As an alternative to a tedious tome on Waxman-Markey the American Enterprise Institute offers colorful quotes from their experts. Some snippets:
Steven F. Hayward writes on a wide range of public policy issues. He is the coauthor of the annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators; the producer and host of An Inconvenient Truth . . . or Convenient Fiction?, a rebuttal to Al Gore's documentary; and the author of many books on environmental topics. He contributes to AEI's Energy and Environment Outlook series.
Pencil him in as "Undecided".
Samuel Thernstrom has studied and written about environmental issues for twenty years, with a particular emphasis on global climate change. He served on the White House Council on Environmental Quality prior to joining AEI in 2003. As codirector of the AEI Geoengineering Project, Mr. Thernstrom studies the policy implications of geoengineering--a new way to deal with global warming by blocking a small fraction of the sunlight that would otherwise warm the Earth's surface. His recent op-ed in the Washington Post discusses the possibility of engineering a cooler planet: http://www.aei.org/article/100625.
Hmm - can we call that "Undecided, but doesn't realize it yet"? C'mon, Nancy has until the Fourth of July to bash this through the House.
ANY DAY NOW: The Brookings Institute sneak-previewed their upcoming report on the economic impact of climate change back on June 8 but it was not a specic look at Waxman-Markey.
Pages 17 and 18 show their estimate of the impact on GDP of different reduction strategies out to 2050. Folks who focus on the direct comparison of GDP (p. 17) will argue that their is virtually no impact. On the other hand, page 18 indicates that GDP is reduced by 1% to 2.5% per year. On a $14 trillion economy, that is a cost of $140 to $350 billion per year, an amount which ought to be able to hold people's attention.
At 1200 pages how can anyone sit down read it, redline and annotate it, analyze it, then write about what it will do, not do and its consequences? If, its as some say, a hairnet with so many holes in it that it is unenforceable, then it is just making Ed and Henry feel good. They could go to the head with this months Playboy if that is what they want.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | June 26, 2009 at 09:50 AM
How much is that in Pelosi $$ ?
Posted by: clarice | June 26, 2009 at 09:57 AM
On the other hand, page 18 indicates that GDP is reduced by 1% to 2.5% per year.
Is this from the same braintrust who estimated unemployment with and without the Porkulous?
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Somewhere around page 850 is the part where some of the taxes collected will be transferred by direct deposit to the accounts of people who make below some arbitrary income level. So this is officially a Cap&Tax&TranferWhatWealthisNotDestroyed Bill.
TM, who is going to pay attention to a measly $140-350B when we ignore Trillions and Trillions?
And to those who say, including here, that this law can be reversed by the next Congress, I say on what planet do you think repealing a cash transfer (or free health care) is gonna happen?
Seen any opposition leadership anywhere?
Posted by: Old Lurker | June 26, 2009 at 10:05 AM
--On the other hand, page 18 indicates that GDP is reduced by 1% to 2.5% per year. On a $14 trillion economy, that is a cost of $140 to $350 billion per year, an amount which ought to be able to hold people's attention.--
Is that a flat 2% reduction or 2% less, of 2% less, of 2% less.....?
If the latter, then the cost would be pretty staggering 30-50 years down the road, no?
Posted by: Ignatz | June 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Heard Byron York on the radio this morning with Laura Ingraham. FWIW he doesn't think the Dems have the votes and that the vote will be postponed. He doesn't think there will be a single GOP yes vote.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 10:29 AM
We'll see, Porch. I heard that too but am pretty pessimistic. We have lost the ability to reason.
Alice in Wonderland...here in DC.
Posted by: Old Lurker | June 26, 2009 at 10:32 AM
I'm pessimistic, too, OL, so I was happy to hear someone who knew more about it than I do (not difficult) was hopeful.
We are definitely through the looking glass.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 10:58 AM
--At 1200 pages how can anyone sit down read it, redline and annotate it, analyze it, then write about what it will do, not do and its consequences?--
Make that 1500 pages. They just produced a 300 page addendum.
