Carbon Jackboots

Mark Steyn on carbon fascism from jet-setting bureaucrats:

In order to save the planet from global roasting, it seems entirely reasonable to ask Mr. and Mrs. Joe Peasant to subordinate their freedom of movement to an annual “carbon allowance” preventing them flying hither and yon and devastating the environment. As Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, explains:

Hotel guests should have their electricity monitored; hefty aviation taxes should be introduced to deter people from flying; and iced water in restaurants should be curtailed, the world’s leading climate scientist has told the Observer.

Rajendra Pachauri? Hey, if you’re manning the VIP lounge at Heathrow, that name may ring a bell:

Dr Rajendra Pachauri flew at least 443,243 miles on IPCC business in this 19 month period. This business included honorary degree ceremonies, a book launch and a Brookings Institute dinner, the latter involving a flight of 3500 miles.

Wow. 443,243 miles. How many flying polar bears does Dr. Pachauri kill in an average quarter? Well, not to worry, he probably offsets his record-breaking ursocide with carbon credits from carbon billionaire Al Gore.

Personally, I have logged something like 3-4,000 miles in the past year. And this cricket fanatic wants to monitor my flying and water use – and even take away ice for my water?

This is the fanaticism that the crew at CRU enable with their conspiracy. This is totalitarian.

I feel a Godwin’s Law violation coming on. I also cry “Hypocrite!” and let slip the hounds of sarcasm on this officious, little asshat.

Have at him, folks.

The View From Bedford Falls

Salena Zito points out that Main Street, USA may not actually resemble the America that Washington politicians believe exists:

His sentiment was said without attending a “Tea Party” or railing against an elected official at a town hall – the media’s usual caricature of people who vent against Washington.

Main Street America has entered an era of populism that embraces neither party. People are tired of government bailouts, spending and unchecked corruption, as well as the media’s perceived lack of curiosity or investigation into all three.

They are really tired of being told their values and way of life are not politically correct.

“It has now become a cliché to say that the Washington elite do not understand people that live outside of their bubble, but clichés are not created in a vacuum,” says Michael Scott, who owns a photography studio near the high school here.

“Politicians used to be known as statesmen,” he explains. “They owned businesses in their hometowns and made about the same amount of money that the average voter did, keeping them in touch with who they represented.”

I suspect that Zito is correct – a large number of Americans have strongly Jeffersonian views of government. Or at least one major tenet of  that philosophy: government should be small and have sharply limited powers. Most Americans do not want the government to “solve” their problems. Because most Americans realize that government is extraordinarily bad at solving anything. Washington can spend madly, but they all too rarely get anything right. The bigger the program, the more likely it is that it will be riddled with inefficiency, fraud, abuse and really bad unintended consequences.

The residents of Bedford Falls are abandoning Obama in droves. It promises to be an interesting 11 months.

Is That CRU Or Crew?

As in mafia crew? Christopher Booker is warning that there appears to be a preemptive whitewashing of the CRU scandal. They must not be allowed to gather their cronies and co-conspirators and stonewall this scandal.

What is tragically evident from the Harry Read Me file is the picture it gives of the CRU scientists hopelessly at sea with the complex computer programmes they had devised to contort their data in the approved direction, more than once expressing their own desperation at how difficult it was to get the desired results.

The third shocking revelation of these documents is the ruthless way in which these academics have been determined to silence any expert questioning of the findings they have arrived at by such dubious methods – not just by refusing to disclose their basic data but by discrediting and freezing out any scientific journal which dares to publish their critics’ work. It seems they are prepared to stop at nothing to stifle scientific debate in this way, not least by ensuring that no dissenting research should find its way into the pages of IPCC reports.

Back in 2006, when the eminent US statistician Professor Edward Wegman produced an expert report for the US Congress vindicating Steve McIntyre’s demolition of the “hockey stick”, he excoriated the way in which this same “tightly knit group” of academics seemed only too keen to collaborate with each other and to “peer review” each other’s papers in order to dominate the findings of those IPCC reports on which much of the future of the US and world economy may hang. In light of the latest revelations, it now seems even more evident that these men have been failing to uphold those principles which lie at the heart of genuine scientific enquiry and debate. Already one respected US climate scientist, Dr Eduardo Zorita, has called for Dr Mann and Dr Jones to be barred from any further participation in the IPCC. Even our own George Monbiot, horrified at finding how he has been betrayed by the supposed experts he has been revering and citing for so long, has called for Dr Jones to step down as head of the CRU.

