This Page

has been moved to new address

Don't You Believe. . .

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: Don't You Believe. . .

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Saturday, October 03, 2009

Don't You Believe. . .

. . . that this fight is over:


WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama's top energy adviser said Friday there is no way Congress will be able to pass a bill on climate change this year.

"That's not going to happen," said the adviser, Carol Browner.

Browner made the statement at a conference organized by The Atlantic magazine, just days after Senate Democrats introduced a major bill on climate change. In a video posted on the magazine's Web site, Browner was asked about the prospects of enacting climate legislation by the time negotiations on a global climate treaty begin in December in Copenhagen.

"Obviously, we'd like to be through the process, but that's not going to happen," Browner said. "I think we would all agree the likelihood you would have a bill signed by the president on comprehensive energy by the time we go early in December is not likely."

Senate Democrats unveiled a bill Wednesday that aims to cut greenhouse gasses by 20 percent by 2020. The House passed a bill in June that calls for a 17 percent emission cut by 2020. The Senate bill includes an economy-wide cap-and-trade system that would require power plants, industrial facilities and refineries to cut carbon dioxide and other climate-changing pollution. While there would be an overall emission cap, polluters would be able to purchase emission allowances to limit reductions. The bill, however, does not lay out how emission allowances would be distributed, a contentious issue left for resolving later.

The fight isn't over.

It really hasn't even started yet.

BZ

8 Comments:

Blogger Tim said...

In a way I think the recession is doing quite a lot to cut greenhouse gases. We are sure seeing it in Detroit. Lot fewer cars on the roads. Other statistics indicate fewer car accidents, car deer collisions, fewer traffic fatalities. Maybe they should just let this go until we get people working again.

Sat Oct 03, 11:00:00 AM PDT  
Blogger TexasFred said...

Uh Tim, you forgot, more 'hood rats not bustin' caps on dat ass...

Just sayin'...

Sat Oct 03, 01:05:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

I might go so far as to posit that there be NO more spending or additional taxation of ANY kind until the recession is completely over and the jobless rate goes below 5%.

Of course, the current administration will do their best to continue seeking the bottom of your wallet and purse.

BZ

Sat Oct 03, 01:26:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Tim said...

BZ- I'd like your expert opinion on RF's comment. Does shooting a gun significantly increase greenhouse gases? I do know it can give a person a severe case of lead poisoning;)
I'll agree BZ that new taxes (well, I might make an exception for the huge bonuses that Wall St. types are STILL GETTING even though THEY caused most of our current problems, but for the average serf and pions such as ourselves) are not going to help us dig out of our current unemployment problems. Hell, I'll go you one better: how about a tax cut for the workin' man?
It's been proven over and over that giving the big boys a tax cut does less to stimulate the economy than putting some cash in the pockets of folks like us. We'll spend that money. They won't. Say what you want about Cash For Clunkers, but at least the little guy got a break and it only cost 2 billion, not 700. It also kept lots of autoworkers employed.
My favorite Reagan quote is that the best social program out there is a JOB.
Only problem is those pesky wars. They are really costing us. Let's pack it in with Iraq and send some of those boy over to finish off the Taliban, and let's not waste time playing mr. nice guy. Kick butt and go home. Screw nation building.

Sat Oct 03, 02:35:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Pasadena Closet Conservative said...

The State of California mandate for electric utilities to cut greenhouse gases is killing those companies. And now the feds are going to place a similar mandate on them? This is getting stupid.

Sat Oct 03, 05:56:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Milepost 154 said...

You'd best be VERY careful there, Tim, particularly with your last line; you're treading DANgerously close to the mantra of many Conservatives: don't hold a war unless you know what you want, unless you know what to do, unless you enter to WIN, unless you enter to KILL and BREAK shit.

I was never against the war in Iraq; however, since Mr Bush didn't take advice from me he entered with little regard for his actual battlefield tacticians -- you know, those who actually went to war colleges and have MEDALS for killing things and breaking shit. If you SERiously wish to win a war you enter with a full commitment, with a pact to utilize OVERwhelming force, to lay waste to people, places and things -- and world opinion be DAMNED.

