NY Times: Obama’s Pretty Much Blameless For Horrible Economic News

You truly have to admire the NY Times and writers Jamie Calmes and Nicholas Kulish, who work themselves into Gordian Knots as they attempt to tell us that “Obama’s hands tied on weak economy”. That was the original web title, changed to Weak Economy Points to Obama’s Constraints

The bleak jobs report on Friday predictably had heads snapping toward the White House, looking to President Obama to do something. Yet his proposed remedies only underscore how much the president, just five months before he faces voters, is at the mercy of actors in Europe, China and Congress whose political interests often conflict with his own. (snip)

Developments overseas have not helped either. American officials have complained as Beijing began letting its currency devalue again, making its exports cheaper and those from the United States to China more costly. And administration officials, and Mr. Obama himself, have lobbied leaders in Europe for more forceful action to promote growth or at least contain the threat of financial contagion there.

Now, let’s be fair as we look at Reality Land: there are things happening on the international stage that are somewhat out of Obama’s control. The original economic downturn was an international one, and things really haven’t gotten any better around the world (which kinda highlights the notion that Leftist economic policies are worthless). Buuuuuuuut, if that’s the case, that a president can be at the mercy of other actors, then this notion destroys the talking points that this is all the fault of Bush and the Republicans, ie, past administration. There were quite a few things happening that were out of Bush’s control. Furthermore, if Obama is essentially helpless, then any good news cannot be laid at his doorstep.

That day, Mr. Obama continued his weekly travels around the country, prodding Congressional Republicans to pass his “to-do list” of temporary tax cuts and spending initiatives to help create jobs. The Republicans only mock him, which leaves Mr. Obama free to blame his opponents and their presidential standard-bearer, Mitt Romney. But in doing so, he telegraphs a message of powerlessness that no leader likes to convey — least of all one who ran for office four years ago vowing to bridge Washington’s partisan gulf.

So, Obama is blameless for submitting a sticky note with no details, no detailed legislation, to Congress which they’ve scoffed at. Even Democrats have done zero about it. Many weren’t even aware of it. And, last time I checked, Democrats controlled the US Senate.

The entire article is meant to convey the notion that when things go bad in the economy that it’s Not Obama’s Fault. He’s just a bystander. The part about Obama showing a message of powerlessness is about the only honest part. He hasn’t tried to bridge the partisan gulf. He stands up on his podium and tells Congress to “get it done” like a parent to child, forgetting that Congress is a co-equal branch of the federal government. And that Obama has blamed Bush uncountable times for not fixing the recession. Although the Bush policies essentially officially ended the recession by June 2009, before the Obama policies kicked in. And once those policies kicked in, the US saw stagnation.

Imagine that John McCain was president: does anyone think the NY Times and the rest of the media would be giving him a pass if the economy sucked this bad?

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: NY Times: Obama’s Pretty Much Blameless For Horrible Economic News »

Scientific American Hyperventilates Over NC “Making Sea Rise Illegal”

I’d forgotten about this story, I think I caught it the other day through Fark, till I perused Real Science this morning. The story starts out with a bunch of idiocy, followed by a few paragraphs discusses Amendment 1 (which banned gay marriage in NC) which has literally nothing to do with the issue, but identifies the writer as a hard core progressive

(Scientific American) In a story first discussed by the NC Coastal Federation and given more play May 29 by the News & Observer of Raleigh and its sister paper the Charlotte Observer, a group of legislators from 20 coastal NC counties whose economies will be most affected by rising seas have legislated the words “Nuh-unh!” into the NC Constitution.

Okay, cheap shot alert. Actually all they did was say science is crazy. There is virtually universal agreement among scientists that the sea will probably rise a good meter or more before the end of the century, wreaking havoc in low-lying coastal counties. So the members of the developers’  lobbying group NC-20 say the sea will rise only 8 inches, because … because … well, SHUT UP, that’s because why.

That is, the meter or so of sea level rise predicted for the NC Coastal Resources Commission by a state-appointed board of scientists is extremely inconvenient for counties along the coast. So the NC-20 types have decided that we can escape sea level rise – in North Carolina, anyhow – by making it against the law. Or making MEASURING it against the law, anyhow.

What’s Scott Huler hyperventilating about?

…“These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900. Rates of seas-level rise may be extrapolated linearly. …” It goes on, but there’s the core: North Carolina legislators have decided that the way to make exponential increases in sea level rise – caused by those inconvenient feedback loops we keep hearing about from scientists – go away is to make it against the law to extrapolate exponential; we can only extrapolate along a line predicted by previous sea level rises.