Booker points out that some very strong supporters of global whoring are now “investigating” the CRU scandal. Let the whitewash carpet bombing begin.

There is powerful evidence of conspiracy in the leaked files. American taxpayer’s money has been funneled to these people. We need investigations of what went on – and not the usual suspects conducting the inquiries. Please go read the whole piece, Booker is on a roll.

The British press is working itself into a towering rage  – they fully understand that they have been lied to. That has traditionally been a surefire way to draw the wrath of the press. Not so much in America, however. Our media is too far into bed with the conspiracy, apparently.

Your Aluminum Finish, Slightly Diminished

An odd little story out of Venezuela. Despite (or maybe because of) the antics of (T)hugo Chavez, Venezuelans are flocking to plastic surgeons. Going into debt to get a nip and tuck or a boob job:

“There is never a question of not doing it, but of how you can do it. We all want to get everything done,” said Helen Patino, a 37-year-old former model who had her first breast augmentation when she was 21 and her third about three months ago.

Venezuela’s inflation is the highest in Latin America, up more than 20 percent in the first 10 months of this year and the South American nation is in recession after a five year boom.

Hard times may even encourage cosmetic procedures as people look for ways to lift their spirits, with many dipping into savings or taking on debt to get operations, surgeons say.

“The financial crisis has spurred people to spend more on themselves … to console themselves in this crisis. I have not seen demand diminishing,” said Peter Romer, a plastic surgeon in Caracas.

One wonders if there will be a plastic surgery boom in the new Omerica if the won gets his agenda in place.

The very old now Jefferson Airplane lyrics seem appropriate.

You Keep Using That Word….

… I do not think it means what you think it means. Mark Steyn looks at what “peer-reviewed” means in the world of climate change true-believer thuggery:

But don’t worry, it’s all “peer-reviewed.”

Here’s what Phil Jones of the CRU and his colleague Michael Mann of Penn State mean by “peer review”. When Climate Research published a paper dissenting from the Jones-Mann “consensus,” Jones demanded that the journal “rid itself of this troublesome editor,” and Mann advised that “we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers.”

So much for Climate Research. When Geophysical Research Letters also showed signs of wandering off the “consensus” reservation, Dr. Tom Wigley (”one of the world’s foremost experts on climate change”) suggested they get the goods on its editor, Jim Saiers, and go to his bosses at the American Geophysical Union to “get him ousted.” When another pair of troublesome dissenters emerge, Dr. Jones assured Dr. Mann, “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

Which, in essence, is what they did. The more frantically they talked up “peer review” as the only legitimate basis for criticism, the more assiduously they turned the process into what James Lewis calls the Chicago machine politics of international science. The headline in the Wall Street Journal Europe is unimproveable: “How To Forge A Consensus.” Pressuring publishers, firing editors, blacklisting scientists: That’s “peer review,” climate-style. The more their echo chamber shriveled, the more Mann and Jones insisted that they and only they represent the “peer-reviewed” “consensus.” And gullible types like Ed Begley Jr. and Andrew Revkin of the New York Times fell for it hook, line and tree-ring.

The sad thing is that the media types who have willingly suspended their disbelief and bought into regurgitating their regurgitated peer-reviewed “science” do not understand that they will not have a place in the new order. They will have done their only useful service in selling the new order. After that, only a few will be needed.

Most will be discarded.

Not so many years ago, responsible journalists would have followed the money and seen that global whoring pimp-in-chief Algore stands to make ridiculous amounts of money if governments and economies bow to his “science”. And they would have been more than a bit jaundiced in looking at his antics. Now, not so much.

They’ve swallowed the proffered kool-aid and puked it back on their diminishing readership.

There is now some very compelling evidence of a conspiracy to suppress data, crush dissent and force government policy into a certain direction. Most of the media is uninterested. That says a lot about them and what they stand – or rather kneel – for.

