Stop the Energy Tax!

The EPA is considering green house gas regulations that will cripple the economy and reduce the food supply. We have two choices.

1. Fight the proposed regulations before they are passed into law.
2. Rise up in rebellion; a second American Revolution.

Because I prefer the first choice, I visited the American Energy Alliance and sent an email to the EPA arguing against the Socialist idiocy.

EPA wants to increase the price of gasoline, electricity, and anything that uses oil, coal, or natural gas by regulating eighty-five percent of the energy we use in America. You only have until Friday to let EPA know that you think this plan should be stopped dead in its tracks—click here to send your message.

Here is the text of the stock message, which can be edited on the site.

I am writing in response to EPA’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) regarding the regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. EPA should not find that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare and EPA should not use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. To quote EPA Administrator Johnson himself, the Clean Air Act “is ill-suited for the task of regulating global greenhouse gases.”

EPA Should Not Find that Greenhouse Gas Endanger Human Health and Welfare

The ANPR seems to presume that greenhouse gases harm human health and welfare. There is little evidence for this claim and historical data show the opposite. Over the past 100 years, as temperature and greenhouse gas concentrations have increased, global GDP has increased 18 fold, average life span has doubled, and per capita food supplies have increased even as global population has quadrupled. What is more, these increases in human welfare have been due to economic growth, which necessarily went hand in hand with greenhouse gas emissions. Had such emissions been capped in 1908, human health and welfare would certainly have suffered during the 20th century. EPA should examine actual historical data to put the model projections into their proper context.

EPA argues the Clean Air Act is precautionary in nature. This is true, but EPA should not regulate greenhouse gases without compelling information that they are causing harm to human health and welfare. This information does not exist today.

EPA should be very cautious about inflicting harm on the economy through increased regulation because, as Lutter, Viscusi, and Morrell argue in their 1999 paper, every additional $15 million in regulatory costs leads to an additional statistical death. This is because regulatory costs impose costs on society that reduce income and in turn reduce expenditures on health and safety.

The regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act would cost billions, if not trillions of dollars, and as Lutter, Viscusi, and Morrell point out, lead to great harm to human health and welfare.

There is Profound Scientific Uncertainty Concerning the Impact of Increasing Greenhouse Gases on Human Health and Welfare

The science of climate change is far more unsettled than EPA explains in the ANPR. EPA should fully examine the state of climate change science. Here are a few examples of issues EPA needs to address and understand before it can accurately state that greenhouse gases harm human health and welfare:

• The leveling off of global temperature. Since 2001, there has not been a statistically significant increase in temperature, even as carbon dioxide levels increased by 4 percent during this period. This leveling-off of global temperatures was not predicted by the global climate models. It is true that the climate is a complex system with many cyclical variations, but each passing year with flat temperatures (in spite of rising greenhouse gas concentrations) renders the most alarming projections less and less credible.
• Heat-related mortality. EPA argues that warmer temperatures will lead to greater heat-related mortality. While this makes intuitive sense, EPA should examine actual data on heat-related mortality. For example, in the United States heat-related morality has decreased even as temperatures increased from the 1970s through the 1990s. EPA fails to consider the countervailing economic and health-related improvements that have caused heat-related mortality to fall as temperatures have increased.
• Worse air quality. EPA argues that "the IPCC projects with virtual certainty" that warming will lead to worse air quality. This is highly unlikely. Instead of relying on the IPCC’s projections on air quality, EPA needs to examine its own air trends website. The website states that, “National average air quality continues to improve as emissions decline through 2007.” These improvements have occurred in spite of increasing population growth, GDP, vehicle-miles traveled, temperature, and greenhouse gas concentrations. There is no reason to believe the air quality trends will reverse.
• Sea level rise. There is nothing new about rising sea levels. Sea levels have been rising for the last 10,000 years—since the end of the last ice age. The real question is whether the rate of sea level rise is increasing. Recent papers by Holgate, Berge-Nguyen et al., and Unnikrishnan et al. all show no increase in the rate of sea level rise. If increased greenhouse gas levels were driving sea level rise, we should see an increase in the rate of sea level rise, but that has not happened.
• A national solution will not solve a global issue. The Clean Air Act is not an appropriate way to regulate greenhouse gases because greenhouse gases are a global issue, not just an issue for the United States. We could reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to zero, but even this dramatic result would not have much of an impact on global temperatures in the long run. The vast majority of increases in greenhouse gas emissions come from the developing world, not the United States. National policies can give incentives for manufacturers to move their operations to unregulated regions, paradoxically leading to higher emissions to produce the goods in question.
• EPA’s models should be open and transparent. EPA should not use closed-source models for critical projections and modeling. All the models EPA references should be available for public inspection and download. EPA should also detail all of the assumptions and documentation for the models. EPA should not hide key assumptions and projections from the public.
• The ANPR has many legal problems. For example, EPA writes that it has the authority under the Clean Air Act to implement a cap-and-trade scheme for greenhouse gases. This claim is unlikely to pass muster with the courts. The DC Circuit, in the recent CAIR decision, ruled that EPA does not have the authority to implement cap-and-trade under the Clean Air Act.