Posted by: Ignatz | June 26, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Ignatz:
"They just produced a 300 page addendum."
Those last few votes are expensive.
Posted by: JM Hanes | June 26, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Correction, JMH.
It's even worse, according to the Corner. Waxman has withdrawn the original 1200 pager and replaced it with the new 300 pager which he is now trying to limit debate of to three hours...TODAY, the same day he produces it!
Posted by: Ignatz | June 26, 2009 at 11:26 AM
They just produced a 300 page addendum.
Does that mean the speed reader still has a job?
IMO, any one who votes for this bill should lose their job.
Posted by: pagar | June 26, 2009 at 11:28 AM
How about we form a mob and storm the Capitol? I bet about 5,000 people armed with rotten vegetables would do it.
Posted by: Fresh Air | June 26, 2009 at 11:28 AM
I was happy to hear someone who knew more about it than I do was hopeful. and Wwelcome to the largest and most successful interracial dating site in the world!
-BlackWhiteConnect.com - is for sincere singles of all races,
seriously looking for an interracial relationship or interracial marriage.
Thousands of new members daily. Join now to meet your dream date in this
comfortable community of different cultures and ethnicities.
Posted by: joycekane | June 26, 2009 at 11:29 AM
I would like to thank whatever poster mentioned National Enquirer here yesterday. It has a fascination website.
Posted by: peter | June 26, 2009 at 11:31 AM
The GOP has to stage a protest..Maybe demand a week off for Congress to honor MJ
Posted by: clarice | June 26, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Just to clarify by muddying the waters;
Hotair says it's a 300 page amendment to the 1200 original pages.
The Corner says it's a 300 page replacement for the original 1200.
I say six of one, half a dozen trillion of another.
Posted by: Ignatz | June 26, 2009 at 11:38 AM
WM needs to do two things.
(1) It needs to be big and complicated. It does not matter that it accomplishes zip zero nada. As long as it's comlicated the public will never know that.
(2) It needs to make the taxpayer suffer. That way as the planet continues to cool (naturally) all those suffering taxpayers will take credit for saving the planet. Simple paychology.
Posted by: boris | June 26, 2009 at 11:49 AM
There is no way this document is a replacement, it is clearly an amendment
Any American who votes for this garbage without reading it should be immediately charged with fraud.
Posted by: pagar | June 26, 2009 at 11:54 AM
You guys can just keep fiddlin' while you gather around the campfire to keep warm. Too bad you can't see what's in front of yer face.
The Waxman Markey Bill provides for modernization of the electrical grid.
When your power grid for your residence starts browning out and resembles Baghdad's, remember those who had the foresight to anticipate the disaster, and sought some solutions with the help of the Party of 'NO'.
As for me, I just powered up my wind generator which cost me $8k after rebates and will produce about 500kwh per month.
"Fortune favors the prepared mind", but bad luck plagues people without vision.....
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Truth in advertising should force the Dems to rename this the Exxom Gas Relief Act. Beano would have been somewhat less expensive.
Getting rid of those dirty, nasty coal plants in favor of pretty, green gas plants (constructed behind a facade of windmills and PVC arrays) will surely
enrich Exxomsave Gaia.Posted by: Rick Ballard | June 26, 2009 at 12:06 PM
There isn't a soul on this earth that knows what is in the Waxman Markey Bill. No one has read it.
Posted by: pagar | June 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM
I can't come up with a more appropriate term for all of this than madness. It is simply madness.
My understanding is that it won't pass in the Senate, but if it doesn't it won't be because of any rational discourse.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 12:19 PM
For those seeking a bit of encouragement, check out Kim Strassel's WSJ piece. LUN
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 12:22 PM
WASHINGTON – U.S. Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Greg Walden, R-Ore., ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, today asked Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Oversight Committee Chairman Bart Stupak, D-Mich., to begin an investigation on the process the Environmental Protection Agency used in developing its endangerment finding.
