Fracking Karl Rove to Pa.: "Climate is gone"
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Fracking Karl Rove to Pa.: "Climate is gone"
You know where Karl Rove spent the day after the all-important mid-term election? Here in the state of Pennsylvania -- Pittsburgh to be exact -- gnawing on steak and potatoes and running a political victory lap with the fracking polluters who can now befowl our state's water supply with impugnity for the next couple of years, aided in no small part by the $38 million in mostly secret donations from large corporations that was donated to Rove's American Crossroads outfit that ran attack ads smearing congressional candidates who support sensible environmental laws. In celebrating Tueaday's GOP win with the Marcellus Shale frackers, Rove showed himself a man who not only knows where his cow flesh is seared but where his bread is buttered.
Here's what Rove told them:
Great choice of words -- "climate is gone." Especially since 2010 is currently tied for the warmest year on record -- nothing to see here. Ironically, the attack ads that Rove funded before America voted made no mention of issues like global warming or hydraulic fracking, as they were too busy telling whoppers about incumbent Democrats gutting Medicare. It is only now, after the votes are counted, that Rove can safely boast what this election was really about. By the way, do you know what else contributes to global warming? Steak and potatoes. Not that fracking Karl Rove would care.
Comments (129)
Taiwan? Yup.
Singapore? Yup.
Malaysia? Yup.
Thailand? Yup.
New Zealand? Actually, I couldn't find info on any stimulus plan in New Zealand.
Maybe that's proof of RG's theory. Sure, the other 31 countries I looked at had stimulus plans, but New Zealand didn't, so RG must be right that it isn't accepted economics that stimulus works, because one country out of 32 didn't put a stimulus into effect.
Oh, my sides.— Talking point sleuth- Most, if not all, of those countries are in the process of slashing spending.— RG
- Sweden? Yup.
Norway? Yup.
Finland? Yup.
Netherlands? Yup.
Portugal? Yup.
Ireland? Yup.
Switzerland? Yup.
— Talking point sleuth - "If this were accepted economic fact that stimulus works, then every nation would be trying it now."
List of G-20 countries that have had stimulus plans as of March 2009:
Argentina
Australia
Brazil
Canada
China
France
Germany
India
Indonesia
Italy
Japan
Korea
Mexico
Russia
Saudi Arabia
South Africa
Spain
Turkey
UK
US
— Talking point sleuth - Well, the rich will spend or invest it. I just don't get stimulus worshipers. If this were accepted economic fact that stimulus works, then every nation would be trying it now and/or we'd have alot more historical data on past events.— RG
"Past that, there's still no guarantee people would spend the stimulus money." True but it has been shown that stimulus aimed at lower and middle income levels is far more effective than one aimed at upper income levels.— Les Ismore- Of course, Reich's prescription for stimulus is dead wrong. The combination of QE2 and another round of stimulus would almost definitely lead to price inflation. Past that, there's still no guarantee people would spend the stimulus money. They may simply choose to pay down debt.— RG
- Hmm, why do I think TPS is not a scientist or an engineer?— pj katauskas
- TPS, here is the link http://robertreich.org/post/1474949428— Les Ismore
- "Blind squirrel, RG, blind squirrel." Actually, TPS I've been arguing for awhile that the actions of the Fed are a prime cause in our boom bust cycles. Its basically a tenant of Austrian economics. Although QE2 doesn't completely fit the bill, I think you've heard me talk about cheap credit before.
— RG - Looks like Gary Johnson is gonna run in 2012. May actually vote again. http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/04/possible-2012-gop-presidential-candidate-gary-johnson-opens-up-to-thedc/— RG
Global warming is a religion. Algore the high priest. Money is the goal. It's all based on computer models, not historical trends and evidence. These charlatans try to take a snapshot in time and try to use it as a basis for convenient "facts". I seriously doubt that the little amount of "pollution" avaialble to end the little ice age of the middle ages. Yes, we did a lousy job for a longtime of cleaning up after ourselves. This about one thing MONEY.— georgel- "TPS, my chicken little osts..."
Blind squirrel, RG, blind squirrel.— Talking point sleuth - {{{---}}} And to claim that all non-global warming believers are funded by oil companies and the like is the kind of garbage Will and others would have you believe. {{{---}}}
Look again, Greg. What's hilarious is that you're lecturing on inaccurate science.
First, you inaccurately generalize about what thousands of scientists have to say.
Then you, laughably, claim that the inaccuracy of your claims is meaninglesshe.
Then you inaccurately characterize what I said and then rail against your inaccurate characterization.
Then you inaccurately portray how many scientists say that AGW is likely.
Then you talk about Al Gore, as if what he says is the same thing as what climate scientists say (which is what you were railing against earlier).
Then you go on to cap and trade, which is a separate issue. Arguing about what measures should be taken is not the same discussion as to the accuracy of scientific theories. A worthwhile discussion, but a separate discussion.
