In the “No good deed goes unpunished” category: 2 good samaritans in Baltimore County Maryland jump in to freezing water to rescue a deer.
They get a natural resources police officer on the scene wrote both men a ticket.
“And he didn’t say anything,” Jim Hart said. “We went in and out of the water numerous times. He didn’t stop us at all.”
They say they were ticketed for not wearing life vests, although both are over the age for mandatory use of flotation devices. (CBS 13-Baltimore)
Imagine if they were trying to feed that deer a Happy Meal! They’d be put on death row…:)
The DREAM Act died.
Well, 1 out 2 ain’t bad as Meatloaf once said.
Not that the liberal media noticed. They were to busy have a Gay Pride Celebration.
So the hispanics they love so much got thrown under the bus and the media barely noticed.
But the snotty little children in House who lost the Omnibus Cramdown decided to avoid the shutdown at midnight Saturday by extending the current spending to…THIS TUESDAY!
Yes, they extended it just a couple of days, undoubtedly so that Harry could Houdini the Democrats who scuttled the Ominibus Bill into line so they could vote for it again on Tuesday.
How petty was this?
But at least Eric Holder and Obama got it in the shorts this time by Congress.
The Democrat-controlled U.S. House of Representatives has voted 212-206 to ban the Obama administration from spending any funds to try terrorism suspects in civilian court instead of military commissions. Attorney General Eric Holder is reportedly all miffed and vexed. 🙂
I like it when he’s vexed.
On Dec. 11, he was off to reassure a San Francisco Muslim group that he wouldn’t let the FBI entice Muslim youngsters into becoming terrorists(The Liberals view of the Portland bomb plot). Who thinks Holder’s date book will be filled up speaking to Christian and Jewish groups worried that their kids can be talked into committing mass murder?
Altogether now, let’s sum it up with some seasonal style:
’Twas right before Christmas, when all through the House
All the Democrats were stirring at the White House Mouse;
The payback was hung by leadership with care,
In hopes that the Dems wouldn’t give it a stare;
Holder was nestled all snug in his bed,
While visions of terrorists danced in his head;
And Pelosi in her ’kerchief, and Hoyer in his cap,
Had just settled their brains for Obama’s trap,
When out on the floor there arose such a clatter,
They sprang from their beds to see what was the matter.
Away to the window they flew like a flash,
Tore open the shutters and threw up the sash.
They heard St. Moran ** exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
“Where the * expletive * is Obama on this cold winter’s night?”
The last time we saw him, he was hiding behind Bill Clinton. (Townhall.com)
**= Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) : “This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama. “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”
So Goes California.
The liberal birthplace of all bad ideas has a defeated one they want to force on everyone, Cap & Trade.
You know, where if you use to much energy or the wrong kind of energy the government steps in to crush you for it.
But, fear not, this to like unemployment & raising taxes according to liberals this kind of “green” scheme will create jobs.
And you wonder why I agree that liberalism is a mental disorder. 🙂
hey, they are only $26 Billion dollars in debt and absolutely convinced that the taxpayers of the other 49 states will have to bail them out so what hell, why not.
No time like the present. Hey, we double the national debt so that was the perfect time for liberals to put 50% more debt in 3 years on future generations after all.
Timing is everything with liberals. All bad.
It’s good for the environment (allegedly). It’s touchy-feely feel goodism.
It make them feel all warm and fuzzy. It can’t be totally wrong then can it?
On Friday, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the bureaucracy charged with implementing AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, adopted a cap-and-trade scheme to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions by about 15% by 2020. CARB’s regulations go into effect in 2012.
The unelected officials at CARB intend to reorder California’s use of energy. In so doing they blandly declaim that their rules will create jobs while admitting to higher energy costs and a slowing economy. Somehow, this formula is transmogrified by CARB analysts into net job creation.
Given the immutable laws of math, one is forced to calculate that CARB’s actions will “create” low-paying jobs at the expense of good jobs.
Beyond CARB’s soothing words, what will Californians, one-eighth of America, likely experience on a practical level?
At the launch of California’s cap-and-trade program in 2012, CARB will give away allowances to the state’s 500 largest greenhouse gas emitters. Companies that cut their emissions, through innovation or lower economic activity, can sell their allowances to firms that need them to comply.
Over time, however, CARB expects to charge for allowances, generating a lucrative revenue stream for a cash-starved state.
