (when the Argentinian president had to flee by helicopter from the roof of the presidential palace to evade a mob of such depositors), the Greek government will declare a curfew, perhaps even general martial law.

- Greece will redenominate all its debts into "New Drachmas" or whatever it calls the new currency (this is a classic ploy of countries defaulting)

- The New Drachma will devalue by some 30-70 per cent (probably around 50 per cent, though perhaps more), effectively defaulting 0n 50 per cent or more of all Greek euro-denominated debts.

- The Irish will, within a few days, walk away from the debts of its banking system.

- The Portuguese government will wait to see whether there is chaos in Greece before deciding whether to default in turn.

- A number of French and German banks will make sufficient losses that they no longer meet regulatory capital adequacy requirements.

- The European Central Bank will become insolvent, given its very high exposure to Greek government debt, and to Greek banking sector and Irish banking sector debt.
Agreed.

(via Megan McArdle)

Green Irony of the Day 

UPDATE: Headline in the Telegraph (U.K.):
UK faces job losses as businesses threaten to flee abroad to escape green energy levies



According to the Guardian (U.K.):
Environmental tax threatens green energy research in UK

Carbon reduction commitment (CRC) scheme has 'perverse effect' of threatening zero-carbon energy research

World-class research into future sources of green energy is under threat in Britain from an environmental tax designed to boost energy efficiency and drive down carbon emissions, scientists claim.

Some facilities must find hundreds of thousands of pounds to settle green tax bills, putting jobs and research at risk.

The unexpected impact of the government's carbon reduction commitment (CRC) scheme is so severe that scientists and research funders have lobbied ministers for an exemption to reduce the bills.

Among the worst hit is the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy in Oxfordshire, a facility for research into almost limitless carbon-free energy. The lab faces an estimated £400,000 payment next year, raising the spectre of job losses and operational cuts. "Considering our research is aimed at producing zero-carbon energy, it seems ironic and perverse to clobber us with an extra bill," a senior scientist at the lab said. "We have to use electricity to run the machine and there is no way of getting around that."
So, scientists are complaining of high energy prices caused by green taxes. Leave it to liberals to label a foreseeable consequence "perverse"--and then demand an exemption.

(via Global Warming Policy Foundation)

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

Chart of the Day 

From the Heritage Foundation's 2011 Budget Chartbook, page 5:



Told 'ya so.

(via reader Warren)

Compelling "Union Yes" 

Last year, labor unions seemingly lost every battle. This year -- with re-election looming -- the Obama Administration is trying to even the score.

First, the National Labor Relations Board sued to force Boeing to keep its assembly lines in union-friendly states. Then, the White House reversed course and conditioned three finalized Free Trade Agreements (with Korea, Columbia and Panama) on a massive worker pay-off program. Now, the National Mediation Board (NMB) announced an investigation into whether Delta Airlines interfered with a union rejection vote last fall.

The controversy began when Delta acquired Northwest Airlines in 2008. Delta -- based in Georgia, a right-to-work state -- largely was non-unionized; Northwest had unions. The merger thus triggered an election among various unions; flight attendants voted on November 3, 2010 to reject union representation. Charges of company election interference by various other unions were dismissed (see page 43 n.2), but the Association of Flight Attendants both sued and complained to the NMB.

On June 1st, the NMB General Counsel agreed to review the fairness of the election. The union claims misconduct because Delta "[sent] daily emails. . . slick brochures to homes [and] encourag[ed] Flight Attendants to vote on company computers, where they could be monitored." Meaning it's OK for the union to campaign for a "yes," but management should be handcuffed. This from a movement that wants to abolish the secret ballot for unionization votes.

On a completely unrelated note, two of the NMB's three members are former union bosses.

As Pajamas Media's Bryan Preston observes, consumers are the big losers:
[I]t is a big victory for Big Labor and for no one else. This investigation will end up gobbling up millions, and a lot of time, for Delta. The airline industry is already ailing badly. Is now really a good time to have a federal bureaucracy rooting around and causing trouble?
Especially when a union won't take "no" for an answer--and an Administration which wants their votes might force a "do over."

(via The Corner)

Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Headline of the Day 

UPDATE: More evidence that bearded progressives need to shave with Occam's Razor.


From today's New York Post editorial:
Erections have consequences
The article begins:
Let us declare with certitude the obvious: Rep. Anthony Weiner has disgraced his office, and himself, and he needs to quit.
One DailyKos diarist (the website has been and still is relentless in blaming conservatives for "hacking" the Congressman's computer accounts) has the grace to demand "some explanation from tech expert Weiner defenders."