A Belief In Magic…

…Is no way to run a country. Matthew Continetti, writing at The Weekly Standard, explains the magical thinking the Democrats have engaged in for the past year:

Next time you run into a group of Democrats, offer to splash water on their faces. They’ve spent 2009 in a dream state, and it’s time they wake up. They’re convinced that they can subsidize health insurance for millions of people while also “bending the cost curve” of health care spending. They want to sign us up for the political equivalent of one of those three-step “eat more to lose weight” diets. Step one: Pile on the expenditures, regulations, taxes, and fees. Step two: Close your eyes. Step three: Pray it all works out in the end.

Sorry, it won’t. Entitlements cost money, and they almost invariably cost more than the government’s initial predictions. When you increase demand for a product and the supply remains fixed, the price rises. Thanks to the individual mandate, the Democratic health care bills lasso Americans into a heavily regulated health insurance oligopoly. All these new consumers will wander through the government-run “exchanges,” buying the plans they can afford with taxpayer subsidies. As demand for health care increases, so will the cost.

There is nothing, literally nothing, that the Federal government runs without gross inefficiencies, waste and, all-too-often, fraud. Yet they want to get their mitts on a huge chunk of the American economy and promise that this time the magic will be there.

If you believe that, I have some really great real estate for you to buy. Small, unmarked bills only.

If you believe a power-mad Pelosi, a bumbling Reid and the world’s only Superbower* will end up cutting health care costs with their program, you seriously need your medication adjusted. Just don’t count on it happening under ObamaCare.

This bill will cripple the American economy, increase health care costs and cut the quality of care. Magical thinking will not change those things.

* Thank you Mark Steyn for a wonderful moniker for Obama.

What ObamaCare Will Bring

No, the Democrats will not be smarter or better with their schemes for health care. They will drag us right down a road others have already traveled.

And you and yours will pay for it.

The scandal of filthy and inadequate NHS hospitals deepened yesterday as figures revealed more than 3,000 patients could be dying needlessly every year.

Death rates are abnormally high at a fifth of trusts in England, with some 3,145 excess deaths at 26 hospitals during 2007/08.

The figures come at a time of collapsing public confidence in the NHS after two reports within 24 hours revealed high numbers of needless deaths at hospitals.

Yesterday, the chairman of Colchester Hospital in Essex, Richard Bourne, was sacked after it emerged that death rates were a massive 12 per cent higher than expected last year.

It means that there are likely to have been dozens of excess deaths at the trust, where regulators said safety was a low priority and patients had to wait months for treatment.

These are “flagship” medical trusts in Britain. These are as good as it gets under Britain’s socialized medicine.

This is what Obama and the left are gung ho to impose on America. This is what a “public option” looks like in the wild, so to speak.

How’s that hopeandchange working for you, folks?

Exposure

Or why a relatively tiny place like Dubai could be big trouble for the American banking system.

And while UK banks, such as Standard Chartered, HSBC (HBC), Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and Barclays (BCS) are much more exposed to Dubai World, with a total of more than $30 billion in default risk according to J.P. Morgan’s note, U.S. banks have extensive dealings with UK institutions. Those include trading and guaranteeing debt, which could translate into losses for U.S. banks.

There’s also U.S. banks’ interactions with their German counterparts. Dubai has loaned a lot of money to Eastern European nations, as has Germany. Any losses from defaults there could expose U.S. banks to some risk.

Finally, there’s the impact of already reeling commercial real estate markets worldwide.

“Dubai may have to unload some very prestigious properties at distressed prices, and this will drive the price of all commercial real estate lower,” said Bove. “That would clearly be a problem for American banks.”

Even though most American banks (other than Citibank) do not have huge direct exposure, the ripple effect looks to be a lot more dangerous at the moment. We are already on the economic ropes in this country right now. Another blow could be a real problem.

The Reality Show Based Community

One rather suspects that the Secret Service is collectively very, very upset at the moment. As they should be.

A White House official, informed of Bravo’s statement, said that was not the case. “We’ve already confirmed that they weren’t invited,” he said.

A publicist for the couple, Mahogany Jones, said they would not comment formally for now.

“Their counsel, Paul W. Gardner Esq. states emphatically that the Salahis’ did not ‘crash’ this event,” the statement said. “We look forward to setting the record straight very soon.”