Conclusion: These are just a few of the reasons EPA should not use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases, nor should it make a finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Although many climate scientists endorse man’s role in rising temperatures, there is no comparable consensus among economists, medical doctors, and other experts on the impacts such warming may have on human health and welfare. Indeed, poorly designed regulations could cause harms (in lost economic output) that far outweigh the modest benefits of lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Read the footnotes: http://www.americanenergyalliance.org/PDF/EPA_footnotes.pdf

Time is short; please go immediately and tell them off!

Sphere: Related Content

Two Weeks from Hell

Today was not a good day.

In the past two weeks, four people--four very dear people--have become seriously ill. Two are family members, one is a former family member and the fourth is a blogging family member.

The youngest is my grandson. He just turned 3 months old. He was losing weight and there was no explanation why. So he was hospitalized for testing. After much prodding and poking, reviewing feeding procedures with my daughter, seeing how well this child ate, they finally came to a preliminary diagnosis. Cerebral Palsy. A very mild form, will not affect him in his mental development, is not expected to become worse over time and will only mildly hamper his motor development.

Next is my nephew. He just turned 15. A Texas boy. A star athlete and always in trouble with his mischief. Last Tuesday, he was playing basketball and hurt his leg in the game. It was still hurting so my sister took him to the doctor. I found out today he has osteosarcoma-bone cancer. My sister is in extreme denial, thinking the surgery next week will be simple and non-invasive. After doing some research tonight, I know it's probably going to be exploratory to determine the size and features of the tumor (calcium malignant, attached at the site) and treatment options. There is a very good chance he will lose part of his leg--if not his life. The exploratory is prior to chemo starting as well.

Then my ex father-in-law. Frankly, I would dance on the graves of my ex and his family. But not him. Out of the entire clan, he was the only one who was ever decent to me. He is in his late 70's and is suffering from heart failure. He's been very ill for quite some time, but he has given up. He has been brought home from the hospital to die, and makes no bones to the grandkids he will be spending Christmas with Santa Clause. He isn't expected to live past Thursday. This once robust, hearty man is a mere shell of himself and it's heartwrenching to see. He's worked his whole life for a family full of ingrates, who always put him down because he wasn't a "book learned" man--although he found a way to put four children through private schools, supported a wife from hell who expected him to cater to her (she refused to even drive a car) while all she could do was denigrate him. He did it quietly, with dignity. When he was out of work from the mines, he worked side jobs and always paid the bills--in cash. He loved his grandchildren, each as they came along. He was the only one in the family to welcome me when I married into it and for that I will always be grateful. While the hellspawn of his family can take a long walk off a high cliff, I do not wish a holiday death on anyone. Having lost both of my parents, it's hard and it will only hit them just how special this man is after he is gone. And it will be too late for them to say a simple "thank you".

Last, but by no means least, is our friend Roger Gardner from Radarsite. He is also fighting for his life, but better bloggers than I have addressed Roger and his trials. However, we have good news on Roger--his prognosis is getting better and better each time we hear from him, and we thank God for that.

Two weeks from hell. Four very dear people, ranging in age from 3 months to early 80's. Obama wants to talk Main Street. I got your Main Street right here. And mine is real--it's not a fantasyland concocted in the wild dreams of a meglomaniac.

Sorry, Stinky--my priorities are far and away more important than your fantasies.

You will just have to wait until you royally screw up--and then you will most definitely hear from me on your so-called change which is nothing more than recycled Clinton. Yeah--you're "green"--green from the stench of decay.

I have my family and friends to worry about. Maybe you should get in touch with real Main Street Americans and what is on our minds--not your ice cream dreams and lollipop sundaes.

Two weeks from hell.

Sphere: Related Content

Dealing With Grief Over the Holidays

As the holiday season swings into high gear, there are many of our military families who are now facing new realities. Days that once held joyous celebration with family, now approach with different dynamics. TAPS (Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors) has put together what they are calling "Practical Tips To Help."

Dealing With Grief Over the Holidays: Practical Tips to Help
National Organization Comforting Families of the Fallen Offers Advice to Help All Who Are Grieving

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 24, 2008

WASHINGTON – Holiday cheer and merrymaking may be everywhere this time of year, but for thousands of Americans grieving the loss of a loved one, the holiday season can be an emotional minefield. And there’s no roadmap for easy navigation.

“The holiday season can be particularly challenging for families who are grieving the recent loss of a loved one,” said Bonnie Carroll, the founder and chairman of the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, TAPS. “We offer tips to help surviving military families, and they are applicable to anyone who is grieving.”

For more than a decade, TAPS has helped surviving families of those who have died in military service. Carroll and TAPS offer the following tips to help anyone who is grieving during the holiday season.

Take charge of your holiday season. Anticipating the holiday, especially if it’s the first one without a cherished family member, can be worse than the actual holiday. Taking charge of your holiday plans, and mapping out how you will spend that time, can help relieve anxiety.

Make plans. Plan to spend the holidays where you feel nurtured, emotionally safe, and comfortable. An escape plan may be difficult to carry out, because American holidays are celebrated in many places world-wide, and there often is no way to escape all of the reminders of the holidays.

