Cap and Trade hijinks

If you want to try to understand the convoluted logic often used by those trying to rip apart cap and trade read on. (If you do not, I do not blame you.)

Read Greg Pollowitz's post at National Review. First we are pointed to this article at WSJ. Then Greg revels in the fact that Dallas Burtraw and Richard Sweeney of Resources for the Future write a letter to WSJ and get a "slap-down" from the editors at WSJ.

What neither WSJ or Greg Pollowitz bother to mention? A post as critical of the WSJ interpretation of the data as Butraw and Sweeney were. By whom? Tim Herzog, Director of Online Communications at the World Resources Institute. Yes, the same place that produced the data that WSJ relied on for the original premise of their article.

Instead, they chose to rip into two other people for not interpreting the data their way. Ignore the source of the data's interpretation? Well, I guess that Tim Herzog carried a little too much weight for the WSJ to just "slap-down."

There is a lot of "ignoring the source's interpretation" of data going around lately. George Will did his own interpretation of climate data a few weeks ago. Then defended it when he was attacked for misusing the data as I wrote here.

There is plenty of it going on with financial and economic data too. I guess once the data is out anyone can interpret it however they wish? Doesn't work like that. Especially when you are not the expert or even an expert.

Please, people. If you want to make your arguments come up with data and expert interpretations of that data that supports your case. You've got to have somebody to do it! Hell, Big Tobacco found 'doctors' who said that smoking wasn't a risk to your health for years!

Stop trying to twist the data to your mold in spite of what the experts say. That's how we got Iraq. Remember Wolfowitz and the "It'll pay for itself in a year!" meme? Yeah.

Postscript

One more thing. Click through to the WSJ article. It's entitled "Who Pays for Cap and Trade?" correct? Then answer me this: How come the title bar at the top of your browser says, "Barack Obama's Cap and Trade Progam is a Tax on the Working Class"? Considering I have yet to hear an actual Cap and Trade policy be put forth from the White House that is a little much, don't you think? Must be why they kinda snuck it up into the title bar. Too misleading to make it the actual title. Slimy. Very Slimy. The WSJ is becoming the New York Post. Wonder why? ;)

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

It's got electoral votes. It's what politicians crave.