The eventual selling of greenhouse gas allowances opens up an avenue for abuse. New York, New Jersey and New Hampshire are part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a mirror of California’s Western Climate Initiative with six other states and four Canadian provinces.
Rather than spend gas allowance funds on energy specific projects, as intended, all three Eastern states have raided climate funds for a more mundane purpose: balancing their budgets, with the total diversion to date exceeding $158 million.
Given California’s budget history, cap-and-trade will soon become cap-and-tax.
The Western Climate Initiative itself offers an opportunity for fraud on a massive scale. Its purpose was to decrease the cost of reducing emissions by letting each region play to its strengths: the Northwest has abundant hydropower while California has strong solar energy potential, so it makes sense to exchange the two.
Or so the theory goes.
In practice, British Columbia, through its government-owned utility BC Power, has been scamming California consumers. BC Power, hit with a fine for its role in California’s Enron-era electricity scandal, has been selling “green” hydropower to California for years.
Then, in an act of electron-laundering, has backfilled its electricity deficit with coal-fired power from Washington state and Alberta. This lets Californians feel good about their electricity while netting Canadians a healthy profit.
Another misapplication of California’s cap-and-trade effort will come in the guise of “environmental justice.” Since cap-and-trade’s main purpose will be to increase the cost of energy, this increased cost must be borne by California’s consumers. Environmental justice’s purpose would ensure that favored political groups will have these higher energy costs subsidized by state programs to insulate them from the pain.
Los Angeles lawmaker Kevin De Leon tried such an approach with last year’s AB 1405. Vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, De Leon’s bill sought to set up the California Climate Change Community Benefits Fund, its purpose being to skim money raised by selling GHG allowances to give to socioeconomically “disadvantaged communities.”
CARB appears set to let up to 8% of the greenhouse gas reductions be met by purchasing “offset credits.” These credits would likely be bought when firms find it difficult or costly to purchase allowances from within California.
The trouble arises in that these credits may be purchased from developing nations. Experience shows that such transactions are rife with fraud, as the Third World lacks the transparency and rule of law needed to ensure compliance.
In addition, offset credits will encourage the flow of capital out of California, where it is needed to create jobs, and into often unproductive uses in developing nations.
Lastly, to be successful, California’s greenhouse gas reduction effort must drastically overhaul transportation. California’s GHG emissions challenge is unique among the states in that only 20% of California’s emissions come from the electrical sector while 50% are generated by transportation.
With its benign climate, California is America’s most electrically efficient state and gets only one-sixth of its electricity from coal compared with the national average of 50%. On the other hand, Californians don’t live in dense urban centers; they like their cars and their freedom to travel. As a result, CARB’s proposed regulations hit oil refiners and drivers particularly hard.
Under AB 32, California refiners must begin to comply with a low carbon fuel standard in 2011, reducing the “carbon intensity” of transportation fuels by 10% by 2020.
This can be done by increasing the amount of ethanol used in fuel (and, when generated by corn, likely has a net negative impact on the environment), by increasing hydrogen-powered vehicles (extremely costly), placing more electric cars in service or by reducing the carbon intensity of the crude oil used in refining.
This last alternative entails reworking California refineries so they can lower carbon-intense, non-California crude for their feedstock, a vastly expensive and uncertain proposition that may force the closure of some California refineries.
Finally, due to burdensome reporting and compliance requirements, California refiners will be at a disadvantage to out of state and foreign refiners, putting added pressure on these big in-state employers to shift their operations out of California and making California more reliant on energy imports.
With California’s adoption of its low-carbon fuel standard, some analysts are forecasting a gasoline price shock of 30% to 80% in five years. With Congress appearing set to end corn ethanol subsidies, this cost may go higher, hitting California families for an additional $570 to $6,500 per year, according to the George C. Marshall Institute.
CARB’s new cap-and-trade rules will place yet another load on California’s teetering economy. Yet with AB 32 the law of the land, CARB has little choice, other than encouraging an ambitious program to build modern nuclear power plants to reduce California’s carbon footprint.
A likelier course will be the repeal of AB 32 before the end of the decade as Californians come to realize that the Golden State’s go-it-alone approach to reducing transportation-fuel carbon intensity isn’t immune to the laws of economics or physics.
But Liberals are, in their own heads. Sounds like California needs to go on a low CARB diet and cut their fat intake. 🙂
Talk about The Biggest Loser!