The Times tells us that Susan Rice will be the next Ambassador to the UN and highlights her opposition to some genocides:
Choice for U.N. Backs Strong Action Against Mass Killings
By PETER BAKER
CHICAGO — President-elect Barack Obama has chosen his foreign policy adviser, Susan E. Rice, to be ambassador to the United Nations, picking an advocate of “dramatic action” against genocide as he rounds out his national security team, Democrats close to the transition said Sunday.
Mr. Obama intends to announce Ms. Rice’s selection at a news conference here Monday along with his previously reported decisions to nominate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for secretary of state, keep Robert M. Gates as defense secretary and appoint Gen. James L. Jones, a retired Marine commandant, his national security adviser, the Democrats said.
The choice of Ms. Rice to represent the United States before the United Nations will make her one of the most visible faces of the Obama administration to the outside world aside from Mrs. Clinton. It will also send to the world organization a prominent and forceful advocate of stronger action, including military force if necessary, to stop mass killings like those in the Darfur region of Sudan in recent years.
Yeah, yeah. Ms. Rice supported Obama's Jan 2007 plan for a rapid withdrawal from Iraq back when the National Intelligence Estimate was that it would lead to increased violence there. But otherwise, genocide is a bad thing. Puzzling. If removing US troops "ends the war" in Iraq, why not announce that the absence of US troops ended the war in Darfur?
Her motivation is her experience with Rwanda:
During her first run at the State Department, Ms. Rice was a point person in responding to Al Qaeda’s 1998 bombing of United States Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. But her most searing experience was visiting Rwanda after the 1994 genocide when she was still on the N.S.C. staff.
As she later described the scene, the hundreds, if not thousands, of decomposing, hacked up bodies that she saw haunted her and fueled a desire to never let it happen again.
“I swore to myself that if I ever faced such a crisis again, I would come down on the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required,” she told The Atlantic Monthly in 2001. She eventually became a sharp critic of the Bush administration’s handling of the Darfur killings and last year testified before Congress on behalf of an American-led bombing campaign or naval blockade to force a recalcitrant Sudanese government to stop the slaughter.
"Going down in flames" is entirely metaphorical, of course - Ms. Rice won't be carrying a rifle or piloting a chopper, unlike real soldiers who will risk going down in actual flames in order to soothe her troubled conscience. The Samantha Powers' Atlantic Monthly recounting of Bill Clinton's Rwanda debacle is available online [and Ms. Rice comes off badly, as noted by Michael Goldfarb].
Finally, the Times reported this in a profile of Ms. Rice a few weeks ago but did not consider it sufficiently newsworthy to note it again:
...married to Ian Cameron, the Canadian-born executive producer of ABC News’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” with two children.
FWIW, Google News offers four stories mentioning both "Susan Rice" and "George Stephanopoulos", only one of which is from Dec 1. That contrasts with over 2,000 mentioning "Susan Rice".
A TROUBLING UNILATERALISM: From her Times profile, Ms. Rice had interesting ideas on the importance of yet another UN resolution on Darfur:
In her own words: Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 11, 2007, in favor of authorizing United States military action against Sudan if the genocide in Darfur continued:
...“Still others insist that, without the consent of the U.N. or a relevant regional body, we would be breaking international law. But the Security Council last year codified a new international norm prescribing ‘the responsibility to protect’” It commits U.N. members to decisive action, including enforcement, when peaceful measures fail to halt genocide or crimes against humanity.”
In her new post she will be well-placed to explain their irrelevance to her counterparts.
Obviously she feels that affirmative action should be taken by the US on the basis of something other than its clear interests. I wonder how she derives her rationale for the need for strong affirmative action? Why not Tibet or North Korea? Such a mystery.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Emerson: A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Posted by: sbw | December 01, 2008 at 11:58 AM
Still lickin' yer wounds Maguire?
Socialist fear-mongering has you somewhat flummoxed, I see.
To further embarass your failed cynicism, and to give you some genuine insight into Obama's
motives, you should read "Team of Rivals" by
D.K. Goodwin and 'The War Within' by Woodward.
Your Cliffnotes from me would be: No more 'Yes' men, and more bicameral, bilateral, bipartisanship.