The endangerment finding, if formalized by a rule, would allow the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act, something U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., once called “a glorious mess.”
“It appears the administration and EPA administrator rushed to issue the proposed endangerment finding without considering fully substantive analysis and views of senior EPA career staff within the agency,” Barton and Walden wrote. “The attached EPA emails raise serious questions about the process for developing the proposed endangerment finding, whether analysis or information was suppressed because it did not support the administration and/or administrator’s proposed finding, and/or whether there is a fear within the agency that there will be negative consequences for offices that offer views critical of the prevailing views of the administrator and the administration.”
Posted by: Neo | June 26, 2009 at 12:31 PM
"but if it doesn't it won't be because of any rational discourse."
Indeed. I am not optimistic about the Party of 'NO!', hence my outlay of cash for green power. It won't be cost effective for years, but the independence is priceless......
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Golly gee, I didn't expect this denouncement from this quarter.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | June 26, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Sack all of Congress
Posted by: Neo | June 26, 2009 at 01:01 PM
will produce about 500kwh per month
Wow, approximately $20 per month at the high end of MO wholesale rates. At that rate, you'll get er paid off in 8 years provided it doesn't break down or anything. Before "rebates" it would have been what, about 20 years?
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 01:05 PM
Between this and the health care rape, we are looking at the destuction of the middle class in america.
Posted by: Wildman | June 26, 2009 at 01:06 PM
What's priceless is cleo here thinking that the cause of the problems with the grid, and the coming brownouts, are the solution to it. We really are through the looking glass.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 01:06 PM
Monica Conyers is now a convicted felon.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 01:08 PM
Bitch set herself up.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 01:09 PM
FWIW, the new Dim Gov of MO, Jay Nixon, just vetoed 200 million in Capital improvement for roads and bridges in order to fund "priorities" like health care.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 01:19 PM
Some of Monica Conyers' Greatest Hits.
Do it, baby.
Posted by: MayBee | June 26, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Shrek!
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 01:33 PM
Some of the comments about Moronica at the Freep site are pretty funny.
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 26, 2009 at 01:58 PM
This doesn't have anything to do with anything, but I just found out you don't need to buy expensive electric jar openers, just use one of those metal paint can openers, pry it under the lid and pop the air out of a jar and then it opens easily. Just thought I'd say.
Posted by: sylvia | June 26, 2009 at 02:09 PM
The Corner is reporting that Waxman-Markey is being pulled - looks like they don't have the votes.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:11 PM
"Wow, approximately $20 per month at the high end of MO wholesale rates. At that rate, you'll get er paid off in 8 years provided it doesn't break down or anything. Before "rebates" it would have been what, about 20 years?"
Sorry. I often assume that people who visit JOM can read....................
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 02:11 PM
Put a question mark on my last comment - it is a rumor, not confirmed...
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:13 PM
Maybee..
your MONICA link provided great joy, sorry to say...it was the satisfaction of thinking John Conyers lives with her. God does work in mysterious ways!
Posted by: glenda | June 26, 2009 at 02:20 PM
Americans for Tax Reform is reporting 206 yes, 211 no, 17 undecided and a 5 pm vote...no idea if this is true.
"The following are the undecided members to target:
Kirkpatrick Az, Change: Boyd Fla now YES, Brown Fla, Change: Bishop Ga now leaning NO, R Kirk Ill, Foster Ill, Donnelly Ind, R Jones NC, McIntyre NC, R Frelinghuysen NJ, Tonko NY, Arcuri NY, Change: Boccieri Ohio, Space Ohio (he voted for it in committee), Carney Penna, Change Davis Tenn now NO, Al Green Tex, Jackson Lee Tex, Eddie Bernice Johnson Tex, Kind Wisc"
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:28 PM
WUWT has a good post with contact info and a list of wavering weenies. Even if it's pulled it's not "over". That CEI/EPA release cited by Neo seems to have had some impact. If you do call your
idiotrepresentative, it's worth mentioning.Posted by: Rick Ballard | June 26, 2009 at 02:30 PM
Sorry. I often assume that people who visit JOM can read....................
