Andrew Bolt, The Herald Sun (Australia)
I ONCE asked the boss of a big Australian company working on Hong Kong’s new airport what he’d advise young engineers back home.
“Leave,” he snapped.
Our culture had gone sour. Development was now a sin. If you wanted to build stuff, forget Australia.
In fact, Hong Kong showed it could squash an island into a giant landing strip and build a huge bridge, underwater rail link and massive airport in the time it took in Australia to get an environmental effects statement for an extension to a milk bar.
But what we’ve seen this week from the Government now beats all that for sheer, mindless stupidity, as deep-sigh green dreaming triumphs over jobs, trade and the spirit of adventure.
I’m talking about the report the Government released that declared an end to any dream of turning the nation’s vast north into a food bowl.
And that’s when you get the first clue that what’s really holding back agriculture in the far north is not the dry season, but green philosophy .
Sure, the report concedes, it’s true that it rains up to 2m a year in some parts of the north, but the CSIRO had said that by 2030 global warming would make the region “hotter and largely drier”. So there’ll be less water to dam.
Oh, really? But the kind of regional climate models the CSIRO uses for its typically scary predictions can’t even predict past weather and “cannot be credible”, as a National Technical University of Athens study said in 2008
And the report itself concedes the rainfall has actually become more intense, not less: “In recent years (1996 to 2007), rainfall intensity (rainfall per rainy day) has increased slightly across the north compared to the past (1930 to 2007)…”
Jay Ambrose, Real Clear Politics
It seems to me that Obama has a controlling idea — the efficacy and responsibility of big government in taking care of people — and that his foremost political value is equality, not just equality under the law or even equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome.
Next: Obama the saint. In his meeting with Republicans, he wanted everyone present to understand that he relies on nothing but facts and logic in his proposals while his critics rely instead on “talking points,” arguments meant to fool people instead of educate them.
His tactic of blaming his predecessor for most of his woes is significantly off base.
He is in bed with a number of special interests, including the lawyer lobby and ethanol producers.
His idea of bipartisanship is agree with him or shut up.
Jennifer Rubin writes about the latest poll results form the Washington Post…
By a 57-to-36 percent margin, voters are pleased that the Democrats no longer have a filibuster majority. Ominously for incumbent Democrats, 56 percent are looking around for an alternative to their representative and only 26 percent approve of the job Congress is doing.
These numbers are even worse than they might appear, considering that the respondents were “adults” — not registered or likely voters. Moreover, the sample included only 26 percent Republicans.
Obama against for against bonuses
Obama angry about bonuses…
…Unless “I know both those guys”
But he backtracks when he realized this doesn’t sound very good…
Victoria McGrane, Politico
Recognizing how damaging the comments could be, the White House press team launched a full-fledged pushback, saying that Bloomberg took the remarks out of context. They also posted an entry on the White House blog to clarify the remarks, saying Obama doesn’t agree with the big bonuses and has been saying the same thing dating back to the 2008 campaign.
But Obama’s comments have angered activists and policy experts on the left who say Dimon or Blankfein are the kinds of Wall Street bankers who helped bring the financial system to its knees with risky practices – the very kinds of people Obama has targeted in his recent anti-bonus comments.