No new (DIRECT) taxes

Via the WSJ's ECO:nomics Conference:

A worldwide cap-and-trade system to control carbon emissions would prove more effective than a global carbon tax, Caio Koch-Weser, former German deputy finance minister and vice chairman of Deutsche Bank, told the WSJ’s ECO:nomics conference Friday.

Mr. Koch-Weser said one problem with trying to impose a carbon tax around the world is that it would be difficult to guarantee the revenues from it would be used to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A cap-and-trade system, on the other hand, relies on businesses trading credits to help keep down emissions.

Of course the true problem (from a politician's point of view) with trying to impose a carbon tax around the world is the direct nature of such a tax on the individual. We can't have that a time when the proles around the world are restless about their own economic futures. Best for government to tax them indirectly by having the costs of a cap and trade system buried deep in the price of end products for the consumer.

The current epoch of history can be called many things, "Profiles in Courage" is not one of them.

Quo Vadis

Wanting to have it both ways (as always)…

• It's an outrage! Rush Limbaugh is the de facto head of the Republican Party!

— So why doesn't Barack Obama debate him?

• Him?! Hah! Snort! Rushbo is nothing but a radio talk show host!

— If he is nothing more than that, why do they make such a big deal about him?!

• Why, you ask?! "Why"?! Because Rush is the de facto head of the Republican Party, that's why!!!

— So why doesn't Barack Obama debate him?

• Him?! Hah! Snort! Rushbo is nothing but a…

Etc… Etc… Etc… Etc…

What We Want (and What We Don't Want)

What we conservatives want is for America to prevail, to go forward — to succeed.

When (say) George W Bush does (or did) something to make America succeed, we supported him (or we supported that policy).

When GWB did something to make America fail, we wanted him (or his policy, rather) to fail.

It is exactly the same with Barack Obama — whatever party he is a member of.

If and when BHO does something to make America succeed, we support that policy (and thus the president).

When BHO does something to make America fail, we hope to see that policy (and thus the president) fail.

What on Earth (!) is so controversial about that?!?!

Didn't untold numbers of liberals want Dubya to fail for the past 8 years?!? And his administration?!? And the Iraq War?!?

Why is that fine, even laudable, while conservatives' opposition to policies is nothing short of an outrage and of treason!? Why the double standards?!

To quote Rush Limbaugh (at CPAC):

Now, about my still-to-me mysteriously controversial comment that I hope President Obama fails. I was watching the Super Bowl. And as you know, I love the Pittsburgh Steelers. [Cheers and Applause] So they have this miraculous scoring drive that puts them up by four, 15 seconds left. Kurt Warner on the field for the Cardinals. And I sure as heck want you to know I hope he failed. I did not want the Cardinals to win. I wanted Warner to make the biggest fool of himself possible. I wanted a sack, I wanted anything. I wanted the Steelers to win. I wanted to win. I wanted the Cardinals to fail.

This notion that I want the President to fail, folks, this shows you a sign of the problem we've got. That's nothing more than common sense and to not be able to say it, why in the world do I want what we just described, rampant government growth indebtedness, wealth that's not even being created yet that is being spent, what is in this? What possibly is in this that anybody of us wants to succeed? Did the Democrats want the war on Iraq to fail!

CROWD: Yes!

Rush: They certainly did. They not only wanted the war in Iraq to fail, they proclaimed it a failure. There's Dingy Harry Reid waiving a white flag: [doing Harry Reid impression] "This war is lost. This war is" — [Cheers and Applause] They called General Petraeus a liar before he even testified. Mrs. Clinton — [Crowd Booing] — said she had to, willingly suspend disbelief in order to listen to Petraeus. We're in the process of winning the war. The last thing they wanted was to win. They hoped George Bush failed. So what is so strange about being honest to say that I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed? [Applause]

Let me add a caveat here. My friends, I know what's going on. I know what's going on. We're in the aspects here of an historic presidency. I know that. But let me be honest again. I got over the historical aspects of this in November. President Obama is our president. President Obama stands for certain things. I don't care, he could be a Martian. He could be from Michigan, I don't know -- just kidding. Doesn't matter to me what his race is. It doesn't matter. He's liberal is what matters to me. And his articulated -- his articulated plans scare me. Now, I understand we can't say we want the President to fail, Mr. Limbaugh. That's like saying -- this is the voice of the New Castrati, by the way, guys who have lost their guts. You can't say Mr. Limbaugh that you want the President to fail because that's like saying you want the country to fail. It's the opposite. I want the country to survive. I want the country to succeed. [Cheers and Applause] [Crowd Chanting "USA" ]

I want the country to survive as we have known it, as you and I were raised in it, is what I mean. Now, I have been called -- and I can take it. Pioneers take the arrows, I don't mind what anybody says about me, any time ever. I don't have time for it. I don't give other people the power to offend me. And you shouldn't either, by the wasted time being offended.[Applause]

I mean, there's some people you can't say you want the President to fail. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States, the Democrat Party has actively not just sought the failure of Republican presidents and policies and now wars for the first time, the Democrat Party doesn't stop at failure. Talk to Judge Robert Bork or Justice Clarence Thomas about how they tried to destroy lives, reputations and character, and I'm supposed to say I don't want the President to fail? [Applause] We're in for a real battle. We are talking about the United States of America -- and there will always be an America, don't misunderstand me -- we're talking about it remaining the country we were all born into and reared and grown into. And it's under assault. It's always under assault. But it's never been under assault like this from within before. And it's a serious, serious battle.

EUtopia at a Glance

It might have something to do with building ridiculous expectations of men or being just plain insufferable, but it seems that a majority of young German men would forego their hoochie mamas for broadband and Rosey palm and her five sisters.

The New Puritanism

Gordon Brown most polluting EU leader. That said, Boeings, as opposed to brand X, are irrationally impied to be at fault.

Not unlike the songs of lider-praise that open and close the north Korean broadcast day, an unrelated requisite recitation of moral purity is tossed in at the end of the wire piece:

The EU sees itself as the world leader on environmental issues, and the bloc's member states last December reaffirmed their commitment to cut carbon emissions and improve energy efficiency by 20 percent, both by 2020, in a bid to fight global warming.

It need not be said that one must state this wherever possible because the programming is so deep that one need not write such a rule. George Romero would recognize this behavior right away. It can also be found here in this item where the matter of Europeans stiffing the 3rd world with the bill to “act on the climate change” that they’re employing transnational bodies to force them to do.

At the same time, many of those reductions committed to by the EU will not really be performed domestically, as a large chunk of the 20 or 30 percent will come from so-called carbon offsets - essentially where wealthy countries pay poorer ones to make their carbon cuts for them.

What will be especially funny is when they run out of deprived populations to project their non-existent crises on.

They Love Death the Way You Love Life

It’s par for the course at Libération PropagandaStaffel. Conservative politicians get death-threats, and most of the commenters on Libé’s site cheer. Some of them buy into the constructed myth that since being a citizen “requires” one to praise Sarko and is not permitted to criticize him, and that the kook sending the threatening letters is “resisting”. Never mind the fact that they man foaming at the mouth in the comments has somehow, magically, escaped the imaginary thought-police of his fevered brow.

But it doesn’t really sound like he’s much of a whacko, not compared to most of the flock... The rambling letters apparently blames the recipients, all of them UMP officeholders and appointees, of enacting fascist policies and all are festooned with bad spelling and grammar. In other words, they were written by a garden variety French leftist.

Among other threats, the letters say: 'You think you have control of your lives, well no, your lives and your families' lives are in our hands.'

It was not clear whether the author was making any specific demand or defending any stated cause.

Of course not! What with that fetish for control of any and all affairs, the perp appears to be promoting the radical left’s social policy, and mirroring their love of violence, so long as their political opponents, families, neighbors, pets, anyone who agrees with them, and their pets are the victims.

Maybe Some of Them Find Enforcement Erotic

Long famous for having a law for every occasion, Germans start toying with genetic cataloging and profiling. The jack-booted thugs are coming after your Aunt Lucille’s incontinent Pomeranian! Have they no shame?!?

Threatening to Evaporate into that Great Transnational Nothingness

Isn’t it funny? Europeans are the single group of people worldwide most interested in outsourcing their security and justice to the UN of the ICC in the name of consensus, cohesion, and global sameness. They also have a penchance for preferring excessive central control for no good reason over Federalism, and yet have no meaningful EU institutions with any sort of government powers.

Europe may now be "whole and free" after the collapse of communism. But the European Union is not a country, and the deep global contraction is stimulating nationalism, not consensus.

With uncertain leadership and few powerful collective institutions, the union is struggling with the strains this economic crisis has inevitably produced among 27 different countries with different economic histories. The traditional concept of "solidarity," of one for all, is being undermined by protectionist pressures from political leaders with national constituencies and agendas.

Just when you thought that you couldn’t understand they’re trying to do by building a transnational super-duper-über-state, they proved themselves to be especially unremarkable and simplistic. They’re even repeating the centuries-old practice of selling each other up the river for a nickel.

Within the larger European Union, fissures are growing between older members and newer ones, especially those that lived under the stifling yoke of Soviet socialism only 20 years ago. Some countries of Central Europe, like the Czech Republic and Poland, are doing relatively well. Others, like Hungary, Romania and the Baltic states, are in a state of near-meltdown. But only two newer members - tiny Slovenia and Slovakia - are protected by being inside the euro zone, and there was little support Sunday for changing the rules to allow more to join quickly.

