Thursday, December 10, 2009

Great Speech President Obama

Excerpts from President Obama's Peace Prize speech

Now He Actualy did a great speech today. This will most likely help his poll numbers and he could be getting a little smarter and acting like the President of America. If he did more conservative speeches like he did then maybe he is changing for the better. What do you all think?

Climategate vs. Boxer: We Need To Stop Cap-&-Trade Tax

On Monday, the EPA moved to regulate six “greenhouse gases” by finding that their contribution to Global Warming constitutes a hazard to human health. One of those gases is methane, the lightest and most abundant hydrocarbon, chemical symbol CH4.
This finding by the EPA unmasks an unscientific charade and a regulatory power-grab.

U.S. Agency to Regulate Greenhouse Gases

The announcement was made late Monday and paves the way for federal regulation of emissions of six gases, including carbon dioxide and methane from refineries, chemical facilities and power plants - even if Congress rejects climate change legislation.
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson made the ‘endangerment finding’ announcement and also said that she believes it is “necessary to move ahead on new emission standards for cars, while potentially opening up large emitters such as power plants, crude-oil refineries and chemical plants to limits on their output of carbon dioxide and other gases.”…
“The endangerment finding means that we arrive at the climate talks in Copenhagen with a clear demonstration of our commitment to facing this global challenge,” Jackson said.

That’s one of the silliest — and scariest — things I’ve ever heard.
Methane, CH4, makes up about 1800 parts per billion, or less than 2/10,000ths of 1% of the atmosphere.
(By comparison, carbon dioxide, CO2, makes up about 375 parts per million of the atmosphere, or less than 4/100ths of 1%. We all know about CO2.)
Methane is a completely non-toxic, non-carcinogenic by-product of animal digestion and vegetation decay. It also vents to the atmosphere in natural seeps from underground reservoirs. The gas is much lighter than air and is the main constituent of the natural gas we burn in our houses. When burned, its residue gases are CO2 and H2O. That’s it.
Methane is supposedly 22 times more effective as a greenhouse gas than CO2, so it’s included in the EPA power-grab. Even considering that, methane’s impact is less than a tenth of that of CO2 because it’s so dilute in the atmosphere.
Unlike CO2, methane doesn’t have much staying power in the atmosphere. Almost all , of whatever source, either escapes into space or reacts with hydroxyl ions to form, again, CO2 and water vapor.

While the graph above might appear scary at first glance, note the scale. The rate of increase over the 20+ year period covered by the graph is about 6 parts per billion methane per year, and the recent trend is nearly flat. That tells you that the natural processes that regulate atmospheric methane are working.
The primary sources for the additional methane added to the atmosphere (in order of importance) are:

rice cultivation;
domestic grazing animals;
termites;
landfills;
coal mining;
oil and gas extraction.

If oil and gas extraction (which, incidentally, is already regulated by the various states and by the MMS in Federal waters) is the #6 source of methane, why are we subjected to pictures like the one below, as the EPA makes its case for regulation?

It’s because EPA knows how to regulate and tax domestic producers. Nobody should expect this to have a meaningful, or even measurable, impact on the environment. It will, however, make transportation, electricity, and every product made with oil and gas more expensive. And it makes for a bigger and more powerful EPA.
As for the meaningful sources of anthropogenic methane, note that more than 60% of all rice paddies are found in India and China where scientific data concerning emission rates are unavailable, and, oddly enough, the EPA can’t regulate or tax them.
Cows they can tax. Termites, however, may prove slightly more challenging.

Is A Republican Civil War Needed?And Are Conservatives Taking Back Our Country?

The media narrative every time Republicans lose is not that Republicans lose, but that conservatives lose. Without fail, every election cycle, made worse by John McCain being the 2008 nominee, is that conservatives cannot win. In 2008, the narrative was that conservatives cannot even make it out of the GOP primary.
As often happens, the media narrative when repeated enough starts being treated as fact, particularly among Republican establishment types who crave acceptance in the media. Their thinking is pretty grade school: “Reporter says conservatives can’t win. Therefore I will not be conservative. They will look at me and say ‘winner.’”
Sadly, this attitude has infected the great bulk of the Republican establishment. The only way to change this is for conservatives to win. But this year, unlike most other years, there is a very real problem. The Republican Establishment is out to beat conservatives to make sure once and for all that the media narrative is established fact.
Look at the pattern, led by Rob Jesmer, the Executive Director of the NRSC, who has rallied Senate Republicans to oppose conservatives nationwide:
In Pennsylvania, the GOP went with Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey.
In Florida, it is Crist over Rubio.
In Connecticut, the GOP has stayed neutral as to the moderates in the race, but made clear the conservative is a loser.
In California, it is Fiorina over DeVore.
Across the board, the GOP Establishment is staying neutral between moderates and endorsing moderates over conservatives. In some cases, it is endorsing liberals over conservatives.
The goal is an intentionally orchestrated campaign to defeat conservatives in the GOP primaries and thereby have the establishment take full credit for what we all know is going to be a good year for the GOP in 2010.
However, conservatives have a real opportunity to fight back. From Florida to California to Pennsylvania and more, if conservatives win the primaries the Republican Establishment will be marginalized and totally unable to take credit for the victories. In what will be a good year for Republicans next year, those conservatives will most likely win the general election too. The media and establishment narrative will be crushed.
So yes, there is a very necessary brewing Republican civil war. This should be a banner election year for conservatives. Sadly, it is the GOP Establishment trying to prevent that from happening.
We must fight back. We know conservatives are the base of the party. We know independents are moving our way. We know conservatives can win. We know from Maine to Florida to California to Alaska a pro-entrepreneurial “leave me the hell alone” message can sell. And yet?
The Republican Establishment in charge now is the same Establishment that was there in 2006. It never got replaced. For example, Mitch McConnell has led us from 55 Senate seats to 40 and his record as NRSC Chairman was equally craptacular. Now this man is both trying to beat conservatives in Republican primaries and oppose Obamacare with cute little messaging amendments. These people are only winners because we let them. Not any more.
Conservatives can win if we fight back. Who is with me?

Bonsai from the Right