And finally, all the while, you ignore the abundant amount of misinformation put out there by "deniers."— Talking point sleuth - A nice overview:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20847— Talking point sleuth - There is no difference between scientist whos say there is 100% proof, and those who go on TV telling us humanity COULD go extinct, they are ringing the fear bell to get people to buy into an agenda to cut carbon emissions. Good or bad they are using their perspective, not fact, to do this. And to claim that all non-global warming believers are funded by oil companies and the like is the kind of garbage Will and others would have you believe. There are thousands of scientists who are against the man made global warming idea. I for one believe humankind's GHG emissions may have a small, but certainly not catastrophic immpact. And that is something we can easily mitigate via nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, and energy efficiency technologies we already have. I would call natural gas a clean fuel compared to petroleum not, certain no where near emission free. The simple fact is that global warming and large scale dangerous, especially after Al Gore's propaganda piece, are now in the public mind as something real, when its nothing more than one possible theory, which has no more real data to prove it than any of hundreds of others. Cap & Trade, on the other hand, is even more of a farce. It is a horrible system to promote emissions reductions and creation of renewable energy because it allows for a tremendous amount of hands to go into the pot. The easiest and most transparent way to promote renewable / reduce emissions would be through a renewable energy credit system similar to what NJ has. You mandate energy producers to have a certain amount of green energy in their portfolio and if not buy credits from those who do produce green energy (via solar on their roofs, etc) it clearly take the carbon fee from the carbon producer directly to the entity that has invested in green technology.— Greg S
- TPS, my chicken little osts don't end with a pleading for increased government power. It is interesting that in regards to the shale, you call for more regulation while acknowledging the ineffectiveness of regulators.— RG
- QE2 could be another stealth bailout for the banks as well. http://mises.org/daily/4787— RG
- Never mind - I found a couple of articles (including one by Reich). The argument does make sense, and it does seem like yet another move to enhance corporate profits (M and As and stock portfolios) at the expense of everyone else. Too bad Obama sold out to the corporate lackeys rather than people like Reich.— Talking point sleuth
- Les - RG posts Chicken Little posts on a daily basis, but hey, stopped clock/monkey at a keyboard, right?
Anyway, got a link to the Reich article?— Talking point sleuth 
Are Les and RG agreeing now???? Gotta love the spirit of bi-partisanship!!!!— bird11
Ah yes. The GOP is obviously going to bear down and focus on jobs.
...... Whats the unemployement rate currently ?.... and how many illegals are working here currently ? both issues go hand in hand.— PAEnglish- No TPS, RG is right on this. Was just reading an article by Professor Reich and his view matches RG. This could create anothe stock bubble unless accompanied by some kind of (dare I say the word) fiscal stimulus.— Les Ismore
- {{{---}}} The San Antonio Congressman who is in line to become chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee is promising 'a number of investigations and oversight committee actions' which he vows will 'hold the administration accountable,’...Smith said that reform of the 14th Amendment, which grants automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants who are born in the U.S., is also an issue his committee may take up under his chairmanship. The 14th Amendment is a hot button issue for conservatives who call for restricting immigration. {{{---}}}
Ah yes. The GOP is obviously going to bear down and focus on jobs.— Talking point sleuth - Printing money and handing it to bankers to bid up asset prices or chase risky returns usually doesn't end well.— RG
- Hmmm. RG thinks the sky is falling. Never seen that before.— Talking point sleuth
- "Quantitative Easing anyone? " Most likely gonna cause another asset bubble. Emerging markets are panicking.
— RG - Les - I am still waiting for an answer to this:
"Remember, we have 8 years of cleaning we have to do." ...Les, can you tell me specifically what they 8 years are??? I assume you mean 2001-2008 but I'm not sure since obviously the people with the big boy pants were running the country in 07-08 when the Democrats controlled the House & Senate. George W. Bush never had the number of Republicans in the House and Senate that Obama had in the 111th Congress - why couldn't the Democrats be the "party of no" and stop all the evil Bush plans? Only two plausible answers I have is that they either 1) agreed with Bush or 2) lack the b@lls to do what they thought was right for the country.......which one of those answers makes you want to have them running things???
— bird11 - With the Repubs in the house, fiscal stimulus will be off the table so one has to wonder, do they want to keep the pain going until 2012?— Les Ismore
- Quantitative Easing anyone?— Les Ismore
- "How did Ronald Reagan cut taxes and tank the economy then raise taxes and the economy took off." This had little to nothing to do with tax cuts, and alot to do with Volcker's tinkering.— RG
- Bird, there are a lot of unexplainable things. How did Ronald Reagan cut taxes and tank the economy then raise taxes and the economy took off. Same with Clinton. Timew were definitely different 15 years ago. Although Newt Gingrich, who in my opinion, really started the politics of total annihilation, was in power for part of that time, the insanity of the current Republican party was not institutionalized the way it is now. So, yes, times were different then.— Les Ismore
Only Liberal Fools believe in Global Warming and lose elections in 2 years.......Global Warming Myth- Wow the wisdom of repeat1stdown. He has just told the world that shale is clean fuel, that equates that combustion of hyrdocarbons is also clean fuel. Thanks for you brilliant republican insight guy. Nothing to worry about folks, it is a liberal media scientific conspiracy that gasoline combust into CO2 and is obviously as now a green house gas. It is infact a clean fuel because Repeat1stdown said so at 7:30am. No need to actually try and develop clean alternatives, gasoline is safe. Typical republican moron!— Atlas
- HISTORIC REPUBLICAN VICTORY- HISTORIC!!!!