Don't count on it--the left seems ignorant of Occam's Razor.

(via reader Ken R.)

Crime Rate Still Falling 

Liberals and the media often hypothesize that crime is "caused" by economic hardship. Related is the "Fox Butterfield" effect--the failure to connect falling crime rates with rising prisoner populations. This stems from an erroneous distinction between "despite" and "because." (See also the justly famous third sentence of this 2009 SF Weekly article.)

In any event, though stuck in an economic slump, crime rates in America keep dropping:
According to the FBI’s Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report released today, the nation experienced a 5.5 percent decrease in the number of violent crimes and a 2.8 percent decline in the number of property crimes in 2010 when compared with data from 2009.
Why is crime falling? Last year, commenter Roy suggested population aging: crimes are thought mostly to be committed by the young. Yet this might be overstated; studies of criminals show a broad peak from late teens to early 30s, and the percent of the population in that range hasn't varied that much.

Rather, as socialogist James Q. Wilson says in the Wall Street Journal, it's culture and cops:
One obvious answer is that many more people are in prison than in the past. Experts differ on the size of the effect, but I think that William Spelman and Steven Levitt have it about right in believing that greater incarceration can explain about one-quarter or more of the crime decline. Yes, many thoughtful observers think that we put too many offenders in prison for too long. For some criminals, such as low-level drug dealers and former inmates returned to prison for parole violations, that may be so. But it's true nevertheless that when prisoners are kept off the street, they can attack only one another, not you or your family.

Imprisonment's crime-reduction effect helps to explain why the burglary, car-theft and robbery rates are lower in the U.S. than in England. The difference results not from the willingness to send convicted offenders to prison, which is about the same in both countries, but in how long America keeps them behind bars. For the same offense, you will spend more time in prison here than in England. Still, prison can't be the sole reason for the recent crime drop in this country: Canada has seen roughly the same decline in crime, but its imprisonment rate has been relatively flat for at least two decades.

Another possible reason for reduced crime is that potential victims may have become better at protecting themselves by equipping their homes with burglar alarms, putting extra locks on their cars and moving into safer buildings or even safer neighborhoods. We have only the faintest idea, however, about how common these trends are or what effects on crime they may have.

Policing has become more disciplined over the last two decades; these days, it tends to be driven by the desire to reduce crime, rather than simply to maximize arrests, and that shift has reduced crime rates. One of the most important innovations is what has been called hot-spot policing. The great majority of crimes tend to occur in the same places. Put active police resources in those areas instead of telling officers to drive around waiting for 911 calls, and you can bring down crime. The hot-spot idea helped to increase the effectiveness of the New York Police Department's Compstat program, which uses computerized maps to pinpoint where crime is taking place and enables police chiefs to hold precinct captains responsible for targeting those areas.
(via Instapundit)

Monday, June 06, 2011

QOTD 

Salon political reporter Alex Pareene:
[T]he Constitution is archaic and boring and lots of it no longer applies anymore.
Sadly, this sort of attitude is all too common among the Washington press corps. Former Newsweek writer Ben Adler argued last fall that it was "dangerous" for Congress to require itself to justify legislation by citing the Constitutional clause authorizing the law. And WaPo blogger Ezra Klein called the Constitution "confusing because it was written more than one hundred years ago."

I've previously detailed the brilliance and proper application of our Constitution. Better still is Iowahawk's masterful parody Ezra Klein student essay called "The Constitution is very important." It's six months old but worth re-reading for its perfect take on how little the progressive press know or care about the process of government.

(via reader Warren)

Curtains for Kyoto 

The UN conference on greenhouse gas limits will meet late this year in South Africa. The goal is to negotiate replacement CO2 emission targets--the Kyoto treaty's "first commitment period" expires at year end 2012.

The United States, of course, never adopted the Kyoto protocol. And at last month's G8 meeting in Paris, "Russia, Japan and Canada told the G8 they would not join a second round of carbon cuts under the Kyoto Protocol at United Nations talks this year and the US reiterated it would remain outside the treaty." For its part, the EU is keeping its options open--and greenhouse gas emissions in Europe rose last year. This makes European stated CO2 targets even less realistic.

Greenhouse gas limits are a cap on growth and a barrier to technological development. Especially during a worldwide recession, why would any country agree to mandatory de-carbonization? Oh yeah, because green "sounds good." Not good enough, hopefully, to continue killing the global economy.

