I’ve held off as long as I can with commenting on the presedential election, as it tends to suck all the oxygen right out of the room, but this issue needs to be aired. There’s more to Obama’s energy plan than bankrupting coal power plants. He also intends to make energy prices “skyrocket”:
This doesn’t sound sustainable to me. Hat tip to Jon Jewitt.
UPDATE: here is video from the San Francisco Chronicle of the actual interview:
Hat tip to Fred for this one.
MarkW (05:56:32) :
and Evan
and Kim
This is the first time it has been brought home to me that skeptics in the US are mainly from the republican side. In a lecture I gave against global warming I had been accused of supporting Bush by a leftist in the audience, and I had thought at the time it was really funny. Not so now.
Listen, I have lived through the greek junta that was instigated and supported by the US back from 1967 to 1974. When the US decided we should have the cover of “democracy” we all went and voted in droves. Democracy it was not. Fear that every third person was an informer, was.
Irak is not a democracy. It has been ordered under armed occupation to be a democracy.
I used to be an americanophile. I really believed all these you are saying,about the good cop, support of freedom and democracy and all that cant. Our junta opened a lot of eyes in Greece.
Before the US invasion in Iraq and the demonisation of Sadam Iraq was the only arab state with a secular government, where the majority of people were literate and where the moslem indoctrination schools were discouraged. Now they are thriving and women have been sequestered again. I am not talking of his faults as an absolute dictator, which were grand. I am talking of the life of the people.
The US is very selective on where it imposes a democracy. Oil interests are an attractor, oil routes etc. The number of dictators that are good friends and supporters of the US are N where N is a large number. Look at the rest of thearab peninsula .
The bases are for imposing the will of the US and its corporations if possible on the rest of the world. “What large teeth you have, grandma”
I am not saying that a world governed by Hitler, or Stalin would be prefereable. I am saying : take out the blinders. The US is after its own interests and under Bush they have expanded in imperial ways.
What is expensive is retrofitting the millions of homes and building new power infrastructures that would undercut the utilities. Who is going to make a power grid that won’t make a profit for anyone but the consumer? That means that Americans have to pay for upgrades on their own– and that isn’t possible when high-paying manufacturing jobs are replaced with lower-income service and retail jobs. That isn’t the fault of politicians, but rich CEOs who value profit over patriotism.
That is about the most stupid comment on economy that I have ever seen !
If I was a shareholder of a company whose CEO would “value” patriotism over profit I would fire him on the spot .
A CEO is not paid to do meetings and pronounce patriotical speeches , that’s a politician’s job .
A CEO is put in place and paid by shareholders who invested their money in the company because they expect a profit .
And yes , again as a shareholder I would make a good CEO very rich – quality has to find its reward .
While we are it who are the biggest investors in companies shares ?
Right , the retirement funds .
And they are responsible for millions of retired people who appreciate their monthly check that is paid for by companies lead by good CEOs .
And the unlucky ones have understood what it means when the CEO and the executive staff is not good because they lost their savings .
There are more and more retired people that will need more and more profit to have something to live with .
They certainly don’t care the least bit about your misguided theoretical ravings about “patriotism” .
MarkW, US support of two none democracies in the Iran v Iraq war with neither likely to become a democracy shows the USA was supporting one side because of power balance and not because of putting a new political system in place in one or more.
Same for Kuwait and all the other monarchies in the middle east, the USA has done nothing to make these countries become democratic whereas Iraq was invaded for “democracy” Sorry, those conflicting behaviour patterns show that democracy was just a byproduct of the war in Iraq, not the reason, so claiming it was a great result is non sensical.
As for Georgia, there has hardly been any global mass support of Georgian initial military intervention in South Ossetia apart from the USA where the Bush simplification of “good guys” and “bad guys” tends to get in the way of facts.
Regards
Andy
Don’t both candidates talk a lot about solar power and alternative sources of energy? How much more money would we have if we could power our nation with solar and wind, and export that coal to china? just sayin’
The face of our new President
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00425/04_11_2008—14_14_425519a.jpg
Reminds me of the most popular Dana Carvey SNL quote from the 1970s.