'Nuff said.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 12:14 PM
genuine insight into Obama's
motives, you should read "Team of Rivals" by
D.K. Goodwin
Yeah, for some reason I'm having a hard time buying that Obama's genuine motives can be found in the media's marketing campaign for Delores Kearns Goodwin's whitewash of Lincoln's troublesome cabinet.
Posted by: MayBee | December 01, 2008 at 12:27 PM
"To give you some genuine insight into Obama's
motives, you should read "Team of Rivals" by
D.K. Goodwin and 'The War Within' by Woodward."
Yeah,a terrific idea,Hitler used the same approach,worked out well.
Problem with the "O"rifice is that he doesn't have a clue about the areas for which he is picking candidates.
This looks more like the tribe sharing out the booty.
BTW Semanticleo,is Obama any closer to preventing your son from going to Iraq?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 12:45 PM
As Rice matures, she becomes more of a "yes man," and she travels with heavy baggage. As for Rice's energetic opposition to genocide, Samantha Powers wrote Sept. 2001 in the Atlantic Monthly ("Bystanders to Genocide"),
At an interagency teleconference in late April, Susan Rice, a rising star on the NSC who worked under Richard Clarke, stunned a few of the officials present when she asked, "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November [congressional] election?" Lieutenant Colonel Tony Marley remembers the incredulity of his colleagues at the State Department. "We could believe that people would wonder that," he says, "but not that they would actually voice it." Rice does not recall the incident but concedes, "If I said it, it was completely inappropriate, as well as irrelevant."
Visiting Rwanda after the genocide, Rice saw the light along with the carnage and advocated coming down hard on the side of immediate, vigorous action . With Obama's views on Dafur, she's softened her tone to follow the Leader. Then there's her recommendation with R. Clarke to refuse Sudan's offer of bin Laden when the gettin' was good.
Posted by: Frau Jedöns | December 01, 2008 at 01:05 PM
It will also send to the world organization a prominent and forceful advocate of stronger action, including military force if necessary
...instead of some ghastly saber-rattler like Bolton.
Peter, has Cleo climbed out of her hole? Tell her not to worry, Obama has never served nor have any living members of his family, so he lacks the moral authority to send troops into combat, even imaginary ones.
Posted by: bgates | December 01, 2008 at 01:13 PM
Rice? Powers? Clinton? Big time craziness, Leo. It's nice to see you haven't changed.
================================
Posted by: kim | December 01, 2008 at 01:13 PM
I wouldn't be too surprised if Rahm told Obama that Gates would depose his butt if he messed too much with the military. I'm not sure that is a good state of affairs, but someone has to talk turkey to this turkey.
===============================
Posted by: kim | December 01, 2008 at 01:23 PM
Oh, is Cleo back? I hadn't noticed.
Posted by: sbw | December 01, 2008 at 01:24 PM
bgates,
Obviously the Democrats have no memory of Mogadishu.Darfur could prove to be another Somalia,seems ideal AQ country.What will they think of the "Immaculate One" when your finest start coming home from another third world hell hole?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 01:27 PM
sbw,
Yes,didn't you notice the pungent odour,somewhat like a long dead prawn?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 01:28 PM
OT
The MSM is now pointing to a Report (LUN) from NBER to show that a Recession started in 12/07. From the FAQ, it appears that they do not adhere to the definition of a recession as "two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP".
It appears that they are basing most of the recession statement on the following:
The committee views the payroll employment measure, which is based on a large survey of employers, as the most reliable comprehensive estimate of employment.
...
The committee identified December 2007 as the peak month, after determining that the subsequent decline in economic activity was large enough to qualify as a recession.
Payroll employment, the number of filled jobs in the economy based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ large survey of employers, reached a peak in December 2007 and has declined in every month since then.
Help me out here - anyone here know much about NBER?
Is this just more "revisionist workings" to re-write the narrative as seen fit by certain individuals?
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 01, 2008 at 01:59 PM
I vote for revisionism. It's necessary to have actually had a recession, by whatever means, so that Obama can be seen as having pulled us out of it.
Posted by: PD | December 01, 2008 at 02:13 PM
"It's nice to see you haven't changed."
