July 13, 2008
How Bush Got His Groove Back
Today, President George W. Bush did something that shocked some of us: With a sweep of his presidential hand, he rejected the attempt by a low-level advisor to the Environmental Protection Agency to force the administration to regular carbon dioxide (which we all exhale) as a "pollutant," defying both the Democrats and the Supreme Court:
The Bush administration, dismissing the recommendations of its top experts, rejected regulating the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming Friday, saying it would cripple the U.S. economy.
In a 588-page federal notice, the Environmental Protection Agency made no finding on whether global warming poses a threat to people's health or welfare, reversing an earlier conclusion at the insistence of the White House and officially kicking any decision on a solution to the next president and Congress.
The Democrats -- both their political wing in Congress and their journalistic wing -- reacted with befuddled fury; how dare the president try to censor Jason K. Burnett, the Democrats' best friend, when all he wanted to do was save the planet!
But we say good on President Bush that he finally found, well, the courage to tell both the Democratic mole inside the EPA and also the Supreme Court to go jump. The Democrats wanted Bush to use the Clean Air Act to "regulate" (ration and tax) carbon dioxide; but Bush said that the law was meant to cover pollutants... not perfectly natural gases that are, in fact, essential to plant life.
He says that it's up to the Democratic Congress to go through the formal process of trying to enact a new law to regulate carbon and carbonoids, if that's what they really want:
The White House on Thursday rejected the EPA's suggestion three weeks earlier that the 1970 Clean Air Act can be both workable and effective for addressing global climate change. The EPA said Friday that law is "ill-suited" for dealing with global warming.
"If our nation is truly serious about regulating greenhouse gases, the Clean Air Act is the wrong tool for the job," EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson told reporters. "It is really at the feet of Congress."
But this is one of those "don't throw me in that bridal path" moments, because the minute the Democrats try to write a globaloney bill into law, they will run smack into the buzzsaw of the economy and energy prices: The people want, and will want for the forseeable future, more drilling... not lame and transparent attempts to force an end to the use of fossil fuels.
The Democrats at least realize they don't want to take the heat (no pun) for crippling the American economy; rather, they want to force Bush to do it -- then blame him for any problems:
Congress hasn't found the will to do much about the problem either. Supporters of regulating greenhouse gases could get only 48 votes in the 100-member Senate last month. The House has held several hearings on the problem but no votes on any bill addressing it. Both major presidential candidates, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama, have endorsed variations of the approach rejected by the Senate.
What's interesting is that this is not really a fight over "anthropogenic global climate change," though that is at the heart of the dispute. The real issue here is the unitary Executive, which Democrats have failed to understand since the year Dot.
They believe, or at least claim, that the theory of the unitary Executive is that the president (the
"Executive" of the country) rules over both the other two branches, becoming supreme leader. This is risible on its face: The president cannot arbitrarily alter the Constitution, so he's stuck with the balance of powers. Rather, the theory of the unitary Executive is that the chief executive (the president) is the final voice of authority for anything emanating from an Executive department, including the EPA. Members of the agency, let alone individual, appointed members of the scientific staff, do not have authority to run their own foreign policy against the president's wishes.
Thus, it is (or should be) meaningless what a lower-level advisory committee at the EPA said about their grandiose plans; Bush has the authority to make them change their findings... especially when the science is still unsettled (scores of scientsts on "the other side" advancing very plausible counter-arguments that globaloney is just that... baloney). And especially does this president have the virtue of rightness on his side, since several other cabinet heads are totally opposed to trying to implement the Court's holding:
The EPA said it had encountered resistance from the Agriculture, Commerce, Energy and Transportation departments, as well as the White House, that made it "impossible" to respond in a timely fashion to the Supreme Court decision.
"Our agencies have serious concerns with this suggestion because it does not fairly recognize the enormous -- and, we believe, insurmountable -- burdens, difficulties, and costs, and likely limited benefits, of using the Clean Air Act" to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, the secretaries of the four agencies wrote to the White House on Wednesday.
While the GOP was in control of Congress, it sometimes seemed as if Bush's only function (apart from Iraq) was to rubber-stamp anything the Republican legislature sent him. But with the loss of both chambers in 2006, Rip Van Bush as awaked from his 40-year slumber and roared into his true power as president: I daresay he has had more success against the Democrats than against his own party.
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, July 13, 2008, at the time of 2:03 AM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/3132
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How Bush Got His Groove Back:
» Slippery deal... from Random Jottings
Dafydd has a good post on some attempted "legislation by bureaucrats" that leftists tried to slip under the radar... ...Today, President George W. Bush did something that shocked some of us: With a sweep of his presidential hand, he... [Read More]
Tracked on July 15, 2008 10:21 AM
The following hissed in response by: MerryMaven
"don't throw me in that bridal path"
Are you sure you don't mean "don't throw me in that briar patch"? As you don't seem to recall, in the Uncle Remus stories by Joel Chandler Harris, and quoting from Wikipedia because it's the easy, lazy way out, Br'er Rabbit ("Brother Rabbit") is the main character of the stories, a likable trickster prone to getting into trouble who is often opposed by Br'er Fox and Br'er Bear. In one tale, Br'er Fox constructs a lump of tar and puts clothing on it. When Br'er Rabbit comes along he addresses the "tar baby" amiably, but receives no response. Br'er Rabbit becomes offended by what he perceives as Tar Baby's lack of manners, punches it, and becomes stuck. Now that Br'er Rabbit is stuck, Fox ponders how to dispose of him. The helpless, but cunning, Br'er Rabbit pleads, "Please don't throw me in the briar patch," prompting Fox to do exactly that. As rabbits are at home in thickets, the resourceful Br'er Rabbit escapes. Using the phrases "please don't throw me in the briar patch" and "tar baby" to refer to the idea of "a problem that gets worse the more one struggles against it" became part of the wider culture of the United States in the mid-20th century.
