Obama To Implement More Stringent Ozone Regulations

Amongst the 3415 new regulations Team Obama is quietly implementing, this is one that I actually rather agree with

(NY Times)  The Obama administration is expected to release on Wednesday a contentious and long-delayed environmental regulation to curb emissions of ozone, a smog-causing pollutant linked to asthma, heart disease and premature death.

The sweeping regulation, which would aim at smog from power plants and factories across the country, particularly in the Midwest, would be the latest in a series of Environmental Protection Agency controls on air pollution that wafts from smokestacks and tailpipes. Such regulations, released under the authority of the Clean Air Act, have become a hallmark of President Obama’s administration.

Environmentalists and public health advocates have praised the E.P.A. rules as a powerful environmental legacy. Republicans, manufacturers and the fossil fuel industry have sharply criticized them as an example of costly government overreach.

The proposed regulation would lower the current threshold for ozone pollution from 75 parts per billion to a range of 65 to 70 parts per billion, according to people familiar with the plan. That range is less stringent than the standard of 60 parts per billion sought by environmental groups, but the E.P.A. proposal would also seek public comment on a 60 parts-per-billion plan, keeping open the possibility that the final rule could be stricter.

Yes, this can put a burden on industry and business, but, unlike “climate change” regulations, ozone can be a dangerous pollutant and have a negative effect on health. Many fossil fuels and other businesses are complaining, and certainly those costs can be passed on. But, this is something that is what the Environmental Protection Act is about, and the lowering of the ozone ppm over the years has become barely known.

That said, we’ll have to see how this shakes out, and what products it effects and at what cost.

Of course, Obama has been sitting on this since prior to the 2012 general election

The E.P.A. had planned to release the new ozone rule in August of 2011, but as Republicans and powerful industry groups prepared to go on attack against the plan, Mr. Obama decided to delay its release, fearing that opposition to the regulation would hurt his re-election chances in 2012.

At the time, Mr. Obama said the regulation would impose too severe a burden on industry and local governments at a time of economic distress.

Interesting: he put his re-election above the health of citizens.

Read: Obama To Implement More Stringent Ozone Regulations »

If All You See…

…is the horrible potential for a massive carbon footprint on Thanksgiving, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Not A Lot Of People Know That, with a post on Obama killing the African dream.

Read: If All You See… »

10 Ways To Reduce Your Carbon Footprint On Thanksgiving, Ruining It For All

Why? Because it’s time for reflection, says HuffPo’s Lori Popkewitz Alper

10 Ways to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint This Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving is a favorite holiday for many. It’s a time to eat, indulge and spend uninterrupted time with family.

It’s also a time for reflection. A time to think about what we’re thankful for and a time to think about how the choices we make impact our families and the planet.

Although every day provides an opportunity for reflection and change, Thanksgiving stands out as the perfect day to kick off a few new habits that will effect the longevity of our planet. If each of us revamped our consumption and waste habits by slightly adjusting what’s already in place, the overall impact could be huge.

Here are a few tips for the Thanksgiving holiday that will reduce our carbon footprint and help keep the planet healthy for generations to come.

See? Reflection. Not on family, friends, loved ones. Nope. Hotcoldwetdry. I’ll leave it to you to read all 10, if you so choose. It’s the standard boilerplate ideas, such as buy local (never a bad idea if you can get better and fresher), turning the heat down (so everyone can shiver and complain), purchasing carbon offsets (rather like paying a ticket for speeding rather than not speeding in the first place). Here’s my favorite

8. Green Your Turkey

A Cornell study shows it takes 14 units of fossil fuel to produce a serving of turkey. If you’re planning to have turkey, try to make it a little greener by purchasing it from a local market or farm. If the turkey is traveling a long distance to get to your table, that’s adding to your carbon footprint. Best option — skip the turkey!

There’s your marching orders, Warmist! No turkey for you!

Read: 10 Ways To Reduce Your Carbon Footprint On Thanksgiving, Ruining It For All »

With Thanksgiving A Few Days Away, You Should Really Give #ClimateThanks Or Something

No, really, Soros funded Joe Romm really wants this, because climatologists spend lots of time changing data to conform to their preconceptions

Here’s How To Show Gratitude To Climate Heroes Big And Small This Thanksgiving

This Thanksgiving season, the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication once again wants you to tweet out some gratitude via the hashtag#ClimateThanks.