“I used to be an americanophile.”
Are you blaming the US for the most dysfunctional economy in Western Europe, for the most corrupt political system, for endemic petty thievery?
It is one thing to assess leadership from the ash heap, it is another to wear its mantle.
MarkW — correct, UNICEF was constantly nattering about 500,000 dead Iraqi babies from sanctions. Bush invaded the country and the nattering went away. One could conclude that Bush is a piker and apparently is nowhere near as efficient a killer as Clinton. Or, one may conclude that UNICEF was making stuff up.
Some of the anti-US rhetoric here is interesting. Something our Euro readers don’t seem to get by and large is that what many US citizens object to is not necessarily government control but rather FEDERAL control. Being against federal power to do X doesn’t equate to being anti-government. We have states, many of which are just as large in area and economy as many European countries. The US is *not* a Euro-style democracy, which essentially boils down to two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. In the US, the sheep is armed.
Meanwhile. Bases exist overseas in some countries due to treaty and in others because they demonstrated an inability to govern themselves and not cause regional problems. Others were installed at the request of the host country to help with their protection. Anyone yammering about bases ought to read some history of NATO, WWI, etc. This certainly can’t be that difficult.
well,,,
do you think the Canadians will put up a fence to keep us out?
Anthony,
Where you err, in my opinion, is not so much in discussing politics, but in relying on some hysterical discussion on Fox news about some obscure taken-out-of-context quote by one particular candidate, and that suddenly it’s all about coal power plants! And reading most of the comments, it looks like you certainly did not help elevating the debate. What is somewhat inevitable (that many who don’t “believe” in AGW do so because it’s incompatible with their political views, in other words they’re right wing republicans) will now become a main feature of this blog: this will now be an outlet where angry republicans can shout and jump around hysterically about how Obama is a S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T, and how he eats little children at night. That is the kind of politics that turns a lot of people away, and will probably cost the republicans the victory today.
Let me just comment on AGW and politicians. No politician in their right mind (save Sarah Palin, but that just proves my point) will say publicly that they don’t “believe” in AGW. Not when the entire scientific establishment is behind it. Obama and McCain are the same, and even our conservative prime minister here is the same. Can you imagine a politician saying that he’d rather believe some conservative blogger who posts Fox news items rather than the AAAS? Come on!
The real point is that the scientific establishment is not immune to ideological corruption. That once you recognize this, you’ve got to ensure that the policies you make are not based on ideologically-motivated scientific advice. The ideological corruption of the scientific establishment when it comes to AGW should be denounced, and prevented. But it cannot be denounced by people who are themselves ideologically motivated, otherwise those claims have no credibility.
Today, I wish that the Americans chose the best president for them. But I am also certain that both candidates, republican or democrat, if elected, will do their best to serve their people. To insinuate that one candidate is morally or ethically corrupt, and that he will “destroy” the country only reflects extreme views that should, as much as possible, not be what the main political and democratic debate is about.
REPLY: I didn’t “rely” on Fox news, as I also posted the video from the very left of center San Francisco Chronicle. I think mostly you are just angry about Fox News, not the content of the issue. Evan Jones said it best. “piffle”. Since you are Canadian, you don’t have to live with the consequences, I do. So if my posting an issue to discuss offends you, I’m sorry, but I simply won’t worry myself about it.
You seem to be the angry one: “this will now be an outlet where angry republicans can shout and jump around hysterically about how Obama is a S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T,” So please don’t even pretend to predict how this blog will be managed, you have no clue. – Anthony
kim (19:31:56) :
“…. the remnants of your Bush Derangement Syndrome”
Come come, I never called Bush deranged.
“Bush has had an excellent beginning against the extreme and destructive Islamists…”
More accurately he failed big time. I would say that the Islamic extremists had a succesful start in 2001.
“His foreign policy has been marked by real progress in the Middle East”…,
I won’t argue with that, he’s alienated the USA in that region and his army has even fought missions in other surrounding countries violating sovereign territories. He has certainly made progress, shame it’s in totally the wrong direction.
