On June 25, President Obama, resorting to his usual props and theatrics, spoke outside on a typical June muggy day in Washington D.C., and spelled out his aggressive plan to address man-made global warming. Often during his speech, he pulled out his bright white handkerchief and wiped his forehead, a bit of stagecraft that the cameras gobbled up.
For those unfamiliar with Georgetown University, it also has an enormous indoor, air-conditioned auditorium (see slideshow) where other prominent figures have given addresses to large crowds. So why didn't Obama choose the more secure, cooler auditorium rather than the humidity-soaked outdoor location? Stagecraft.
Even the Christian Science Monitor noted the obvious histrionics of a president who likes to use props when giving "important" speeches instead of relying on his own words.
When it comes to pinpointing the nadir of the Obama administration, future historians are going to suffer a serious case of option paralysis. Was it Benghazi? The NSA? His use of the IRS to harass the Tea party? The various scandals involving his black ops department, the EPA? Obamacare?
Personally, though, I think the one they will eventually plump for is Obama's Climate Action Plan of June 25 2013. The economy, after all, is everything. Without an economy you can't afford a domestic policy, let alone a foreign policy. So you'd think the very last thing any president would do as his country began to show the first vague signs of slow – and quite possibly illusory – recovery after a long recession would be to jeopardise it with a whole new raft of utterly pointless regulation and wasteful government expenditure. Why it would be like seeing a man drowning and, instead of throwing him a life line tossing him a lead weight.
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV): Obama Declaring A War On American Jobs With Climate Plan
U.S. Senator Brian SchatzSkeptics of man-made global warming need to be “ridiculed” said U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii who spoke at last week’s Netroots Nation gathering in San Jose, Calif.
“These people have to be ridiculed,” Schatz said at the gathering of liberal activists. “They have to be run out of town rhetorically.”
So much for tolerance and civil discourse, a supposed hallmark of America’s supposedly peaceful progressive movement.
Schatz, appointed to fill the vacancy caused by Sen. Daniel Inouye’s passing last year, is a global warming alarmist who believes in his heart that climate change is man made and solvable.
Before taking the U.S. Senate seat, Schatz worked with Democrats to write a “discussion draft” of legislation that would impose fees — known as taxes outside the Beltway – on carbon emissions.
It is remarkable that when the scientific consensus on global warming is at its weakest state in years, President Barack Obama has decided to make the issue a new focus of his troubled presidency — and, indeed, that he intends to use the issue as the launching pad for a radical extension of federal power even more significant than his health-care takeover.
President Obama campaigned as a man of science, though he himself has no scientific training. He lambasted his critics as being anti-science Luddites and even enjoyed an endorsement from Bill Nye the Science Guy, who allowed his name to be associated with dishonest and unfair attacks on Republicans. Barack Obama, of course, is not a science guy. For example, he has flattered far-left conspiracy theories about common vaccinations, saying, “The science right now is inconclusive,” which is a position about as scientifically defensible as claiming that the dinosaurs went extinct because Fred Flintstone ordered too many bronto-burgers.
Statement by Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: “President Obama is still parading his ignorance on climate science, linking bad weather to “global warming”, claiming a mythical 97% consensus, and implying that his executive actions can alter the globe’s temperature and lessen extreme weather events. The President has descended into the realm of medieval witchcraft by claiming he can combat global temperature rises and weather patterns through administrative action. Let the battle begin.”
Monty DonI have just been listening to the BBC's latest professed attempt to find the reasonable middle ground on the great environmental debate. And, as ever with the BBC, it's about as neutral, balanced and informed as an Advanced Self-Flagellation, Tofu And Wind Farming workshop hosted by George Monbiot and the Hon Sir Jonathon Porritt Bt at the Centre for Alternative Technology in Machynlleth.
This particular effort, on BBC Radio 4, was called Shared Planet and was presented by the hunky, great-in-a-hat jeweller-turned-gardening-presenter Monty Don. For the record, I like my fellow Old Malvernian: he has hinterland, bottom, a pleasing aura of wistful melancholia, good looks, a melodious speaking voice, solid dress sense. In the flesh, he's charming (if, perhaps, more reserved than one might prefer: but then I speak as someone who is always impetuously upfront about everything) and down to earth. Also, of course, he does know his gardening and once gave me some very good advice on tulips.
This post was written last night, shortly after I received the document. It is autopublishing at 6AM EDT (3AM PDT) since I’ll hopefully be asleep here in California when the embargo time passes.
There were two documents provided to the press: a fact sheet/summary and the full plan. Both are available as PDF’s at the end of this essay. I see a lot of “pie in the sky” language in the plan document, with little in the way of concrete ideas. It seems just another expansion of “big government” bureaucracy with little tangible benefit to the American citizen.
This by no means a complete point by point commentary, I’m just touching on things that caught my eye. Readers are encouraged to submit responses to specific points in the comments section below.
Obama: Killing the Coal IndustryDaniel P. Schrag, a White House climate adviser and director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, tells the New York Times "a war on coal is exactly what's needed." Later today, President Obama will give a major "climate change" address at Georgetown University.
“Everybody is waiting for action,” Schrag tells the paper. “The one thing the president really needs to do now is to begin the process of shutting down the conventional coal plants. Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they’re having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.”
Obama's speech today is expected to offer "a sweeping plan to address climate change on Tuesday, setting ambitious goals and timetables for a series of executive actions to reduce greenhouse gas pollution and prepare the nation for the ravages of a warming planet," according to the Times.
Coal-Fired Power PlantIt can’t be said often enough. There has been no global warming for the past 15 years, and now even the New York Times can no longer pretend otherwise. But just because “climate scientists” swung and missed on that hanging curveball doesn’t mean Barack Obama is about to be deterred. He’s got a socialist agenda, and global warming is the excuse for why it must be implemented urgently right now, Congress and the truth be damned.
Obama’s admirers at Mother Jones are pretty excited about what to expect in today’s big fraud, er, speech:
Here are four things that are expected to be included:
Emission rules for existing power plants: The EPA has already issued (but not yet finalized) rules for new power plants, which will likely mean the end of conventional coal-fired power in the United States. But Obama is expected to unveil standards for the fleet of existing power plants, which account for 40 percent of all emissions in the US
Tougher efficiency standards for homes and appliances: The Department of Energy tightened efficiency standards on some household appliances in 2009. But a number of new standards have been stuck at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the White House awaiting approval.
So how’s your day going so far? Sure, even if you’re doing okay, what about all the bad stuff you have caused to your health, to less fortunate people throughout the world, and for that matter, even to the planet’s climate and environment since the time you got out of bed this morning.
Have you had your coffee or tea yet? Golly…I sure hope you’re not overdoing it! According to Dr. Sam Robbins in an article published in Health, Fitness & Longevity Solutions, more than about one cup three or four times weekly would be excessive if you’re over 35 and worried about heart disease, joint pain or diabetes. He says that multiple cups or higher-dosed caffeinated products such as expresso, energy drinks or weight loss pills can really bring you grief. Hey, we’re talking increased risks of heart attacks, excretion of stress hormones, depression and attention disorders, body fat, ulcers and acid reflux…and that’s only the beginning. I can’t ever bear to tell you the other hazards.