In 2013, this effort to thank the many heroes — sung and unsung — who are fighting to preserve a livable climate for billions of people, was wildly successful:

Last Thanksgiving 2,500 people and organizations thanked each other through #ClimateThanks. When we originally put out the call last year we had no idea how people would respond, and were astounded by the wave of gratitude that swept through Twitter. In the end the climate community sent nearly 8,000 #ClimateThanks messages and reached 6.87 million people, becoming one of the largest Twitter storms on climate change ever.

I remain very thankful for climate scientists, who toil away for long hours away from their family, sometimes in the most inhospitable parts of the world, for not much money (sorry disinformers) — and do so thanklessly. Indeed they do so in the face of anti-science cyber-bullying and legal harassment and general hostility from climate disinformers — all because they have devoted their lives to averting the gravest of human tragedies. They are like the hero of Henrik Ibsen’s classic An Enemy of the People — which someone should modernize into a climate science parable.

So, wait, they’re taking lots of fossil fueled vehicles to travel far from their families to inhospitable parts of the world to tell us that fossil fuels are bad? Huh.

I also give thanks to the idiots who provide me with all sorts of blogging material, such as

Even Thanksgiving Is Connected to Climate Change

It’s nearly Thanksgiving, and while we all will — and should — count our many blessings, you’re forgiven if your thoughts eventually turn to the mouth-watering traditions of the holiday feast.

So when my friend John Mandyck, global chief sustainability officer of UTC Building & Industrial Systems, said he had some food-related thoughts he wanted to share, since we’re both from Central New York, I was anticipating some long-forgotten recipe for corn pudding, or oyster stuffing, or some equally seasonally and locally appropriate contribution to the holiday table.

Instead, he sent me a blog he recently had penned for Greenbiz. It’s about the connection of food spoilage to climate change, and I think the thoughts he captured are worth sharing. His premise is thought provoking, and, given the season, something to keep in mind especially as you finalize the menu for your upcoming family gathering.

You know, there is a problem with food waste, particularly in the 1st World. But, instead of dealing with the actual problem, these wankers have to shove it under the banner of “climate change”, when it should stand on its own.

Read: With Thanksgiving A Few Days Away, You Should Really Give #ClimateThanks Or Something »

Grand Jury Looks At Evidence, Refuses To Indict Darren Wilson

This, of course, has made liberals and the media (but, I repeat myself) very upset, so they’re attempting to spin this away

Ferguson police officer won’t be charged in fatal shooting

A grand jury on Monday declined to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager, resolving a secretive, months-long legal saga and reigniting powerful frustrations about America’s policing of African Americans.

Said unarmed black teenager would be alive if

  • he hadn’t stolen cigars in a strong-arm robbery
  • been walking in the middle of the street after performing a strong-arm robbery, which was guaranteed to get a police officer to notice him
  • hadn’t attacked an officer of the law through the window of his patrol car, showing his propensity for violence
  • tried to take the officer’s weapon during the vehicle altercation
  • hadn’t charged the officer of the law after running away post vehicle attack

In case the Washington Post missed it, Grand Juries are supposed to be secretive.

The decision means that Wilson, 28, will face no state charges for the Aug. 9 shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown. It also set off a show of fury on streets near where Brown was shot, a reflection of emotions that register in this riven city as either out of control or justifiable.

At least two police cars and a half-dozen buildings were set aflame. Not far from Christmas lights in downtown Ferguson that read “Seasons Greetings,” police fired tear-gas canisters to contain the crowds. People looted liquor and convenience stores, a response that ran counter to the peace that Missouri authorities, President Obama and Brown’s family had requested.

As St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert P. McCulloch announced the decision, National Guard troops fanned out across the city. There was calm and silence in the streets of Ferguson for a half-beat after the announcement, but anger erupted shortly thereafter, and just after midnight county police reported hearing automatic-weapon fire. Protestors also blocked Interstate 44, causing a miles-long back-up of traffic.