“…….. the recognition worldwide, …… of America’s benignity and necessity in the maintenance of a peaceful and civil world.”
Invading a country under false means, causing the deaths of thousands by direct action, unbounded secularisation, disease etc. is not by any stretch of the imagination benign, peaceful or civil.
“The housing bubble and consequent credit crunch are the fault of the Democrats.”
?????????? Of course it is, to you EVERYTHING is the fault of Democrats!
“Your parochial view of American and international geopolitics is your own fault.”
I have a very positive view of America as it was only a few years ago. I am sure that an intelligent, diplomatic and charismatic leader will undo much of the damage in the last 8 years
…
this will now be an outlet where angry republicans can shout and jump around hysterically about how Obama is a S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T, and how he eats little children at night…
“I just want to spread the wealth around.”
Voting record on abortion, partial-birth abortion, botched abortion (baby lives for minutes/hours/days wo/ any food/water/medical care).
fwiw, I didn’t vote for John McCain – I voted for Sarah Palin. And I’m not a Republican – I’m a social/fiscal conservative.
Given the past 100 year track record of American politicians and legislators, I think we can safely assume that both of the major candidates will continue to move the U.S. closer to bankruptcy.
America needs to move in a truly different direction, not merely toward more rhetorical lip service.
Francois O
By that comment you expose your bias and your ignorance. As a scientist and engineer, I see growing evidence that natural causes have greater impact on climate change than anthropogenic causes. Encourage you to evaluate evidence presented from BOTH sides. e.g.,
See ClimateAudit
ICECAP.us
Global Warming and Nature’s Thermostat
As far as deconstruction of the Constitution and threatening Checks and Balances, nobody in U.S. History has done what Cheney-Bush have in the last 8 years.
Oh, please!
Stuff and nonsense! Piffle.
Alien and Sedition acts? “Pet Banks”? Suspension of Habeas Corpus? The Corrupt Bargain (v. 1876)? Plessy Vs Ferguson? Attempted takeover of the Supreme Court? Internment of Japanese, Germans and Italians? “Dirty Tricks” squads?
That’s just off the top of my head.
What are they teaching in these schools?
Francois:
“Where you err, in my opinion, is not so much in discussing politics, but in relying on some hysterical discussion on Fox news about some obscure taken-out-of-context quote by one particular candidate, and that suddenly it’s all about coal power plants!”
This all seems like a fairly ignorant rant on your part. What makes you think that we got this information from Fox news. That is simply dumb sterotyping from you. I certainly didn’t get it from there. And what makes you think that the comment is out of context. Give me any indication of anything in Obama’s background than would support him not wanting to shut down the coal industry. Many of his supporters are the most rabid of the environmentalists, and closing down the coal industry would be a dream come true for them. And where do you get the notion that “it’s all about coal power plants”. Coal power plants are simply one of the many things that make Obama repugnant. His clearly stated idea that the US Constitution is deeply flawed because it contains no mandate for the redistribution of wealth by the government is also a huge issue. And in light of his position on the governments responsibility to redistribute wealth, on what do you base your judgement that this man is not a socialist. Yes, many people believe that socialism is a disgusting ideaology, but where do you get off to resorting to the hyperbole of “eating little children at night”.
“That is the kind of politics that turns a lot of people away, and will probably cost the republicans the victory today.”
Complete nonsense. The republicans will loose today because our major media outlets have been actively campaingning for Obama all along. People are under the impression that Obama will solve the economic crisis when in fact each and every policy that he expounds will do nothing but make it worse. Because of the media the public is under the impression that the Republicans are responsible for the current mess even though it was the Democrats that perpetuated and supported the subprime loan industry that got us here.
Yesterday they interviewed a woman who had listened to an Obama speech. She explained how thrilled she was about the speech because now she would no longer have to worry about making her car payments or her house payments. Obama is simply an idiot who thinks that he can channel money from one group to another, punish failure and reward success, while having no impact on society. Who the hell is going to build houses and make mortages if they cannot expect to get paid because Obama is busy buying votes from his supporters at the expense of American business?
