Obama Instructs Federal Government to Reduce Pollution, ‘Lead by Example’

ANOTHER executive order? What’s he up to now, 25? Where are all the libs who went nuts when Bush signed a few executive orders?

What an unbelievable hypocrite this man is.
Does he think Americans didn’t notice that he and the wife took seperate planes to Denmark.
They spent over a million of taxpayers money and left a massive carbon footprint.
Then there was datenight to NYC, a NYC flyover photo-op, and trips all over the country to continue campaigning.
One set of rules for the WH one for everyone else.

Where is the executive order to double flush the toilet to save water and energy?

If Obama is going to lecture us again on how we can cut back then let them “lead by example” and stop wasting money and bankrupting the country.
Most Americans are cutting back on everything.
Obama is living the life of a rich celebrity and some of it on our dime–poor Michelle had to sacrifice by flying to Denmark with Oprah!
Lead by example and stop stuffing the pockets of rich supporters on Wall Street.
Who really believes the WH/Obama can lead anything?

The White House setting an example on how to scale back–now that’s funny.

Mr. Obama has clearly shown he can multi-task. Unfortunately, it seems Congress can not. Mr. President, you need to lazer like focus on two things:(1)Afghanistan; and (2) health care reform. For the next 90 days clear your personal calendar of everything else. You have talented people working for you. Time to delegate responsibly. It’s also time you made it clear to Sen. Reid and Spkr. Pelosi that you and the American people are sick and tired of nothing being accomplished in Congress. A press conference in which you explain that Congress should work five days a week, like the rest of us, instead of three would be helpful. Executive orders like this, a speech to the LGBT dinner, a kerfluffle over meeting the Dalai Lama, are only distraction ammunition for your opponents and the media. Get more rest, be more focused, and, frankly, be tougher. It’s past time that Congressional Democrats understood, like Republicans always do, who leads their party.

This is just a prelude to the massive tax increases he has in store on the climate bill.. NEVER trust a Marxist

B.Bear, I agree a laser focus is needed and that President Obama needs to step up and make his specific proposals clear to congress. However, I disagree with one of your two priorities for the president. One should indeed be Afghanistan– time is of the essence to be sure. The other, however, should not be health care (at least not the current health insurance reform morass) but the economy in general. He should insist that Congress quickly send him spending bills for the year that are fiscally responsible, and veto any that are larded up with pork projects. Then he should focus on job creation and finishing the job of cleaning up the financial mess still with us from last fall– mortgage relief is not working particularly well, new financial regulations have not been put firmly in place, etc. THere is indeed much to do and I think there is bipartisan support for getting it done.
Yes, I’m serious about the bipartisan statement. If he makes the right moves on AFghanistan, Republicans will back him up. I can see McCain, Graham, Snowe, and others supporting him on sensible financial regulation and other measures to help the economy. Health care reform can wait until the economy is back on firmer footing– then we can fight over whether more than a targeted move to provide insurance for the 8 to 10 million who truly need help obtaining health insurance (as opposed to those millions eligible for SCHIp, Medicaid, or Medicare who are not enrolled, those who can afford insurance but choose not to carry it, and those who are not legally eligible for assistance) and an concentrated effort to fix the financial problems that exist for Medicare/ Medicaid now.

We global temperatures are in decade long cooling trend.
Dump Letterman.

i think its a great idea and have waited too long for this.. hope he instals solar bipv on the Fed buildings..
Finally

Sigmonde provided an excellent example of a Bush executive order that libs went nuts over. Here’s another– the EO modifying the Presidential Records Act. And the complaints about Bush EOs started even before 9/11. I recall there were some EOs that dealt with unions early on that raised hackles– like one that said government projects did not have to use all union labor and another that said government contractors had to notify union workers that legally they were allowed to withhold the portion of their union dues that went to political contribution.
Yes, there were numerous EOs from Bush II that made Democrats and libs (not always the same thing) go crazy, as I remember.

We global temperatures are in decade long cooling trend.
Posted by: Mace
it only takes ten years to determine global warming effects?……. thank you for your exhaustive research.

I can see McCain, Graham, Snowe, and others supporting him on sensible financial regulation and other measures to help the economy
Posted by: moderate
if the ‘too big to fail’ problem is not addressed, or
not enough bank capital reserves, unregulated ‘exotic’ financial instruments, CEO pay scale and bonus, and more….. then ‘financial regulation’ becomes a meaningless concept

@YO – You are on a roll today. Obama should sign you up as one of his apologists.
Regarding the amount of CO in the air:
The principal constituents of the atmosphere of Earth are nitrogen (78 percent) and oxygen (21 percent). The atmospheric gases in the remaining 1 percent are argon (0.9 percent), carbon dioxide (0.03 percent), varying amounts of water vapor, and trace amounts of hydrogen, ozone, methane, carbon monoxide, helium, neon, krypton, and xenon.

Does this mean that the Obamas won’t use two jets and spew a million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere for another losing effort?

“build yourself a plastic sheeting cubicle, seal with duct tape to make it air tight, relax,..then wait about 6 hours, and let us know whether CO2 had any adverse pollutant type effects..”
This is simply mindless.
Plants require CO2 to survive and create the oxygen we need.
Not everyone should be allowed to have children.