It's sad to see you haven't...........but I really don't anticipate any epiphanies from you or Maguire on the road to Damascus.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 02:49 PM
Didn't the GDP decline by about .5% in 3Q08? Music to Democrat ears, since they've been hankering for a recession for years. They'll have some control over how the 4Q08 numbers get crunched, too.
Another great opportunity for Rahm Emanuel.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 01, 2008 at 02:55 PM
Watch the worship, Leo. It doesn't fit you.
=========================
Posted by: kim | December 01, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Ah, our irascible host, TM, has awoke the sleeping "go by many names" troll.
I'm counting on you all to properly or improperly, stun him with your intelligence.
He must be happy about Hillary Clinton winning.
Posted by: glenda waggoner | December 01, 2008 at 03:02 PM
Leo:
Um, you won't find TM on the Road to Damascus. He isn't about to negotiate with Assad.
Posted by: Appalled | December 01, 2008 at 03:03 PM
"Watch the worship, Leo. It doesn't fit you."
For you, during the coming Holidays, is wishes for happiness, and for such happiness, there must be a search for knowledge.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 03:11 PM
".but I really don't anticipate any epiphanies from you or Maguire on the road to Damascus."
You are sounding like a "Christianist" Septic,the Obamanists will not like that.
Glenda Semanticleo comes pre-stunned.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 03:11 PM
"Socialist fear-mongering has you somewhat flummoxed, I see."
Yeah, we were soooo worried that Obama would be pushing a socialist agenda in the foreign policy arena. You really have no idea that engaging you is a form of mindless entertainment, do you?
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 01, 2008 at 04:24 PM
PD-
I don't recall them doing that for dating the Clinton Recession-employment peaked in mid-to-late 1999 and the bubble popped in 2000. Disappointing that they would be bitten by the "Protect Obama" bug, but not unexpected. Will be great to see the keepers of the GISS data moved over to BLS and NBER during the Obama Administration to make sure the numbers are always improving.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 04:27 PM
It's a minor point, but do they think that John Negroponte, John Bolton or Zalmay Khalizhad didn't have imput to the White House, when they needed it. Susan Rice, has been so systemativally wrong, she must have studied at Biden's knee.
Posted by: narciso | December 01, 2008 at 04:36 PM
Extraneus-
Another great opportunity for Rahm Emanuel.
Indeed. Wonder what Congress will do when Obama's first budget comes in with a deficit north of 1 Trillion dollars and a few states and other municipalities come shaking a tin can-can't be worse than the banks and autos getting their tribute. I'm waiting for the first pension fund to blow up personally, right around the time Congress crams down "card-check".
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Rich,
The gibbering sophists (or, as they're commonly known 'economists') of the NBER have different rulebooks depending upon the party in power.
If one plays by the "two consecutive quarters of lower GNP" then the earliest date possible would be June '08. If the monkeys wish to use employment then one might suggest that an actual decline in the wage component of the BEA Personal Income measure might be more valid than the numbers of nonproductive slackers cut loose. The "bite" of a recession doesn't begin until the wage component of the Personal Income number drops. Dumping slackers obviously improves productivity. If the BEA Wage & Salary number is used then the "real" recession had not begun by the end of Q3 '08.
I'm not sure that 'revisionism' is appropriate. The agglomeration of gibbering sophists is simply performing according to historical norm. We must always remember that the leading lights among this group are responsible for generating the justifications for those marvels of modernism - the MBS and the CDS (with nonoptional grenade attached).
The respect given to their pronouncements should be commensurate with that fact.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Susan Rice, Janet Napalitano. Can Jamie Gorelick be in Obama's hand to complete three of a kind?
Posted by: LindaK | December 01, 2008 at 05:07 PM
"You really have no idea that engaging you is a form of mindless entertainment, do you?"
SSssshhh,We're fattening this one up for the Christmas Troll Bake.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 05:15 PM
narciso-
Susan Rice's screw ups are in a league of there own. If I were paranoid, I'd ask who she really works for. Her tenure at State and the NSC was a disaster causing the whole of Central Africa to burn, not just Rwanda. She has such a tin ear, she even turned down bin Laden when offered.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 05:16 PM
the fact is that recessions are usually declared a year or more after their supposed inception. Common practice. I can say we saw signs of an industrial recession @ January of this year.