And I assume you understand you won't get power when the wind don't blow.
Tell ya what, pull yer meter and see how you get along with the whirlygig on the roof.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 02:33 PM
That CEI/EPA release cited by Neo seems to have had some impact.
Fingers crossed. If it can be delayed until the June unemployment numbers are released, that would also be a help.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:35 PM
If your
pea brained weaselrepresentative isn't on that list, you can find contact info forither/him here.Posted by: Rick Ballard | June 26, 2009 at 02:39 PM
My rep (Doggett) is a Dem who's already defected because the bill doesn't go far enough. Ugh. Well, for now, he's useful.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:46 PM
ATR.org has a new update:
New update on cap-and-trade Waxman-Markey bill - keep calling 202-224-3121
Bishop Ga now Leaning YES
Scott Ga from Leaning YES to NO
Boswell Iowa from Yes to Leaning NO
Bean Ill from YES to Leaning YES
Ehlers Mich from Leaning YES to YES
Walz Minn from YES to Leaning YES
Massa NY from Undecided to Leaning NO
Kilroy Ohio from Yes to Leaning YES
Cooper Tenn from YES to Leaning YES
Ortiz Tex from Undecided to Leaning NO
Johnson (Eddie Bernice) Tex from Undecided to YES
Jackson Lee Tex from Undecided to YES
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:47 PM
"you won't get power when the wind don't blow."
And pohtovoltaics don't power up at night.
Wind velocity im y vicinity averages 12 mph PER DAY AND NIGHT. I assume you know the wind blows at night, cause yer a farmer.
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 02:51 PM
Do we have a definitive answer on the passage or failure of this bill? I just woke up and can't find it, and Rush is time delayed.
Posted by: daddy | June 26, 2009 at 02:53 PM
BTW;
Wind tech has maintenance costs about half
what PV's run. But don't let me interfere with yer grassroots "NO" effort to contact yer Reps. You're on a roll, WingNut Nation.
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 02:54 PM
An Iowahawk exclusive...
Posted by: Extraneus | June 26, 2009 at 02:54 PM
Wind velocity im y vicinity averages 12 mph PER DAY AND NIGHT. I assume you know the wind blows at night, cause yer a farmer.
And?
Is it gonna blow when the grid is at peak load?
Like I said. Pull the meter and see how you get along.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 02:54 PM
Waxman openly making deals on the floor now:
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:56 PM
BTW;
Wind tech has maintenance costs about half
what PV's run.
So, what's the AVG cost per KWH for wind compared to the AVG cost per KWH for coal or nuclear or Nat Gas?
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 02:56 PM
Why the long face at LUN
Posted by: peter | June 26, 2009 at 02:56 PM
No definitive answer yet, daddy...still a lot of horsetrading going on (see above). Heading for a 5 pm EST vote, supposedly.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 02:57 PM
Stupid Chinese,
They have 40 Wind Turbines surrounding the Shanghai Airport, but you know what the morons are doing? Why they're currently constructing 29 in country Nuclear Power Plants and building OIL Lines and Natural Gas Lines thousands of miles across the country. How stupid must they be. Can't we send them Al Gore and Henry Waxman to wise 'em up?
Posted by: daddy | June 26, 2009 at 03:00 PM
"Is it gonna blow when the grid is at peak load?"
My chances of having power are based on
my contingencies. Do you have any option apart from accepting what yer local power co. sells to you.? Having no alternative is something that appeals to you? What a man/woman of vision...................!!!!
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 03:02 PM
Yes, Daddy this vote shouldn't be any where as close as it is. The Chinese are laughing their heads off at us. The Russians
too, probably the Saudis as well
Posted by: narciso | June 26, 2009 at 03:08 PM
Posted by: Neo | June 26, 2009 at 03:09 PM
$8k seems a bit steep for one of thses.
