Archive for March, 2022

Still more: Is Europe toast?

March 30, 2022

WSJ: “If Mr. Biden and the Europeans don’t get Ukraine right, Europe’s future is finished.”
==============
Last week, we first posed the question: Is Europe toast?

We argued that Western Europe has dug itself two very deep holes by increasing its energy dependence on Russia … and by deprioritizing (and defunding) security & defense.

Neither of these holes are candidates for quick filling.

Over the weekend, following right on cue, the WSJ’s Dan Henninger opined:

If Mr. Biden and the Europeans don’t get Ukraine right, Europe’s future is finished.

Henninger provided the poignant historic backdrop:

World War II was fought largely because Europe was experiencing the indiscriminate murder of civilians under Nazi military doctrine.

Since coming out of the ruins in 1945, the collective European memory has sustained an aversion to allowing the reappearance of that horror on its soil.

But, it’s happening now, again.

(That horror) is being revived by Mr. Putin who is attempting the extermination of a people and the obliteration of their cities.

=============

The rub, as articulated decades ago by Donald Rumsfeld:

If you look at the entire NATO Europe today, the center of gravity is shifting to the east.

Specifically, according to Henninger, Rumsfeld was referring to  Poland and the Baltics (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), the NATO members that for years warned France and Germany — and U.S. presidents — that Mr. Putin’s Russia was a clear and present danger.

It’s apparent that for all practical purposes, that message has largely fallen on deaf ears.

“Old Europe” (Great Britain, Germany, France) was geographically buffered from Russia by, in Rumsfeld’s words, the Eastern flank (i.e. “New Europe”).

Falsely comfortable, Western Europe paid  “yeah, yeah, yeah” lip service to the threat  while refocusing its attention and resources on social spending and, more recently, climate control.

Now, as Obama’s spiritual advisor Rev. Wright would say: “The chickens are coming home to roost”.

If Ukraine falls to Putin, Poland’s geographic buffer is gone.

Then what?

Henninger poses the central immediate question:

What will old Europe do in the next four weeks, as Mr. Putin launches cruise missiles from Russian territory or the Black Sea into apartment buildings, schools and hospitals across Ukraine?

The still sleepy-eyed Western European nations seem comfortable that Putin’s invasion will fail in Ukraine … or, that Putin will simply stop at Ukraine’s borders … or that the U.S. will massively intervene to bail them out (for the third time in history).

In other words their strategy is to pass their tea, champagne or beer … and hope for the best.

Yipes.

===============

Flashback:

Remember when Saddam Hussein’s invaded Kuwait in August 1990

When George W. Bush mulled over whether to repel the Iraqi leader militarily or not, British PM Margaret Thatcher admonished Bush with the classic: “Remember, this is no time to go wobbly, George.”

Apparently, Boris Johnson, et. al., didn’t internalize the message.

This past weekend, British foreign minister Liz Truss said that Russian sanctions could be lifted if Russia withdraws from Ukraine and commits to end aggression there. Source

We’ll let you skate on unprovoked invasions, civilian carnage, and other war crimes.

If you just promise us that you won’t do it again, we’ll just turn the page and stay the course.

Very “Old Europe”, right?

Biden’s staff tries to keep him on message….

March 29, 2022

The tool of choice: “cheat sheets”.
============

Let’s set the stage.

Yesterday, President Biden faced the press, trying to remediate the stir that he caused with his European trip ad libs: “Respond in kind” to chemical weapons; American soldiers “will see for yourself” when they go to Ukraine; “Putin must be removed from power”.

Over the weekend (e.g. on all the Sunday talk shows) Biden’s staff was hard at work “clarifying” his remarks (i.e. in DC parlance, “walking them back”).

Then, the handler’s decided to have the President put the punctuation marks on the walk backs at a controlled press conference.

From the get-go, things went off track

Biden opened by ad libbing; “I’m not walking anything back”.

Nonetheless, he tried to dutifully follow the script that the handlers gave him.

How do we know?

He got sloppy with his crib notes … and a press photographer snapped them for the public record.

imageimage

Couple of interesting aspects to this story…

> The bold print questions bear a remarkable similarity (i.e. practically verbatim) to the questions posed by the administration-friendly reporters who were called on.

> Even the sequence of the questions that reporters asked seemed to match-up with the cheat sheet.  Hmm.

> The crib sheet didn’t have minute details (like the population of Mariupol) …  they listed high level “talking points” that one might have expected an involved, alert person to easily recall from memory.

> There was a glaring mismatch between the scripted answers …  and Biden’s opening declaration of no walk-back.

That clearly violated the classic presentation mantra: Tell them what you’re going to tell them; tell them; tell them what you told them.

So, what we learned was that Biden either was or was not walking back his controversial remarks.

The only certain conclusion that one might draw was that Biden and his staff aren’t on the same page.

It wasn’t even clear that Joe knew that his staff was on the airwaves all weekend walking back his comments.

How could he not know that?

Makes one wonder who in the administration made the decision to deploy the staff to take to the air waves and walk back the statements?

Obviously, it wasn’t Biden.

So, who’s running the show?

Are Biden’s ad libs simply inconvenient truths?

March 28, 2022

“Not everything that is true needs to be spoken”
==============

During the Ukraine crisis, whenever he has gone off the teleprompter and spoken his mind, Biden has made reverberating headlines that his handlers have had to quickly (and forcefully) “clarify”.

First was his reference to “minor incursions” which was broadly interpreted as giving Putin a green light to invade Ukraine, provided that the invasion was contained to the east most Russian-speaking areas.

Then, over the weekend, he told American paratroopers stationed in Poland that they would see first-hand the physical destruction and human catastrophe in Ukraine “when they go there”… interpreted by some (many?) as an indication that U.S. “boots on the ground” in Ukraine was not off the table.

And, the coup de grâce: His teleprompter-be-damned declaration that “Putin must be removed from power” … widely taken as a thinly veiled threat of “regime change”.

So, what’s going on?

Are these simply misstatements … a lack of “message discipline” … or something deeper.

==============

My hunch: When speaking off-the-cuff, Biden is uttering stuff that he has heard or seen before (say, in his cabinet meetings) … and that he does genuinely believe.

On this weekend’s Sunday shows, the current Ambassador to NATO coined Biden’s statements to be “principled reactions”.

Said differently, I don’t think that he’s just making this stuff up.

That raises the question of message control.

Why can’t Biden stay between diplomatic guardrails and leave some things unsaid?

=============

I’ve got a couple of hypotheses…

Disclaimer: I’m not a doctor or psychologist, but I’ve seen many CEO’s in operation and have an unfortunate family medical history that includes Alzheimer’s

First, Biden is widely slammed for being a weak leader, a figurehead president who isn’t in charge and who lacks bold stroke courage.

He’s got to be cognizant of the public opinion … and. it has got to irk him.

What’s the logical reaction? What would most CEO’s do?

Go off their handlers’ prepared script to demonstrate control … and, do so with macho pronouncements (e.g. “Putin must go”), that burnish their manhood credentials.

An obvious problem with this hypothesis is that Biden’s handlers immediately step in to whack his manhood by “clarifying” (i.e. “retracting”) his remarks.

=============

Second, one of the things I witnessed in my mom’s Alzheimer ward was a reversion to childlike behaviors.

One of the manifestations: unvarnished truth-telling … often inappropriate uttering of beliefs and opinions that are genuinely held to be true.

Think: “this food is awful”, “You’re dress is ugly”, “You’re ugly”.

These are “inconvenient truths.”

Kids do it … and so do old folks with slipping cognitive controls.

As former Senator Max Baucus is fond of reminding: “Not everything that is true needs to be spoken”.

Baucus — also a former Ambassador to China — has a reputation for injecting historical and philosophical quotations into his speeches and remarks. Source

So, what’s the prescription?

=============

The WSJ’s James Freeman opines that “the President should avoid public speaking .. at least when the topic is important.”

Freeman argues that:

Some issues are just too important to be left to an unscripted Joe Biden.

These are dangerous times and we would all be much safer if Mr. Biden would speak less.

Yes, it’s important for all of us to be able to hear from our elected officials and to assess the content of their remarks as well as the skill and conviction with which they advocate for their policies.

But this particular elected official does not appear to be up to the task.

While we consider the implications, Mr. Biden should try to say as little as possible in public during an international crisis.

That’s a pretty sad commentary… sad, but probably true … and worrisome in itself.

Biden: “Never said sanctions would be a deterrence”

March 25, 2022

But, his advisers and spokespeople say they do … and he did
==============

In his NATO press conference, Biden was asked by a CBS reporter:

Sir, deterrence didn’t work.

What makes you think Vladimir Putin will alter course based on the action (on sanctions) that you’ve taken today?

Biden got huffy and went off the teleprompter script:

That’s not what I said.

You’re playing a game with me.

Let’s get something straight.

I did not say that sanctions would deter him.

Sanctions never deter.

You keep talking about that.

Sanctions never deter.

Just a minute there, Mr. President.

Let’s go to the video tape…

click for a 30 second mash-up
image

> VP Kamala: “The purpose of the sanctions has always been and continues to be deterrence.”

> Press messenger Psaki: “Sanctions can be a powerful tool. The overall goal of imposing sanctions on Russia is to have a deterrent effect.”

> Deputy national security adviser Daleep Singh: “Sanctions serve a higher purpose. They’re meant to prevent and deter a large-scale invasion of Ukraine that could involve the seizure of major cities, including Kyiv. They’re meant to prevent large-scale human suffering that could involve tens of thousands of casualties in a conflict.”

> Pentagon press secretary John Kirby: ”Clearly, we want them (the sanctions)  to have a deterrent effect.”

National security adviser,Jake Sullivan:The president believes that sanctions are intended to deter.”

=============

Maybe Biden’s key advisers are all going rogue … or they heard him wrong.

Or, maybe Joe’s  is just spewing malarkey again

So who and what are you going to believe — Biden … or his entourage of advisers … or your own eyes?

================

P.S. Seriously, somebody should alert Biden to the modern day miracle of video recording…

Greater threat to the planet: Putin or climate change?

March 24, 2022

Putin is the clear & present danger … so, unleash our oil & gas industry, Joe.
=============

Business leaders are now pushing Biden for an “Energy Marshall Plan” … to mobilize U.S. oil & gas companies for energy independence and export capacity.

Here’s what they’re thinking…

Analytically speaking, risk assessment boils down to a couple of decision criteria:

> How immediate is the threat?

> How severe are the potential consequences?

> How likely are the consequences?

> How might mitigation change the odds?

Applying these risk assessment criteria, the answer to the headlined question is pretty clear (to me).

Putin is demonstrably a clear, present, proven and potentially nuclear danger.

Just turn on your TV to watch the slaughter of innocent people and the destruction of a nation and a culture.

Putin is maniacal (and probably crazy), determined and has planet-destroying nuclear weapons that he might use if he’s cornered.

The climate change threat is murky (sorry, but the science is even more unsettled than it is on Covid) and prospective (decades off) … with asserted and uncertain long-term consequences.

Bottom line: If the choice is binary, Putin must be stopped ASAP.

If the Putin and climate threats need to be “balanced”, then the scale should be tilted to stopping Putin.

Putin is clearly the more immediate threat.

Climate control can wait.

Let’s go through the decision criteria…

=============

THREAT ASSESSMENT

Immediacy 

The Putin threat is happening now.  Just turn on your TV right and watch the slaughter of innocent people and the destruction of a nation and a culture.

Even climate control zealots concede that its potential “existential threat” from climate change is decades away.

=============

Severity

Climate control zealots say that, unchecked by draconian mitigation, the planet will be a degree or two warmer in 50 years … and that’s enough to end life as we know it.

Let’s assume that’s true.

Some might argue that the Putin threat is localized and contained.

The Ukraine invasion is tragic and sad, but c’mon man, it’s just Ukraine.

Once Putin gets to the Polish border, the U.N. and NATO will stop him in his tracks.

Might be true.

But, what if Putin is, in fact, crazy and, when cornered, he starts lobbing nukes.

Suddenly, we’re looking at a level of global destruction that gives climate change a run for its money.

==============

Likelihood

So, what is the likelihood that climate change puts planetary existence at risk?

Sure, clean energy beats dirty energy and a green mindset makes sense.

But, the case for climate change ending the planet’s existence is a reach.

It is disputable whether the “data is clear” and that “the science is settled” on the consequences of climate change.

For details, see 16 Reasons why I’m lukewarm on climate change

Personally, I’d score the likelihood of Putin unleashing planet-destroying nukes higher than a climate existential threat.

Update: Yesterday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky issued a dire appeal for help as Russia’s attacks across the country intensified and the Russians set afire the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.

In Zelensky’s words: “The end of the world has arrived.” 

=============

Mitigation

This is where things get dicey.

I’m confident that the U.S. will become increasingly green.

That’s a good thing.

I believe that American ingenuity and technology will — sometime and somehow over the next 50 years — provide game-changing climate control remedies.

But, as Igor Sechin, CEO of Russia’s state-owned Rosneft, has warned

Some ecologists and politicians urge for a hasty energy transition, yet it requires an unrealistically fast launch of renewable energy sources and faces issues with storage, ensuring reliability and stability of power generation. WSJ

And, to this point, climate control initiatives in the U.S. and Europe have largely been virtue signaling … outsourcing fossil fuel production to other countries (most notably Russia!) … putting the U.S. and Europe in a vulnerable security position.

Question: Is Russian oil cleaner than U.S. or Canadian oil?

Answer: Nope!

So, the pivotal question is how to “mitigate” the Putin threat.

Well, maybe Putin can be jawboned and shunned … and will come to his senses and rein in  his destructive tendencies.

My opinion: Odds of that are essentially zero.

Maybe the rational Russian people will rise up and take him out.

I’m betting the under on that one, too

Let’s try diplomacy.

How’s then been working out?

Not to worry, NATO will ultimately use military force to contain the Putin risk at the Polish border.

English translation: NATO nations will encourage the U.S. to kick Putin’s ass when the time comes

Military containment might be doable … but, at a high cost with the incumbent risk that a crazy Putin starts a nuclear war.

=============

So what to do?

Oh yeah, there are other Putin-mitigating options.

How about draining his war-mongering financial resources with sanctions?

In logic-speak: necessary but not sufficient … especially since the current sanctions explicitly rule out any transactions related to the flow of Russian oil.

According to Biden’s Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh:

“To be clear, our sanctions are not designed to cause any disruption to the current flow of energy from Russia to the world” Source

Say, what?

Bottom line: The only non-military way to cripple Putin’s war mongering is to use U.S. oil & gas production as a geo-political strategic tool … the geo-political strategic tool!

As one right-leaning pundit puts it:

Putin’s power comes from money, most of Putin’s money comes from oil and gas.

It stands to reason that if you’re trying to punish him, hitting him in the wallet is the most effective way to do it.

So why would our President specifically exempt what is the best, most effective, and really only significant way to hurt Putin in way that might impact his behavior?

Of course, there’s an explanation…

Biden is boxed by his party’s far left climate control zealots.

Nonetheless, as we’ve said before:

It’s time to reprioritize energy security and independence by unleashing U.S. oil & gas production!

He has to do an objective risk assessment (see above), stiff-arm his parity’s uber-left loons, restore U.S. energy superiority by unleashing our oil & gas industry.

It’s as simple as that!

 

More: Is Europe toast?

March 23, 2022

In 2018, Trump tried to warn NATO members …
=============

But, it took Putin’s Ukraine invasion to force a long overdue realization that reality bites.

As we posted yesterday:

Western European NATO nations have dug themselves into two very deep holes.

First, they have green-thought themselves into energy dependence on Russia … largely by declaring nuclear and non-Russian fossil fuels to be existential threats.

Second, they have de-prioritized security and grossly underspent on their own defense … apparently assuming that Putin’s Russia and China were just misunderstood nice guys … and that, worst case, the U.S. would swoop in and save them (again).

===============

Regarding the European energy hole, we channeled the WSJ’s Kimberly Strassel who opined that “Putin’s shocking violence in Ukraine — his willingness to wield energy as a weapon — sobered the Continent overnight”  … and optimistically pointed out that several European nations are already taking decisive remedial steps to minimize their Russian-energy dependence.

==============

Today, let’s look at the European security & defense hole

From the get-go, Trump chastised NATO nations for underspending on defense — if effect, shifting their responsibility to the U.S. and he threatened to withdraw the U.S. from NATO if other member nations didn’t increase their defense spending to at least 2% of their GDP.

At a NATO summit in 2018, Trump literally doubled down on his criticism of defense spending among NATO members by upping the target for defense spending to 4% of GDP.

At the time, left-leaning analysts and European leaders dismissed Trump’s 4% defense spending targets because he did not indicate specifically how the money would be spent or why such a massive increase in defense spending was needed. Brookings

I guess that Putin’s Ukraine invasion summarily and conclusively answers the “why” question.

===============

The most important current question is how the European nations will now act to fill their conspicuous security & defense hole.

According to the WSJ:

European NATO allies and Canada have increased defense spending, but many still don’t hit NATO’s commitment to contribute 2% of gross domestic product to defense.

The good news :

European Union heads of state or government said in a March 11 declaration that “we must resolutely invest more and better in defence capabilities.”

The leaders vowed to “increase substantially defence expenditures” and “invest further in the capabilities necessary to conduct the full range of missions.”

More specifically:

Germany, Europe’s biggest economy and its most notorious defense free rider, has pledged to meet its 2%  commitment … starting with an immediate €100 billion down payment.

Smaller countries are stepping up too. Poland, which already meets the NATO target, recently passed a law increasing defense spending to at least 3% of GDP in 2023.

Frontline nations Romania, Latvia and Lithuania have publicly set clear goals or passed legislation to boost.

Better late than never … but they’d better get hopping … Putin is on his way west.

Given the turn of events, Trump has every right to say “I told you so”.

Is Europe toast?

March 22, 2022

Putin’s Ukraine invasion has forced a long overdue realization that reality bites.
=============

Western European NATO nations have dug themselves into two very deep holes.

First, they have green-thought themselves into energy dependence on Russia … largely by declaring nuclear and non-Russian fossil fuels to be existential threats.

Second, they have de-prioritized security and grossly underspent on their own defense … apparently assuming that Putin’s Russia and China were just misunderstood nice guys … and that, worst case, the U.S. would swoop in and save them (again).

Brings to mind an old saying regarding the French: “We’ve saved their asses twice and they still haven’t forgiven us.”

=============

Let’s take first things first…

Regarding the European energy hole, Kimberly Strassel wrote in the WSJ:

The Europeans have embraced the climate religion with a fervor to rival Bernie Sanders.

Yet Mr. Putin’s shocking violence in Ukraine — his willingness to wield energy as a weapon — sobered the Continent overnight.

No one is giving up on renewables, but nobody is any longer pretending they are the basis of energy reliability or security.

Fossil fuels will remain for decades a currency of global power, and Russia’s invasion highlights the stupidity of being broke.

Strassel offers evidence that European nations seem to have gotten the message:

Germany’s is stockpiling coal and expediting terminals for liquefied natural gas.

Europe is working to get more gas through pipelines from Norway and Azerbaijan.

Poland plans new nuclear plants.

The U.K. may restart onshore fracking and ramp up North Sea drilling.

Norway plans to expand Arctic exploration.

Of course, Europe would now be willing to replace all of their Russian oil & gas with U.S. produced oil & gas … but, Joe says “no”

Apparently, he still hasn’t gotten the message … .

See: Greater threat to the planet: Putin or climate change?

But, Biden does seem to eventually follow Europe’s leads — albeit with a frustratingly long time-delay — so there’s still faint hope.

Most oil production: U.S. or Russia?

March 21, 2022

The question came up in casual(?) conversation over the weekend.

Of course, it prompted me to do some digging.

Here’s the latest top 10 list according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration database.

The volumes in the table represent crude oil and “lease condensate” (aka natural gas), the hydrocarbon liquids collected at or near the wellhead.

image

> The U.S. tops the list, followed closely by Russia and Saudi Arabia

> Canada and Iraq hold the #4 and #5 positions.

> China is only produces about 40% of the the U.S. and Russian totals

Editorial note: Tell me again why the XL pipeline is a bad idea. Canada is a friendly, proximate ally, right?

==============

Most interesting (to me) are the historical trend lines.

image

> Note that US oil production (the blue line)  declined during the Bush years  … but turned upward in the Obama years … took the top spot under Trump … and has fallen under you-know-who

> Also note that the old USSR led the league when it existed … Russia accounted for a majority of the USSR production before the USSR dissolved …. and has steadily increased its production to now produce roughly the same quantity of oil as the entire USSR was producing in its final years.

> Finally, note that if Russia controlled the former USSR republics, it would be at the top of the list … e.g. Kazakhstan alone produces 1.75 million barrels per day

Think that last point is a motivator for Putin?

My marathon day at Disney…

March 18, 2022

Let’s take a break from Ukraine and inflation today.
=============

In March 2020, one of my sons and one of his appropriately aged sons (i.e. one of my grandsons) were booked for a Spring Training trip to Florida.

Then came Covid and  the lockdown.

Despite our non-cancellable reservations, Southwest gave us flight credits for future use. Thanks SWA.

=============

Finally. with Covid in remission, we dared to try again.

This time, a second grandson met the age cut-off and made the travel team.

Minor set-back: the MLB lockout.

So, the “Homa Party of 4” shifted gears and headed for Disney.

=============

Another setback: Rain on 3 of the 4 days (isn’t Florida supposed to be the “Sunshine State”?) and thermometers hitting the 30s (where’s global warming when you need it?).

Undeterred, on the one good weather day, we set out — big & little men on a mission — to make the most of it.

Man, and did we ever!

By my iPhone numbers:

  • 13 hours
  • 22,821 steps
  • 7.8 miles

Infographically, over 25 activities (as recorded by my grandson and me):

IMG_1241

Bottom line: Mission accomplished … probably more (way more?) than a “normal” family does in 4 days … nothing I would have rather been doing on that day … great for “Pops” mental health … blessed with a great son (and even greater grandkids) who were willing to include me.

=============

A couple of trip notes:

> Flights were full … oversold going and returning … SWA’s $900 in credits for waiting until the next flight were tempting (well, not really)

> Masks required on the flight … all passengers  complied (some wearing their non-N95 masks passive aggressively)… no flight attendants hassled by passengers (or vice versa)

> HUGE crowd and long lines at Disney

Example: We were thru the gates when the park officially opened at 9 o’clock … we sprinted to Mine Train … by the time we got to the ride, the posted wait time was 90 minutes.

Note: I suspect there was a backdoor into the park that we didn’t know about.

> Disney’s new pricing schemes make gas pumps look like oases.

In rough numbers, $150 gets you through the gates and 4 “lightning passes” that allow you to cut some lines (with reservations that may or may not be available) … a couple of “top tier” rides require an additional $12 ante (per rider) 

> Disney’s attention to customer service and cheerful “cast members” is still intact

Example: When my grandson’s  $8 ice cream cone was bumped out of his hand, a cast member immediately gave him a complementary replacement. Saved the moment.

> Much of the huge crowd was HUGE … tagging overweight as “highly vulnerable” to severe Covid consequences doesn’t seem to have put America on a mass weight reduction program … hmmm.

> Kids love Disney … our kids, for sure … and universally, from what I observed.

===============

So, would I do it again?

You bet I would!

Biden: “I will welcome the Ukrainian refugees.”

March 17, 2022

Finally, I agree with him on something!
============

My ancestry is 100% Polish and Ukrainian.

So, emotionally, I have a dog in this fight and I was pleased that…

Last week, following the lead of Poland and other western European nations, President Biden remarked:

I will welcome the Ukrainian refugees. 

We should welcome them here with open arms. 

To that end…

> The Administration has granted temporary protected status to some 75,000 Ukrainians already in the U.S.

> CNN reported that the White House may expedite the resettlement process for Ukrainian refugees with ties to the U.S.

> The WSJ opined that “if small and relatively poor Eastern European nations can take in hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, a country as large and wealthy as the U.S. can also do its part.”

=============

As the WSJ points out, the humanitarian need is clear … and, as a country, we have the wherewithal to accommodate Ukrainian refugees.

And, for background, as we previously posted:

Ukraine’s population is about 45  million.

Over 70% of Ukrainian workers have secondary or higher education.

The literacy rate is near 100% among its youngest generations.

The workforce has one of the highest levels of English proficiency in post-Soviet countries.  Source

Ukraine’s workforce — commonly reported to be highly skilled  — is the product of the country’s educational system.  Source

The Ukrainian education system is intensely focused on technical and scientific disciplines.

With over 130,000 engineering graduates annually, Ukraine is home to the largest IT engineering force in Central and Eastern Europe. Source

Bring ‘em on, Joe.

An old adage sums up the responses to Putin’s invasion…

March 16, 2022

Here’s the oft-repeated metaphor:

Question: In a bacon and egg breakfast, what’s the difference between the chicken and the pig?

Answer: The chicken is involved, but the pig is COMMITTED!

Explanation: The pig puts its life on the line for “the cause”. The chicken stays a safe distance away … just making a low cost contribution to support the cause.

==============

Obviously, Zelenskyy and his fellow Ukrainians are the pigs … facing a literal and immediate existential threat … they’re fighting for their lives and their country.

The chickens?

Think: The UN, NATO, Western Europe, U.S.

They’re the ones who laid the groundwork for this mess … largely pooh-poohing the Putin threat for decades, becoming energy dependent with many (most?) of their energy eggs  in the Russian basket, prioritizing the ever-elusive climate control agenda and social spending over national, regional and global geo-political security.

Now, they’re adopting the role of chickens … hesitant to confront the lethal bully… staying largely on the sidelines … offering up best wishes and ineffective rhetoric … funneling aid, but keeping their distance to preserve some semblance of deniability.

That approach may work … or the chickens may morph into pigs as Putin keeps escalating his war and expanding his territorial appetite.

In that case, another old adage comes to mind … something about a cooked goose.

===============

P.S. Keep “bacon & eggs” in mind when Zelenskyy addresses the joint session of Congress today.

Biden’s “big lie” re: domestic oil production …

March 15, 2022

… and, what he can do to prove that he’s not lying through his dentures.
=============

Last week, Biden defiantly read from his teleprompter:

“It’s simply not true that my administration or my policies are holding back domestic energy production.”

Oh, really?

Apparently, Biden’s handlers and his teleprompter scribes aren’t aware of the technology known as video recording.

Here — from Biden’s own lips — is his pledge to contain (and ultimately kill) the U.S. oil & gas industry:

click to view (18 seconds)
image

Biden’s pledge:

To ensure “no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill. Period. End.”

Q.E.D.

=============

So, how can Biden prove that he’s not lying when he says that he’s not handcuffing domestic oil production?

image

According to Bloomberg:

Senate Energy Chairman Joe Manchin called on the Biden administration to use the Defense Production Act  to rush completion of a stalled pipeline through his state to help Europe replace Russian natural gas supplies.

The pipeline is more than 90% complete but has been challenged by environmentalists, and a federal court in January rejected its permit to cross a national forest.

Manchin said the 303-mile Mountain Valley Pipeline, which crosses his home state of West Virginia into Virginia, could transport two billion cubic feet a day and be up and running in four to six months.

The Defense Production Act would be justified to expedite it so the gas can be quickly converted to liquid form and shipped to Europe.

Manchin also has urged the administration to repeal his inauguration day executive orders that imposed constraining regulations on the oil and gas industry.

================

Bottom line: If you’re really pro-domestic energy production, Joe, repeal your energy-throttling EO’s and use the Defense Production Action Act to “make” the  evil-minded, supply-withholding, profit-motivated oil companies start cranking out more oil & gas ASAP.

Or, just admit that you’re lying like a rug…

===============

P.S. The WSJ suggests that this question be posed to Biden the next time that his handlers allow him to unplug his teleprompter:

Mr. President, will you do everything in your regulatory power to make it easier for American companies to produce more oil and gas to make the U.S. and its allies in Europe and elsewhere less dependent on Russian energy?

Don’t hold your breath for the question or a truthful answer…

 

Dilbert asks: "Who wants a bully in the White House?"

March 14, 2022

Is it really better to have a groveler-in-chief dealing with our adversaries?
============

Over the weekend, Bill Maher made news by asking a simple question:

image

Maher’s question reminded me of the above headlined post from the  HomaFiles archives, circa 2016 …

=============

During the 2016 Presidential campaign, cartoonist Scott Adams hit the nail on the head on his Dilbert blog

Adams observed that, during the campaign, Hillary’s constant refrain was that we can’t have a loose cannon bully in the White House.

Of course, Dems and their media friends kept that notion front-burnered during the campaign.

clip_image002

======

Adams cut to the chase on on “Dangerous Trump”:

(more…)

Hitting Putin where it hurts him the most …

March 10, 2022

No, we’re not talking oil sanctions … we’re talking burgers and lattes … but not chips.
==============

After McDonalds investors and consumers called for the chain to cut ties with Russia, the company announced that it is temporarily closing its 847 restaurants in Russia.

Announcing the action, McD’s CEO told employees:

Our values mean we cannot ignore the needless human suffering unfolding in Ukraine.

image

Some other companies are following suit…

> Coke and Starbucks pledged to suspend all business activity in Russia

> PepsiCo said it was halting sales of its big soda brands there … but would continue to sell potato chips.

Apparently, Pepsi concluded that stopping the flow of Lays, Doritos and Fritos might trigger Putin to further accelerate his atrocities.

Kamala: “End dependence on oil tyrants … get an EV”

March 9, 2022

The rub: Our EV future is dependent on batteries from Asia … mostly CHINA!
============

According to an SNE Research analysis channeled by Statista

At present, the ten manufacturers with the highest market share in terms of battery capacity are all headquartered in Asian countries, mainly China, South Korea and Japan.

The top five manufacturers – CATL, LG, Panasonic, BYD and Samsung – together account for over 80 percent of global automotive battery production.

The Chinese company Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL) alone controls about 1/3 of the market.

Infographic: Asian Batteries Power Global EV Fleet | Statista

If that isn’t scary enough, consider that about 97% of lithium is currently refined in China. Source

Ditching Russian energy is a great idea … but putting our eggs in China’s basket strikes me as jumping from the pan into the fire.

 

Woody Allen: “Mankind is at a crossroads”

March 7, 2022

Woody’s 1979 “Speech to Graduates” seems eerily on-point today.
=============

image

I’m not a big Woody Allen fan, but one of his long ago quotes has always stuck in my memory.

The Ukraine crisis brought Woody’s words front-of-mind:

More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads.

One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.

The other, to total extinction.

Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.

Unconsciously applying Woody’s admonition, the WSJ puts it this way:

Europe is learning a hard “Ukraine changes everything” lesson.

In the U.S. we’re shocked at the images from Ukraine.

Whether we’re willing to change our own complacent status quo in the face of manifestly real external and internal threats to our security is less clear.

At least now we have a baseline for discussion:

Do nothing, and disorder descends.

For a deeper cut,, see my prior post…

Greater threat to the planet: Putin or climate change?

… that argues Putin is a clear, present, nuclear threat …  that prevails over climate change on immediacy, likelihood, severity and game-changing mitigation.

So, climate control should take a backseat to stopping a manic who is killing masses of people, destroying a country and postured to threaten nuclear blackmail as long as he’s in power.

In other words, shelve the elitist idealism and “drill, baby, drill”.

============

Worth reading

Woody’s entire speech …. as published in the New York Times, August 10, 1979 … is a quick read … pithy, funny and on-point

The key elements:

We are a people who lack defined goals.

We have never learned to love.

We lack leaders and coherent programs.

Unfortunately our politicians are either incompetent or corrupt. Sometimes both on the same day.

We have no spiritual center.

Religion has unfortunately let us down.

Feeling godless then, what we have done is made technology God.

We’re counting on computers and electricity to solve our problems.

Eventually, energy will be in short supply and each car owner will be allowed only enough gasoline to back up a few inches.

We are adrift alone in the cosmos wreaking monstrous violence on one another out of frustration and pain.

Violence breeds more violence.

It’s a 3-minute read … and worth the time.

 

It’s time to reprioritize energy security and independence by unleashing U.S. oil & gas production!

March 4, 2022

Objectives: (1) Stop funding Putin’s aggression with Russian oil & gas revenues (2) Replace U.S. and European countries’ Russian purchases with U.S. oil & gas (3) Support the Canadian oil industry (4) Dampen domestic (and world markets) inflation rates

==============
A prior version of this post was published on February 22, 2022

Some necessary background …

Remember when Trump made the U.S. a net exporter of oil products?

image

Focus on the dark line on the above chart … it depicts the U.S. trade deficit (or surplus) in crude oil & liquid fuels (mostly natural gas condensate, LNG).

Biden inherited a trade surplus … exports of crude oil & oil products exceeded the total imports of those goods. (Note that the dark line dipped below zero on the y-axis in 2020).

But, in 2021, imports of crude oil turned upward and the trade surplus evaporated.

Said differently, the U.S. was net energy independent in at the end of the Trump administration … but, thanks to Biden’s policies, we’re net energy dependent again.

How did Biden do it?

By signing executive orders aimed at crippling (and ultimately killing the domestic U.S. oil industry) by essentially stopping new oil exploration and shackling oil production and transport (e.g. the XL Canada to U.S. pipeline)

=============

Bottom line, Biden’s decision to curb U.S. oil drilling, production and transport has literally fueled inflation (<=pun intended) and, to a large extent, funded Putin’s war chest.

On the latter point, let’s run the numbers…

image

In 2020, the U.S. produced 11.3 million barrels per day (MBPD) of crude oil and liquified natural gas (LNG).

But, the U.S. consumed 17.2  MBPD … and had to import 5.9 MPD (the red number above).

Note that Russia was the 2nd largest producer in the world @ 10.1 MBPD … and exported 70% of its production (6.9 MBPD).

==============

Let’s dissect the U.S. imports…

In 2021, U.S. oil imports increased to 8.5 MBPD.

Where is that oil coming from?

image

About 1/2 comes from Canada … an ally that is close to the U.S. geographically and politically.

So what did Biden do to cause this unfortunate turnaround?

For openers, killing the XL pipeline project.

The implication: less oil from Canada … and higher costs (and environmental risk) by trucking the crude oil that is supplied to the U.S. by Canada.

Why screw our allied neighbors?

Even more important, the U.S. has been importing almost 600,000 barrels per day of oil from Russia.

Annualized at current rates, that’s 217 million barrels of oil bought from Russia each year.

What’s the dollar value of those purchases?

Let’s look at oil prices …

image

Rounding up a bit to simplify the arithmetic, crude oil prices are now at about $100 per barrel.

So, 217 million barrels has a market value of over $21 billion each year. That’s money flowing into Putin’s coffers.

Note: That’s about $9 billion more than the oil would have been market valued on Biden’s inauguration day.

How’s Putin using that windfall?

It’s reasonable conjecture that a fair chunk of it is funding Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

So, what to do?

If Biden wants to send a clear signal to Putin, he should “follow the data” and rescind his oil-crushing executive orders … TODAY.

While not immediate, that move can cut the flow of funds to Putin by reducing our direct oil purchases from Russia … and by, perhaps, depressing global oil prices.

It’s time for another Operation Warp Speed … one that unleashes the U.S. oil & gas industry.

There aren’t a lot of options, Joe.

=============

If you think that climate control should trump energy security, read Greater threat to the planet: Putin or climate change?

Greater threat to the planet: Putin or climate change?

March 4, 2022

Putin is the clear & present danger … so, unleash our oil & gas industry, Joe.
=============

Analytically speaking, risk assessment boils down to a couple of decision criteria:

> How immediate is the threat?

> How severe are the potential consequences?

> How likely are the consequences?

> How might mitigation change the odds?

Applying these risk assessment criteria, the answer to the headlined question is pretty clear (to me).

Putin is demonstrably a clear, present, proven and potentially nuclear danger.

Just turn on your TV to watch the slaughter of innocent people and the destruction of a nation and a culture.

Putin is maniacal (and probably crazy), determined and has planet-destroying nuclear weapons that he might use if he’s cornered.

The climate change threat is murky (sorry, but the science is even more unsettled than it is on Covid) and prospective (decades off) … with asserted and uncertain long-term consequences.

Bottom line: If the choice is binary, Putin must be stopped ASAP.

If the Putin and climate threats need to be “balanced”, then the scale should be tilted to stopping Putin.

Putin is clearly the more immediate threat.

Climate control can wait.

Let’s go through the decision criteria…

=============

THREAT ASSESSMENT

Immediacy 

The Putin threat is happening now.  Just turn on your TV right and watch the slaughter of innocent people and the destruction of a nation and a culture.

Even climate control zealots concede that its potential “existential threat” from climate change is decades away.

=============

Severity

Climate control zealots say that, unchecked by draconian mitigation, the planet will be a degree or two warmer in 50 years … and that’s enough to end life as we know it.

Let’s assume that’s true.

Some might argue that the Putin threat is localized and contained.

The Ukraine invasion is tragic and sad, but c’mon man, it’s just Ukraine.

Once Putin gets to the Polish border, the U.N. and NATO will stop him in his tracks.

Might be true.

But, what if Putin is, in fact, crazy and, when cornered, he starts lobbing nukes.

Suddenly, we’re looking at a level of global destruction that gives climate change a run for its money.

==============

Likelihood

So, what is the likelihood that climate change puts planetary existence at risk?

Sure, clean energy beats dirty energy and a green mindset makes sense.

But, the case for climate change ending the planet’s existence is a reach.

It is disputable whether the “data is clear” and that “the science is settled” on the consequences of climate change.

For details, see 16 Reasons why I’m lukewarm on climate change

Personally, I’d score the likelihood of Putin unleashing planet-destroying nukes higher than a climate existential threat.

Update: Yesterday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky issued a dire appeal for help as Russia’s attacks across the country intensified and the Russians set afire the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.

In Zelensky’s words: “The end of the world has arrived.” 

=============

Mitigation

This is where things get dicey.

I’m confident that the U.S. will become increasingly green.

That’s a good thing.

I believe that American ingenuity and technology will — sometime and somehow over the next 50 years — provide game-changing climate control remedies.

But, as Igor Sechin, CEO of Russia’s state-owned Rosneft, has warned

Some ecologists and politicians urge for a hasty energy transition, yet it requires an unrealistically fast launch of renewable energy sources and faces issues with storage, ensuring reliability and stability of power generation. WSJ

And, to this point, climate control initiatives in the U.S. and Europe have largely been virtue signaling … outsourcing fossil fuel production to other countries (most notably Russia!) … putting the U.S. and Europe in a vulnerable security position.

Question: Is Russian oil cleaner than U.S. or Canadian oil?

Answer: Nope!

So, the pivotal question is how to “mitigate” the Putin threat.

Well, maybe Putin can be jawboned and shunned … and will come to his senses and rein in  his destructive tendencies.

My opinion: Odds of that are essentially zero.

Maybe the rational Russian people will rise up and take him out.

I’m betting the under on that one, too

Let’s try diplomacy.

How’s then been working out?

Not to worry, NATO will ultimately use military force to contain the Putin risk at the Polish border.

English translation: NATO nations will encourage the U.S. to kick Putin’s ass when the time comes

Military containment might be doable … but, at a high cost with the incumbent risk that a crazy Putin starts a nuclear war.

=============

So what to do?

Oh yeah, there are other Putin-mitigating options.

How about draining his war-mongering financial resources with sanctions?

In logic-speak: necessary but not sufficient … especially since the current sanctions explicitly rule out any transactions related to the flow of Russian oil.

According to Biden’s Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh:

“To be clear, our sanctions are not designed to cause any disruption to the current flow of energy from Russia to the world” Source

Say, what?

Bottom line: The only non-military way to cripple Putin’s war mongering is to use U.S. oil & gas production as a geo-political strategic tool … the geo-political strategic tool!

As one right-leaning pundit puts it:

Putin’s power comes from money, most of Putin’s money comes from oil and gas.

It stands to reason that if you’re trying to punish him, hitting him in the wallet is the most effective way to do it.

So why would our President specifically exempt what is the best, most effective, and really only significant way to hurt Putin in way that might impact his behavior?

Of course, there’s an explanation…

Biden is boxed by his party’s far left climate control zealots.

Nonetheless, as we’ve said before:

It’s time to reprioritize energy security and independence by unleashing U.S. oil & gas production!

He has to do an objective risk assessment (see above), stiff-arm his parity’s uber-left loons, restore U.S. energy superiority by unleashing our oil & gas industry.

It’s as simple as that!

 

Biden: “Next week, you can order more free Covid test kits”

March 3, 2022

During his SOTU address, Biden made another game-changing announcement:

Starting next week, we can all order another set of “free” Covid tests at COVIDtests.gov

Hmm.

You may remember my whining that the ones I ordered — when Omicron was raging — took several weeks to arrive … after Omicron peaked and stated to ebb.

A friend of mine ordered on the first day (Jan. 18) and received her’s on Monday … just as she was following CDC guidance and ditching her mask.

Omicron is pretty much in the history books, so why is Biden offering free tests now?

It’s not because a new variant has been ID’ed that might spread wildly.

If there were such a variant, the CDC wouldn’t have “guided” us to ditch our masks, right?

So, what’s up?

Simple: OVERSTOCK.

The original Biden offering was 500 million test kits.

Turns out that take-up has been low.

To date, folks have only ordered about 1/2 of the 500 million tests.

So basically, Biden is running a clearance sale to get rid of the inventory he’s holding for a product that he’s giving away for free.

Reminds me of the Mr. Pillow guy…

=============

P.S. Have you tried to get reimbursed for a store bought test kit?

Joe promised that insurance companies would reimburse for them.

I’ve got Medicare, a Supplement and an Rx plan.

So far, all 3 are claiming that it’s the other guy’s responsibility.

Apparently they didn’t get Joe’s memo.

I’ll keep you posted…

Biden: Staying the course after a successful first year … say, what?

March 2, 2022

One chart continues to say it all…
=============

In case you missed it, Biden’ SOTU wasn’t a “reset” … it was a serving of refried beans.

  • Rooting for the Ukrainians … from the sidelines
  • Reaffirmed the sagacity of diplomatically “leading from behind” … despite the brutal outcomes
  • Determined to kill oil & gas … unless it’s produced in Russia and fuels Putin’s atrocities
  • Asserted that inflation is caused by greedy companies … certainly not out-of-control spending and constraints on energy production
  • Still wants to throw more money at more things.

In other words: same old, same old.

=============

Raises an obvious question:

Is Biden unaware that the dogs aren’t eating the dog food?

Current RCP poll-of-polls says that less than 30% of the country thinks that Joe is taking the country in the right direction.

image

Time for a “reset”?

No way, it’s time to stay the course…

Yipes!

==============

P.S. Did you notice?

> Biden’s didn’t showcase his chief political scientist, Anthony Fauci at his SOTU speech.

> In a passionate call to support Ukraine, mistakenly referred to Ukrainians as “Iranians.”

For the record, I thought that he said “Uraniums”.

Supporters are claiming that the gaffe is attributable to his childhood stutter. Axios

 

Biden: “As promised, I crushed the virus … and you can take your masks off”

March 1, 2022

Will he dare to say that?
==============

It’s ok to cheer on the latter point.

Miraculously, the science changed last week … and the CDC was able to issue new guidance that let’s most people (including school kids!) to toss their masks.

About a year late and, coincidentally, just in time for Biden’s SOTU address.

Whatever.

Let’s cheer the revised guidance!

==============

But, what about the broader claim: “I crushed the virus”?

Remember when Biden taunted that Trump was responsible for all the Covid deaths while he was president?

Soon America will have accumulated 1 million Covid-tagged deaths … currently at 973.119 and counting.

I doubt that Biden will point out that the majority of the deaths have happened under his watch … despite Trump handing him 2 approved vaccines that were in production and ready for distribution.

image

=============

And, I doubt that Biden will mention CNN’s headline:

image

Point-of-fact, almost 1,500 people are still succoring to Covid-tagged deaths each day … many because Biden had put the development and distribution of therapeutic drugs on the back-burner.

==============

And, I doubt that he’ll mention that his CDC was forced to admit that it had been hiding data on Covid hospitalizations, vaccine effectiveness and breakthrough infections … politically fearing that the information might be “misinterpreted” by non-government scientists … and the public at large.

image

============

Finally, I doubt that that Biden will spotlight the Johns Hopkins study that concluded:

Lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality.

But, they imposed enormous economic and social costs.

==============

Bottom line: We’re finally at a good spot on Covid … but I’ll cringe if Biden claims that he “crushed the virus”.

We’ll see if “Straight- shooting” Joe shoots straight on this one.