The bad news is that what hit us with the sub prime melt down has nothing to do with the declaration of a recession. Such a declaration then may push us deeper into a recession or worse, as evidenced by today's Dow. The good news is that if in fact we have been in a recession, then maybe we will start climbing out faster. How this nugget of wisdom jibes with a 35% reduction in automobile sales and Wall Street meltdown, I'm not sure.
As to genocides; the "Great Powers" tend to cancel each other out, which results in inaction; Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia, Darfur, etc. all are cans of worms, which is why the aggressors feel they can act with impunity.
Exactly which country is going to intervene militarily in favor of the oppressed in these places? The French enabled the Hutus, The Chinese enable the Sudanese, the Russians enabled the Serbs, and the Somalis had all sorts of radical Muslims supporting various factions, but more their own warlords pillaging and terrorizing the people than anything else.
Now we have the Indians and the Pakistanis rattling sabres. If that goes down, it will push everything else off the front pages. maybe we can then go in and really clean out the tribal areas.
Posted by: matt | December 01, 2008 at 05:37 PM
Rick-
The respect given to their pronouncements should be commensurate with that fact.
I made the mistake of turning on the business news and saw the NBER recession led. Curiously, one of the talking heads said the sell off was because of the numbers. However, looking at a 6% sell off in oil, 7% in gold, 10% in silver and a rally in US Treasuries, one gets the sneaking suspicion that another closet full of shoes is about to drop-somewhere.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 05:44 PM
Rich - I believe that would be tomorrow when the Big 3 do not get the help from the Govt.
Sad, but probably true...
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 01, 2008 at 05:52 PM
"She has such a tin ear, she even turned down bin Laden when offered."
So bin Laden is safe for four years, if he hasn't fallen off the perch?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 05:52 PM
"Now we have the Indians and the Pakistanis rattling sabres. If that goes down, it will push everything else off the front pages."
The fact that India and Pakistan are antipathetic nuclear powers with a recent history of genocide and mutually conflicting religious and political beliefs is sobering.
A war between these two nations is exactly what al Qaeda wants.
Obama better get on the hot line to the guy down the well and tell him to break out the lead underwear, his time is nigh.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 06:02 PM
That is not good news at all, as Professor Farnsworth(Futurama reference)I remember reading about such a prospect, originally
in Richard Lamm's "MegaTrauma" a decade before he became a candidate on the reform
party. Another testament to the value of partition; after you Joe and Samantha!
Posted by: narciso | December 01, 2008 at 06:16 PM
"...engaging you is a form of mindless entertainment.."
I am considering my audience and you are a key component thereof. You seem to never tire of having your ass handed to you, do you?
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 06:16 PM
PDinDetroit-
I can be really callous sometimes, but I hope you stay well in Detroit. I was thinking that it may be that and thought about the swaps exposure on the US automakers. The Delphi bankruptcy had a notional amount at 10 times the bonds, and the process seems to have been a fairly smooth. I'm not too sure a GM, Ford, and Chysler C11 filing would be as smooth and what sort of credit event clauses even a bailout would trigger. I'm also a bit surprised that the UAW has been so uncooporative because a C11 bankruptcy is going to blowback on them-how well have they been managing their funds (any takers that it is better than how GM has managed the business).
I'm not sure that the autos were really the cause of it though because of the odd sell off in the Euro and rally in the Yen in addition to the metals and oil sell off.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 06:21 PM
Kudlow has it chalked up to China's numbers. Hummm, still doesn't explain the currency moves, but getting warmer.
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 06:44 PM
Septic,
Just imagine you are the Black Knight and,well,JM Hanes isn't.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 01, 2008 at 06:45 PM
Semanticleo:
"I am considering my audience and you are a key component thereof."
If you're performing for me, you should probably rethink your target demographic.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 01, 2008 at 06:52 PM
Rich,
The same coterie of gibbering idiots mentioned above assured us that "emerging markets" are now "the little engine that can" wrt the world economy. Obviously, they can't. Today's sell off probably had many causes, not the least of which is the fact that people getting out the end of last month showing a bit of a profit decided to lock it away in cash.
Kinda like the productive consumers are doing in their buying strike against the election of the commie. The initial claims made about Black Friday sales increases are fading faster than Chinese employment numbers.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 07:09 PM
"you should probably rethink your target demographic."
