You gotta be shitting me. It has been 8 years since we've seen this nonsense. Say what you want about "W" but the escalation in aggression in the US had been coming throughout the 90s building to Sept 11th, 2001.. Then W threw down the gloves and nobody thought it was funny anymore. 9 Months ago, Obama said on the campaign trail that 'If they bring a knife to the fight, we'll bring a fun'...... (which btw, the comic irony is NOT lost on me). But he said it...so... Your turn Mr President.. let's see if you talk as tough to the Communist Fascists as you do with the Republicans.
Somebody mentioned the bogus midair crash between a US Military Military Patrol Plane and a Chinese fighter that resulted in the US Plane being held captive for some period of time. This sounds a lot like the same game being played.
I wonder if the fact that the Chinese sailors stripped to their skivy's when hit by fire hoses means they were adopting the old strategy of mooning your enemies if they can't catch you!
Here's what's happening in the world that few know about. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/19/AR2009021902579.html What we have is the same thing that we had in the Carter Administration. The Russians invaded Afghanastan and our response was to, oh you know that they were distraught, we boycotted their olympics. That's right someone broke into a neighborhood home and we elected not to go to their party. Well, once the world saw what a yellow, chicken we had in the White House, the next thing you knew some Islamic thugs took over our embassy in Iran. Once again we have a idealistic dreamer in the White House that thinks that he can run from every conflict and still negotiate his way to successful diplomacy. Fasten your seatbelts.
Gip, It was as predictable as the sunrise.....I keep waiting for the adult supervision to show up at the party. When will they/we learn????? Now North Korea......meanwhile, in the West Wing, instead of growing a sack, they're passing out the words to kum-bay-ya.
One of the new sneak punches is the Crap er, Cap and Trade tax. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123655590609066021.html Naturally it's the Left Coasters who are going to shove this one down our throats. Here's the biggest irony. Head speculated this morning that some companies will probably move their manufacturing abroad to avoid this newest sticking by the Obama administration. You remember all that ******** the guy threw out about ending tax cuts for companies that ship jobs abroad. So what are these assholes going to do, tax companies that keep their jobs here in the US. All of this has to be done quickly while the average American idiot is still fawning over the new president and the rest haven't awakened yet to what's going on.
I read the article that Gip cited, but I must admit my ignorance regarding what the Cap & Trade Tax actually is. Could someone please explain it to me? It looks like Indiana, because of our relaince on coal power, is going to get socked, but I'm not sure how.
Sid, I am no expert on emissions trading for sure, but my simpleminded explanation is as follows: In essence, it sets a "cap" on the amount of carbon-based emissions an entity is entitled to produce. To produce any amount in excess of the "cap", you must "trade" or buy emission credits from a one who produces less than his cap. So those areas/industries that rely more heavily on carbon-based energy sources , e.g., coal, will be compelled to buy credits from those more heavily reliant on alternative/non-carbon based sources, e.g, hydro-electric, wind, nuclear, etc. In essence, the mid-west producers will be at a material competitive disadvantage due to their reliance on carbon-based energy sources.....
Wasn't Al Gore a big proponent of this? Based on the WSJ opinion piece, the proposal is wildly unfair.
It is worse than your reliance on coal... it also has to do with your relatively small population... Since states that have a MUCH larger carbon footprint (like CA and NY which are #1 and #2 in total carbon pollution I believe), have much greater populations... they have a smaller carbon 'footprint' that is figured out per capita. Basically... You have a government standard on how much carbon emissions that your company can have. If your company exceeds that, they are hammered with fines. They your company doesn't create that amount of carbon, they can create 'credits' that can be saved for a rainy day OR they can be traded to companies who create more pollution in an effort to reduce their fines. There are a lot of 'feel good' elements to this, but the end game is that the companies that will be hammered the most will just pick up and move production somewhere else...
Thanks for the explanation, Terry. This also enables me to understand what Corey is saying above. Now I can say with confidence that I know what I'm talking about...........What a bunch of crap!