How much did it cost us to buy all those white coats handed out to doctors yesterday?
Obama apparently didn’t learn anything by his stunning embarrassment in Copenhagen.
To Obama everything is still a dog and pony show to make him look good.
Why not? the Obama Media wouldn’t dare show pictures of lab coats being handed out just for a photo op.

===Lead by example===
How about we try this…instead of 2 airplanes to Copenhagen, you just take one?

Next, in a fireside chat about our national malaise, Jimmy Carter, Jr. will tell us to wear a warmer sweater and turn the thermostat down this winter.

But wait–didn’t The One just dazzle them at the UN? Don’t they just love him there?
“The United Nations called on Tuesday for a new global reserve currency to end dollar supremacy which has allowed the United States the “privilege” of building a huge trade deficit.
“Important progress in managing imbalances can be made by reducing the reserve currency country?s ‘privilege’ to run external deficits in order to provide international liquidity,” UN undersecretary-general for economic and social affairs, Sha Zukang, said.”

“Does he even know how to lead?”
A fair number of people think he does. For more details, see my comment posted Oct 6, 2009 12:34:11 AM

YO:”maybe you can do an experiment for us, remember Tom Ridge’s suggestion about how to protect from bio-weapons attacks…
build yourself a plastic sheeting cubicle, seal with duct tape to make it air tight, relax,..then wait about 6 hours, and let us know whether CO2 had any adverse pollutant type effects..”
I tried it and it was quite fun. It only took a few minutes until I passed out from oxygen deprivation. In this lively experiment I increased the concentration of CO2 in my immediate surroundings from 387 parts per million to about 100,000 parts per million, an increase of more than 25,000%! Even so CO2 had no adverse “pollutant type” effects, rather a lack of oxygen caused this mammal to shut down for a time. Not surprising.
What’s your point again? Are you suggesting if we don’t stop driving our cars we’ll all pass out from oxygen deprivation? That’s just as silly as suggesting an increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm to 400 ppm (an increase of ~40%) will cause ice sheets to slide into the ocean. No one knows what the true radiative forcing of doubling atmospheric CO2 is (we know it is limited, however), nor does anyone know how the rest of the incredibly complex climate system will react. All we can say is there is no conclusive evidence to state today’s warming is predominantly man-made, unprecedented or catastrophic.
Lastly, look up Ken Briffa Yamal Series for an education on how paleoclimatogists create hockey stick shaped temperature graphs.

“The principal constituents of the atmosphere of Earth are nitrogen (78 percent) and oxygen (21 percent). The atmospheric gases in the remaining 1 percent are argon (0.9 percent), carbon dioxide (0.03 percent)”
That’s carbon dioxide 0.03% and rising rapidly.

How convenient for the naysayers to demand conclusive evidence which cannot ever be provided. Are we supposed to find an identical planet to Earth to use as a control for testing purposes? We believe the evidence IS conclusive enough to make a judgment call on it.
Posted by: Skip | Oct 6, 2009 3:09:09 PM
————–
Naysayers? I prefer rationalist, critical thinker, professional engineer, realist, one who demands excellence.
The burden of proof is always on the one who is positing a theory. Always. You may believe the evidence to date is conclusive but not many scientists do. Please spare me the “thousands of scientists” canard.

Just once I’d like the Global Warming diciples to explain to me how rising CO2 levels can cause the temperature to go up when the data states that on average the CO2 levels rise 800 years after warming begins.That’s the data,folks-warming BEFORE rising CO2 levels.Isn’t that the same as saying that a clap of thunder causes the bolt of lighting that precedes it?

Just once I’d like the Global Warming diciples to explain to me how rising CO2 levels can cause the temperature to go up when the data states that on average the CO2 levels rise 800 years after warming begins.That’s the data,folks-warming BEFORE rising CO2 levels.Isn’t that the same as saying that a clap of thunder causes the bolt of lighting that precedes it?
Posted by: Nephron | Oct 6, 2009 11:44:12 PM
Surely you’ve read the unpacking of the whole “carbon dioxide doesn’t lead, it lags” argument. I know Gore started all this (aaaargh!) but the short answer (short for me, lol, which I realize isn’t very short) is that before human intervention, changes in CO2 lagged temperature rises. However, CO2 causes temperature rise AND warming causes CO2 outgassing from oceans. This feedback system is confirmed by the CO2 record – in the past, the amplifying effect of CO2 feedback enabled warming to spread across the globe and take the planet out of the ice age. So, you’re talking about very long (glacial-interglacial) timescales. While the carbon dioxide didn’t cause the first 800 years of warming, it likely caused or greatly contributed to the next 4200 years of warming.
The notion that CO2 lags and amplifies temperature was predicted in 1990 in a paper by Claude Lorius and James Hansen. It wasn’t a shocker for the Global Warming experts and community.
My favorite response to this Q is Deltoid’s:
“CO2 is not causing global warming, in fact, CO2 is lagging temperature change in all reliable datasets. ”
See also my forthcoming paper: Chickens do not lay eggs, because they have been observed to hatch from them”.

“But don’t tell us that we should lead by example when you are jet setting around the world”
___________________________________
You seem to have missed out on the fact the President of the United States has international duties.
At least he isn’t jetting back and forth to his Texas ranch every second weekend like the last one.