Subjected to inventory…

“Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory … of how we are taking responsibility.”

Those are Speaker Pelosi’s words,  and they ought to scare you spitless,  because she’s talking to the Chinese about combating climate change.    She also declared a healthy environment a human right,  and that governments would have to make decisions and choices based on science,  something neither she nor the Obama administration has any intention of doing.

“They also have to do it with openness,  transparency and accountability to the people,”  she said. ”  Everyone has to have their situation improved by it.”

If you still harbored the faint hope that the eco-Nazis wanted to heal the earth instead of increasing power,  this should disabuse you  of that quaint notion.

If you find the current level of government intrusion into your life a cause for concern,  just wait until liberals legislate themselves the right to tell you what vehicle to drive — oh, wait,  Obama is in the process of doing that.    Mark my words —  it will be less than 2 years before Congress cranks up standards  and regulations to such an extent that only government-owned manufacturers will be able to meet them.   If too many people try to hang on to their non-conforming vehicles,  there will be lawsuits against them for potential vehicular homicide,   since tiny cars invariably lose crash contests.    Democrats in Congress will nobly step forward to “protect” us environmental heathens and legislate the larger vehicles out of existence.  Except for theirs,  of course.

Meanwhile,  if your electricity comes from coal,  as it does in much of the Southeast  and elsewhere,  you will be forced to either pay exorbitant amounts for “cleaner” power,  or go back to candles and fireplaces  — no,  wood-burning fireplaces are already outlawed in California.    Perhaps they’ll let us burn vegetable peelings and rags,   and the upholstery from the cars we once drove.

Instant justice…

That’s what Ralph Peters wants for terrorists,  his point being that dead ones end problems,  while live ones always cause them.    He correctly posits that the Gitmo which needed to be closed was a fabrication,  not a reality.

What he doesn’t say,  because it’s understood by anyone with common sense,  is that there will be far fewer captures by American troops.  What is the point of taking captives if all you can do is ask very nicely if they would please tell you everything they know?   I exaggerate,  but not by much,  because the Army Field Manual  is quite restrictive in the methods of interrogation allowed.

Peters offers several amusing suggestions for placement of the detainees which will never occur,  but the Wall Street Journal wonders where they could go.  Obama’s thoughtlessness on the second day of his administration has created  a huge problem for Democrats, and is certainly pushback against  his reputation as a deep thinker.

Democrats beat back in committee a proposal by Rep.  Todd Tiahrt to prohibit the transer of detainees to the U.S,  but the dilema remains.    No one will put Craig Smith’s simple solution into effect,  which would rid us of the detainees and the lefties at the same time,  but it’s an entertaining notion.    Sen.  Dianne Feinstein is  one of the few Democrats promoting bringing  all the detainees to the US,  but there has been remarkably little outcry over Republicans saying Obama might have to wait to close Gitmo.

His Oneness  can’t appreciate having his campaign remarks about how closing Gitmo would be easy surface in editorials,  much less   seeing any vindicating Bush.    And he surely doesn’t like FloppingAces pointing out that his plan to close Gitmo is essentially Bush’s plan from 3 years ago.   Did he put Rep. Alcee Hastings up to his Gitmo 2.0 proposal,  which is the only thing on the horizon which could solve the problem?