Rumsfeld’s flippant comment about old and new Europe seem as correct no as it did then, and does the traditional fear new Europe has for being, once again, thrown into the Bear’s mouth in the hope that it will make him a vegetarian.

The natives would care,but they’re too busy trying to re-terraform that moonscape of theirs for mother Gaia.

Last year, a spate of brutal, unsolved "rabbit murders" left 40 bunnies near the city of Dortmund dead.

That’s not just a crime against cuteness and “nature” as it’s understood by people who have no natural environment left, it’s practically a serial crime spree. Let’s hope that helplessness and despair don’t take root, and that they can convince themselves that this is all just another perfectly acceptable cow-like mutilation by aliens. Then again, they might be able to take away from this one of those ‘Like Lions for Lambs” harangues that will clue them in on the need for an east-west détante within the EU:

In an echo of the city's old cold war split, the Tagesspiegel daily wrote Monday that hares in the eastern side of the once divided city are now competing with rabbits for food in the western side.

Some Posts...

...just seem to write themselves.

EU to EU: Drop Dead

The result of yesterday's mini-summit in Brussels hits on many levels:

European Union leaders, led by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, rejected a call by Hungary for a sweeping bailout of Eastern Europe, as the bloc struggled to find consensus on an approach to the spiraling financial crisis at a summit Sunday.

Now, there are many valid reasons on both sides of the issue which led to the rejection of this request of some EU members by other EU members. However, the part that galls:

But both the bailout and calls for Eastern European countries to join the euro sooner were coolly received by Western European nations. Ms. Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy both separately suggested that Eastern countries should look elsewhere -- to the International Monetary Fund, for instance -- for help.

The World Bank is also mentioned as a source for possible bailout funds for the EU's very own Eastern European member states. Of course, the largest provider of funding to international financial institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank would be .... the United States. So, the denizens of solidarity, the champions of One Europe and the absolute true believers in an inescapable march to an ever closer union will turn not to Brussels but to Washington if/when a bailout of their very own member states is required.

The dog whistle to alert the US taxpayer that a US bailout of EU member states is coming will be sounded this week when UK PM Gordon Brown visits Washington attempt to drum up US support for a "Global New Deal". If one hears the phrase "strengthening global financial institutions" coming out of the PM's mouth, the US taxpayer should take that as a cue to instinctively reach for their wallet (or what is left of it).

There is one bit of good luck on the side of the US taxpayer in this developing story. The EU has unfortunately chosen one of their most hapless emissaries to palm off sell this deal to the Americans. It is just that every personal appearance by the UK PM of late has only ended in tears for those in attendance.

Next Time On “Who Wants to be Called a Superpower”

=Sarko managed a very insightful comment at the recent Munich security conference, albeit something absolutely no action can be expected will be taken on by the patchwork of continental statelets that just want humanity to hold them in high regard for no clear reason:

Does Europe want peace or does it want to be left in peace? I’d like you to think about this. Do you want peace or do you want to be left in peace? It isn’t the same policy, it isn’t the same strategy, and the consequences aren’t the same. If you want peace, you have to give yourselves the means to exist as an economic, financial, political and military power. You want to be left in peace? If so, you have to curl up very small, stay in your corner, cover your eyes, block your ears, and not talk too loudly, and for a time you will be left in peace. Until the moment when it’s discovered that you haven’t got the means to defend yourself. But at that point, it will be too late.

The overwhelming response he got at that security conference was that Europe indeed wanted to be left in peace. Sobeit. The very fact that they’re having a conference to discuss a conference is ultimate bureaucratic prize. Especially since the Strasbourg/Kehl conference is going almost certainly to be a Kabuki theater scene of the Europeans being asked to share some burden in Afghanistan and knowing from their pre-emptive strike that they will say no.

What is that creeping around in that world view of the large part of the European leisure class? Simple: achieve peace by eliminating whatever small capacity their governments still have to defend their populations and interests. Here we see that the reflex is so ingrained and requiring no thought that they even oppose the holding of a conference where most of their governments will be resoundingly refusing to oppose the Taliban and al Queda. I guess identity politics, and class and religious warfare is honky-dorey with these nuts because they consider themselves non-participants and non-members of humanity anyway. Either that or violently bumping your fist in the air for peace does something for them. To each his own. I guess their sexual proclivities aren’t doing it for them anymore.

Further on the medievalism theme, we find this unintentionally funny headline: Strasbourg prepares for siege as Anti-NATO forces gather.

“There is no question of ruining Strasbourg, but NATO cannot claim to occupy a town if we cannot do the same”.

Keep an eye out for head-smashing and public car-b-ques for peace. Sure sounds peaceful and super-national to me, what with all of that imagining there’s no countries, and such – especially since the item is hosted Russia Today, a state-operated media arm of a passive-aggressive mobocracy with nukes.