Sunday, June 23, 2013

Big Announcement From Obama on Climate Change

Hat tip John Speedie for audio

Here is an email I got this morning from some guy named Jon Carson, head Chingon at Organizing for Action (Obama's version of the Politburo or something like that)

Organizing for Action

From:Jon Carson,  Add to Addresses Block Sender
Date:Sunday, June 23, 2013 2:07 PM
Subject:Tuesday's big announcement:
Size:11 KB

Now, this is huge news:

President Obama is set to announce his plan this week to address the growing threat of climate change.

"Summer's here!"

We'll know more specifics on Tuesday, but it's expected he'll offer a bold, national approach to reducing carbon pollution -- and lay out a vision to lead global efforts to fight climate change.

The powerful, well-financed forces who still deny the science behind climate change aren't going to like this -- and they'll be fighting this progress every step of the way. In fact, before he's even seen the plan, House Speaker John Boehner is calling it "absolutely crazy."

(He's right.)

That's why President Obama is calling on all of us -- anyone who believes that climate change is a threat -- to join him in taking action right now.

Add your name today -- say you'll do your part to help fight climate change:

Thanks -- more on this soon.


Jon Carson
Executive Director
Organizing for Action

My reply:

Here you go, Jon.

Update* So I sent this post back to Jon Carson, and here is the reply I got:

Organizing For Action  Add to Addresses Block Sender
Date:Sunday, June 23, 2013 2:37 PM
Subject:Thanks For The Email Re: Tuesday's big announcement:
Size:4 KB
Thanks for your email.

If you have a question about Organizing for Action or need support, please write us at or call (571) 403-1776.

Click here for a list of Frequently Asked Questions.

And if you have a question about the 2012 campaign, including those regarding your contribution(s), merchandise, or an invoice, please contact Obama for America at

Thanks again,
Organizing for Action

Must be one of those automatic reply machines. Or maybe nobody's at home at Organizing for Action.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

Yes, I got that email too. I'm looking forward to something comprehensive and thoughtful, something that would live up to my late mother's judgment that Obama is the best president we've had in a long time -- much better than Kennedy.

Of course John Boehner will kill anything being done, but that shouldn't stop people of intelligence, patriotism and good will from advocating what is right.

Gary Fouse said...

Stop it. It's going to be more taxes, more regulation, carbon fees and all that big govt stuff. All to support Al Gore's half-baked theories. This is probably a ruse to bring in big global governance.

Squid said...

We must all remember that "O" and his buddy Al Gore tried to start the "Chicago Climate Exchange" (CCX) which was going to tax carbon emissions. All was going very well until the "Warmers" were exposed as charlatans, who wanted to sell their snake oil to the low information folks. The Exchange went bankrupt and south. Now "O" wants to use his Presidential credentials to tax us into oblivion. Here is what Daniel Greenfield posited in his timely online offering. It is very good reading!



Siarlys Jenkins said...

Government's job is to regulate, and its source of revenue is tax. The legitimate question is what to regulate, why, and how much it will cost. IF regulation is bad, maybe you'd like to repeal the laws against first degree intentional homicide? Oh no, that's good regulation. People die from air and water pollution, and dumping your effluent onto your neighbors downstream and downwind is not a free market, its a subsidy for your business paid by others who don't benefit.

Climate change is deadly also. There is no benefit to one polluter lowering their carbon output unless everyone else does so too. A classic tragedy of the commons, which calls for prudent regulation -- and tax.

Squid's link makes the National Enquirer look like the Torah.

elwood p suggins said...

I guess I just don't get it. I am expected to pay $40K or so for a little-bitty electric car which has a whopping 40-mile range on a good day. Then I am supposed to build a $25K windmill in my back yard to charge it up. At a savings of roughly 12 cents per mile, after I have driven it 100,000 miles, I will indeed have saved $12K in fuel costs.

Since I can get a perfectly serviceable 30 mpg conventional fuel mid-sized car for no more than $20K, looks to me like I will have spent $45K to save $12K. If that does not epitomize government in action, I don't know what does.

I most certainly agree that we do need to start weaning ourselves off of fossil fuel for both cars and power generation, as these resources are not in infinite supply.

We do not, however, have to be environmental-whacko, like Siarlys, about it. If we do it wisely but gradually, and let the markets, technology, and common sense (that seemingly rapidly disappearing/endangered commodity) guide us, we should be able to phase it in and avoid, or at least minimize, a lot of the stuff Gary describes.

Although I admittedly have not completely researched it out, ethanol is fairly widely touted by many "greenies" to be a/the panacea. Around here, E-85 fuel is cheaper than regular gasoline (not as much cheaper as it used to be, but still cheaper). At least as far as I can understand it, I am aware that some high-performance racing cars/boats run off of pure methanol.
Seems to me that if ethanol is good, methanol, which is apparently cheaper to produce and sustain, although not as politically attractive, might even be better. If adding either ethanol/methanol to gasoline reduces the price of fuel, look to me like burning the pure stuff would be even cheaper, and I guess reduce emissions significantly along with all the other alleged benefits. Worth a try??

Gary Fouse said...

That's why we
get outfits like Solyndra.