George Will on Obama: The Devils in His Details

[Chuckiechan]

RealClearPolitics - Articles - The Devils in His Details

Recycling George McGovern's 1972 "Demogrant" notion, Obama promises a $1,000 check for every family, financed by a "windfall profits" tax on oil companies. Obama is unintimidated by the rule against legislating about subjects one cannot define.
Obama thinks government is not getting a "reasonable share" of oil companies' profits, which in 2007 were, as a percentage of revenues (8.3 percent), below those of U.S. manufacturing generally (8.9 percent). Exxon Mobil pays almost as much in corporate taxes to various governments as the bottom 50 percent of American earners pay in income taxes. Exxon Mobil does make $1,400 a second in profits -- hear the sharp intakes of breath from liberals with pursed lips -- but pays $4,000 a second in taxes and $15,000 a second in operating costs.

I've been waiting for Obama to flesh out his $ 1000 tax give a way program. Funny, only Fox is asking the question and no one is answering.

[Pexster]

I find it interesting how we hear so many comparisons of oil company profit margins to other major corporate sectors; in this case manufacturing. Are there other industries where the sales of the end product are ongoing, predictable, and absolutely necessary from such a limited number of providers? Comparing oil and gasoline sales to anything else I can think of in our society is meaningless.

Exxon Mobil has no risk in bringing gasoline to market. The competition is limited. They control their distribution channels with an iron fist. They have, effectively, a license to print money just as easily as does the Federal Reserve.

[Harold7]

Just wait until some Republican (or laughingly, the MSM) musters up the courage to ask Obama to explain what's going to happen to America when he signs and the Democrat Senate ratifies the UNFCC treaty and with it implicit approval of the UN's Sustainable Development Agenda Sustainable Development Front just read Principle 5 of the Rio Declaration and you can see the intent to create a Global Poverty Act... paid for by guess who... here's a sample of what the UN has in store for us taken from the UN Conference on Human Settlements, Agenda Item 10 "The influence of Agenda 21, and other United Nations treaties and policy documents is very clear in the implementation of land use policies in rural America. The United Nations policy on land use was adopted in 1976 by the UN Conference on Human Settlements (HABITAT I). The Preamble says, in significant part:

"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable."(7)" and America suddenly discovers that it's tax and energy and land use policy is controlled by whatever global warming agenda the UN has decide it needs and is fully, legally enforceable on the U.S...if you really want to be frightened, read all of Agenda 21 to fully understand the degree of control the UN expects to excercise over the world through the use of legally binding treaties.

Once these treaties are signed and ratified they become law of the land and give the UN legal authority to dictate to the US government whatever actions it deems necessary to fight global warming... just spend some time reading these documents as I have and you'll see just how expensive the Obama energy plan is gong to be for America... the UNFCC expects to spend 20 Trillion dollars by 2030 for world-wide energy infrastructure improvements... take a wild guess about where they expect to get most of the money.

All you have to know about what Obama means about "change" can be clearly determined by reading and understanding what happens to America when these international treaties become law ...as George Will so accurately states, the devil is in the details, but will America ever find out what those details are before it's too late.

[MTAtech]

Harold,

Talk about blowing something out of proportion. The UNFCC is the primary international forum dedicated to addressing the planet’s climate issues. Obama will also create a Global Energy Forum of the world’s largest emitters to focus exclusively on global energy and environmental issues.

If you really thing, the U.S. will "give the UN legal authority to dictate to the US government whatever actions it deems necessary to fight global warming..." you either are in fantasyland or stole some of Rush's drugs.

[Harold7]

Maybe you should take the time to actually read and understand what's in the UNFCC and how it can't be separated from any of the other programs here: United Nations - Economic and social development it is all an interrelated whole of global governance.

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the provisions of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution that makes ratified treaties supreme law of the land... every element in any climate treaty that Obama can commit the U.S. to is as legally binding on America as if it were a part of the U.S. constitution, so if the fundamental premise of the UNFCC is to follow the mandates of the IPCC and to implement the UN Sustainable Development Agenda, Millennium Development Goals and all the rest of the programs lying in wait in the UN, how can anything I posted be anything but a clear delineation of the intent of Obama and the Democrat party to surrender control of the U.S. to the UN... how else are they going to get the 20 trillion dollars they need infrastructure improvements the rest of the world needs...

If I'm wrong in my assessment of what an Obama presidency (and probably a McCain presidency as well) will mean to America, please provide your analysis and reasoning for the consequences of ratifying these international climate treaties... name calling and personal attacks aren't a substitute for reasoned argument... tell me where (and why) I'm wrong if you can.

[Creatures]

so harold even if this is true, you are against helping others and against trying to get the world a little cleaner as it is now?

even if it costs a little bit (compared to how much those wars in the past 8 years cost, which in case you didnt notice was about "helping" them)?

Creatures

[MTAtech]

What I'm saying is that regardless of what is in a treaty, a treaty can't contract away Article I and Article II powers. Beyond that, no government official would give up their powers from a practical standpoint.

From a moral standpoint, the goals are laudable -- helping those that need the most help.

[Chuckiechan]

so harold even if this is true, you are against helping others and against trying to get the world a little cleaner as it is now?

Yes. It should be done by Sweden. Let them spend some of the Nazi dental gold they have stored in their vaults.

You can't help people who won't help themselves. If you want to piss away more money on pie in the sky ideas, spend your own.

[Pexster]

Yes, the consistency with which this argument was applied to GWB over the last seven years is impressive, indeed!

(Because, rest assured, he has pissed away more of our national treasure than most people would have dreamed possible.)

Too bad you won't see this, Chuck, but you are a bald-faced hypocrite!

[surreal]

Actually I don't think Chuck is a hypocrite, he's mechanical and operates by a wind up key