“No politician in their right mind (save Sarah Palin, but that just proves my point) ”
The only point that you have just proven is that you are a political hack yourself and that you are just as guilty of doing that which you blame others here of doing.
Can you imagine a politician saying that he’d rather believe some conservative blogger who posts Fox news items.
You just produce one ignorant characterization after another. Nobody here posts Fox news items. The information that you get here is factual information that comes from a variety of sources, including climate scientists and data from national scientific institutions.
“But it cannot be denounced by people who are themselves ideologically motivated, otherwise those claims have no credibility.”
First of all, everyone is ideologically motivated. And your point is that pro AGW positions coming from ideologically motivated people have credibility but anti AGW positions coming from ideologically motivated people don’t? The difference between this issue and most political issues is that this one can be verified exactly and emperically. That is why the alarmists will be proven wrong. In the meantime, the position of the alarmists is politically motivated, and no amount of resistance is going to change their minds, regardless of where it’s coming from.
“To insinuate that one candidate is morally or ethically corrupt,”
I personally don’t care if you like the insinuation or not. I will make it. When you look at Obama’s closest freinds and associations like William Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, the Reverend Wright, Tony Resko, Franklin Raines etc; and when you look at his association with Acorn (now being investigated in many states for voter fraud), you have to conclude that the man is blind, deaf, dumb and the worlds worst judge of character, or else he is corrupt.
anna v, I think your experience with the 1974 Greed Junta has warped your perceptions. The Afghani and Iraqi people proudly waved their purple fingers emblematic of their enfranchisement as voters in a democracy. I also find it disgusting than you could prefer Saddam to the regime in Iraq at present. He sent people through shredders feet first so they’d feel it longer, you know.
It is almost accidental that skeptics tend to be conservative. It could have been the other way had a political movement donned the costume of science in order to perpetrate a policy fraud upon the populace. So don’t be ashamed of any of your associations with the truth and the real path of science. Politics is an inauthentic overlay to physical truth.
==========================================
Francois O (08:39:19) :,
What’s the alternative? Listen to ABC, CBS, CNN, or NBC? Those stations are biased to the left.
http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx?RelNum=6664
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278808786575124
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/22/study_coverage_of_mccain_much.html
http://www.journalism.org/node/11266
http://www.journalism.org/node/12299
http://www.journalism.org/node/12097
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081503100.html?sub=AR
From ABC’s ‘The Note:’
“Like every other institution, the Washington and political press corps operate with a good number of biases and predilections.”
Even the BBC admits a bias:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html
You wouldn’t move out of Diego Garcia either immediately.
Would, too.
But I’m more interested on your thoughts on the war in Iraq, this is a war which was not about creating a democracy in the Middle East, the USA has been more than happy not to have democratic governments in the Middle East for the last 30 years, including when it supported Saddam in the 1980’s, so that is poppycock.
In the 1980s we were trying to win the Cold War. Saddam was firmly in the Soviet camp and up to his eyeballs in Red Army hardware. Creating democracy in Iraq was not at issue at that time. We wanted him to be our son of a bitch rather than their son of a bitch. In WWII, we were only too happy to be a cobelligerent of Stalin, and we put his army on wheels via Lend Lease.
Since the Cold War, we have encouraged democratic reform all over the Mideast. Your statement that we have been “perfectly happy” not to have democratic governments there is simply incorrect.
The war was about WMD’s that didn’t exist and striking back at targets where you could, trying to claim a democracy being formed as a result of your actions is hijacking a good reason when all the actual reasons are bad.
Not for one moment did we hesitate to establish democracy in Iraq the instant Saddam was out of power.
You need to review dubya’s actual speeches rather than the highly prejudiced accounts of his political enemies. WMDs were merely one item on a very long list, almost every one of which would have been a justification for invasion. WMDs in and of themselves were not the issue. (Lots of countries had WMDs. Would an invasion of, say, France have been justified on the grounds they had many more WMDs than Saddam at his worst?)
The reason this is a primary US intrest is because the history of the world indicates that only democracies have stable relationships with their neighbors.
That’s a little like saying that we only drink water because it’s wet.