Posted by: PeterUK | June 26, 2009 at 03:09 PM
"probably the Saudis as well"
At least they had the vision to build desalination plants. Our visionaries have us woefully unprepared for the next crisis.
Water shortages...........................
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 03:11 PM
This bill should be prime filibuster material.
Posted by: dk70 | June 26, 2009 at 03:12 PM
Skystream 3.7....check it out.
Posted by: Semanticleo | June 26, 2009 at 03:13 PM
"this vote shouldn't be any where as close as it is. The Chinese are laughing their heads off at us. The Russians
too, probably the Saudis as well"
They are probably paying for it.
Posted by: PeterUK | June 26, 2009 at 03:14 PM
"At least they had the vision to build desalination plants. Our visionaries have us woefully unprepared for the next crisis."
Democrat House and President.Still you will get free health care in the dark.
Posted by: PeterUK | June 26, 2009 at 03:17 PM
The last word on Michael Jackson.
Posted by: PeterUK | June 26, 2009 at 03:19 PM
Thanks for that Peter, We really dodged a bullet there didn't we. By the way do you know that the Governor of NJ is apparently
Tim Kaine, other great wisdom from Slow Joe.
Posted by: narciso | June 26, 2009 at 03:26 PM
Our visionaries have us woefully unprepared for the next crisis.
True. We have oil and natural gas just sitting in the ground, and the technology to extract it, their idea of vision is that instead of doing so we should be moving toward energy sources that are not as efficient, cost more, and for which the technology is much less well-developed.
And this is called "moving toward energy independence." Seems to me the easiest, quickest, cheapest way to get away from foreign oil is to drill domestic oil. But no. Oil is "bad."
Sem, if you want to run a turbine, that's fine with me. I happen to think domestic drilling is a better "alternative," and it can work for a whole lot of people.
Posted by: PD | June 26, 2009 at 03:29 PM
Why the long face at LUN
Lurch is such a fool to try to get into a battle of wits with anybody; it's kind of like the genius of the hot air turbines battling the evil engineers at the utilities.
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 26, 2009 at 03:44 PM
A close relative worked for years at ">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station#History"> The Palo Verde Nuclear Facility 50 miles west of Phoenix. It has 3 reactors, and was initially designed for and got approval to construct 2 more reactors in the 80's. Being that the grid to funnel the power to California and throughout the Southwest already exists and is being used, that the facility already exists and already deals effectively with the removal of waste from 3 units, and that the facility is already environmentally approved and operating in somebody's back yard, it has always seemed sensible to me that if we do decide to start acting rationally and building more Nuclear reactors in this country, that completing the last 2 units at Palo Verde is a prime location for where we begin the process.
We have got to get rid of the Waxman's and Markee's and other assorted idiots in this country and start getting some sensible people in positions of power to do what needs to be done for the future of this nation.
I urge you guys who know way more than I do about this engineering stuff to start looking at Palo Verde, etc, because I think awareness and discussion of a concrete, viable Nuclear Option needs to be in our vocabulary and in our minds eye, so that we have something to concretely propose as what we ought to do, instead of constantly fighting defensively against idiotic pie-in-the-sky nebulous Tax propositions mouthed to the public 24/7 by our miserable, miserable media.
I am completely opposed to this bulls@#$ Legislation Waxman is trying to ram down our throats. But if we are going to have to bite into it, then we Repub's ought to have a provision in the damn thing that we will only vote Yes if we get undeniable approval in the Legislation to immediately start construction on Units 4 and 5 of Palo Verde, or at some other location that you engineers consider a better location. We have to get some offense going. We have to have an electorate that is not simply angry, but that is angry and adamant about real solutions. We need every voter in this country to have a general idea about exactly where the next power plant in this country should be built, and when it should be built. Until I hear a better alternative, I vote for Palo Verde and I vote for tomorrow. End of rant.