So, the law would stop “climate scientists agitators” from gazing into crystal balls to predict sea rise, and instead use actual fricking real world data. *GASP*

Oh, and as Steven Goddard points out at the Real Science link, there’s been no sea rise this century

Double oh. Here’s how scientific Scientific American is

Which, yes, is exactly like saying, do not predict tomorrow’s weather based on radar images of a hurricane swirling offshore, moving west towards us with 60-mph winds and ten inches of rain.

Cluebat: the winds have to top 74mph for a storm to be considered a hurricane. And I love comment #25

I wonder if any university or climate research institute would be willing to pay in 2050 the cost of any wrong property transaction, insurance or similar business transaction based on taking in good faith its predictions of sea level rise?

Good point.

Read: Scientific American Hyperventilates Over NC “Making Sea Rise Illegal” »

If All You See…

…is an evil beer infused with world killing CO2 that no one else should drink, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery.

Read: If All You See… »

Obama: The Cure For The Economy Is Thingamajigs

Via The Lonely Conservative, who points out that we’re going to have to listen to this crap from this babbling SCOAMF for the next five months. Hey, just wait till he loses in November. We’re going to have to listen to a different set of whiny crap. Anyhow

(The Blaze) While stumping in Golden Valley, Minn., President Obama told a group of Honeywell employees that his proposed tax breaks would help them afford “thingamajigs” for their furnaces.

“There are some folks here who could use $3,000 a year,” President Obama said. “If you got $3,000 dollars a year extra, that helps you pay down your credit cards, that helps you go out and buy some things that your family needs — which is good for business.”

“Maybe some of you will be replacing some thingamajig for the furnace,” the president said to laughs and applause.

“They’ve been putting that off! But if they got that extra money, they might just go out that and buy that thing, right?”

Strangely, what Obama is proposing is private sector economics. If you have that $3,000 extra, you spend it on something, which puts money in someone else’s pocket, who then spends it on something else, helping out another person, and so forth. At each step, a portion goes to the government, particularly the state and local level through sales tax. Which means there is money for those governments. Which means that they have to rely on the Central Planning Office, er, federal government, less. And all this gets the economy moving……ah, who am I kidding? This “tax break” is simply a way to patronize the American voter by giving them a temporary change in the the tax code, which disappears soon after.

BTW, why would anyone need a furnace when climate change is going to give the Earth a fever? Plus, should we really be taking hot showers? If the water was cold, we’d stay in for a shorter time, which would help save Gaia.

Read: Obama: The Cure For The Economy Is Thingamajigs »

UK Guardian: Only 100 Months Left To Save The World

The Guardian has been running a series for a bit called 100 months left to save the world. Yesterday they ran an article about Rio+20: don’t wait for disappointment from the bureaucrats, which is a hoot

In three weeks the 20th anniversary conference of the Earth Summit will take place in Rio, Brazil. Once again, most of us will feel like spectators to the biggest debate about life on earth: whether or not to maintain convivial environmental conditions for human civilisation.

Because a few degrees F will mean we’re dooooooooomed. Or not. It’s funny how Homo Sapiens have adapted to a myriad of changing climatic conditions throughout our millions of years of history. We’ve dealt with a massive glacial period. We’ve dealt with the climate flipping back and forth between cool and hotter than today since the end of the last glacial period. Humans live all around the globe in many different types of climates from really hot to really cold, from deserts to super wet. If Warmists were really concerned, they might decide to hold an on-line conference instead of taking unnecessary fossil fueled flights to yet another exotic vacation spot.

What can we do, nothing? No, our actions are limited only by our imagination. If you want to know how different the future can be, just look to the past and compare it to the present. We can, for example, remove the legal privileges that put the interests of finance above all else. We can completely redesign how we move around, like the city of Ghent did, making cars mere guests on streets.

Food, energy, homes, trade can all be re-imagined and better ways found. The point is to start, and many people are. The global range of initiatives beginning the transition to a new economy is impressive.

What can you do? Practice what you preach. Stop waiting for legislation that forces Everyone Else to live the life. Of course, what we’ve seen since the passage of the Kyoto Protocol is a failure of most signatories to fulfill their obligations to actually reducing CO2 output, despite economy killing measures. A comment found by Tom Nelson at the story provides exactly the way things have worked

Trouble for you is, if anything, people generally are moving away from the fear of CO2 driven man-made catastrophe.