Find sustenance for the soul. Your church, synagogue, mosque, or other faith community may offer services, resources, and support networks to help. You may want to look for a support group for people who are grieving and have suffered a similar loss. Families who have lost a loved one serving in the military may find comfort by connecting with other survivors through our online community, online peer support groups, or care groups.

Don’t be afraid to change your holiday traditions. Some traditions may be a comfort, while others might cause pain. Consider which traditions to keep, and which ones to forego this year. Do not feel like you have to do something because you have always done it that way.

Include your lost loved one in gift-giving. Consider making a donation to a charity in memory of your loved one. Give a gift on behalf of your loved one to someone else.

Create a tribute. Light a candle, display a favorite photograph, or set a place at the dinner table to represent the missing loved one. Consider writing a letter to your loved one about the holidays and your special memories with that person.

Be gentle with yourself. Realize that familiar traditions, sights, smells, and even tastes, may be comforting, or may jolt your emotions. This is the time of year when you need to be careful with your emotions and listen to yourself.

Attend holiday functions if you can. Consider attending holiday parties and events, especially if you’ll be able to spend time with supportive family members and friends. Make an escape plan in case the event is more than you can handle, and trust your hosts to understand if you need to slip out. If you think a holiday gathering might be more than you can handle, it is ok to stay home.

Don’t pretend you haven’t experienced a loss. Imagining that nothing has happened does not make the pain of losing a loved one go away, nor does it make the holidays easier to endure. Even though holiday memories may be painful, they can also be comforting. It is ok to talk with others about what you have lost, and what the holidays mean to you.

Pay attention to your health. It’s often difficult for people who have experienced a recent loss to sleep. Make sure you get regular rest and drink lots of water. Do not over-indulge in sweets or alcohol. If you feel overwhelmed, talk with your medical care provider.

Take stock of both joy and sadness. Give yourself permission to feel joy as well as sadness. Don’t feel like you have to “be a certain way” because of your loss. Just be yourself.

Express your feelings. Bottling up your feelings may add to distress, not lessen it. To express your feelings, use your creativity to write a poem, talk with a supportive friend, create a painting, or pen a journal entry.

Share your holiday season with someone else. There are many lonely people who might like to experience the holiday season with someone else. Consider volunteering with a local charity or soup kitchen, inviting a neighbor for a special holiday meal, or including others in your holiday activities.

For more tips on dealing with grief during the holidays, go to the TAPS website at www.taps.org.

TAPS is the national organization providing compassionate care for the families of America’s fallen military heroes. TAPS provides peer-based emotional support, grief and trauma resources, seminars for adults, Good Grief Camps for children, case work assistance, and 24/7 crisis intervention care for all who have been affected by the death of a loved one serving in the Armed Forces. Services are provided free of charge. For more information go to www.taps.org or call the toll-free crisis line at 800.959.TAPS....

Sphere: Related Content

Durban II: An Early test of Obama's Mid-East Intentions

The 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban quickly became a disgusting display of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel Propaganda. Much of the hatred took place in a six-day NGO Forum in a large cricket stadium attended by six thousand representatives of close to two thousand NGOs. It is there that the "Durban Strategy" was formulated, that is delegitimize the Jewish State via branding it as a racist entity. To his credit Then Secretary of State Colin Powell walked out of the conference.

Last month the United Nations released the draft statement for the follow-up conference scheduled for Geneva in April 2009. This conference is planned to be worse than the first one, It is an Anti-Jewish, Anti-America and Anti-Freedom HATE FEST. There are even sections which will restrict freedom of speech. Other nations have announced that they will not attend.

On Jan. 23, the Canadian foreign minister made the clear statement of principle that "Canada will not participate in the 2009 conference." A week later, 27 senators sent a letter to Rice asking her to do the same. Having had no response, on Feb. 13 during a Senate hearing, Sen. Norm Coleman asked Rice point-blank, would she make the same statement and refuse to "provide credibility to this process by participating?" Rice answered: "No, we've not made that statement. ... We have not tried to make a final decision on this."

The Secretary of State had decided to punt it to the NEXT administration.

The United States should show leadership and morality. President-elect Obama should announce immediately that we will NOT attend this hate fest. His decision to attend or not will be an early test of his true intentions regarding the Middle-East, as well as the appeasement of Islamo-fascism and anti-Semitism.

Read the rest here.

From Monkey in the Middle:

While European nations will attend, Canada and of course Israel will not be attending. The United States should be taking the lead in this, but will not. If history is any indication of what this kangaroo court will be like, then you can expect the UN aka Tower of Babel, to condemn Israel and Judaism. We can expect these purveyors of hatred to force the world into silence on Islam and to announce Islam as the world's only true religion.

I also expect that Barack Hussein Obama, being true to his Muslim background, will not only have the US attending Durban II, but will lead the charge against Israel.

And that is his idea of Change. God help us!

Cross posted from Monkey in the Middle

Sphere: Related Content

Let's Say Thanks

Another way to thank our troops! It's free! It is REALLY easy! What are you waiting for? Go!

I never get tired of thanking our troops! Go here for more details....

Sphere: Related Content