With the caveat being: if that offends you, then DON'T DO IT.

Iraq should have been STEAMrollered. Afghanistan should have been STEAMrollered. Everything flattened. Those not wearing uniforms per the Geneva Convention should have been considered as targets and worthy of at least one magazine of .223 --

Regards Wall Street, I'll give you a bit of that, with this exception:

The source can be placed at the foot of the Fed Gubmint -- those who insisted loans BE made to those who had NO remote chance of repayment and EVERYONE in the loop KNEW it. The buyers KNEW it -- with the rare exception of the abysmally retarded -- for shit's sake, Kiddies, did you REALLY think you could afford that McMansion without a HUGE CALL on the back end -- ?? And SOONER rather than later?

On the other hand, the Fed PAID for the NUMBER of loans made and that in itself stirred the Greed Element in lenders and the like. So yes, BOTH parties were at fault: buyers AND lenders.

One final observation: if the Fed Gubmint was TRULY concerned with an ACTUAL recovery, the'd simply cut checks to individual taxPAYers whose verified tax ID number is on file with the IRS.

NOT to corporations, agencies or faceless entities.

Let's see: there are roughly 300 million people in the US. Take out an estimated 10 million illegal invaders. Verify with tax records. Let's say, uh, 290 million lawful residents. Why, that would include the lawful POOR as well, wouldn't it? Those who paid taxes.

And so, what have we paid, again, very ROUGHly, in terms of TARP and bailout funds?

Sure, yes, I realize, no one really knows. It's all ones and zeroes and, after all, it's money the Politicians didn't have to work for so, as far as THEY're concerned it's FREE CASH. Ahem. Where WERE we?

Oh yes. TARP and bailouts. It's like this:

One estimate indicates that a conservative figure is $4.28 TRILLION. Other figures indicate that $11 TRILLION dollars have been promised.

So, let's hedge our fiscal bets. Let's say that "only" $3 trillion dollars have been spent on TARP and stimulus and the like.

Do the math.

With 300 million people, EACH person SHOULD receive a check for one MILLION dollars.

Trust me. THAT would have the GREATEST POSSIBLE impact on our national recovery.

Sat Oct 03, 10:43:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Tim said...

M154- I didn't think Iraq was needed. The people who hit NYC were two countries over. We agree completely on tactics to fight a war. Marquess of Queensbury rules are for boxing matches, not wars. War is not a pillow fight.

I couldn't disagree more on where you place blame for the mortagage meltdown, but then again it had nothing to do with my original comment.
When I refinanced in '02 I had to provide tax returns, have a credit check, get my home appraised and go thru lots of red tape. So I reject this whole arguement about the government FORCING banks to lend money. Shit, we gave them 700 Billion last year to lend to people and they just used it to buy up each other, so frankly I think that arguement is a bunch of bull.
Even if that were true, of which I am unconvinced, Republicans were responsible. They had the President, and Congress. Their lack of regulatory oversight allowed these bankers to craft Byzantine financial instruments that no one knew what the hell they were. I'd love to take out an insurance policy on an insurance policy that stated I could go to Vegas, lose my ass, and still walk away with a million dollars. Why is it so hard for Republicans to admit that Bankers are just greedy bastards? Why always pick on poor people. A lot of these people are just simple folk who got buffaloed by legal mumbo jumbo that they did not understand. Yes, shame on them for not reading the fine print. Shame on the Government for not making them write these contracts understandable for regular people with regulations that prohibit crap like that.

I totally agree that the Government should have paid that TARP money bottom up and not to banlers. Same with stimulus money. That why I liked Cash for Clunkers.

Finally I totally support ANY GOVERNMENT PROGRAM that puts a million bucks in my pocket. Raise taxes on Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, they have enough yachts.

Sun Oct 04, 09:41:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

I don't trust a word emanating from the BHO administration.

Sun Oct 04, 01:50:00 PM PDT  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home