Kyoto – dead
Copenhagen – disaster
Durban – washout
Rio+20 – good party – CO2 to be sidelined in favour of “sustainability”
GB – greenest government ever? Think not!
Australia – entire population harboring homicidal ideas for green
Canada – no intention of signing emission treaties, ditched Kyoto
India – not going to reduce emissions
Japan – no intention of signing emission treaties
Russia – no intention of signing emission treaties
China – not going to reduce emissions
UEA hacking – Police not looking for anyone
CO2 – Increasing, Temperatures not
MWP – was global
GWPF – donor outed, nothing to do with big-oil
Jones – damaged, quiet.
Hansen – laughing stock
Mann – bricking it
Gleick – bricking it
Lovelock – I was wrong about global warming
Survey – intelligent people are climate skeptics

Your main problem is the dwindling of numbers of believers, I would say.

That, and the other main problem is that anthropogenic global warming was seized upon by the extreme left as a means of putting more taxpayer money and more control of people (fascism) in the hands of government. And like most leftist movements, it’s always about going after Someone Else, not the individuals who push the notion.

Read: UK Guardian: Only 100 Months Left To Save The World »

Washington Post Reminds Obama That He Actually Needs Ideas To Win

This comes on the heels of the horrible economic news from Friday, which of course is surely Someone Else’s fault (sic)

(Washington Post) Friday’s dismal jobs report and some unexpected words from Bill Clinton delivered a bracing reminder to President Obama and his advisers that the election remains primarily a referendum on his record and that their path to victory may lie less in trying to discredit Republican Mitt Romney and more in winning a battle of ideas with their Republican rival.

What, exactly, are Obama’s ideas? What is his agenda for a 2nd term? If you head to his campaign website and peruse the issues section, it is primarily focused on what he has (supposedly) done. About the only thing he says he wants to do is funnel more taxpayer money to campaign donors who own “green” energy companies and put Americans to work doing menial jobs like filling potholes.

In fact, a good chuck of his website seems aimed at attacking Mitt Romney. Now, there’s nothing wrong with that, this is politics, but one would think Obama would have a response as to what he would do different than Mitt. Oh, and a lot more of the “news” at Obama’s website is about “just get out and vote. No, you don’t need to have an idea what you’re voting for, just vote for Obama.”

The president’s campaign has appeared wedded to a strategy of trying to discredit Romney. That began with attacks on his role at Bain Capital, the private equity firm where he made his fortune. Obama’s advisers believe it will have the desired effect on voters, but so far there is very little evidence that attacks on Bain are changing minds. Current polls continue to be extremely close.

It’s not surprising that Team Obama wants to focus on Romney: the Obama record is pitiful. They really have no new ideas to deal with the #1 issue, the economy. They can blame Bush and Republicans all they want, but it is a meme that loses steam when one asks the question “OK, let’s assume it was all Bush’s Fault. You’ve had over 3 1/2 years to do something. You had full control of Congress for the first two. What have your policies done to fix the issues you say someone else created?”

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Washington Post Reminds Obama That He Actually Needs Ideas To Win »

Entirely Reasonable Warmist Has No Idea What The Climate Will Do, But We Should Go With Carbon Taxes Anyhow

I love when Warmists sound reasonable, then expose themselves. In this case, Tim Worstall, who starts out by showing a picture of steam venting from what looks like a nuclear power plant, but is supposed to represent Evil CO2. After reasonableness and kumbya, we get

The cumulative effect of all of these feedbacks is something we simply do not know. We don’t even know what all the feedbacks are; and of those we do know about, we’re not sure in which direction they move. While there are some reasonable guesses about what the total number and direction of them all added together, we’re not certain whether that total effect is positive or negative. (snip)

It is this “we don’t know” that leads to needing to do something. Economists call this uncertainty, and the correct and reasonable reaction to uncertainty is insurance. It can sound a little odd: the idea is that the less we know about the effects of climate change, the more we ought to do about it. But consider insurance against your house burning down. If you know the chance is 1 in a million then you’ll not be willing to pay (much) more than one millionth of its worth to insure it. If the risk is 1 in 10,000, then perhaps one ten-thousandth of the value. But if you are uncertain what the risk is then you are willing to pay much more of the value in order to gain insurance.

OK, so, we have no clue, but, since we have no clue (note to Tim: science is about facts, not guesses), we should Do Something. Preferably with Other People’s money (2nd note to Tim: you’re free to guess with your own money, champ)

Except for one little point: we in the UK are already paying that carbon tax. With emissions around the 500-million-ton mark, that $80 per tonne tax works out at about £25 billion or so that should be paid in tax to solve the problem, entirely and absolutely. And in the UK, when you add up fuel duty, Air Passenger Duty and all the rest, we already pay that and more in carbon or greenhouse taxes. We’re not paying it in all the right places, this is true: fuel duty and APD are too high, while diesel for farmers and trains is too low. But given that the total amount is already being levied, all we need to do is shift around what is already being charged to solve the climate change problem.

