Comments on: Boxer-Kerry: “climate” bill or green jobs program?

By: Ron de Haan

Ron de Haan — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:14:30 +0000

Chu talking like a chicken:
http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/11/05/more-on-secy-chu%E2%80%99s-convoluted-climate-economics/comment-page-1/#comment-29866

By: Garacka

Garacka — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:21:43 +0000

Sorry to pick on Kerry, but so mnay pictures of him look like cardboard cutouts, this one included.

By: Adolfo Giurfa

Adolfo Giurfa — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:57:40 +0000

[snip]

By: jorgekafkazar

jorgekafkazar — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:30:57 +0000

Jim (06:09:23) : “Does Kerry think the more smug he can muster, the more likely someone takes him seriously?”

It’s all paht of his Kennedy impehsonation.

By: LarryOldtimer

LarryOldtimer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:51:21 +0000

If an equivalent set of storms happened now, even with all of the flood control facilities that have been constructed since then, millions of people in California would simply drown. Millions.

Of course. were the New Madrid earthquakes circa 1812-1813 were to recur (as they will), the devastation in the Mississippi Valley would be enormous. Once again, millions of Americans would die quickly.

Oh, but we must spend all of our treasure to prevent . . . to prevent . . . Would someone at least wipe the sweat from the warmmongers’ brows? . . . they are getting feverish indeed. And want to pass their illness on to the rest of us.

By: LarryOldtimer

LarryOldtimer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:38:38 +0000

Take a look at the weather in CA during the winter of 1862-1863, I believe it was. It rained without letup from nothern border to southern border for 30 days and 30 nights. Something like 75% of the man made structures in the state got washed away. In Sacramento, all that could be seen (from a boat, of course) were the tops of the telegraph poles sticking out of the water. The San Joaquin Valley became a lake some 280 miles by 80 miles, traversible by boat. Half of the city of San Diego was washed out to the ocean, as were at least a half a million head of cattle. All rivers in SoCal changed their courses.

Now the eco-whackos want to return the Los Angeles River to its natural (unpaved) state. My background in hydraulic engineering tells me that it would then have only about half of the capacity to carry the runoff it now carries to prevent flooding of homes and businesses.

What a way to substantially reduce the problem of illegal aliens in the US. By all means, return the Los Angeles River to its natural state.

By: Mark_0454

Mark_0454 — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:43:12 +0000

A few weeks ago one of my Senators, Kirsten Gillebrand, had a WSJ editorial pointing out how prepared New York is for cap-and-trade. We already have Wall Street with all their experience in trading futures. She waxed rhapsodic about the boon this would be for Wall Street and all of New York.

An endless supply of government money and Wall Street traders, what could go wrong?

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:39:50 +0000

“We should never be more vigilant than at the moment a new dogma is being installed. The claque endorsing what is now dignified as “the mainstream theory” of global warming stretches all the way from radical greens through Al Gore to George W. Bush, who signed on at the end of May. The left has been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism.”

-ALEXANDER COCKBURN, TheNation

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070625/cockburn

By: Harold Vance

Harold Vance — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:38:23 +0000

If passed, it’s going to be a gravy train for Al Gore and his cronies.

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:09:23 +0000

Does Kerry think the more smug he can muster, the more likely someone takes him seriously?

By: old construction worker

old construction worker — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:41:01 +0000

This CO2 Cap and Tax bill must be defeated. It is welfare for Wall Street. It will not make us less dependent on foreign energy. It will make us dependent on foreign Carbon Credits. How stupid is that?

By: Mike Campbell

Mike Campbell — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:51:55 +0000

Love those signs.

By: Kirk W. Hanneman

Kirk W. Hanneman — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:25:55 +0000

Here is a decent political analysis:

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091105/congressional-rules-take-leading-role-us-climate-progress

The main point is that Harry Reid actually agrees with the Republicans, or feels it is in his best interest to do so at this point at least: the bill will be further delayed by 5 weeks to have the EPA analysis completed (don’t be surprised if it’s as flawed as the EPA’s analysis of Waxman-Markey, which through various dubious methods determined that the cost to American families would be the same as “a postage stamp per day.”

Note that in committee Max Baucus (Montana) voted against the bill out of concern with the effect on farming (and inability to offer his amendments due to Boxer’s rules maneuver). Jay Rockefeller (West Virginia) is on record against the current bill (and also comments that it may not be taken up until after the 2010 elections). These are not even among the most centrist Democrats in the Senate.

Even with whatever mischief Lindsey Graham is up to, there are just not votes there for this bill without major changes (at least, maybe not even then), and Harry Reid knows it…which is why the bill will not be brought up this year, IMO. And Graham, after hearing from his constituents and considering Boxer’s hyperpartisan methods, has a good chance of reconsidering as well.

By: Mike McMillan

Mike McMillan — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:25:21 +0000

Senator Boxer is not wearing glasses.

By: Mr Green Genes

Mr Green Genes — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:20:23 +0000

rbateman (20:59:35) :

It ain’t Mr. Greenjeans.

WUWT??? :-)