Anway, I'm sorry if I'm being too critical here, but "bridal path" makes no sense at all. "Bridle" path makes a little more sense as horses use paths and brides not so much. But in the context of your tale, neither one fits. Global warming is a "tar baby" and the president kind of threw carbon dioxide, as the rabbit, back into the briar patch.
And as to the actual topic of your post, "Yay!" It is fools like this one in the EPA who make me think the entire concept of civil service is a bad, bad idea and we would be much better off with patronage and a complete turnover of the parasites every four or eight years.
The following hissed in response by: Roy Lofquist
But this is one of those "don't throw me in that bridal path" moments,
The actual expression is "Don't throw me in that briar patch". It comes from the 1946 Disney movie "Song of the South" which featured the tales of Joel Chandler Harris' Uncle Remus stories. The Uncle Remus segments were conventional scenes of an elderly black man and some children while the tales themselves were animations. Briefly, Br'er Fox had caught Br'er Rabbit and was trying to find the worst fate possible for the wascally wabbit. Br'er Rabbit said "anything you want, but don't throw me in that briar patch". The patch was, of course, where Br'er Rabbit was born and raised.
A song from this movie, "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah", won the 1947 Academy Award for best song.
It is not surprising that you are unaware of the origins because "Song of the South" was deemed politically incorrect by Disney management a couple of decades ago and hasn't been seen since. This is unfortunate because the movie was charming and inoffensive.
The following hissed in response by: hunter
If the President can continue pointing out that that AGW (apocalyptic global warming) is a social panic movement- that in effect the emperor has no clothes- he will have done a great service to this nation.
The highjacking of common sense and good policy making by the enviro extremists is no more evident than in the scam being perpetrated by hansen, gore, & co.
Ending their reign of bs will do us all good.
And if it get your governator flushed out, so much the better.
The following hissed in response by: Karmi
I daresay he has had more success against the Democrats than against his own party.
Agree! When the Republicans controlled both houses, they were about as useless as they are now...well, probably more useless than they are now.
The above hissed in response by: Karmi at July 13, 2008 11:40 AM
The following hissed in response by: Baggi
My mom looked for years for the movie Song of the South and eventually found it on Ebay.
It's a real shame that it hasn't been digitally re-done and re-released. The odd thing is though that if you go to Disneyland, that have the water ride that has all the characters from the song of the south in it. Silly.
The following hissed in response by: Ogemaniac
Cripple the economy my @#$@#. I pay FIVE DOLLARS extra per month for green electricity. FIVE FREAKING DOLLARS. And that is in a state with poor wind and solar resources. Yeah, surely our whole economy would collapse if we all had to give up a cup of Starbuck's joe or some piece of Chinese junk each month in order to quit spewing CO2, mercury, particulates, sulfur, nitrogen, and all sorts of radioactive garbage into the atmosphere.
The following hissed in response by: Dishman
I'd be interested in seeing how your "Five Dollars" is derived. I question the correctness of your assertion. The key questions are as follows:
1) Is it actually "green"?
2) Does it have swing load capabilities? If it doesn't, then it requires swing loaders, which aren't green.
2) Is the base load supply green? If it's a variable supply, without a green base load, it's not actually green, because it requires additional swing load supply that is less clean than base load.
3) Is it subsidized? This could include direct and regulatory subsidies. If it is, then someone else is helping to pay the cost.
4) Is it scaleable? Hydro meets all the above criteria, but it's not scaleable. We're already maxed out, with all the economically viable locations already used.
The following hissed in response by: David M
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 07/14/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.
The above hissed in response by: David M at July 14, 2008 8:33 AM
The following hissed in response by: MerryMaven
"Song of the South" was the Disneyfication of the "Uncle Remus" stories by (or collected by) Joel Chandler Harris. They were based on, if not actual, African folk tales. The Disney movie, no matter how often I find myself humming "Zippity doo dah," was not original.
It is good to see that the Wren's Nest, the home of Joel Chandler Harris, which I visited as a child, is still there in Atlanta: http://www.wrensnestonline.com/
The following hissed in response by: cdquarles
In proper Southern, it is said thusly: "Why, sir, do wha' ya will wit' me, jes' don' throw'm in dat dere briar patch."
The above hissed in response by: cdquarles at July 15, 2008 11:03 AM
The following hissed in response by: LarryD
CO2 is a product of human respiration, if it is a pollutant, then humans are pollution sources just by breathing.
So, Ogemaniac, if you want to reduce your pollution, quit exhaling.
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved