July 3, 2009
"50 Things Wrong with the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill"
Stephen Spruiell and Kevin Williamson take Waxman-Markey (formally known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES)) apart in National Review:
The stimulus bill was the legislative equivalent of the famous cantina scene from Star Wars, an eye-popping collection of the freakish and exotic, gathered for dubious purposes. The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, known as ACES (the American Clean Energy and Security Act), is more like the third panel in Hieronymus Bosch's Garden of Earthly Delights -- a hellscape that disturbs the sleep of anybody who contemplates it carefully.Two main things to understand about Waxman-Markey: First, it will not reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, at least not at any point in the near future. The inclusion of carbon offsets, which can be manufactured out of thin air and political imagination, will eliminate most of the demands that the legislation puts on industry, though in doing so it will manage to drive up the prices consumers pay for every product that requires energy for its manufacture -- which is to say, for everything. Second, it represents a worse abuse of the public trust and purse than the stimulus and the bailouts put together. Waxman-Markey creates a permanent new regime in which environmental romanticism and corporate welfare are mixed together to form political poison. From comic bureaucratic power grabs (check out the section of the bill on candelabras) to the creation of new welfare programs for Democratic constituencies to, above all, massive giveaways for every financial, industrial, and political lobby imaginable, this bill would permanently deform American politics and economic life.
The House of Representatives, famously, did not read this bill before passing it, which is testament to either Nancy Pelosi's managerial incompetency or her political wile, or possibly both. If you take the time to read the legislation, you'll discover four major themes: special-interest giveaways, regulatory mandates unrelated to climate change, fanciful technological programs worthy of The Jetsons, and assorted left-wing wish fulfillment. We cannot cover every swirl and brushstroke of this masterpiece of misgovernance, but here's a breakdown of its 50 most outrageous features.
SPECIAL-INTEREST SOPS
1. The big doozy: Eighty-five percent of the carbon permits will not be sold at auction -- they will be given away to utility companies, petroleum interests, refineries, and a coterie of politically connected businesses. If you're wondering why Big Business supports cap-and-trade, that's why. Free money for business, but higher energy prices for you.2. The sale of carbon permits will enrich the Wall Street investment bankers whose money put Obama in the White House. Top of the list: Goldman Sachs, which is invested in carbon-offset development and carbon permissions. CNN reports:
Less than two weeks after the investment bank announced it would be laying off 10 percent of its staff, ***Goldman Sachs confirmed that it has taken a minority stake in Utah-based carbon offset project developer Blue Source LLC. . . . "Interest in the pre-compliance carbon market in the U.S. is growing rapidly," said Leslie Biddle, Head of Commodity Sales at Goldman, "and we are excited to be able to offer our clients immediate access to a diverse selection of emission reductions to manage their carbon risk."
Continue reading ""50 Things Wrong with the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill""
Posted by Tom at 10:45 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
July 1, 2009
Iraq Briefing - 30 June 2009 - An Historic Day for Iraq
This briefing is by General Ray Odierno, Commander of Multi-National Forces-Iraq, who spoke via satellite with reporters at the Pentagon yesterday, providing an update on ongoing security operations in Iraq.
This briefing is notable mostly because yesterday we handed off security to the government of Iraq for cities across the country. This is a milestone, and Iraqis and Americans should be proud of the accomplishments of our two nations that brought us to this point.
Odierno assumed command of MNF-Iraq on September 16th, 2008, succeeding General David Petraus.
As a Lieutenant General Odierno had previously been commander of Multi-National Corps-Iraq, a job he held from May 2006 to July 2008. The job of corps commander is to run the war on a day to day basis. He implements the MNF-Iraq commander's vision. Below the Corps commander are the divisional commanders (two-star, or Major General), each of which headquarters a region of Iraq (see org chart)
Called "The Patton of Counterinsurgency" by people who know what they're talking about, next to Petraeus Odierno is the person most responsible for the success of the surge in 2007-08.
This and other briefings can be seen at DODvClips. The Pentagon Channel also has briefings, news stories, as well as 24x7 steaming video, so visit it as well.
The transcript is at DefenseLink.
Unfortunately this interview is somewhat marred by a dopey reporter from NPR who acted quite inappropriately during the briefing. I've watched dozens of briefings over the past two and a half years, and by far most of the reporters act professionally, so this was an aberration.
Even so, this briefing is particularly informative, so be sure to watch the video and read the transcript.
From Gen. Odierno's opening remarks:
Continue reading "Iraq Briefing - 30 June 2009 - An Historic Day for Iraq"
Posted by Tom at 9:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Afghanistan Briefing - 23 June 2009 - Cookie Cutter Solutions Don't Work Everywhere
This briefing is by Colonel John Spiszer of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, otherwise known as Task Force Duke.