In a sign of the way that the events from Ferguson have both compelled and startled a nation, protesters also gathered in front of the White House as well as in major cities from coast to coast, with sporadic reports of police cars being attacked.

Remember when these Democrat voters said all they wanted was a Grand Jury? Of course, now the race-baiting violence enablers are decrying the decision of the Grand Jury, saying that things were done wrong, and this should have gone to a trial. Here’s the ACLU of Missouri, which decided that due process only applies to certain people

“The grand jury’s decision does not negate the fact that Michael Brown’s tragic death is part of an alarming national trend of officers using excessive force against people of color, often during routine encounters. Yet in most cases, the officers and police departments are not held accountable,” said Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri. “While many officers carry out their jobs with respect for the communities they serve, we must confront the profound disconnect and disrespect that many communities of color experience with their local law enforcement.

It might be more productive if the ACLU stopped blaming the police for the criminality with certain “people of color” communities. Black on Black criminality is rampant in communities like Ferguson. As we can see from the post-decision violence and criminality.

“The ACLU will continue to fight for racial justice. We must end the prevailing policing paradigm where police departments are more like occupying forces, imposing their will to control communities. This ‘us’ versus ‘them’ policing antagonizes communities by casting a blanket of suspicion over entire neighborhoods, often under the guise of preventing crime.

“To build trust, we need a democratic system of policing where our communities have an equal say in the way their neighborhoods are policed. Collaboration, transparency and communication between police and communities around the shared goals of equality, fairness and public safety is the path forward.”

So, the ACLU wants to what? Disarm the police? Give the criminals and criminal enablers a say in how law enforcement polices the communities full of criminals?

The prosecutor, Robert McCulloch, even called out the media and social media for their factless media narrative during his statement, and, as Ben Shapiro points out

But never mind: the media had somehow turned the true story of Michael Brown – the story of a 6’5”, 289-lb. 18-year-old strong-arm-robbing a convenience store, confronting a police officer and attempting to take his gun, running away, turning back to charge that officer, and being shot multiple times – into the story of Emmett Till. Never mind that there was not a single shred of evidence suggesting that Wilson targeted Brown based on race; never mind that Brown matched the description of the robbery suspect because he was the robbery suspect; never mind that Brown attacked an officer twice. No, this was a pre-ordained narrative for the media: white racist police officer strikes down young black unarmed man. The result of that overwrought and outright false media-generated controversy: extended riots in Ferguson.

Instead of yammering on about heavy handed police, perhaps these communities and the media should look at the criminality within communities like Ferguson, and the spread and love of thug culture within those “community of colors”. Anyhow, that won’t happen. Instead, media enablers are crying and looking for spin. As the opinion pieces and editorials pop out whining in all sorts of manners, Rashad Robinson leads the way at the NY Daily News, who links this to the Rodney King decision (which, IMO, was an actual miscarriage of justice, unlike the Ferguson one)

DARREN WILSON NOT INDICTED: Justice system has failed us once again

…..

Today, I sit with a similar feeling of frustration. Despite a groundswell of outrage and months of protests from multitudes of black folks and their allies, Officer Darren Wilson will not be punished for the murder of 18-year-old Michael Brown.

What Mr. Robinson is proposing is justice by mob rule, and damn the evidence. They want their pound of flesh.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Grand Jury Looks At Evidence, Refuses To Indict Darren Wilson »

If All You See…

…are wonderful, wonderful trees sucking up carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Public Secrets, with a post on yet another Obama diplomatic screwup.

Read: If All You See… »

Black Friday Creep Is Totally Like Climate Change

Climate Tourettes

Editorial: Black Friday’s creep into Thanksgiving rips at heart of American family holiday

The commercial creep is a bit like the evidence of climate change. Incremental and hardly noticeable, then all of a sudden unmistakable with Christmas merchandise lapping ever closer to the back-to school sales.

The rest of the editorial is actually pretty good, discussing the problem of Black Friday creeping, particularly into stores being open for sales on Thanksgiving itself.

But, making a comparison to “climate change”? Please. That’s ridiculous.

Read: Black Friday Creep Is Totally Like Climate Change »

Unbelievable Catch By Odell Beckham

This is sick

Catch of the year? Yes! Best catch ever? Not sure. The one by David Tyree, catching it on his helmet, might beat it out.