(via Global Warming Policy Foundation)

Sunday, June 05, 2011

Program Notes 

Day of rest--of which I'm going to need more. I've got serious surgery scheduled in less than two weeks, so expect a slow-down then a hiatus in late June.

Saturday, June 04, 2011

Legislation of the Day 

The good news: a recently introduced, Democrat-written House bill would cut taxes.

The bad news: the bill "HR 1985, the Small Business Tax Equity Act, would allow medical marijuana dispensaries to take the full range of business expense deductions on their federal tax returns." It also would grant state-certified marijuana sellers easier access to bank loans.

Proving progressives have plenty of friends in high places.

Your Tax Dollars At Work, Part II 

UPDATE: below


The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds about "twenty percent of all federally supported, non-medical basic research in the United States." It has a history of wasteful spending and political propaganda (recently subsidizing a climate change musical).

A recent report by Senator Tom Coburn (R-Ok) finds over $3 billion of wasted or duplicative grants, including:
• $80,000 study on why the same teams always dominate March Madness;

• $315,000 study suggesting playing FarmVille on Facebook helps adults develop and maintain relationships;

• $1 million for an analysis of how quickly parents respond to trendy baby names;

• $50,000 to produce and publicize amateur songs about science, including a rap called "Money 4 Drugz," and a misleading song titled "Biogas is a Gas, Gas, Gas";

• $2 million to figure out that people who often post pictures on the internet from the same location at the same time are usually friends; and

• $581,000 on whether online dating site users are racist.
NSF also gave almost $560,000 to test (see report page 35) how long sick shrimp could run on a treadmill. The scientists involved, of course, defended their work as critical to the common good.

Granted, $3 billion is small change, given a $1.3 trillion Federal budget deficit last fiscal year. Yet, President Obama promised to cut "wasteful spending" that "we don't need." The NSF -- particularly its fuzzy Social, Behavioral, and Economics directorate -- seems like a good place to start.

MORE:

I can't resist adding a picture of a shrimp-on-a-treadmill--perhaps he was running away from the "Barbie":


source: report at 35

(via Washington Post)

Friday, June 03, 2011

Chart of the Day 

From the May 28th Economist:



As the magazine says:
Backhanders are so common in Nigeria that they feature in the country’s unofficial anthem, "International Thief Thief". Its author, Fela Kuti, the late father of the Afrobeat genre, sang in 1980, To become of high position here / Him go bribe some thousand naira bread / To become one useless chief. When a Broadway musical based on Kuti’s life premiered in Lagos recently, fans shouted out the names of today’s leaders over the first few bars. Little has changed since the song was written. When The Economist requested an interview with the president, we were asked whether we would contribute to his election campaign--or whether the president should pay us.

Politicians in all parts of the world want bungs. But Nigerian leaders are so greedy that they have subverted the entire machinery of state to serve their needs. Every policy is a scam, every regulation a source of rent.

Freed from kleptocrats, Nigeria could be an African giant. It has the people, resources and entrepreneurial metabolism to make it one of the world’s 20 leading economies, reckons PwC, a consultancy. Today it ranks 132nd by GDP per head. More than two-thirds of its people live on under $2 a day. Despite its many resources, the amount of electricity that is delivered to each Nigerian is a thirtieth of the level in South Africa.

More Anti-Israel Bias 

Late last month, the U.K. branch of Amnesty International hosted a Middle East Monitor Online event (also sponsored by the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign) called "Complicity in Oppression: Does the Media Aid Israel?". Given the history of press bias against Israel, as Mark Tapson of FrontPageMagazine says, "one could be forgiven for suspecting that an event with a title this absurd must have been an evening of standup comedy."

In a sense it was: You get the idea.

Middle East Monitor Online (MEMO) itself is laughable. Earlier this year, it published an article calling Israelis "pathological liars from Eastern Europe." According to the Telegraph (U.K.), MEMO:
is run by one Dr Daud Abdullah, the deputy secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain and a signatory of the Istanbul Declaration. This gothic document states that it is the obligation of the "Islamic Nation" to "carry on jihad and Resistance" against Israel and to fight "by all means and ways" any "foreign warship" attempting to block arms smuggling to Hamas, which, last time I checked, was still a terrorist organisation according to EU and UK law.
The meeting's sponsors said the Telegraph's factual article was itself an example of press bias. A liberal blogger described publications disputing the meeting's premise as an attempt to "shut down debate."