"Mindless" is probably overstated....a few sandwiches shy of a picnic would be more accurate in your case....
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 07:09 PM
Or a circus in Assclownistan short of a troll in yours.
Posted by: boris | December 01, 2008 at 07:40 PM
"Or a circus in Assclownistan short of a troll in yours."
Whaaaa?
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 01, 2008 at 07:53 PM
Cut corporate taxes as Kudlow says. Robert Reich is such a fool.
Does anyone know of a link to a transcript of Bernacki's speech today down in Texas?
Posted by: glasater | December 01, 2008 at 08:04 PM
OK - now here you go.
I only missed by a thread or two.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 08:12 PM
Rick--thanks so much. When I tuned in--he was mentioning CDS
and wanted to study it further.
Posted by: glasater | December 01, 2008 at 08:21 PM
Will be great to see the keepers of the GISS data moved over to BLS and NBER during the Obama Administration to make sure the numbers are always improving.
Expect pronouncements such as these:
In the preceding quarter, it appeared, the Tenth Three-Year Plan's quota for bootlaces had been overfilled by ninety-eight per cent.
Posted by: PD | December 01, 2008 at 08:29 PM
Rich - NP, I am doing well and right in the eye of the storm for now. I have been doing my level best to keep my customers afloat and my co-workers employed. So far, so good...
I am skilled in IT and should land on my feet if the worst does occur.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 01, 2008 at 09:40 PM
PD;
their ain't no way for the Obamanauts to dress up this sow's ear as a silk purse. We're talking fundamental changes in the economy. I'm hoping for perhaps another year of recession at the best, but that's more a dream than hope. The combination of the auto industry, Wall Street, and housing going down all at once is daunting to say the least.
To fix this thing, we're going to need some economic drivers and people with money to make them viable a la personal computers circa 1982 or the internet explosion in the 90's. Wealth has to be created somewhere to fund the bailouts and grow an economy, and right now I don't see many of those drivers.
Posted by: matt | December 01, 2008 at 09:44 PM
matt - agreed. What is the next "killer app"?
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 01, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Red Beings and Rice.
Posted by: willem | December 01, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Just in case that "killer app" is as ephemeral as a SoLunar Windmill, I think I'll start working on a map of the nonzombie car plants and looking at which of the big builders are well situated in each area.
The zombies had a 47% share prior to selecting collective suicide as the path forward. The nonzombies should pick up a third of that within two years. Lots of new hires in right to work states means lots of new houses (funny how that works). Pulte, Centex and Beazer can all build at the required level - especially in right to work states.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 10:57 PM
The elimination of secret ballots in union elections would probably put an end to right-to-work, or at least gut it of any practical effect.
Posted by: cathyf | December 01, 2008 at 11:05 PM
When Chambliss wins tomorrow it will mean that the Dems will have to change the cloture rule in order to get card check to the floor (unless a couple of the few remaining RINOs flop). Even at that, there are a number of Dem Senators from right to work states that may not really feel like putting their seats at risk by voting for card check.
I wonder why Zero isn't putting a little Hope & Change hustle into the Georgia race? Surely a word from messiah would mean the end for Chambliss. Unless Zero's a fraud or something.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 01, 2008 at 11:21 PM
matt-
We had a chance with oil exploration, nuclear power, and other energy infrastructure. Now with Obama we'll get jerked around by OPEC and Russia, while federal judges protect mosquitoes and newts, and when the lights go dim, we can thank Obama for those "green collar jobs". I'm not really a futurist (and don't have that "market maker" technique) so not sure what else could be on the horizon.
Rick-
I've found the whole thing with the US automakers disgraceful. Really, where is the UAW's and car companies pride-they have to go back to Congress and kiss even more ass. And just eye-balling it, those guys are going to need much more than another $25 billion and "green cars" aren't going to cut it.
Just brainstorming an idea, but couldn't the steel industry's C11 reorganization (most declared bankruptcy in 2003) be a basis for reform for the US automakers?
Posted by: RichatUF | December 01, 2008 at 11:58 PM
PUK & boris:
Would it be really slutty if I said you're both my favorites?
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 02, 2008 at 12:23 AM
Next killer app: Wind-powered Chia Pet Rock.
Synthesis, man!
Posted by: sbw | December 02, 2008 at 07:59 AM
Rich
I think one thing is for sure. We've dithered on electrical production untill we're on the verge of a crisis. With the Obama administration, we'll dither around with windmills and solar panels untill we get to full blown crisis stage. There might have been some hope under McCain and Sarah. We need to fast track some coal and Nat. Gas plants asap, and get some nuclear projects on the books, yesterday. Instead we'll build low output, unreliable "green" power while the airconditioning goes out. Expect sales of hardwired backup generators to be brisk.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 02, 2008 at 08:07 AM
sbw - so, bad breath will cause the Chia to grow like a bonzai? Who knew that the nasty CO2 would do that...
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 02, 2008 at 08:43 AM
As I was saying before my computer seized up on me; Iowa's lead in endorsing the one
means ethanol is here, forever, going gangbusters. Which means burning our food for fuel, a whole new level of inflation.
Add that, probably more blends of supposedly
ecologically friendly gas with no new refineries, coming on line. Well Susan's such good friends with the Sudanese, maybe we can bum some gas from them. Seeing as the 9th Circuit has blocked drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchoi area, although the Supremes will probably reverse, General Jones seemed to talk a good game, wonder if he'll follow through, it's not really his bailiwick. Nuclear needs to be pushed
forward,who's his energy sec again? It's like a bad rerun of that 70s show, without
the laughtrack. You're right, we had a choice with John and Sarah, but Tina Fey's impression was so funny; won't be so funny when they're freezing their butt off.
Posted by: narciso | December 02, 2008 at 09:06 AM
Just did a little looking around on the Energy Secretary question. All the named possibilities seem equally appalling, with the possible exception of Ed Rendell? Mostly a bunch of green energy ecofreaks. Hmmm, reccession/depression, energy shortage, credit contraction, could be an interesting 4 years here.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 02, 2008 at 09:32 AM
The new Canadian Prime Minister explicitly said that he would not sacrifice the economy in pursuit of environmental goals. Then he flew off to Europe to visit the 'European No Coal and Steal Plan' talks. icecap.us has his comments.
=======================================
Posted by: kim | December 02, 2008 at 09:37 AM
"We've dithered on electrical production until we're on the verge of a crisis."
Are you sure of that? I'd say that the pols have carefully measured the level of pig ignorance, gullibility and stupidity which are the hallmark of the muddle and determined that the best way to pick pockets (regressively, of course) is to put a "green" face on the biggest gas play in history. The big gas turbines which will actually produce power behind the silly facade of "alternative energy" do not take long to build and will be presented as a "necessary" adjunct - a way stop on the path to the religious effort to save dear Gaia.
Gaia worshipers can't really complain about the extraction of double the necessary costs when the grail is in sight. There is some small consolation in the fact that the stupid will pay the most in terms of percentage of income but the pols will probably offer "relief" to the least productive, dumping the heaviest load on those making the first steps away from the clods who clog the bottom.
It's just standard progressive immiseration.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 02, 2008 at 09:43 AM
Well Rick, whether it's a conspiracy of stupidity or ill will doesn't change the fact that things are probably going to be a little dicey on the energy front for a while. I'm having a hard time getting real optimistic here. We've got consumer credit expected to drop by $2 trillion, housing still falling, credit still not going out, commodities in free fall, unemployment starting to trend up. This thing could get ugly.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 02, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Oh, and you've got the govt blowing prodigious amounts of money pumping it into a falling market.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 02, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Here is DJ Drummond on GM. He says it is worse than you think at GM.
LUN
Posted by: bad | December 02, 2008 at 02:47 PM
"He says it is worse than you think at GM."
Since I tend to think of Beetlejuice when I see GM, it must be very bad indeed.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 02, 2008 at 03:19 PM
If we have to burn food for energy, could I nominate Velveeta and Wonderbread?
Posted by: clarice | December 02, 2008 at 03:35 PM
May I add coconut to that list? and stinky perfumes?
Posted by: bad | December 02, 2008 at 05:55 PM
I do not know how to use the flyff gold ; my friend tells me how to use.
Posted by: sophy | January 06, 2009 at 11:26 PM