The order of battle is not as well defined on the various military websites for our operations in Afghanistan, comparing very poorly to what you'll find on the Multi-National Forces-Iraq website. Much of this is because many (but not all!) of our "allies" do not want their troops to fight, and insist on a command structure that does not run exclusively through the United States. Fortunately, Kimberly Kagan's Institute for the Study of War has an excellent Order of Battle that was published in February. Their document tells us that the 3rd BCT is part of Regional Command - East / based at Bagram Airfield. The 3rd BCT itself operates out of FOB Fenty, Jalalabad, and is responsible for Kunar, Laghman, Nangarhar, and Nuristan provinces.
This and other videos can be seen at DODvClips. The Pentagon Channel also has videos and news stories, so visit it as well.
The transcript is at DefenseLink.
From Col. Spiszer's opening remarks:
Posted by Tom at 8:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
June 28, 2009
"The less we protest, the more people will die"
Yesterday I outlined many reasons why Why President Obama Should Stand for Freedom in Iran and other places around the world. I described why his policy of silence was foolish and how no, speaking up did not give the tyrants a reason they would not otherwise have had to crack heads. I quoted ex-Soviet dissident Anatoly (now Natan) Sharansky about how Reagan's "Evil Empire" speech gave their movement a much needed boost in the arm. I also quoted from The Washington Post some Arab democracy activists who were distraught at Obama's lack of forceful action with regards to Iran.
Today I bring you Jose Maria Anzar, prime minister of Spain from 1996-2004. He hits it out of the part in an editorial in the today's Wall Street Journal:
If there hadn't been dissidents in the Soviet Union, the Communist regime never would have crumbled. And if the West hadn't been concerned about their fate, Soviet leaders would have ruthlessly done away with them. They didn't because the Kremlin feared the response of the Free World.Just like the Soviet dissidents who resisted communism, those who dare to march through the streets of Tehran and stand up against the Islamic regime founded by the Ayatollah Khomeini 30 years ago represent the greatest hope for change in a country built on the repression of its people. At stake is nothing less than the legitimacy of a system incompatible with respect for individual rights. Also at stake is the survival of a theocratic regime that seeks to be the dominant power in the region, the indisputable spiritual leader of the Muslim world, and the enemy of the West.
Continue reading ""The less we protest, the more people will die""
Posted by Tom at 9:36 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)
Obama to Cut Military Spending to Pre - 9/11 Levels
Via The Tank military blog over at NRO, Gregory S. McNeal provides the scoop on Obama's plans for national defense spending:
While trillions of borrowed dollars fly out of Washington in the form of stimulus (and into Washington from America's wallets), the federal government is cutting back in one area where the Founders believed a federal government was necessary -- "to provide for the common defense."Perhaps most alarming are the cuts to missile defense, right when our enemies are preparing advanced missile systems. As an illustration of the dramatic cuts, consider this alarming graphic provided by the Heritage Foundation:
Liberals used to complain that defense spending crowed out other programs. While that argument might have had some merit in the 1950s, it certainly doesn't today. Obama and his Democrats are spending us into oblivion through their "stimulus," and their "cap n' trade" tax (Waxman-Markey, or American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009), and plans for national health care will send us into the abyss.
Meanwhile we've got enemies around the globe which they ignore. But wait, it gets worse:
Continue reading "Obama to Cut Military Spending to Pre - 9/11 Levels"
Posted by Tom at 9:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
June 27, 2009
Why President Obama Should Stand for Freedom in Iran
While I've been away these past two days President Obama has issued some more mild criticism of the election fraud in Iran, prompting President Ahmadinejad and other Iranians to lash back in rage. The latest from The Washington Times
President Obama on Friday called the postelection crackdown in Iran "outrageous" and flatly refused President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's request for an apology. One leading Iranian cleric, meanwhile, called for protest leaders to be executed.Continuing this week's harsh rhetoric, Mr. Obama, after meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said "direct dialogue" with Iran will suffer as a result of the beatings and killings of protesters, though he didn't spell out exact consequences. He said he remains vigilant to see how events play out.
Mrs. Merkel went much further, demanding a recount of the votes and saying the international community must identify the victims and make Iran account for their treatment.
"Despite the government's efforts to keep the world from bearing witness to that violence, we see it and we con-demn it," said Mr. Obama, though he continued to say Iran itself must decide the election results. "If the Iranian government desires the respect of the international community, then it must respect the rights - and heed the will - of its people."
Apparently having learned from one or another Clinton on how to parse words to keep all sides happy and yet leave him room to take any position in the future, he vaguely promises that ""direct dialogue" with Iran will suffer" yet doesn't say what that means.
Does it mean that he won't meet directly with the Iranians at all? Or not until certain preconditions are satisfied? If the latter, what are they? Again, no specifics.
Ahmadinejad, for his part, fired back
Continue reading "Why President Obama Should Stand for Freedom in Iran"
Posted by Tom at 8:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
June 26, 2009
Stop Waxman-Markey, the "Cap 'n Trade" Tax
From this morning's Washington Times
The Democrat-led House pressed Thursday for enough votes to pass landmark legislation that would combat global warming by forcing U.S. companies to reduce their carbon-dioxide emissions, expanding expensive renewable-energy sources and trimming consumers' choices on new light bulbs and hot tubs.Publicly, President Obama urged passage of the legislation -- one of his top priorities -- even though it faces near-unanimous opposition from Republicans. Behind the scenes, his top aides and environmental allies lobbied wavering Democrats to vote yes as early as Friday.
...
But resistance there remained high among both Democrats and Republicans to key components of the bill, including its complicated pollution-permit market system called cap-and-trade. In addition, Senate Democrats are divided over regional disparities in the impact of the bill.
...
The House bill would cut U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions -- primarily carbon dioxide -- 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050. It would also establish a new Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), which would force utilities to supply a minimum amount of their electricity from renewable energy sources.The bill would reach carbon-dioxide emission targets by establishing a cap-and-trade system, which would require heavy emitters of carbon dioxide, and the oil and gas industry, to buy annual emissions permits from the government or through a secondary market.
The plan, as written by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, would auction a small percentage of the available permits, or allowances, directly to companies. The rest, more than 85 percent, would be given away to selected industries, local utility companies, states and Indian tribes.
Waxman-Markey, otherwise known as the Waxman-Markey, otherwise known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES) is absolutely the nuttiest bill ever devised. It's designed to fight a non-existent problem, it creates a trading system that will serve no purpose other than to waste time and money, and dramatically increases government power. It's like something out of a Franz Kafka novel.
Continue reading "Stop Waxman-Markey, the "Cap 'n Trade" Tax"
Posted by Tom at 9:30 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
June 24, 2009
Terror in Tehran... But is the Government Getting the Upper Hand?
A young woman describes her horrific experiences in Tehran today while CNN uses Google Earth to show where the events took place. The regime has moved into high gear as it looses restraints on the security forces:
Absolutely heartbreaking.
Continue reading "Terror in Tehran... But is the Government Getting the Upper Hand?"
Posted by Tom at 10:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
June 23, 2009
More Action, Protests, Remberences of Neda Agha-Soltan in Iran
Here are some of the latest videos of the the protests in Iran (h/t The Corner)
This one by the Associated Press shows amateur video reportedly shot on Sunday. It also shows protests, and the police making arrests. It also shows part of the infamous video where Neda Agha-Soltan, dubbed the "Angel of Freedom," lay dying of a gunshot wound to the heart.
This one is labeled "Night to June 22," which I take means it was shot Sunday night.
This next one, though, is my favorite. It was shot sometime over the weekend that shows a crowd turning on the police and chasing them. This isn't the norm, to be sure, but it sure is good to see:
Continue reading "More Action, Protests, Remberences of Neda Agha-Soltan in Iran"
Posted by Tom at 10:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
One and a Half Cheers for Obama
Yipee, after a week and a half of equivocating, our president said something right today regarding Iran. Mostly right, anyway.
Hello, everybody. Good afternoon, everybody. Today, I want to start by addressing three issues, and then I'll take your questions. First, I'd like to say a few words about the situation in Iran. The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings, and imprisonments of the last few days. I strongly condemn these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost.I've made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran's affairs. But we must also bear witness to the courage and the dignity of the Iranian people, and to a remarkable opening within Iranian society. And we deplore the violence against innocent civilians anywhere that it takes place.
The Iranian people are trying to have a debate about their future. Some in Iran -- some in the Iranian government, in particular, are trying to avoid that debate by accusing the United States and others in the West of instigating protests over the election. These accusations are patently false. They're an obvious attempt to distract people from what is truly taking place within Iran's borders. This tired strategy of using old tensions to scapegoat other countries won't work anymore in Iran. This is not about the United States or the West; this is about the people of Iran, and the future that they -- and only they -- will choose.
The Iranian people can speak for themselves. That's precisely what's happened in the last few days. In 2009, no iron fist is strong enough to shut off the world from bearing witness to peaceful protests [sic] of justice. Despite the Iranian government's efforts to expel journalists and isolate itself, powerful images and poignant words have made their way to us through cell phones and computers, and so we've watched what the Iranian people are doing.
This is what we've witnessed. We've seen the timeless dignity of tens of thousands of Iranians marching in silence. We've seen people of all ages risk everything to insist that their votes are counted and that their voices are heard. Above all, we've seen courageous women stand up to the brutality and threats, and we've experienced the searing image of a woman bleeding to death on the streets. While this loss is raw and extraordinarily painful, we also know this: Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history.
As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people have a universal right to assembly and free speech. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect those rights and heed the will of its own people. It must govern through consent and not coercion. That's what Iran's own people are calling for, and the Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government.
Note that he used the words "appalled," "outraged," and "condemed." Good for him and I'm glad he said it, but I think Michael Goldfarb has it right:
Continue reading "One and a Half Cheers for Obama"
Posted by Tom at 9:19 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