Mr. Gardner, an entertainment lawyer, did not respond to a message left at his Baltimore office, which was closed for the holiday.

The Secret Service — which one Homeland Security official described as “completely embarrassed” by the incident — has begun an investigation into how the pair managed to get through multiple layers of high-level security to crash the affair, where they managed to rub shoulders, literally, with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, among others. Edwin Donovan, a spokesman for the Secret Service who spent his Thanksgiving Day fending off phone calls from reporters, said the investigation was continuing, but would not discuss it in detail.

This is very, very bad, That these two managed to get past what should be the tightest security in the world is more than a bit embarrassing for the Secret Service.

Not that the Obama presidency itself does not have the air of a very bad reality show about it.

Climaquiddick

McQ at QandO has a rather good name for the latest climate “data” revelations out of New Zealand. Another supposed authority on global warming appears to have been caught falsifying data:

As an aside, I’m going with the “quiddick” suffix vs. the “-gate”. As CR mentioned, “-gate” refers to a story the media will relentlessly pursue while “quiddick” refers to a story the media will do its level best to ignore. I think, given the current “coverage” that it is obvious “quiddick” is more applicable – although I do like another suggestion about a name for the whole AGW movement – “Global Whoring”. Fits.

Global Whoring certainly applies to the chief hysteric of the church of global warming. I am quite sure you know who I mean.

Not so very many years ago, the media would be going crazy digging into this. Now, however, they are firmly on board with the warmists and not so very interested in the fraud going on right under their noses.

Oddly enough, they can’t understand why their revenues have largely disappeared as they became cheerleaders for the left side of virtually every issue.

I like the Global Whoring moniker to describe the fraud these people have been selling. It really is time to get a full accounting of the activities of these people. No more secret data, no more secret computer code. If they are paid with public funds, their data must be public.

unprecedentedsidential

Seriously, have you ever seen an ego this big in the White House before? I have been around for a number of years and have lived through the presidencies of enough presidents to make me wince. But the blatant, unprecedented claims of the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue  to being so super-unprecedented as to be without precedent in a completely unprecedented fashion are indicative of a certainly unprecedentedly huge self-regard of his unprecedentedness.

Despite his lack of actual accomplishments.

“It says how very unique he feels he is,” said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who worked in the Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and Carter administrations. Hess described Obama as “a man who sees himself as unprecedented in every way … given his background — his mother, his father, where he grew up, how he became president of the United States.”

“Of course, biblically, there’s nothing new under the sun, and for most everything he’s done as president there is some precedent for somewhere,” he added. “What he does is variations on a theme.”

Still, Hess said, the word doesn’t have “great political currency.”

“I don’t think he gets special credit for being unprecedented, but he thinks that way,” he said. “I think that tells us more about him than really anything else about how he runs the White House.”

Isn’t that cute? He thinks he’s special and everything. Gee, I’ll bet he does a  two and a half gainer into his pants every morning rather than donning them the traditional way.

Sadly, there is plenty of precedent for a cipher of a mediocrity with a huge self-regard claiming their unprecedented specialness. So he’s not even being unprecedented in that.

(The “best and the brightest” munchkins in the Wizard of O’s White House also desperately need a really good thesaurus, just so they can come up with some other superlative to describe their unprecedentedness. They could also use a dictionary.)

Those Not Consulted

Before Barack Obama decided to try the 9/11 masterminds in New York (while setting up Eric Holder to be the fall guy when something goes wrong) perhaps he might have consulted a few – more than a few, actually – real stakeholders. Like those who lost family members in the Twin Towers. People like Peter Regan, who lost his father, a New York firefighter, on that day.

I will never be convinced that these terrorists did not commit an act of war. And committing an act of war does not qualify these men to enjoy the rights and liberties of the citizens of this country, rights that so many have died to protect.

I do not care to hear any explanation or reason for such an act. To give these savages an audience is wrong. I detest a decision that gives them a public forum blocks from the still highly visible act of hate.

I urge this administration to reconsider its decision to try these men in a civilian courtroom. And give them another opportunity to spew their hate.