Amnesty International is anything but an honest broker. It routinely fails to distinguish between aggression and self defense. After Israeli soldiers fired on more than 300 Syrian and Palestinian protesters who swarmed the border and infiltrated Israel, AI condemned Israel. And it fingers Israel for a disproportionate share of human rights violation charges. Making AI the poster child for NOfP's rule: "The number of human rights violations in a country is inversely proportionate to the number of human rights complaints about that country."

So it was a comedy: a bunch of anti-Israel groups holding a press event to prove press pro-Palestinian bias. AI and the others can neither recognize their own bias nor credit Israel's humanity. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

(via Maggie's Farm)

Thursday, June 02, 2011

QOTD 

Michael Barone in the May 25th Washington Examiner:
Question: What do the following have in common? Eckert Cold Storage Co., Kerly Homes of Yuma, Classic Party Rentals, West Coast Turf Inc., Ellenbecker Investment Group Inc., Only in San Francisco, Hotel Nikko, International Pacific Halibut Commission, City of Puyallup, Local 485 Health and Welfare Fund, Chicago Plastering Institute Health & Welfare Fund, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee, Teamsters Local 522 Fund Welfare Fund Roofers Division, StayWell Saipan Basic Plan, CIGNA, Caribbean Workers' Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Health and Welfare Plan.

Answer: They are all among the 1,372 businesses, state and local governments, labor unions and insurers, covering 3,095,593 individuals or families, that have been granted a waiver from Obamacare by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.

All of which raises another question: If Obamacare is so great, why do so many people want to get out from under it?

More specifically, why are more than half of those 3,095,593 in plans run by labor unions, which were among Obamacare's biggest political supporters? Union members are only 12 percent of all employees but have gotten 50.3 percent of Obamacare waivers.
Agreed.

Useless International Organization 

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the global nuclear watchdog, is quick on the uptake, reports the New York Times:
In a . . . report on Syria, the agency also laid out a detailed case, for the first time, that the country was "very likely" building a secret nuclear reactor that should have been reported to the agency. The facility was bombed by Israel in September 2007, and Syria quickly bulldozed the site, eliminating most of the evidence.

Although the C.I.A. released photographs in 2008 of the reactor building, taken before the bombing raid, the agency’s inspectors in Vienna had at first been quite skeptical of any evidence provided by the Bush administration, with which they had clashed over the status of Iraq’s nuclear program. But they have now come to the same conclusion that Washington came to nearly four years ago, and American officials said they plan to use the report to press the agency’s board of governors at its meeting next month to refer the issue to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions.
As Neptunus Lex quips:
"Possible sanctions" for a plant that was destroyed almost four years ago?

Talk about barn doors and fled horses.
(via Maggie's Farm)

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

The Health of Britain, Part XIV 

The Care Quality Commission is the new health and social care regulator for England. It has powers to monitor and enforce healthcare quality of the government's National Health Service. This includes verifying "whether elderly people receive essential standards of care in 100 NHS hospitals throughout England."

Last week, the CQC published reports on 12 British hospitals. Three hospitals flunked -- in part for failing to provide adequate nutrition: According to the Daily Mail (U.K.), the CQC:
found staff routinely ignored patients’ calls for help and forgot to check that they had had enough to eat and drink.

Dehydration contributes to the death of more than 800 hospital patients every year. Another 300 die malnourished.
Appalling--but a 25 percent failure rate is hardly surprising for socialized medicine.

(via reader Warren)

Plus for Pawlenty 

Commenter Sue K. says I'm overly negative about Republican Presidential aspirants. So it's nice to have something to praise:
[I]t's notable--make that downright amazing--that former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty launched his campaign for the Republican Presidential nomination Monday by including a challenge to King Corn.

"The truth about federal energy subsidies, including federal subsidies for ethanol, is that they have to be phased out," Mr. Pawlenty told a crowd in Des Moines. "We simply can't afford them anymore."

He's certainly right about that, though that hasn't stopped nearly every other candidate from deploring the federal deficit while supporting the most egregious of corporate welfare subsidies. This marks a change for Mr. Pawlenty, who over two terms leading Iowa's northern neighbor first fought farmers on subsidies but later supported their push for a 20% ethanol mandate for gasoline. But in refusing to stick to the script for candidates looking to harvest votes in February's Iowa caucuses, Mr. Pawlenty has passed an early test of fortitude. By opposing ethanol despite the political risks, Mr. Pawlenty will also gain credibility to tackle other energy subsidies that drain the federal fisc to little good effect.
The downside: it's exactly how John McCain began his 2008 campaign. So don't be surprised if the election outcome is the same.

In contrast, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich still support ethanol subsidies.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?