As IF Times

link Obama gives dire warning at start of nuclear summit – latimes.com.

I am reminded of the famous courtroom scene in the movie, A Few Good Men starring Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson.  In the scene, the dialogue goes something like this:

Cruise:  ” Would you say this placed Private Santiago in danger?”

Nicholson: ” Yes”

Cruise: “Grave danger?”

Nicholson: “Is there any other kind?”

Since Obama has come into office, has anyone noticed that any issue that he addresses will have dire consequences if not immediately acted upon?  There appears to be a stock speech about how awful things are but not as bad as they will become if, “we don’t act decisively”, or the other chestnut, “act swiftly”.   We’ve heard this pattern of rhetorical cliches as applied to the TARP  scheme, to the stimulus package, to healthcare, to global warming, and now to nuclear proliferation.  It gets old and if his credibility has not been spent with the first 1 or 2 dire warnings, its currency is much deflated now. 

None of this would be as galling if it weren’t for the fact that all of the solutions offered are wrong and in direct contrast to his stated rhetoric.  People who keep track of these things may notice that there has no been no bipartisan support for any of his policies, there has been no transparency in policy drafts,  a conspicuous disregard for public opinion and worst of all,  the ratcheting up of government debt and influence upon Americans.  The invoking of the “dire consequences” clause should not be an excuse to implement any old policy that happens to fall into an ideological agenda.  It’s as if he thinks that wrapping everything in an apocalyptic theme will alarm people enough to support his policy directions.  I can’t recall any other president in recent history with as much pessimism as this guy.

I wonder if the hyperbole is something they teach in Harvard law school or is part of his natural character to over dramatize everything.  For instance, I wonder if he has invoked the dire consequences line to his girls when they are reluctant to go to bed.  “Let me be clear, you must act swiftly and go to bed or there will be dire consequences”.  What is interesting about the whole scenario is that the president has NO HISTORY of being able to navigate out of any mess much less those with dire consequences.  There is no track record of any success in building or turning around any venture.  It can be said however that he has a particular familiarity and expertise in using public funds to build a bureaucracy.  Talk about your dire consequences.

link UN process in danger unless world agrees on climate change – Telegraph.

Talk about flogging a dead horse.  Someone is paying too much money for these guys to continue pushing an agenda that has been entirely discredited.  This is reminiscent of the penultimate scene in the classic movie Trading Places with Eddie Murphy when a scheme to manipulate markets is exposed and the two manipulators are undone.  In the movie, the two individuals are screaming and pleading to have the traders come back after the markets have closed and their personal financial doom is sealed.

How pathetic that money is still being funneled into an agenda that has been exposed to have no merit, dubious science and shrinking public support.  However, closer inspection will reveal the real reason this charade continues to live.

The wives want to go shopping.

Yes, the real reason that these junkets are held is so that the wives can visit new and exotic places.  Copenhagen isn’t the hottest of places to shop and undoubtedly, the spouses complained.  “Why don’t you have the next conference somewhere warm and tropical.  If global warming is so pervasive, take me somewhere warm!’

By sheer coincidence, the next great summit of intellectual hand wringing (talk about mixed metaphors) is planned for Cancun Mexico because Palm Springs was sold out.  Really? Not Greenland or Inuvik?  For that matter, why not just do a skype teleconference? It’s a bit more credible to bleat about global warming if you’re  not using barrels of jet fuel, gasoline for limos, paying for fancy hotels and eating cows, which as we’ve discovered, don’t contribute to warming.  I’d be more convinced if the poobahs came to a conference via viking rowboats wearing only hemp garments and meeting in a public square under candlelight.

I’m not really sure who this crowd is catering to when they issue dire and dark warnings, as if the public will continue to take them seriously.  This plea from Yvo de Boer, the head of some goofy committee at the UN,

“… the world cannot afford another failure.  Copenhagen was the last get-out-of-jail-free card and we cannot afford another failure in Cancun,” he said.  “I think if we see another failure in Cancun, that will cause a serious loss of confidence in the ability of this process to deliver.”

How could Copenhagen be the last stand if they have to go to Cancun for the final, final last stand?  I think after Mexico, the wives will want to go to Hong Kong for the final, final, final last stand.  What would be nice is if they at least not call these meetings Climate Conferences but Climate Frauds, or CF’s.  There has been suggestion that they be really called Cluster…. well, never mind.

Update, December 2014  Carbon Footprint in Lima