We’ve then got to go and convince everyone else: but think how much easier that will be once we show quite how cheap and simple the solution is. No more of the mantra that we’ve got to end industrial civilisation: three squares a day has become something of a habit for many of us. And no more of the shouts that nothing needs to be done.

Those monetary values don’t seem cheap to the rest of us. Especially since we “don’t know.” Try again, Tim.

Read: Entirely Reasonable Warmist Has No Idea What The Climate Will Do, But We Should Go With Carbon Taxes Anyhow »

If All You See…

…are evil cows killing Gaia, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Conservative Commune.

Read: If All You See… »

Obama Sends Letter To Poland, Says “Regrets” Idiotic Choice Of Words

Still no apology though

(AFP) US President Barack Obama has expressed “regret” at what he called his inadvertent use of the erroneous term “Polish death camp”, in a personal letter to his Polish counterpart made public Friday.

“I regret the error and agree that this moment is an opportunity to ensure that this and future generations know the truth,” Obama wrote to Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski in the letter dated May 31.

Making the letter public Friday, Komorowski — who on Wednesday publicly urged Obama to cooperate in “correcting this unfortunate error” — said he was satisfied with the “rapid” expression of regret by “our important ally and good friend.”

Reuters hilariously titles their story “Poland welcomes Obama letter on “death camp” error”. But, as the Telegraph points out

Although Tomasz Nalecz, spokesman for the Polish president, said the letter had pleased Mr Komorowski it remains to be seen whether it will sooth anger in Poland.

The silence has fuelled feelings in Poland that the American government is indifferent to Poland and its feelings despite the country being one of Washington’s most steadfast allies in Europe.

Even if the Polish government adopts a conciliatory approach to the matter for the sake of Polish-US relations, Mr Obama’s refusal to provide an apology will tarnish both his and America’s reputation in the eyes of most Poles.

Is it too difficult to simply apologize, Mr. Obama, instead of further damaging our relationship with Poland? It may not be a big deal to you, but to the Poles it is a huge insult.

PS: I forgot to mention the part in the letter that calls the remark an “inadvertent error” when I went from using the Telegraph story first to the AFP one. Unless Obama was speaking off the cuff, it was simply idiotic. When politicians give written speeches, particularly on foreign matters, there are people who review said speeches. There are protocol officers, and with foreign references, often State Dept. weenies involved. As the speech was written, apparently no one thought “hey, um, this might be a really poor choice of words. Let’s clarify it with a few extra words. Otherwise, we might offend Poland and her people.”

Evening update: Nice Deb and The Other McCain cover the Obama admin. blowing off Polish hero Lech Walesa. Go read why.

Read: Obama Sends Letter To Poland, Says “Regrets” Idiotic Choice Of Words »

Confirmed: The Less You Know About Science The More You Believe In The Climate Change Hoax

Just to be clear, by “climate change hoax” I mean the notion that man is mostly or solely responsible for every change in the weather, known as hotcoldwetdry, and the slight uptick in temperatures since the end of the Little Ice Age. And, in a bit of comical irony, we find out, via James Delingpole, the Register has published a story entitled The more science you know, the less worried you are about climate highlighting a Warmist backed study that backfired

A US government-funded survey has found that Americans with higher levels of scientific and mathematical knowledge are more sceptical regarding the dangers of climate change than their more poorly educated fellow citizens.

The results of the survey are especially remarkable as it was plainly not intended to show any such thing: Rather, the researchers and trick-cyclists who carried it out were doing so from the position that the “scientific consensus” (carbon-driven global warming is ongoing and extremely dangerous) is a settled fact, and the priority is now to find some way of getting US voters to believe in the need for urgent, immediate and massive action to reduce CO2 emissions.

Study was pushed by the National Science Foundation (NSF) which has a notorious Belief in anthropogenic hotcoldwetdry. Fortunately, the study finds a way to delve into pushing non-science to get people to believe in their pet pseudo-religion after their study failed spectacularly

Thus it is, according to the assembled profs, that the US government should seek to fund a communication strategy on climate change which is not focused on sound scientific information.

It does not follow, however, that nothing can be done … Effective strategies include use of culturally diverse communicators, whose affinity with different communities enhances their credibility, and information-framing techniques that invest policy solutions with resonances congenial to diverse groups. Perfecting such techniques through a new science of science communication is a public good of singular importance.

I guess the NSF has missed that Warmists have been “spreading awareness” with very little science for over 20 years. And people are less apt to freak out when they understand that the 20th Century saw a whopping scary 1.4°F temperature increase with a “statistically insignificant” rise over the past 15 years. People prefer to be shown science, rather than the musings unhinged rantings of people who gaze into crystal balls.

 

Read: Confirmed: The Less You Know About Science The More You Believe In The Climate Change Hoax »

Pirate's Cove