I’m on the record on this one already. These murderous thugs are illegal combatants under the Geneva Conventions and are not worthy of civilian legal protections under American law. Period. They are mass murderers who committed an act of illegal war against the United States. They should be tried in a military court, not in New York City.

And Obama should not be spitting on the families of the victims in this fashion.

I’m quite sure the Wizard of O will not reconsider his decision (his decision, not Holder’s) unless the polls really show this is damaging him. In which case he will cheerfully throw Holder under the bus and reverse course.

So get loud, people. This decision is an affront to the victims, to the nation itself and even kicks dirt on so-called international law. Make sure the polls show that this decision hurts the one and the decision will be changed.

Environmental Determinism Makes A Comeback

Really, what passes for “science” these days is hysterical. From the BBC: Climate ‘is a major cause’ of conflict in Africa

Climate has been a major driver of armed conflict in Africa, research shows – and future warming is likely to increase the number of deaths from war.

US researchers found that across the continent, conflict was about 50% more likely in unusually warm years.

Writing in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), they suggest strife arises when the food supply is scarce in warm conditions.

Climatic factors have been cited as a reason for several recent conflicts.

Problem is this paper does nothing of the sort. The “Supporting Information” material of the report makes this abundantly clear:

We denote civil war in country i in year t as warit. All
country-year observations with a civil war in progress are coded
as 1s, and other observations are coded as 0s. The PRIO data
extend from 1946 to 2006, but because of the limited temporal
availability of some climate data products (discussed below), and
because the political processes underlying conflict were likely
changing rapidly before 1980 as increasing numbers of African
countries gained independence, we focus our analysis on the
1981–2002 period.

Got that? Only 20 years are looked at in this study. Total. Given that no link between (warning: nonsense term) “climate change” could possibly be established over a mere 20 years worth of data, why was this “study” even written? How could it possibly be published? It would be as if I wrote a paper claiming to be based upon Boyle’s Law without ever discussing gas under pressure. It’s nonsense pure and simple.

This objection doesn’t even take into account the confounding variables rife in any such attempt to subject human behavior to environmental determinism, an idea real scientists tossed in the trash generations ago. Think of all the racist nonsense about the industriousness of cool climate “Nordic races” used to perpetuate the myth of white superiority in previous centuries. Now, compare those beliefs with this study focusing on the propensity of Africans to violence based upon their warm climate.

Really, we are comfortable going there nowadays?

But, hey, I’ve got a competeing theory. My theory says a warming climate will lessen the potential for conflict. Using North America as my test subject, and a more climatically friendly time period of 200 years, I will divide history into two segments; 1801-1900 & 1901-2000.

Using the “Wars of the World” timeline here are the North American conflicts:

1801-1900 (Cool Period)

1. Mexian War of Independence 1810-23
2. US Occupation of West Florida 1810
3. Tecumseh’s War 1811
4. War of 1812
5. Creek War 1813-14
6. Fort Mims Massacre 1813
7. Seven Oaks Massacre 1816
8. First Seminole War 1817-18
9. Vesy’s Rebellion 1822
10. Yaqui Uprising: Mexico 1825-27
11. UPCA Civil War 1826-29
12. Mexican Conservative Revolt 1827
13. Mexican-Spanish War 1829
14. Turner’s Rebellion 1831
15. Black Hawk’s War 1832
16. Indian Stream “War” 1835
17. Murrel’s Rebellion 1835
18. Second Seminole War 1835-43
19. Texan Independence War 1835-36
20. Papineau’s Rebellion 1837
21. Mackenzie’s Rebellion 1837
22. Aroostook War 1838-39
23. Buckshot War 1838
24. Pastry War 1838
25. Comanche-Texan Border War 1840
26. Dorr’s Rebellion in Rhode Island 1842
27. Texan “Archive War” 1842
28. Bear Flag Revolt in California 1846
29. Mexican-American War 1846-48
30. Yucatan Caste War 1847-55
31. Whitman Massacre 1847
32. Cayuse War 1848-55
33. Walker’s Invasion: Mexico 1853-54
34. Third Seminole War 1855-58
35. Rogue River Wars 1855-6
36. Wakarusa War 1855
37. Yakima War 1855-8
38. Pottawatomie Massacre 1856
39. Spirit Lake Massacre 1857
40. Mountain Meadows Massacre 1857
41. Utah War 1857-8
42. Mexican Reformation War 1858-67
43. Brown’s Raid on Harpers Ferry 1859
44. Apache and Navaho War 1860-5
45. American Civil War 1861-65
46. Franco-Mexican War 1862-67
47. Sioux War 1862-64
48. Sand Creek Massacre 1864
49. Saint Albans Raid 1864
50. Sioux War 1865-68
51. Fetterman Massacre 1866
52. Fenian Raiders 1866-70
53. Wagon Box Fight 1867
54. Red River Rebellion 1869-70
55. Blood River Massacre in Montana 1870
56. Camp Grant Massacre 1871
57. Apache War 1871-73
58. Red River Indian War 1874-75
59. Kiowa War 1874
60. Yaqui & Mayan Uprising in Mexico 1875-98
61. Apache War 1876-83
62. Mexican Coup 1876
63. Sioux War 1876-77
64. Cheyenne War 1878
65. Victorio’s Apache Raiding 1879
66. Apache War 1885-6
67. Northwest Rebellion in Canada 1885
68. Sioux War 1890-91