Saddam had the will and was getting the means to WMD, just as do the Persians.
=======================================
evanjones (10:08:03) :
–You wouldn’t move out of Diego Garcia either immediately.
“Would, too.”
What and screw up the entire GPS system ?
And not have your only base in the Indian Ocean?
I don’t think so
Regards
Andy
And more from Evan Jones
“Since the Cold War, we have encouraged democratic reform all over the Mideast. Your statement that we have been “perfectly happy” not to have democratic governments there is simply incorrect.”
So how are you doing, which states have gone over to democracy in the Middle East since you have been promoting it?
Lets take one arabic region that did go over to democratic rule in the last few years, Gaza/WestBank. They voted for Hamas, so how did the USA respond to this new found democratic government voted in by majority?
Or is it only democracies that are pro USA that are ok?
Regards
Andy
This is the first time it has been brought home to me that skeptics in the US are mainly from the republican side. In a lecture I gave against global warming I had been accused of supporting Bush by a leftist in the audience, and I had thought at the time it was really funny. Not so now.
Oh, yes. A great majority of US skeptics are from the republican side. I, myself, am a liberal republican.
It has been ordered under armed occupation to be a democracy.
Yes. But that didn’t stop Italy, Japan, or Germany.
And yes, it is a great shame that Greece was made a pawn in the Cold War. (“Z”)
The US is very selective on where it imposes a democracy. Oil interests are an attractor, oil routes etc. The number of dictators that are good friends and supporters of the US are N where N is a large number. Look at the rest of thearab peninsula .
Yes. It’s an ongoing process. It can’t be done at once. And we only interfere if great crimes against humanity are occurring (as Somailia, Bosnia, Iraq), and sometimes not even then (Rwanda, Darfur, Cambodia). We do not invade dictatorships that are not massacring their own people (as Iran) unless there are exceptional circumstances (as Afghanistan).
The bases are for imposing the will of the US and its corporations if possible on the rest of the world. “What large teeth you have, grandma”
No! A thousand times, no!
I am not saying that a world governed by Hitler, or Stalin would be prefereable.
Obviously.
I am saying : take out the blinders. The US is after its own interests and under Bush they have expanded in imperial ways.
Our “interest” is freedom and democracy. Our “imperial way” is liberation and self-determination. Perhaps it is not my kind who is wearing the blinders?
Steven Hill wrote:
>I am just about sick of the USA, anyone have a thought
>on where I can relocate?
I’ve been thinking about Ireland. Here’s an index of economic freedom:
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/topten.cfm
Bush simplification of “good guys” and “bad guys” tends to get in the way of facts.
We both have read our share of history. You don’t think there are “good guys” and “bad guys”? Really?
this will now be an outlet where angry republicans can shout and jump around hysterically about how Obama is a S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T, and how he eats little children at night.
Bland only eats the bad boys
Who can behave, but don’t.
Disgraceful lads who say, ‘Don’t care!’
And, ‘Sha’n’t!’ and ‘Ca’n’t!’ and, ‘Wo’n’t!”
–W.S. Gilbert
–You wouldn’t move out of Diego Garcia either immediately.
“Would, too.”
What and screw up the entire GPS system ?
And not have your only base in the Indian Ocean?
I don’t think so
You don’t? How little you understand us!
Two words: Clark. Subic.
(Besides, if those islands got global warmed right off the map, do you imagine we’d have no GPS?)
johnceberhardt wrote:
>The ‘drill, baby, drill’ short sighted mentality will not reduce our
>dependence on foreign oil and it won’t help us in the short run.
>Experts say that it will take about 10 years to extract that oil if we
>started today.
Do you realize that Bill Clinton vetoed a bill in 1996 based on that same logic? Maybe 10 years is soon enough. We don’t need help in the short run. Oil prices were artificially high because of speculation that imploded when the rest of the market collapsed. Gas prices are back down to under $2 / gallon– nearly down 50% in 3 months. I guarantee that drilling here will reduce our dependence on foreign oil because we’ll have more domestic oil.
And Anthony, great topic. It amazes me how some lose their civility so quickly.