Showing posts with label Diplomacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Diplomacy. Show all posts

August 13, 2009

Ill Omen For Cap and Trade in the USA

In a sure sign that cap-and-trade is in serious trouble here, the Australian Senate has voted down a cap-and-trade system in their country.

Why does it matter what the Aussies are doing? Because one of the primary arguments for a cap-and-trade system in this country is that everybody else is doing it, and we're not living up to our global responsibilities if we don't. It becomes awfully difficult to make that argument if other countries have already rejected similar schemes themselves.

Australians tilt farther left than Americans do as a whole, and if they can't muster enough to support there then it's highly unlikely that it can be done here either. Much as they did with the Kyoto Treaty which was rejected 95-0 in the Senate while Bill Clinton was still president largely because China and India were exempted, senators are highly unlikely to put businesses in their home states at such a disadvantage to their foreign competitors - especially in a recessionary economy.

Hillary Clinton recently tried to get India to do something about their carbon emissions too, only to be told in no uncertain terms that India wasn't buying:
"There is simply no case for the pressure that we, who have among the
lowest emissions per capita, face to actually reduce emissions," Ramesh
told Clinton. He asserted that "detailed modeling" showed "unambiguous"
results -- that developing country emissions would remain well below
the averages of developed countries even with high growth rates.
Australians understand that cap-and-trade would be an economy killer for them. Indians get it too. Too bad American Democrats still don't. It's going to be up to the American people to explain it to them in a language they DO understand: beat them at the ballot box. The 2010 election season is coming fast. It's never too early to let your representatives know that we're watching and, unlike their MoveOn.org paper tigers: we vote.

, , , , , , , ,

August 10, 2009

Hillary Clinton Loses It

A translated question from a Congolese student got Hillary Clinton hot under the collar when she thought he asked what Bill Clinton thought about a Chinese trade deal. Her response? "

"My husband is not secretary of state, I am," she replied. "If you want
my opinion I will tell you my opinion. I am not going to be channeling
my husband."
On one hand, I can appreciate that she's perturbed that she's played third fiddle behind both her husband and Barack Obama. I have no doubt that every day she shows up for work as Secretary of State rather than President is like walking into a bad dream from which she just can't seem to awaken. The evidence that she is living her own personal nightmare is written all over her face and in her demeanor as she answers the question. She's looking worn-down and tired: a far cry from the vibrancy she displayed on the campaign trail last year.

On the other hand, she IS the Secretary of State and her JOB is to be diplomatic. I may not be the world's foremost expert on diplomatic niceties, but I'm pretty sure losing your stuff on some student isn't part of the job description. If she can't keep herself under control, then perhaps it's time to return to the Senate where being a Democrat who screams at the "little people" is pretty much par for the course. So much for that Obama "smart diplomacy," huh?

The schadenfreude is delicious, but it gets even better. It turns out that the translator screwed up, and the student wasn't asking about Bill Clinton at all. He was asking what Barack Obama thought. So her answer about "channeling her husband" must certainly have caused quite a bit of confusion when she referred to Obama as "her husband."

In the immortal words of Larry the Cable Guy: I don't care who you are: that's funny.

, ,