1901-2000 (Warm Period)

1. Assassination of McKinley 1901
2. Black Patch War 1904-9
3. Mexican Civil War 1911-1914
4. Mexican Revolt 1914-15
5. Poncho Villa’s Raids 1916-17
6. Preparedness Day Bombing in America 1916
7. Mexican Civil War 1920
8. Mexican Catholic Revolt 1927-29
9. “Bonus Marchers” Intervention 1932
10. Mexican Conservative Revolt 1936
11. Internment of Japanese-Americans 1942-45
12. Attack on Blair House 1950
13. Black Panthers in America 1966-73
14. Chiapas Rebellion: Mexico 1994
15. EPR Revolt Mexico 1996

Thus, I’ll argue that a warming climate has resulted in a 78% reduction in armed conflicts compared to cooler eras.

See how idiotic it is?

Cross posted at The Iconic Midwest

Those Dam Kangaroos

Man’s best friend – and man – assaulted by dam kangaroo:

A ROGUE kangaroo put a Victoria man in hospital after he tried to stop it from drowning his dog in a farm dam.

Chris Rickard, 49, of Arthurs Creek, sustained deep cuts to his abdomen and face after being attacked by the kangaroo as he tried to free his dog, which was being held underwater by the animal.

That would be a dam kangaroo, a particularly difficult subspecies. Spraying is not generally effective. Possibly using the correct bait in traps would work, however.

The Truth About Government Motors

Edward Niedermeyer reveals the truth about the surprise announcement that General Motors would “repay” loans from the American taxpayers – even as it reported a huge loss for the third quarter. It seems that the “repayment” is anything but in reality:

For starters, $6.7 billion doesn’t begin to scratch the surface of what G.M. actually owes us. Over the past 12 months, the Treasury has given it some $52 billion in the form of cash, loans and the purchase of that 60 percent of the company’s post-bankruptcy equity. And that number fails to take into account the two bailouts of G.M.’s former lending arm, GMAC, or the $3 billion spent on the “cash for clunkers program,” which doubtless kept the company from posting even deeper losses.

Moreover, G.M. is not, in the strictest sense, paying back taxpayers at all. Rather, it is refunding $6.7 billion of an $18 billion escrow account that was given to it by the government when it emerged from bankruptcy. The rest of that account will be used to cover fourth-quarter losses (including $2.8 billion pledged for the rescue of G.M.’s major parts supplier, Delphi), repay loans from the Canadian government, and possibly prop up the automaker’s shaky European operations. That escrow account is due to expire in June, at which time G.M. will repay what remains of the $6.7 billion from this week’s pledge — and then pocket the estimated $5.6 billion remainder.

There’s much more, go read it all.

My own opinion is that GM will not, in the long run, survive at all. Chrysler is likely to fold even sooner. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but I know I will not personally ever buy a vehicle from either company. I rather suspect that a lot of others feel the same way, judging from recent sales figures.

American taxpayers got taken for a ride on the GM and Chrysler bailouts by the Wizard of O and his munchkin minions – those companies are going to pay dearly for that as the taxpayers wake up to that fact.