A new political blog--Enjoy!
Defined by Opposition
http://definedbyopposition.wordpress.com/
Mr Miller, it is over
15 years ago
Monday, February 7, 2011
EPA Cries Over Spilled Milk
The EPA has discoverd that milk contains "a non-petroleum oil" (they mean milk-fat)---and so the folks at the EPA, who regulate oil spills that threaten our shorelines, have decided dairy farmers must implement measures to counter any dangerous milk spills.
These measures include "training first responders" and "building containment facilities" to prevent damage from catastrophic milk spills. The Agriculture Department apparently has a $3 million dollar program to help farmers comply with EPA oil-spill regulations.
Apparently this is not an early April-fools joke. http://fuelfix.com/blog/2011/02/03/epa-spilled-milk-regulation-indicative-of-broader-problem/
And here I thought the farmhouse cats were in charge of milk spills!
Friday, February 4, 2011
Legality, Just a Mere Technicality
President Obama has now ignored two federal court rulings:
He hasn't lifted the oil embargo as Judge Feldman ordered and is now in contempt of court. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-03/u-s-administration-in-contempt-over-gulf-drill-ban-judge-rules.html
He is also deliberately ignoring the ruling that Obamacare is unconstitutional--it's null and void. Dead. Caput.
But Mr. Obama continues to implement Obamacare anyway.
Is Mr. Obama operating illegally? I would say "yes".
Why be Concerned about the Scam of Global Warming?
Because the farce of Global Warming is bad for the whole world, not just the United States.
For example, the ethanol that the U.S. is required to put into gasoline is derived from corn, which has led to global food shortages of corn and a world-wide rise in food prices. Not to mention the fact that turning corn into fuel is a very energy-requiring process. And don't forget that ethanol-laced gasoline doesn't burn as efficiently. Which means that ethanol is NOT a solution to our petroleum needs. In fact, ethanol is probably a negative. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10057/04-08-Ethanol.pdf
These concerns also lead to foolish federal policies. Energy Secretary Chu wants renewable energy sources (such as wind and solar) to replace US petroleum needs. Unfortunately, renewable energy sources cannot replace petroleum. Wind and solar can only be used for electricity--and electricity uses up a mere 1% of petroleum here in the US.
Well, if we all went to electric cars, wouldn't that solve the problem? Well, while petroleum produces less than 1% of our electricity, fossil fuels produce 70% of our electricity. Not exactly "green."
BTW, solar yields about 0.02% of our electricity, while wind power gives us less than 2% of our electricity. Nuclear power plants and hydroelectric plants comprise most of the remaining sources of electricity. (2009 statistics--see http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0802a.html
These numbers also point to the difficulty of President Obama's call for 80% of US energy needs to come from "green" sources. Clean Energy Standards (or CES) will force energy companies to turn to expensive sources of energy, since nuclear power plants are not being built. Furthermore, wind and solar power are not dependable sources of energy--just another small problem.
What to do? May I suggest that the government get out of the way of the development of energy sources?
Mr. Obama is currently in contempt of court by refusing to lift the moratorium on off-shore drilling. From Judge Feldman: “Each step the government took following the court’s imposition of a preliminary injunction showcases its defiance,” and, “Such dismissive conduct, viewed in tandem with the re-imposition of a second blanket and substantively identical moratorium, and in light of the national importance of this case, provide this court with clear and convincing evidence of the government’s contempt."
Next, stop interfering with energy development. Allow nuclear power. Allow the free-market system to come up with even better technology than wind or solar power, instead of subsidizing pet projects. And allow drilling of American oil until we have something better.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
A Few Comments on Egypt
How should President Obama deal with the difficult situation in Egypt?
Face it, Egypt IS an incredibly problematic situation. Especially since apparently the Administration was caught completely off-guard about Egyptian circumstances. Though Mr. Obama is blaming US Intelligence for not giving him sufficient warning about the conditions in Egypt, it may be that Mr. Obama just wasn't listening to the intelligence that was being provided. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/04/world/main7317044.shtml
The President didn't attend the 1st two-hour meeting concerning Egypt--he was watching his daughter play basketball. Later that day he met for an hour about Egypt--and then partied with Mr. Axelrod. http://www.politico.com/politico44/wbarchive/whiteboard01292011.html
These meetings were followed by the Vice-President's statement that Mr. Mubarek is NOT a dictator, then statements by the President that Mubarek must go. Confusing, to say the least.
Plus, there's all this demagoguery about "peaceful" riots (an oxymoron!) and "democratically minded" people in the Cairo streets. I thought the riots were about food. Furthermore, peaceful assemblies don't steal precious treasures from museums.
Also, I am wondering why Mr. Obama is touting "democracy" and "free elections" when he is also willing to treat with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that supported Nazi Germany and has ties to other Muslim terrorist organizations. http://www.answers.com/topic/muslim-brotherhood
One of the biggest problems, I think, is that Mr. Obama has now backed the United States into a corner. Whatever Mubarak is, he was an ally. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has a long history of snubbing our allies, so this brush-off is not out of the ordinary. These brush-offs have just not had such disastrous potential as this rejection of Mubarak, which could potentially lead to a total collapse of the Middle East into Muslim theocratic-fascist regimes. Especially if one thinks that the Muslim Brotherhood could be an American ally.
A better reaction? Maybe just shut up.
And a Brief Note from Obama's Climate Change Czar
Another advocate of global warming is John Holdren, Mr. Obama's Science Czar. He is concerned that the population is simply "not educated." http://nation.foxnews.com/czars/2011/01/31/science-czar-republicans-need-education
Mind you, this is the man who advocates forced abortions and sterilization-for-all in order to save planet Earth from humanity.
I wonder, is Mr. Holdren suggesting that we are stupid? Or is he suggesting something more sinister?
More Global Warming
"Neither rain, nor snow, nor......"
But you can't get any mail when your mailbox is frozen shut.
Tomorrow will be the third day that we will be iced in. And we may have more snow or ice Thursday nite or Friday morning.
All because, says Al Gore, because of global warming. http://blog.algore.com/2011/02/an_answer_for_bill.html
Increased temperatures mean that the air holds more moisture, allowing for more rain or snow.
The problem with this 'theory', Mr. Gore, is that increased temperatures might explain more rain, but not more snow.
You have to have "cold" clouds to get snow and ice. "Warm" clouds just won't make that ol' frozen precipitation.
Besides that fact that temperatures have been cooling since the 1990's. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/4029837/Global-warming-Reasons-why-it-might-not-actually-exist.html
Neither are the glaciers melting--in fact, they are advancing in the Himalayas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
