Tuesday, January 20, 2009

The audacity of misery

From Obama's inaugural address today:
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Meanwhile, in Myron Ebell's lair on Planet CEI, the poisoned misery is gushing.

John Berlau refutes the concept of a "national purpose" by quoting ideologue Milton Friedman's rather childish deconstruction of President Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country".

Sam Kazman shows himself as too dumb to understand the meaning of the word "global" in the term "global warming" when he drivels on about today's cold temperature in Washington DC.

Christine Hall insists that Americans should burn more oil than ever before and never even think about apologizing for it.

Ryan Young titles his piece of rubbish "Why Good Men Don't Become President Anymore" and then doesn't bother to tell us if his George Bush was a good man or not.

Iain Murray ineptly fisks the inaugural speech and gets refisked by commenters on the blog. Unbelievably, he says, "Science should inform, not dictate policy." So, the law of gravity is just some worthy advice, is it?

Doug Bandow takes a lazy cheap shot about freezing weather and global warming, and says bring it on.

Grand old idiot Fred Smith stupidly tries to deconstruct the "pump priming" metaphore before explaining away the current financial crisis as the consequence of the lack of economic freedom and responsibility. Evidently the old duffer is too insulated to note Alan Greenspan's shocked disbelief on his realization that this is all total bollocks.

Ivan Osorio writes something incomprehensible about unions.

Cord Blomquist has nothing interesting to say beyond his empty sneer at President Bush's establishment of a "Freedom Institute".

Iain Murray (again) quotes a nuclear energy poll to say that the public is turning against the theory of anthropogenic global warming -- as is the intended consequence of all the lying done by the CEI.

Cord Blomquist (again) demands all regulations to be cut as well as a corporate tax rate of 0% to "get the economy chugging along more efficiently". After all, if these conditions can give us a bloated and corrupt investment banking industry, just think what it will do for industries that create actual physical toxic waste that can get into our food!

Fred Smith (again) equates fair trade with protectionism which led to the second world war.

And Myron Ebell catches up on his brief (three days before the 20th) with the statement:
The first bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) brought to a vote in the 111th Congress is the omnibus land grab bill that was blocked in the waning days of the last Congress by Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). It was re-introduced by Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, as S. 22. It contains around 160 titles. Lots of new National Parks, Wilderness Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Trails, and National Heritage Areas. Plus making official a whole new designation of public land lockups for the Bureau of Land Management called Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. And withdrawing 1.2 million acres from the Bridger-Teton National Forest in Wyoming from future oil and gas production–an area with high gas potential.
Now, the part of this enormous Bill, which Ebell was too useless to link to when he linked to the utterly meaningless vote when he told us what to think about it, says:
'Wyoming Range Withdrawal Area' means all National Forest System land and federally owned minerals located within the boundaries of the Bridger-Teton National Forest identified on the map entitled `Wyoming Range Withdrawal Area' and dated October 17, 2007, on file with the Office of the Chief of the Forest Service and the Office of the Supervisor of the Bridger-Teton National Forest.

Withdrawal- Except as provided in subsection (f), subject to valid existing rights as of the date of enactment of this Act and the provisions of this subtitle, land in the Wyoming Range Withdrawal Area is withdrawn from--
(1) all forms of appropriation or disposal under the public land laws
(2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(3) disposition under laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing.
It appears that the Bridger-Teton National Forest oil-drilling issue was pretty much settled back in 2006 when even Republican-minded gun lovers could see it was incompatible with their appetite for shooting wild animals between the trees.

But Myron Ebell -- the fascist destroyer of hope -- sees it the other way. He thinks that protecting public lands from being cordoned off and raped by bulldozers counts as stealing it from its rightful owners -- the mining and drilling companies.

Is this guy still working in the PR industry or what?

Sing it now:
This land is your land,
this land is my land
From California
to the New York Island
From the Redwood Forest
to the Gulf Stream waters
This land was made for you and me.

As I went walking
I saw a sign there
And on the sign it
said "No Trespassing."
But on the other side
it didn't say nothing,
That side was made for you and me.


Post a Comment

<< Home