Posted by: daddy | June 26, 2009 at 03:50 PM
And speaking of truly clueless I give you Thomas Barnett, no one else would have him:
Posted by: narciso | June 26, 2009 at 03:54 PM
Daddy,
Palo Verde is not currently seeking permits. I'm rooting for the TX plants myself. A new republic needs new power sources.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | June 26, 2009 at 04:02 PM
Daddy
The Callaway Nuclear plant, right near me, recently gave up on trying to get another two reactors going. Mainly due to politics, not economics. They have the room, and had already started sitework, but, I think the elections in Nov spelled doom for the project. Unfortunately, we'll be in a crisis before people start demanding sane options.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 04:09 PM
The next time someone says Bush didn't care or do anything about the environment, remind them that Texas has the largest wind farm (in the world?, at least the states) and it was while Bush was governor of Texas. Yeah, and Bush is the only one of these nincompoops that had an eco friendly home before eco friendly homes were popular.
Posted by: Sue | June 26, 2009 at 04:10 PM
I called my rep and his office REFUSED to tell me how he is voting. Who does the guy think he works for?
Posted by: Jane | June 26, 2009 at 04:12 PM
Skystream 3.7
Rated at 400KWH at 12 MPH avg windspeed. So, now, you're down to about $16 month.
Do you have any option apart from accepting what yer local power co. sells to you.?
Actually, yes, but you wouldn't know that, would you?
Really, if you were less interested in putting up a monument to Gaia, and more interested in actual back up power, you could buy a nice 12 KW LP Kohler generator for 4k, and have enough money to buy fuel for it for a couple thousand hours. Heck, you'll need something to back up the whirlygig anyway.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 04:14 PM
Bush also helped make Texas the leading producer of wind powered electricity in the US. In 1995 Bush made wind power a key facet of Texas' renewable energy policy. Under a 1999 Texas state law, electric retailers are obliged to buy a certain amount of energy from renewable sources. This environmentally progressive legislation is a striking counterpoint the energy policies of his presidency that favored the status quo.
And what has Al Gore done for us? Why nothing, but he made a few bucks doing nothing.
Posted by: Sue | June 26, 2009 at 04:17 PM
Who does the guy think he works for?
Posted by: Jane | June 26, 2009 at 04:12 PM
Some lobbyist.
Posted by: Sue | June 26, 2009 at 04:19 PM
Six young contract attorneys get a plum assignment:
LUN
Posted by: peter | June 26, 2009 at 04:21 PM
Thanks Rick and Pofarmer,
I was confident you folks out there were cognizant and up to date on this stuff. If it's Callaway, then thats fine with me. But we need a Proposed unit, somewhere, someplace, that we can rally around nationally and point to and say, build this sunofabitch here and build it now, or take your Legislation and shove it up your rectum. We have got to go on offense.
I have no idea who our spokesman should be---some decently respected science guy etc. But in my view we have to have something we can rally for, not simply against. Please keep tossing out suggestions.
Posted by: Daddy | June 26, 2009 at 04:21 PM
Sorry that link failed: here's a clip :
A group of six young Chicago-area lawyers just landed a singular career opportunity: joining the legal defense team of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich as pretrial contract lawyers, meaning they're likely to spend the next several months poring over 3.5 million pages of documents turned over by the prosecution.
The six attorneys lined up in a courtroom on Thursday to tell U.S. District Judge James Zagel, who is overseeing the case in the Northern District of Illinois, that they understood the protective order they signed, requiring them to keep confidential the documents they will be reviewing. U.S. v. Blagojevich, No. 08-888. The six, mainly solo practitioners, are Aaron Goldstein, 34; Keenan Saulter, 33; Elliott Riebman, 27; Rob Walker, 34; Michael Di Natale, 28; and Robyn Molaro, 29.
Following a status hearing at which the judge set a June 3, 2010, trial date for the ousted Democratic governor who was indicted in April on federal charges of political corruption, the young lawyers said they were attracted to the case by its challenge and prominence. It may not hurt either that it was an offer of a long-term project during one of the worst U.S. job markets for young attorneys in decades.
"It's just an interesting white-collar case, it's high-profile, and it's fun," said Di Natale, an attorney at Di Natale Law Offices of North Riverside, Ill.
The six lawyers didn't know each other before the case, but many of them were acquainted with some of the senior attorneys on the case. Di Natale, who formerly worked at Jenner & Block, said he has known Blagojevich's lead lawyer, Sheldon Sorosky, his whole life through his father Joseph, who leads the firm they share.
Posted by: peter | June 26, 2009 at 04:23 PM
Update from Malkin on new developments. I'd like to say this is unbelievable, but it's not:
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 04:29 PM
Those tariffs in Waxman-Markey are already having an effect ...
A Chinese firm's bid to buy the gas-guzzling Hummer car brand will be blocked on environmental grounds, according to Chinese state radio.
Steve Rattner call your office
Posted by: Neo | June 26, 2009 at 04:38 PM
Jane,
Sounds like fodder for your next show. Reminds me of the Wizard of OZ, or, since Michael Jackson just died, The Wiz. (Worst show ever by the way, even worse than Cats.) Your guy has an opinion, but not the courage to voice it. Rush just had on something about some Republican Rep that "didn't have an opinion" so obviously he lacks a brain. And we all know Waxman/Markee have no heart for America, so it sounds to me like a rerun of Characters from the Wizard of Oz---no brain, no heart no courage. Maybe Palin's Dorothy? At least she'd look hot in Ruby Red slippers.
This is frightening beyond words, but at least carte blanche for somebody to photoshop pix of my favorite Guv'nor in red pumps!
Posted by: Daddy | June 26, 2009 at 04:39 PM
I can't stand it. I'm going out to do something worthwhile---looking for more bearpoop.
Posted by: Daddy | June 26, 2009 at 04:42 PM
OT - wow:
Duke official charged in child sex case
Prayers for that poor child.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 04:47 PM
Sorry, I left out the key part:
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 04:50 PM
Farah Fawcett arrives at the gates of heaven, and St. Peter commends her for a life well lived. He asks her what wish she would like him to grant as a reward.
"Gee, St. Peter, I think I'd wish for all the little children of the world to be safe."
A half hour later Michael Jackson drops dead.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 04:56 PM
And yes, a bear does s--t in the woods, but with the qualifier of "he'd prefer to do it on the bike trail if one's available".
Sort of like that Pope thing. Yes, the Pope is still Catholic, but the ArchBishop of Canterbury, well he's still some variety of Christian, but only when it don't interfere with Sharia Law.
Posted by: Daddy | June 26, 2009 at 04:57 PM
For at least thirty years now everyone who is not a blithering simpleton has been ineligible for the Archbishopric of Canterbury.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 26, 2009 at 05:11 PM
Brodhead's really running a tight ship at Dook; the Il Douche of college presidents (although the competition for that title is neck and neck).
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 26, 2009 at 05:13 PM
Prayers for that poor child.
Posted by: Porchlight | June 26, 2009 at 04:47 PM
It would be my pleasure to take care of this matter. And I don't pray so IYKWITAAITYD
Posted by: Sue | June 26, 2009 at 05:15 PM
Posted by: glasater | June 26, 2009 at 05:17 PM
Who does the guy think he works for?
Big money donors.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 26, 2009 at 05:20 PM
Waxbrain bribes convicted Rep. Grayson on the floor of the House. Unbelievable.
Posted by: Fresh Air | June 26, 2009 at 05:36 PM
"For at least thirty years now everyone who is not a blithering simpleton has been ineligible for the Archbishopric of Canterbury."
It is a political appointment,Archbishop Swampy is Tony Bliar's prelate. A good little lefty.
Posted by: PeterUK | June 26, 2009 at 05:39 PM
Grist for the mill. Very relevant to the question of why this bill and why now? Scroll down to #6.
LUN
Posted by: Chris | June 26, 2009 at 05:53 PM