More at Twitchy.

BTW, the Giants are pretty much out of the Playoffs picture.

Read: Unbelievable Catch By Odell Beckham »

“Rape By Fraud”? NJ Politician Looks To Criminalize It

I usually leave these loony tunes type stories to The Other McCain, but this one caught my eye

(NJ.com) Imagine this: A man woos a woman to bed with tales of his riches, fast cars and a vacation home in Monaco. But he actually lives in his mother’s basement.

Or this: A seemingly wealthy widow convinces a younger man to sleep with her on the notion that they may marry and he’ll inherit her money. In reality, she’s broke.

In both cases, someone lied about his or her status in order to have sex with someone else.

Under a bill recently proposed by a south Jersey lawmaker, such actions would not only be considered dishonest. They could prompt charges of rape.

Earlier this month, Assemblyman Troy Singleton (D-Burlington) introduced the bill (A3908), which would create the crime of “sexual assault by fraud,” which it defines as “an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not.”

That’s right, if you misrepresent yourself at a bar and get a bit of nooky you could be charged with felony rape. Remember when liberals said they wanted government out of the bedroom?

“I truly believe that we have to look at the issue of rape as more than sexual contact without consent,” Singleton said. “Fraud invalidates any semblance of consent just as forcible sexual contact does.

This could lead to a 20-30 year prison sentence. Way too much to excerpt, you need to read the whole article.

I wonder when we are going to criminalize fraud from politicians?

Here’s another interesting and somewhat related article

(CNN) The University of Virginia is suspending all fraternities and associated parties until January 9 following a Rolling Stone magazine article that described a student’s account of being gang raped and her frustration at trying to bring her alleged attackers to accountability.

They know exactly which fraternity house this occurred in, but, they are going to punish without due process all fraternities. Sororities and all Greek system activities are likewise suspended. Without due process. Despite there being no criminal complaint. Nor evidence.

She didn’t want to go to law enforcement but told the school’s Sexual Misconduct Board what happened, Rolling Stone reported.

Let me get this straight: she says she was raped, but failed to go to the actual authorities? Her frustration lies with her, then. This is one of the big problems, in that schools have no business taking the place of the legal system. However, they are convenient places to complain when there might be no criminal activity. I wonder if we will later find out that the story is manufactured?

I see Noah Rothman is also discussing the NJ.com article, as well as others.

Read: “Rape By Fraud”? NJ Politician Looks To Criminalize It »

Good News: Obama’s Green Loans Were Unprofitable, And That’s The Way They Should Be

And by “unprofitable”, The Week writer Ryan Cooper means to government, because the loans sure seemed profitable to the recipients of the loans, 80% of whom were Democrat donors

Yes, the Obama administration’s green loans are unprofitable. They should be.

Last week, we were treated to another instance of completely confused debate over a government financing program, this time the Department of Energy’s green loans initiative. The department released a financial report on the program, which has been quite successful. A report at BusinessWeek claimed the program was on track to make a $5 billion profit.

The problem is that the $5 billion figure doesn’t take into account the costs of financing or the rate of default. Correcting for that, the program is narrowly unprofitable. Thus, the bean counters over at the Tax Policy Center attacked, wagging their fingers at reporters for not reading the report closely, and accusing the Department of Energy of selling its program in a misleading way.

The report itself has an interesting graphic

That equates to $535,714 per job created. Anyhow

But this whole discussion is beside the point. As with the TARP bailout — when the government invested tens of millions of dollars in big banks — discussions of “profitability” are completely pointless. The federal government has the world’s reserve currency and the legal ability to make arbitrary quantities of dollars. Profitability is an important question for businesses, and state governments to a lesser extent, because they don’t have the dollar creation machine. But for the feds, it’s simply not an important benchmark. The question is whether the policy is good or not.

The problem is that so many of the loans were made for political payback, and many were not paid back. Many were made despite the DOE knowing that the loans were bad risks (Solyndra, anyone?) This is just another talking point to make it seem like government pissing away taxpayer money on “climate change” is a good thing.

Read: Good News: Obama’s Green Loans Were Unprofitable, And That’s The Way They Should Be »

Bad Behavior has blocked 19148 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE