Lest we forget...

...where socialism can take us...on the 70th anniversary of the beginning of WW2...at 4:45 a.m. on Sept. 1, 1939, to be precise—the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein began to shell the Polish military base at Westerplatte. For the Germans, for the Poles, and for the British and French, who immediately declared war on Germany, this was the beginning of World War II. The Soviet Union, having signed a secret agreement with Nazi Germany, did not declare war but was itself preparing to invade Poland and the Baltic States. Which it did, two and a half weeks later, on Sept. 17... The former Allies prefer to remember the bits of the war—D-Day, for example—that contribute to their memory of the 1945 Triumph of Democracy, preferring to forget that the war's initial raison d'être, the independence of Poland and the freedom of Central Europe, was not really achieved until 1989... The majority of Russians, a recent poll shows, do not know that the USSR invaded Poland in 1939...more from Slate here...

...nor I would guess do the majority of the rest of us. Perhaps we all need to reflect on the fact that the Soviet Union today is still attempting to recover from decades of a corrupt ideology, and that Nazi Germany followed a similar course, taking the world down a road to hell...

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," Santayana's Law of Repetitive Consequences...

...and how does all this relate to climate change/global warming ?

...I don’t believe that the (U.S.) Administration’s sense of urgency is driven by Copenhagen. Copenhagen simply gives them another argument for swift passage of a bill – any bill. Instead, I think that they need to act quickly before:(a) Obama loses any more popular support(b) Additional data comes in confirming the fact that global temperatures have stopped rising(c) People have time to review the (Waxman Markey) bill and the facts.
We know that the bill is not about reducing global warming since even its supporters admit that it will have a negligible impact. We know that it’s not about raising money since the government is giving away most of the emissions rights. The most likely motive is to shift power to Washington – which is in line with the direction of the Administration’s other actions. Their strategy of moving quickly, attempting to curtail debate, and vilifying the opposition is also consistent with their actions in pushing for the stimulus package and for national health care. I think the goal in each of these cases has been/is to get something – anything – passed in order to get the federal foot in the door...more here...

Here's the bottom line...

...any politician, of any country, who would vote for radical environmentalist legislation that would cripple their own economy, while literally doing absolutely nothing to reduce "global warming" should be kept away from sharp objects for their own self-protection. In NZ and Australia similar legislation to the US Waxman-Markey Bill is being looked at askance. Analysis of Waxman-Markey concludes ...in the year 2050 with an 83% emissions reduction the temperature reduction is (estimated) nine hundredths of one degree Fahrenheit, or two years of avoided warming...all together a scientifically meaningless, and economically ruinous project. It has to be asked if the Senators supporting such snake-oil lunacy are doing so with their eyes and ears open or shut, and whether they have any concern for the people they pretend to represent...more, here... and, while the warmists get more desperate, they talk of "treason". Bjorn Lomborg replies...reasonable people can differ over their interpretation of the Waxman-Markey bill. Even if we set aside its masses of pork-barrel spending and analyses that show it may allow more emissions in the US for the first decades, there are more fundamental problems with this legislation.
At a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars annually, it will have virtually no impact on climate change. If all of the bill’s many provisions were entirely fulfilled, economic models show it would reduce the temperature by the end of the century by 0.11 degrees centigrade – reducing warming by less than 4 percent.
Even if every Kyoto-obligated country passed its own, duplicate Waxman-Markey bills – which is implausible and would incur significantly higher costs – the global reduction would amount to just 0.22 degrees centigrade by the end of this century. The reduction in global temperature would not be measurable in a hundred years, yet the cost would be significant and payable now.
Is it really treason against the planet to express some skepticism about whether this is the right way forward? Is it treason to question throwing huge sums of money at a policy that will do virtually no good in a hundred years? Is it unreasonable to point out that the inevitable creation of trade barriers that will ensue from Waxman-Markey could eventually cost the world 10 times more than the damage climate change could ever have wrought?
Today’s focus on ineffective and costly climate policies shows poor judgment. But I would never want to shut down discussion about these issues – whether it is with Gore, Hansen, or Krugman. Everybody involved in this discussion should spend more time building and acknowledging good arguments, and less time telling others what they cannot say. Wanting to shut down the discussion is simply treason against reason...more here...

Virgin sacrifices to appease the Earth gods...

...are in order according to Iowahawk's interpretation of the US Waxman-Markey Bill. Whether the bizzare android alien Mr Waxman (right; and this is him after extensive surgery) will officiate at the ritual sacrifices is still unknown. In the meantime House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended the bill, saying that "...it is critical that we do something immediately to show we are serious about solving this climate crisis. Without burnt offerings of taxes and virgins, Gaia will smite us all in her angry burning wrath. So let me just say to the corporate and virgin special interest groups - don't come crying to us in 400 years, when our temperatures are up almost 1 degree celsius."
Pelosi denied the bill was anti-consumer, pointing out it contains specific infrastructure and job creation funds. It specifies 500,000 unionized positions to construct a planned 300-foot tall National Eco Pyramid and Virgin Sacrifice Altar in Youngstown, Ohio, as well as funds to train over 20,000 youth volunteer earth-priests in live beating heart removal...
"The rider simply recognizes that virgin members of Congress are often so busy doing the work of the people that we have little opportunity for actual sexual intercourse," said Waxman. "For example, were I not focusing on this crucial legislation, I would totally be porking some sexy, sexy ladies. No, really, I'm serious. I would be. Stop laughing."
Bill co-sponsor Edward Markey (D-MA) said that even if enacted into law, the bill allows a 9 month grace period for current virgins to change their sacrifice eligibility status.
"Easy for him to say," complained Kevin Warren, a 34-year old Green Bay Packer fanatic from Fon du Lac, Wisconsin. "You try getting laid with a foam rubber cheese hat, green face paint and Favre jersey..." ...more from the maestro here...

...and Bjorn Lomborg on the colossal rort of taxpayer money that is the climate industrial complex...American electricity utility Duke Energy, a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, has long promoted a U.S. cap-and-trade scheme. Yet the company bitterly opposed the Warner-Lieberman bill in the U.S. Senate that would have created such a scheme because it did not include European-style handouts to coal companies. The Waxman-Markey bill in the House of Representatives promises to bring back the free lunch...more here...