Liberals LOSE everything in just 2 years!! The USA is a Center/ Right Counrty- Obviously...... - {{{---}}} We dont have evidence one way or another on cliamte change. {{{---}}}
The number of expert scientists who claim there's absolute proof is very small. For example, the IPCC said that there is a 90% chance that climate change is anthropogenic. Of course, there are people out there at the far end of the spectrum who say that the AGW is proven, but that isn't true of the scientific association after scientific association that have signed on in support of theories that climate change is likely affected by human activity.
What's more than a little interesting is that you repeatedly misrepresent the position of huge numbers of experts, and that you fail to address the massive amounts of disinformation put out there by "deniers," much of it undeniably financed by rightwing fanatics and some people with vested interests in the energy industry.
— Talking point sleuth - Hey TPS dude- you are a tool, stop with the 24 hour whining.
-
- db - they're creating massive fractures, and they don't know the full extent of what could or couldn't happen. Also, it is entirely possible that leaks and/or leaching can happen with the bore holes and the casing that protect the ground water. Yes, there are regulations in place for how the bore holes are created and need to be cased, but accidents happen. That doesn't mean that they will happen frequently, but the scale of the impact if accidents do happen needs to be weighed into the equation.— Talking point sleuth
- Thanks, Greg. I did remember correctly that you were an engineer equipped to respond to Evo and his ilk. Thanks. I am not an engineer but went undergrad to a place that required a great deal of math, science and engineering, have a Bachelor of Science degree, so I can be at least somewhat conversant on those subjects.— pj katauskas
- So TPS, to use your logic, we should dump whatever onto the ground and into the water. No harm can come from it, right? Ever hear of Love Canal? And there is a big difference between fertilizer chemicals and the toxins used in the fracking process.
- I have not said man made climate change is false, I have said there is no hard data to prove it is true. There are models that prove it true and models that prove it false. I am all for renewable energy, and have a degree in environmental science and work in the alternative energy sector, so I am certainly pro-green. But as Will and other liberals claim the right is a bunch of fear mongerers, I believe the climate change propoganda is the worst kind of fear mongering. We dont have evidence one way or another on cliamte change. And all the scientists that say it is happening also say that our climate is too complex and unpredicatable to say what would happen if you used geoengineering options which use the same science that is required of them to "prove" global warming is happening. My point all along has not been global warming is true or false, its that we dont know, and those who say they know flip flop when they then claim our climate is too complex in the same situation. I am all for renewable energy and reducing fossil fuel use for many reasons, but I am against the fear mongering, bad science, and flat out lies and supression of counter agruements that the global warming crowd uses.— Greg S
- Then we are largely on the same page Greg S, because my point has only been that bad science has been propagated by the pro and anti sides. The reason it commands so much attention (and deservedly so) is that it is potentially a humankind ending phenomenon. I believe 99% of the world doesn't know the answer to the question, so these armchair theorists (myself included) should not be taken as gospel on this question as many seem to do with their Congressmen/women.
The ultimate question is, and the one that gets politicized unfortunately, at what point will people agree that we have accumulated enough suggestive data that we should take SOME action. 100 volumes of material? 1000? 10000? What if the ratio is 100 scientists for but only 10 against? What about 100 against? When/where is the line drawn?
To rebut a statement made about million/billion/trillion decisions not being made based on theory alone, it's just not reality and happens all the time, from government (there are WMDs in Iraq! = trillions of dollars of war in the Middle East) to the pharmaceutical industry (there are countless medications in which we have no idea WHY it works, only theory -- that is argued against as much as for) to the weapons industry (in theory said armor scaled plating works, etc.), just to name a very quick few.
So when will it be enough information to act or, conversely, affirmatively DENY its existence?— Evo621 - Another not well-known issue is potential uranium development.
http://be*vercountyblue.org/2010/10/26/marcellus-shale-fracking-releases-uranium-university-of-buffalo/
Replace the asterisk with an "a." Laughably, the filter won't allow the original spelling to get through.— Talking point sleuth - {{{---}}} I have said throughout this thread that the state needs to properly regulate the disposal of fracking fluid and needs to make sure the surface casing is properly set. {{{---}}}
As is not infrequently the case, db, we agree on much of the substance of the issue. Regulation and taxation are what's needed in this situation. I would add, also, that moratoriums, or maybe some kind of limited moratoriums to allow for further study, would also be a good idea. These communities do need economic development, and all the stakeholders do have rights to be at the table where regulatory decisions are made.
But db, if you think that no one among the anti-frackers have been advocating for regulation and/or taxation, then you simply haven't investigated the issue. Your propensity to connect this to some massive worldwide envioronmentalist conspiracy is inaccurate, and no strawman - you've repeated your conspiracy up and down this thread.— Talking point sleuth - The corporations have spoken! Bow before the corporate masters.— Speakingtruth
- {{{---}}} The arrogance of the liberals to conclude they can control the climate is amazing. {{{---}}}
Bush3, you really need to get together with Greg: --snip-- However none of these pro-climate changers believe releaseing sulfur into the atmosphere is a good idea, not beacuse it wouldnt work, but because they dont fully understand the system! --snip--
You guys seem to have some wires crossed in your laughable conspiracy that all the thousands of scientific experts who think climate change could be anthropogenic are either idiots or crooked and arrogant liberals.
Please get it together, boyz.— Talking point sleuth - Evo, I'll just refer you to db's 1136 post. You don't make enormously expensive regulatory policy changes based on incomplete or questionable science. You don't need an engineering degree to make that judgment.— pj katauskas
- "The state and federal land protection agencies are in bed with the drillers," Its called regulatory capture and it shows the futility of screaming for more regulations. "to implement excise taxes as they have" I'm not really sure how excise taxes would reduce pollution. Can you explain this?— RG
- Sorry, I repeated one point twice there. I meant to point out that massive withdrawals of water could affect the water table/ground water in ways other than just contamination.— Talking point sleuth
- The arrogance of the liberals to conclude they can control the climate is amazing. The cap and tax bill is dead, Will. All that would do is line the pockets of the evil corporations that will sell their carbon indulgences(credits). Why do libs believe that only they care about the environment, as if the conservatives do not have to breath the same air and drink the same water. I have a question for Will and Al Gore. Why did Al not pursue this green agenda the 8 years he and Clinton were in office? We could have moved to get off oil etc? Amazing only happens when he is out of office, and loses his prez bid.— Bush3
- pj - do you realize how many fields of chemical engineering there are? A Chem Engineer is not like calling someone a baseball player. Chemistry spiders into hundreds of fields, and frankly, if he's not a member of a chemistry field that specializes in meteorological analytics, his opinion is no more valid than the guy on the street that thinks the world is only 7000 years old. So no, I don't put any credence on his opinion.
Nevertheless, assuming he is the Nobel-winning author on climate theory that he (and apparently you) hold him out to be, one scientist does not a theory make. And for that matter, even "accepted" theories have plenty of detractors to go with supporters. The presence of disagreement is not a de facto bad theory.
My personal standpoint is I don't know one way or another, which is what 99% of the world should be saying if they were honest. I hope the Right (and their scientific support) is correct and that they are infinitely smarter than the rest of us. I just like pointing out people claiming their group's "bad science" is somehow superior to another group's "bad science." It's absurd.— Evo621 - {{{---}}} And who was in charge the last eight years? A Dem governor. {{{---}}}
Boy, there's a shock. A Democratic politician rolling over to corporations just like Republican politicians do.
What's always hilarious is when Republican apologists assume that anyone who favors Dems over Repubs thinks that Dem politicians walk on water.
The state and federal land protection agencies are in bed with the drillers, and Rendell has for the most part, up until recently resisted efforts, primarily led by the ANTI-FRACKERS to implement excise taxes as they have (at least to my knowledge) everywhere else they've been fracking.
The only thing that makes Rendell look good on this issue is the fact that the new Gov. will be even worse. And the only thing that makes the Dem state legislators look good on this issue is that the Republicans have been even worse.— Talking point sleuth - Hello Mr. Smith! Why is it that IDIOTS as yourself always want to play the PATRIOT CARD? Every time you clowns imagine to have what you think is an upper hand we hear the carpavanola about "moving forward together". All Americans were REALLY in a better position when the Idiot Bush left town, but what I have seen from your crowd it a continual bleating to bring back the good ole shrubby daze!
Of course, you have failed to mention that--far and away--the acrimonious blithering was coming from YOUR side. I suspect you reach out to you enemies with either a grenade or other sort of weapon. You are, however, entitled to a witless!— BEMiller - No, Evo, you first. Tell me why I should believe scientists that (1) fudge data, (2) use incomplete data, (3)distort the peer review process, (4) refuse legal requests for their data, and (5) demonize scientists who disagree with them. If you'd take just a few minutes of time you'd find the holes in the GW game.— pj katauskas
- Evo, not all theories are asking for a few tril in global GDP to stop unclear outcomes. If you hold this theory so dear, curb all your emissions and invest your money in alternate energies. Thanks.— RG
- Welcome back, db. It's nice to see that you're still up to your old standards - managing to put two conspiracy theories in one post. We haven't had enough wild-eyed conspiracy theories around here lately.
I love your arguments. I mean, Dimock never happened. There is no way that running bores down through and below the water table and ground water could ever leak/leach toxic chemicals into the water table/ground water. There's no way that toxic chemicals could migrate to the water table through massive fractures created by fracking. There's no way that surface run-off could ever affect ground water or the water table. And don't forget, surface-water contamination could never affect ground water or the water table.
And, of course, anti-frackers are only interested in raising the cost of energy. Tap water lighting on fire, poorly constructed roads being build with improper run-off protections, high traffic of construction vehicles and water trucks, large-scale draining of ponds and creeks to obtain the water for fracking, water contamination, no anti-frackers care one wit about any of those things.
No one can spin a conspiracy quite like you can, db. As I said, welcome back.— Talking point sleuth - And good to see you, TPS, no one can erect strawmen like you can. I have said throughout this thread that the state needs to properly regulate the disposal of fracking fluid and needs to make sure the surface casing is properly set. And it is absurd to think fracking fractures can spread 6,500 feet to the surface - that would actually be counterproductive as the gas would not go into the well - so engineers make sure the process stays within the formation in question. All of your other concerns can be regulated - but the anti-facking forces aren't interested in regulating, they are interested only in shutting it all down. And therein lies the problem. — db_cooper
- "And the agencies that regulate those lands have rolled-over and not enforced regulations that are already in place. "
And who was in charge the last eight years? A Dem governor.
I think it would be easier to find common ground on regulation if opponents weren't spreading so much misinformation about fracking. I have stated my willingness to make sure that fracking fluid is properly disposed, that surface casing is properly cemented, and that well pads are properly cleaned up. That would prevent groundwater contamination. But fracking opponents act like the actual fracking of the formation 7,000 feet deep can reach groundwater formations less than 500 feet from the surface. That just isn't the case.— db_cooper - still waiting for your post mid-term election analysis. cat got your tongue?— notojm
- A pig-like leader for the pigs. No surprise.— CiceroSpuriousDeodatus
- {{{---}}} but, once again, the anti-Marcellus folks aren't interested in reason here. {{{---}}} Right. The anti-fracking folks have never said word one about excise taxes.
Hilarious.— Talking point sleuth - {{{---}}} A lot of the Marcellus play is under state forest/state game lands, so private property doesn't come into play in that instance. {{{---}}} And the agencies that regulate those lands have rolled-over and not enforced regulations that are already in place.— Talking point sleuth
- Evo, if I recall from his previous posts elsewhere and here, I think Greg has an engineering degree, chemical, I think, so he's equipped to deal with the science of global warming, sorry, climate change. How about you?— pj katauskas
- "Greg S, where is your meteorological PHD oh wise one? " One does not need a PhD in meteorology to recognize the symptoms of bad science - over-reliance on computer models, unwillingness to release raw data so results can be replicated, coordinated efforts to block the presentation of opposing views, unwillingness to consider alternative theories, and using hyperbole to pursue a non-scientific agenda.— db_cooper
- Then will you and Greg S please combine you scientific (non-scientific? can't tell what your expertise is) chops and present the data that refutes climate change, AND why that data should be trusted while not the other.
If you can't, which we all know you can't, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth and are no better than any other Left/Right pundit.
And if you can, then my compliments sir/madam. :-)
Lastly, wouldn't it be safe from your standpoint to disavow all theories? Otherwise, it looks like you are cherry picking. If you are going to cherry pick, then please, as I requested of Greg S, write down the theories that are sufficient in your book, and those that aren't.
Thanks.— Evo621 - You want to see some really polluted environment check out north or west Philly.— pj katauskas
- "as they were too busy telling whoppers about incumbent Democrats gutting Medicare. " Uh, Will, Obamacare DID cut $500 billion from Medicare and might well end as we know it the popular Medicare Advantage program. So how is saying the incumbent Dems gutting Medicare a whopper? Meanwhile, you still treat the discredited pseudo-science of AGW as gospel truth. So to you, the truth is a lie and a lie is a truth. Welcome to the topsy-turvey world of Attytood.— db_cooper
- bobcitydoc - do you really think the "environment" is better cared for in the democratic strongholds like - let's say Philadelphia - than in the republican strongholds in the Western states. You might hate the NRA and gun owners but hunters and fishers (rednecks in Democratic parlance) care more for protecting the environment than the averga e citizen.— bird11
- "so private property doesn't come into play in that instance." Can't the state just sell it via a bid process, with a contract that states that whoever buys it will be responsible for any and all clean up?— RG
- KEEP THE CHANGE - be careful! While I disagree with the Democratic policies of the last 4 years I can't honestly say that Republicans haven't for a long time been co-conspirators. This isn't a Republican wave this is the second wave of 2008 - people are not happy with Washington politics as usual. The Democrats got their chance in '08 and failed. Republicans get another chance with '10 but if they don't change their ways and wake up to the reality their return will be as short lived.— bird11
- Greg S, where is your meteorological PHD oh wise one? Where is it from? Is the planet also 7000 years old? You weren't there to see the dinosaurs, so how do you know the bones they find aren't fakes? How do you know plants go through photosynthesis? How does electricity work? Does gravity exist? Does the solar system really exist?
Please. Just because something is theory based, does not mean it is void of validity. So do us a favor and check off which theories Greg S supports so we will all know better and can sleep at night.— Evo621 - phillyjeffsr, don't hold your breath. And db, you're dealing with a "sky-is-falling" lib pundit, so what do you expect? Extending Will's and other opponents' logic would have made them anti-light bulb because you need to generate electricity for it to work. There are safe ways to extract stuff from the earth. Our efforts should be on doing that, not knee-jerk opposition.— pj katauskas
- "Seems to be more a property law issue than an environmental one. Maybe you should lobby the government to strengthen property laws. "
A lot of the Marcellus play is under state forest/state game lands, so private property doesn't come into play in that instance. Rendell has placed a moratorium on Marcellus development on those lands, and I imagine Corbett will promptly lift that moratorium. But in the end, I think the Marcellus play may well be done in by basic economics - fracking releases an initial rush of gas, but the rate of production drops off rapidly. Which is why, IMO, the production companies are fighting a tax so hard - at the later production rates of the wells, they are maringally profitable to operate at the current low natural gas prices, especially since a lot of transport infrastructure still needs to be built. I think a gradated tax tied to both the rate of production from a well and the price of gas might be reasonable, but, once again, the anti-Marcellus folks aren't interested in reason here.— db_cooper - the media is lazily reporting that the country was tired of the liberal agenda over health care, bailouts and the environment. Really? People don't want affordable health care, a functioning economy and clean air and water? Really? I think don;t think we'll see the repubs really trying to undo so-called Obama-care, nor will they be asking the banks for our money back any time soon (they will merely thank the tea party whackos for their help and shove them aside). But the environment, if past Repub "leadership" provides any clue, Mr. Rove is right. At least at the Federal level and in truly red states like his, the environment is dead... but not here. There will be hell to pay for Mr. Corbett if he does not hold drillers feet to the fire, and he knows it. One termer if he lets these red necks destroy our state.— bobcitydoc
- I am still waiting patiently for Will, or any other of his lemmings to refute/respond to Greg S's 9:25 post.— phillyjeffsr
- "Does it have to contaminate our drinking water before we do something about it?" Well, it would help if folks like Will were serious about addressing the side effects of drilling rather than spewing anti-fracking propaganda as part of an effort to halt the development of the Marcellus Shale - all in the name of fighting so-called AGW. I agree PA needs to look at other states such as North Dakota for better regulation of drilling and fracking, and there needs to be strict regulation of the disposal of leftover fracking fluids (that's where almost all of the contamination problems to date have come from), better monitoring of setting surface casing that prevents groundwater contamination from the well bore, and regulations that ensure well pads are restored after the drilling is done. But you don't hear any of that from the anti-fracking crowd - they try to claim that fracking an impermiable formation over a mile deep can somehow contaminate groundwater less than 400 feet from the surface - the same kind of bogus 'science' we see from the AGW crowd, and for the exact same reasons - they are in favor of changing American lifestyles to one more like that lived by Europeans, and making energy prohibitively expensive here is the lever they seek to accomplish that.— db_cooper
- zzzzzzzzzzzzhate Rove zzzzzzz hate zzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzz Soros zzzzzzzzzzzzz hate,hate. Dems good. SSDD— georgel
lol that's good, bird...actually Jimmy Carter installed it. I think I read something recently about $2.7 billion per year in tax subsidies for oil, gas and coal industries. Time to move forward.— one_eyed_jack- jack - FYI I oppose those oil subsidies too and would actually see more purpose in giving people some way to pay for the initial cost of solar as long as the money was paid back over time. Of course my best friend who works for PECO and is trying to pay tuition for his two sons vehemently disagrees with me.
— bird11 - Ignoring the REPUBLICAN WAVE that swept through the country on Tuesday does NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY you fool.
- @one_eyed_jack: I'm a big fan of solar. think it is a great way to go but I'm wondering how you got solar? Did you have it installed yourself or did the government just show up one day and stick it on your roof?— bird11
- @RunningOutOfWittyNicknames "The Lefties can heat their homes with as yet undeveloped miracles..." Undeveloped miracles? My electric bill last month was $2, what was yours? In July and August, it was $0, even when using the AC. I no longer need to buy gas or oil to heat my home, how about you? But I guess it is a miracle that the sun rises every day.— one_eyed_jack
- Wait, didn't Les tell us that Cantor, Boenner, etc voted with Pelosi 50% of the time? Now they're not governing in good faith?— RG
- Les, you will also need to explain the period of 1995 thru 2000 - remember the Clinton days you love so much. How is it possible that Clinton was able to do such an incredible job during that period with a House and Senate that didn't even have big boy pants to wear??
I guess Republicans just loved Clinton so much because at least he was white.— bird11 - Les, you will also need to explain the period of 1995 thru 2000 - remember the Clinton days you love so much. How is it possible that Clinton was able to do such an incredible job during that period with a House and Senate that didn't even have big boy pants to wear??
I guess Republicans just loved Clinton so much because at least he was white.— bird11 - Karl Rove is a genius at controlling the narrative.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”- VOLTAIRE
"We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."
— Abraham Lincoln
Wrong narrative.
— LastRights 
Comment removed.- Comment removed.
- "Remember, we have 8 years of cleaning we have to do." ...Les, can you tell me specifically what they 8 years are??? I assume you mean 2001-2008 but I'm not sure since obviously the people with the big boy pants were running the country in 07-08 when the Democrats controlled the House & Senate. George W. Bush never had the number of Republicans in the House and Senate that Obama had in the 111th Congress - why couldn't the Democrats be the "party of no" and stop all the evil Bush plans? Only two plausible answers I have is that they either 1) agreed with Bush or 2) lack the b@lls to do what they thought was right for the country.......which one of those answers makes you want to have them running things???— bird11
- Well, stocks are jumping today. Its not due to the election, but rather to QE2. Beware another asset bubble.— RG
- Les, you mean the Rs need to govern "in good faith for ALL Americans" like BO, Pelosi and Reid did over the last two years? Give me a break. They were the ultimate in political arrogance and as a result they and the Ds got their +sses handed to them on Tuesday. Nothing like it since 1938. They should be proud of that.— pj katauskas
- "Yes, because our recovery will be put on hold for the next 2 years." Its already been on hold for 2 years, despite the "governing" of the "big boy" party. "Perhaps if the Republicans will now finally pass the jobs bill President Obama proposed." He passed the stimulus without them, how'd that work out again?— RG
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- TYPO "My glee is only in pointing out that we will have the grown ups back in power in the house in 8 years." Should read 2 years!— Les Ismore
- "Les, any chance you will ever view the the parties without slanting everything left??" No, not until the Republicans put their big boy pants on and actually try to govern in good faith for ALL Americans. And believe me, with this crop of Reps, it aint gonna happen.
"if a Republican controlled House with a Democratic President and Senate can't save the economy it is ALL the Republicans fault." Yes, because our recovery will be put on hold for the next 2 years. Remember, we have 8 years of cleaning we have to do. Perhaps if the Republicans will now finally pass the jobs bill President Obama proposed....heck I dont care if they call it the Mitch McConnell/NewtGingrigh/Sarah Palin Bill To Create Jobs... I just wish they would get off the sidelines and govern!
"And you continue to come dangerously close to gleefully rooting for failure simply to advance your political party." Not hardly. My glee is only in pointing out that we will have the grown ups back in power in the house in 8 years. I wish the Repubs would come to the table in good faith but we all saw they had no interest in anything other than short term political gain.— Les Ismore - Greg S, you're making too much sense by talking about facts and science. That's not what Will traffics in.— pj katauskas
- "So, the Party of Nothing will make noise over the next 2 years, accomplish nothing, the deficit will soar since they have no ideas and will not work to make Amercia stronger"....Les, any chance you will ever view the the parties without slanting everything left?? In 2007 & 2008 when the economy slid into the cr@pper economically the House and Senate were controlled by Democrats yet come 2100 & 2012 if a Republican controlled House with a Democratic President and Senate can't save the economy it is ALL the Republicans fault. And you continue to come dangerously close to gleefully rooting for failure simply to advance your political party.— bird11
- tiger, leaving it in the ground for 10K years makes Will and folks like TPS and Les feel virtuous. That's really what it's all about.— pj katauskas
- Global warming, ahem, now "climate change" is and was a hoax. And its supporters niftily ignored the fact that 40% of Russia's land mass provided no data. The by far largest polluter is China, which fires up a new coal-powered utility plant about every two weeks. And don't give me the per capita argument. The environment doesn't care about per capita statistics, only about total emissions. Will should write about the world's largest polluter and about all the money AFSCME poured into the campaign, way more than the C of C. But that doesn't fit his narrative. Must stay on the D/lib message at all costs.— pj katauskas
It's always fun(ny) to watch WB try to make a point.— soccerdad1150- The truth is this pollution will not just effect wells. It easily has the potential to destroy the entire Delaware and Chesapeake water sheds. $4 million gallons of unretrieved polluted water per well will do a lot of damage. They are planning on sinking thousands of wells. This will render Southern PA, MD, Delaware uninhabitable without potable water. "Greed is good," G. Gecko— GA in Blue Bell
- Will, climate is dead, because there is no truth behind what they are saying. Please tell me what studies you have done / read and fact checked, that indicate their is a global warming or climate change phenomenon occuring that is caused by man? The thing is, there isnt any, all of these supposed facts on climate change and global warming are theories on complex systems that we have no real grasp of. While it may be true that man is effecting the climate, there is not one shred of real evidence to back that up. The simplest way to prove climate change believers wrong is this, the same science that says more CO2 and other GHGs in the atmosphere (from man made sources) that will cause a temperature increase, also says that if we put sulfur particles in the atmosphere (mimics volcanic erruptions) we would cool the planet. However none of these pro-climate changers believe releaseing sulfur into the atmosphere is a good idea, not beacuse it wouldnt work, but because they dont fully understand the system! So they admit they dont fully understand our climate system when a solution is presented, but are willing to claim disaster is coming based on the same science! Will, if you are so willing to support the climate change cause please refute/respond to this.— Greg S
The Lefties can heat their homes with as yet undeveloped miracles...Asa for me I say frack me.- After this election, I'll take your prognostications with a grain of salt. I'm still confused by your rhetoric, though. if the Pubs don;t have any ideas, how would that be taing the nation back to the 1950s? And wasn't the country prosperous in the 1950s?— RG
- Mr.Smith-Amen.— Yankee Air Pirate 12
- "I expect a great 2012" Absolutely, a new Democratic majority in both houses, President Obama reelected, HCR kicking in pretty soon, no more Wall Street bailouts and a committment to move the country forward instead of back to the 1950's like in John Bohnnnnners wet dream of his childhood.— Les Ismore
- "People still hate the Republicans" People usually elect politicians they hate. "I expect a great 2012" Even though you said america wouldn't grow stronger, and the deficits would soar? You must be talking politically then, which makes it sound liek you're putting party before country? You wouldn't do that, would you Les?— RG
- You should have seen the show Pittsburgh's PBS station had on Monday night. It showed all the disasters that have befallen the neighbors of this drilling. The attorney for the drilling company said, you can't let PETTY GRIEVANCES get in the way of their drilling. I guess I am not surprised anymore at the corporate arrogance.— WDRussell
- "I think we need to be fair to Will, TPS, Les, and others." haha...no need to jump out any windows. Look at the results. House majority, yes, Senate majority no. People still hate the Republicans even more than the Democrats and given 2 years of Republican disinitiatives, I expect a great 2012, not only for President Obama but for all Americans. Former half-term governor Sarah Palin has pretty much shot her political load and will be fading off into the sunset. Her endorsement at the Senate level was pretty much the kiss of death unless she piled onto a leader. So, the Party of Nothing will make noise over the next 2 years, accomplish nothing, the deficit will soar since they have no ideas and will not work to make Amercia stronger (even dissing our vets,...as usual).— Les Ismore
- I think we need to be fair to Will, TPS, Les, and others. They are handling the election results a tad better than Paul Krugman: "We just saw An Iliad at McCarter. Fine show. But I am feeling this strange desire to slay my enemies, then throw them on a funeral pyre." http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/got-us-to-the-greeks/
— RG - Comment removed.
- "Don't forget Emminent Domain laws and that Gas companies are lobbying to be able to drill without leases." Seems to be more a property law issue than an environmental one. Maybe you should lobby the government to strengthen property laws.— RG
Now that the acrimonious midterm elections are over, I will reach out to my "enemies" on the left, and extend an olive branch. I believe that we have some common ground around which we can unite, as American patriots, and move forward together. I believe that we can all celebrate with great joy and pride in the political evisceration of Nancy Pelosi. Really, all Americans are better off today with Ms. Pelosi banished from her leadership position. Can I get a witness?— Mr. Smith- Does it have to contaminate our drinking water before we do something about it? Every living thing needs clean air and water, regardless of political persuasion. Without environmental laws capitalists do not have to pay for the pollution they create, we the taxpayers do.— landscape
- Comment removed.
- How popular is repealing health care reform? Not very, at least if you stick to facts and not the histrionics of the Tea Baggers. http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/8114.pdf— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- Swifty sounds just like a wife beater: I wouldn't have to hurt you if you didn't make me!
With the GOP wins for Governor, plus the House, pundits say the redistricting will keep the Republicans in the House majority for at least 10 years. If you libs would have focused on the issues at hand, and not trying to put you liberal utopia in place, things would be different. Chew on that.— jmc- Comment removed.
Got a typo up there....Tueaday's— Morty Seinfeld
So what good does it do us by leaving it underground for 10,000 years?— tiger
Will - Are you a vegan?— phluphya19147- TalkingPointSleuth is dead on, and even left out a lot. Don't forget Emminent Domain laws and that Gas companies are lobbying to be able to drill without leases. mm4844, do some homework before expressing totally uninformed opinions. Do you think you and yours are going to see any of that gas money? I have house over Marcellus Shale and have seen the initial devastation.— prenestino
- Try again, failure.
First, companies can drill under your land if your neighbor has leased their land (called "mandatory" or "compulsory" inclusion) - so simply not entering into a lease agreement does not equal protection from drilling under your land.
Runoff from a neighbor's land can easily affect your land even if you have no lease agreement.
Your well can be contaminated even if you have no lease agreement if toxic chemicals get into the water table.
Next time, maybe you should post on topics that you know something about?— Talking point sleuth - Bored. Liked it better when blog tried to defend failed Progressive policies. Topics like these are silly for one reason -- a land owner could easily keep the gas drills out by simply not entering into the lease/drill agreement and accepting that big check. Oooops...looks like capitalism still works after all...— ProgressiveFailures
- Yes, lets turn away business and jobs for speculative, lying scientists who themselves are looking for more grant and federal money for research. Put people back to work and stop killing jobs with your drivel.— mm4844
- Sadly enough, Federal laws don't matter in climate. It's going to take place on the state level, but not till after the corporations mess things up pretty bad. It will happen eventually, because America will get to the point where any solution is better than doing nothing. I can't remember a legitimate Republican policy that's done anything since the war legislation and the Patriot Act. They're an inept party because they refuse to operate in the modern smaller world.— HandNik
1
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: