History’s path to tyranny

May 23, 2012

History’s path to tyranny
Ron Kilmartin

May 23, 2012

Over the past year I have been reading a few pages a day of William L. Shirer’s history of Nazism, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” – Nearly 1200 pages and I have finally finished. It is a masterpiece of journalist history based on Shirer’s own observations beginning in the 1920s. It is centered of course on Adolf Hitler, his cronies, and his generals. As I read this I began mentally comparing it with our current leader and our current administration’s edicts from the EPA and other agencies. I found that there are many similarities between Hitler’s rise to power and Obama’s, as well as the tyranny of the Nazi administration. So I decided to write up my comparative observations, as given below.

It is not that Obama is following a path to Nazism, but that he seems to be following a path to a tyranny that is all his own: racist, anti-rich, pro-socialist, anti-industry, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, , anti-Israel, pro-Islam, anti-Constitution, anti-First Amendment anti-Second Amendment, anti-Fourth Amendment, anti-Tenth Amendment and anti-America, to name a few of the tyrannical tenants of Obamaism.

There are many other historical examples of tyrannical leaders besides Hitler, but for now he will do just fine as a model tyrant, and Shirir’s tome provides a ready means for comparison.

I submitted this article to an internet magazine and was rejected because (1) I misspelled Adolf as Adolph (unpardonable), and because it violated something called the “Godwin Law”. The editor advised me to google it. I admit I had never heard of the Godwin Law, so I took his advice and looked it up –Wikipedia seems like a reasonable source, in this case. The Godwin Law stems from Mike Godwin’s observation in the 1990s that newsgroup chat room discussions that end up citing Hitler or the Nazis ended the thread and further discussion. According to Godwin, the “law” is framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. Godwin has argued that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

Acknowledging the Godwin Law, I submit that my comparison is valid. Stalin could be exchanged for Hitler, and Supreme Soviet for the Reichstag. It is all about tyranny, and not there and then, but here and now!

History’s path to tyranny

The Nazi Chancellor Adolf Hitler issued thousands of executive orders stripping freedom, liberty and human rights from the German people, together with orders for extermination of the Jewish people and millions of Eastern Europeans. This began in the 1930s continuing up through his order of April 26, 1942, which made him absolute dictator with life and death power over all the Germans. Throughout all this, the lapdog German Reichstag gave their rubber-stamp of approval to each new demand of the dictator.
Any unbiased observer should have no doubt that Obama is following this same path to tyranny, whether willy-nilly, coincidental, or deliberate. He is issuing executive orders bypassing Congress much as Hitler did with the blessing of the Nazi-dominated lapdog Reichstag. Indeed, some of Obama’s executive orders seem perilously close to being martial law threats, not unlike the orders that drove the militant Nazi Brown shirts, the street thugs of the 1930s.
These executive orders are an extension of Obama’s unrestrained class-warfare: his Alinsky-style hustling of his union gang base, his support of black-panther voter intimidation, his attacks on law enforcement, his reckless open borders policy, his loony anti-human energy and carbon emission policies, his socialized medicine plan, his love-affair with Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood, his hate affair with the Catholic Church, Israel and the Jews, his troop of schizophrenic socio-commie czars and agency heads who sit up all night devising new spider-webs to entangle and collapse the American economy by overwhelming the system, Clower-Piven style.
And let us not forget the latest Obama-bot’s endorsement of Karl Marx’s class warfare, and the new Obama socialist campaign motto, that great Leninist slogan “Forward”, which was plastered over all the Red Squares of the Communist world in the last century with giant pictures of the local national “Dear Leader”. And slogans perhaps like “Forward, onward, march over the bourgeois trash and the $15 trillion debt, on to Obamatopia! On to $1000 loaves of bread, 50% unemployment, 3rd world electric power, sack-cloth for the serfs, and dachas for the Hollywood and Wall Street nomenklatura. Are we also going forward to Stalin’s Great Terror, Hitler’s Auschwitz, Pol Pot’s killing fields, Castro’s firing squads, and Mao’s Giant Leap Forward? There is that word again! Forward! 100 million died under the “forward” banner of these tyrants.
Just why do we need, as Obama has said, a civilian armed force as strong as the military? What are they for? Who will be their enemy? Will this be Obama’s Brownshirts or Gestapo?
We have a president following Hitler’s dubious path towards tyranny. The question is, does America also have the equivalent of a compliant lap-dog Reichstag in the present Democrat-majority Senate? So far, not a peep out of Senate leader Harry Reid, or any Senate Democrat about the bevy of unconstitutional executive orders. Everyone with a D after their name is just sitting down and letting Obama land executive order haymaker after haymaker in their bellies. It is like they are saying “Oh please hit us again Mr. Obama, those E.O.s just feel so good! Besides, we Democrats could not do them by ourselves because of those nasty liberty-loving Republicans! Yes, Mr. Obama, there comes a time you have to set the Constitution aside and do what you have to do to move Obamaism forward!” Oops, there is that word again, forward.
It is up to the Democrat majority in the Senate to show that they are not aping the Nazis in Hitler’s Reichstag with party line voting or cowardice on calling bad executive orders that bypass the constitutional requirement that laws are made in, and only in, Congress.
In my lifetime, until Obama came along, the most brazen executive attack on the Constitution was Roosevelt’s attempt to pack the court. At that time the Democrat-majority Senate courageously rejected his dictatorial plan. So there is a historic precedent for a Democrat Senate telling a Democrat president to go pound sand. Does the present Democrat Senate have the same courage?
Democrat and Republican Senators alike should support Senator Rand  Paul’s bill S299, the “Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act”, which has already passed the House. While this bill is looser than I would prefer, it will help set some brakes on an imperial president and his minions who think they have a free reign to do whatever they please.
We need to move not to Obama’s forward to obamaism, we need to move backward, to Constitutional government.


Obama Gives Coal Miners the boot

May 4, 2012

Comment on article “Obama gives coal miners the boot”

Citation for original article:



The Obama anti-coal stance is based on the thin air of the carbon dioxide hoax. Once more we have a lawyer diddling with science, always a prescription for disaster, and in Jackson a rabid environmentalist who not only does not care what she is doing to the economy, she is actively pursuing its destruction through reducing our power systems to third-world levels of blackouts and unreliable service. IF you do not have reliable power 100% of the time you do not run good manufacturing plants, good assembly plants or data farms; you just go out of business.

The EPA is regulating 50% of the coal-fired power plants out of existence. Considering they provide 50% of the nation’s reliable electric power, this means EPA Chief Jackson and El President Obama are removing 25% of the reliable power from the grid. This translates to thousands of industries and millions of jobs going off to never-never land.

What is galling is the Republican House lets the EPA get away with their power grab and does not put the financial squeeze on them .

Congress moreover has the power to outlaw EPA (and the cabal of other global-warming-promoting agencies) from any actions based on regulating carbon emissions. Why does Congress sit on its hands while these agencies are running amuck, setting American industry up for a fall, and the loss of millions more jobs? Why?

Is the house leadership having too many golf games with the president?

It’s a man-made global hoax

May 1, 2012

It’s a man-made global hoax
Ron Kilmartin
March 23, 2012
California AB 32, S375, Agenda 21 and the insane anti-fossil Obama energy schemes are liberty-smashing and economy-smashing ideas from the liberal-socialist inferno, all founded on the computer propagated notion that man-made carbon dioxide will cause global warming. This idea however is unsupported by data and is in reality a man-made global hoax.
This GIGO computer hoax (garbage in, garbage out) was initially generated at university centers for political climatology (such as Stanford, Cal Berkeley, Cal San Diego, Massachusetts, East Anglia G.B., etc.), and after 3 decades the hoax has propagated throughout the academic and political worlds. Special thanks go to academia, the media, the enviro-NGOs (e.g., Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, etc.), and bureaucratic and political cohorts of every stripe for poisoning the public mind with the CO2 lie at every level, from kindergarten up to and including all the Washington bureaucracies and the U.N.

In Islam, lying is OK if the lie will advance the cause of Islam. In academe, lying seems OK if it will help your university get a fat federal grant. The faux appeal to ethics of some of the lying academics is laughable. And as we have seen with the Department of Energy and Solandra, among others, the bigger the lie the fatter the federal grant. And let’s not leave the bureaucrats out from EPA, NOAA, NASA/GISS, National Academy of Science, Interior, Energy, Agriculture, etc. They have to feather their own nests, like all good bureaucrats – can’t leave any funds unexpended at the end of the fiscal year, can’t say anything about the false basis of the carbon dioxide hoax- can’t upset the applecart. Can’t risk my own job!

How long can a society last that allows itself to go prostrate before this global warming devil-god? Here is an answer: it cannot last. Dr Steven F. Howard, noted economist, predicted that the “80 by 50 rule” (80 percent reduction in CO2 by 2050) to which AB32, Agenda 21, sustainable development, etc., are all pointed, will put the US economy back to the days of the cotton gin. That is pre-indoor toilets for the history-challenged, let alone pre-TV, etc.
The CO2 hoax is turning life into springtime for the lying ruling classes and into winter for the hddled masses. This lie will bring us third-world levels of unemployment far greater than now and unending misery for the next several generations (if you are between 1 and 18, welcome to your lifetime Obama-tax burden especially for you, your children, and your grandchildren).

Its Getting CLOUDY for AB32

November 1, 2011

Its Getting CLOUDy for AB32

By Ron Kilmartin

A chorus of dissenters to my letter to the editor (CC Times 9/20/11) seemed to have missed the message while attacking the messengers, myself and Chriss Street, author of “Study Discredits Global Warming, AB32”, which I cited: http://www.calwatchdog.com/2011/09/07/22086/

The message bears repeating. Nature Magazine, the premier British science magazine, has for over 2 decades been a citadel against publication of any articles ascribing global temperature variation to the sun. In their world, warming had to be due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide. With Nature’s publication of the article on the CLOUD experiment, the walls of this citadel cracked a bit and let some sunlight in (and some cosmic rays).

The CLOUD experiment verified that cosmic rays can create aerosols. The aerosols in turn create clouds, which in turn cool the climate, and conversely cause warming when cloud cover is low. The variation in cosmic ray bombardment of the earth is due to solar wind. When the solar wind is strong, it pushes away cosmic rays. When the solar wind is weak, cosmic rays bombard the atmosphere. The much-hyped climate models do not consider this fundamental climate molder.

By this indirect process solar activity (sunspots) regulates climate. This process was first proposed by Danish researcher Henrik Svensmark in the late 1990s.

The cosmic ray results from CLOUD were similar to results of Aarhus University, Denmark, and the Danish National Space Institute with the ASTRID particle accelerator, reported in May 2011.

The variation in earth temperature with sunspots has long been known but the mechanism eluded discovery until Svensmark came along, and verified after these research efforts were performed. The climate models which have heretofore ignored solar activity now need to be updated to included this process and cloud formation. I anticipate that this will result in nearly all warming/cooling being ascribed to solar activity and little or none being assigned to anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Since AB32 is based on the climate model results, and the updated and corrected models will necessarily downplay the role of CO2 (assuming no modeler meddling with the data). So if AB32 is based on a hoax, which I have long believed, it is time to real this legislation in and stop its funding.

One of the critics to my letter objected to use of the word gorefraud (un-capitalized). A swindle of such incredible magnitude as the climate hoax deserves a special word – I believe gorefraud is an appropriate adjective as it links this well-known liar’s name to a description of the evil crime he, along with thousands of others, have perpetrated.

This crime is already costing the world tens perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars a year which will continue to increase until the people demand that governments quit throwing the sweat of their backs into this black hole, In California AB 32, S375, and the new S23 requiring voodoo green power are environmental straight-jackets on the California economy and major job-killers, as real businesses around the state pack up and leave. At the federal level the EPA has its head as deep in the sand as CARB, with the explicit direction of the President to overrule the people’s Congress.

Global warming? The world has been on a temperature downtrend for over a decade, and today temperatures are at their 1980 levels, and predicted to get much cooler. AB 32’s objective is to bring CO2 emissions down to 1990 levels. Why? It does not even compute, except in the mental gymnastics of some enviro-nazis and their political and bureaucratic cronies.

Angelo M. Codevilla (2010) wrote an excellent book on the American scene “The Ruling Class, how they corrupted America and what we can do about it”. The Ruling Class has by and large bought into the CO2 hoax, and has created corrupt crony networks linking venture-capitalists, the media, academe, unions, politicians and bureaucrats to rip off subsidies from the backs of taxpayers, and with more to come in the form of cap and trade costs, which will be passed directly through to the taxpayer working class. Occupy Wall Street? How about Washington DC and Sacramento, where the ruling class continuously attacks our economic system?

Send it to the Morgue!

September 15, 2011

Dear Senator McConnell and Speaker Boehner:

The President’s tax (a.k.a. “jobs jobs jobs”) bill should go straight to the morgue.

Here is a real plan that will put the country back to work and get the economy humming:

No tax increases, cut capital gains to 15%, defund Obama care, defund the anti-CO2 hoax at EPA and Energy, defund Agenda 21 at Transportation, EPA, Ag and Interior, cut anti-business regs with a machete, open up energy development from Alaska to the Gulf and from California to New York, can the green job mantra and subsidies and make room for real jobs, the ones colored brown!

Then this country will go back to work led by the vital energy sector which is the economic backbone, the national economic engine of this great country. The economy will boom as the people regain confidence in the future, which has been all but lost under Obama.

The flow of oil money to the Middle East will stop. And if the sheiks and the OIC don’t have any money they will cease being a problem for us and Israel both here and abroad.

Islamic Problem solved, no more shots fired.

Balance of Payments problem solved – positive not negative.

Jobs Problem Solved – brown, not green.

Confidence Problem Solved – future looks good, not bleak.

Investment Problem Solved – private not government.

That is a jobs win, an economy win, a tax revenue win, and a foreign policy win all wrapped into one, but most of all it is a win for liberty and freedom and hard-working Americans and their children ad grandchildren.

Obama’s tax (a.k.a.“jobs jobs jobs”) bill is a permanent increase in taxes for another wasteful temporary stimulus. No permanent solutions, just more permanent dependents added to the government dole and more government employees to be paid by an oppressive tax burden on our children and grandchildren out to 3 or 4 generations. The cost of government employees we have now is unsustainable. There must be large scale cuts in numbers, salaries and pensions, starting in Washington D.C. and proceeding to every state, county and city in the land.

The president keeps promulgating European solutions in spite of the fact that the entire European continent is a socialist failure and is teetering on collapse. Are he and his czars and his secretaries totally blind to this reality or simply so steeped in Marxism it is hopeless that they will ever figure out how America works?

Ron Kilmartin

Cc: Senators Feinstein and Boxer, and Rep. John Garimendi.

Pepsi -soccer

September 5, 2011

Comment on Planning to Disaster: San Diego and California’s Sustainability Strategies

June 4, 2011

Comment on Planning to Disaster: San Diego and California’s Sustainability Strategies

From OpenMarket.org 6/3/2011:
Planning to Disaster: San Diego and California’s Sustainability Strategies

By Marc Scribner

See original article here:

My comment :

The SCS is a child of California legislation AB 32 and S375. These in turn are  children of UN Agenda 21, adopted without Congressional approval by the Beltway agencies. They all derive their raison d’etre from the false theory of man-made CO2-caused global warming. The records show that warming and cooling are cyclic phenomena, and California temperature is predominantly influenced by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which has entered a cooling phase that may last another 20 or 30 years. Not only is CO2 not guilty of causing significant warming, it is in fact the other products of combustion – water vapor and steam, that are the warming culprits in this equation. See the paper Econometrics and the Science of Climate Change 15 May 2011, by Timothy Curtin (on Google). The SCS, AB 32, S 375, and Agenda 21 will have no effect on global temperature. What they will do is empty your retirement accounts and spread the wealth around to the green fleecers and 3rd world nations. The full impact of this mass of regulations will be further economic collapse on top of the present malaise.

Ron Kilmartin
June 4, 2011

Sustainability = UN Agenda 21 World Governance

May 13, 2011

Contra Costa Times editorial: Establishing sensible and sustainable growth
MediaNews editorial
Posted: 02/18/2011 12:01:00 AM PST

BACK IN 2003, Contra Costa County leaders pieced together a long-range plan that was designed to promote infill housing development near transportation centers. The purpose of the Shaping Our Future plan was to reduce the need to drive, make jobs and shopping more accessible, provide adequate low-income housing and protect open space.

However, much of the plan has been shelved because there was insufficient incentive for cities to follow it. With the passage of Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375, the strategies outlined in Shaping Our Future have been given new life.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments will give final approval to a Sustainable Community Strategy in 2013, with a first draft to be released next month.

If cites do not adhere to it, they will risk losing funds for transportation projects.

The idea behind the plan is the same as it was under Shaping Our Future. Cities will be urged to plan housing, job centers and transportation infrastructure in a coordinated manner that reduces driving.

For many years, urban planners have been calling for a much closer link between transportation projects and land-use policies.

For the sake of efficiency as well as reduced air pollution and traffic, the Sustainable Community Strategy makes sense.

There already are some good examples of this so-called smart growth that are
compatible with the new planing goals.

For the past few years, Pittsburg has spent considerable effort in renovating its old downtown with new affordable housing projects, and is working on development of government offices and housing adjacent to the planned eBART station near Highway 4.

Other areas that have similar plans include the Concord Naval Weapons Station land, the areas around Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill BART stations and downtown Lafayette and Martinez.

Sustainable Communities Strategies will have to account for a projected 900,000 new housing units in the nine-county Bay Area before 2035, many of which will have to be built near job centers.

Regardless of one’s views on the dangers of greenhouse gases, much of which are produced by motor vehicles, the Sustainable Community Strategy deserves support.

If we are to preserve open space in the region and build affordable housing that is conveniently close to jobs and shopping, better land-use policies are needed.

Suburban sprawl is expensive, promotes excessive dependence on driving, endangers the environment and reduces open space.

Replacing sprawl with intelligent growth choices should be the norm without the threat of financial penalties. But if that is what it takes to motivate city planners and developers — and, especially, city politicians — to build more intelligently, then so be it.

Ron Kilmartin

Re the CC Times editorial “Sustainable Growth”, 2/18/2011. Sustainability and Smart Growth are at their base, euphemisms for a major eco-socialist assault on our republican form of constitutional government. They are products of Agenda 21 which calls for total undermining of the U.S. Constitution. In the Agenda 21 utopia, there are no property rights, freedom, or liberty. People – the workers – live in urban centers, and the area outside these centers are wildlands, with no human activity allowed, except for the elites, who will have their country dachas. See the appalling utopia maps of America at http://www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html.

Agenda 21 is a plan for an overarching global governance under the U.N. Americans are particularly targeted to loose much of their wealth, which is to be transferred to the Third World.

The purported need for “sustainability” and Agenda 21 is based solely on the fraudulent theory that carbon dioxide has or will cause global warming. The facts are that there has never been any historic evidence of CO2 causing global warming. To the contrary, evidence against the CO2 fraud is overwhelming,

The hucksters of Agenda 21 have been extremely clever in setting up the entire world for the sustainability deception by focusing mainly on the world’s cities and mayors, for sedgewaying into local politics and setting up of dictatorial local councils of “stakeholders” – councils of mostly enviro-nuts with an agenda of population control.

Contra Costa County, Alameda County, and most of their cities are already members of the Agenda 21-sponsored International Council of Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).

ICLEI operates surreptitiously out of the public eye, provides organizational and planning assistance to local governments, such as draft regulations that will channel the rulings of the local councils. Governments that sign the ICLEI charter surrender their sovereignty, a violation of the Constitution.

Readers are urged to contact elected member of their city council or county board of supervisors and demand that they tear up any agreements they have made with ICLEI. We should make our counties and cities follow the examples of Spokane, WA; Carroll County, MD; Broomfield County, CO; Edmund, OK; Arvada, CO; Amador County, CA; Monterey County, CA; North Little Rock, AR; and Austin, TX, all locations where people have risen up and demanded their politicians destroy ICLEI agreements and sustainability agendas.

Readers are further urged to go see the Freedom Advocates website for more details: http://www.freedomadvocates.org/. You will be shocked.

Scott JokerstFeb 18
What we are finding is “sustainable” are those ordinarily private economic activities that can persist on their own without government subsidy. By that measure, if it made sustainable economic sense to develop infill housing and businesses near public transportation centers … then they will develop, and thrive on their own. Otherwise, these are ideas which may have some merit from a narrow, though perhaps laudable perspective, but which simply don’t stand the systematic test that is the only one that matters — what does the consumer want, and can afford, with money of their own that they are willing to spend.

All other subsidized activities are simply wealth redistribution strategies, either to the poor, or most importantly, to developers and other businesses that have something to gain from “the program.”

Consider something like high speed rail in CA? Why would one need it when one has, much more economically, access to auto and air transportation to anywhere a train could possibly go?

Given our current state and municipal budget situation, we should hold off on Sustainable Development initiatives until we have enough in the bank to sustain the endless subsidy they entail.
Carri DealFeb 18
Nice Article. I just now got Coupons of my Favorite Brands at “Printapons” search online and start saving now
Facebook social plugin

* 1

Displaying all 3 posts.

A failed appeal to Governor Brown – no reply

May 6, 2011

Ronald F. Kilmartin
Consulting Engineer Tel 925 934 0378
415 Turrin Drive Fax 925 945 7187
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 ronkilmartin@comcast.net

April 3, 2011

Governor Jerry Brown
Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA

Dear Governor Brown:

Before you sign SB X1 2 (Simitian), I would like to be sure that you are aware of the current science regarding CO2 and global warming theory.

It has been found that this theory is not supported by historical data. It is a false hypothesis.

This is shown by the attached graph of annual mean global temperature and mean CO2 concentration for the period February 1996 through February 2011. It can be readily appreciated that there is no relation, since temperature is topping and trending downward over this period, while CO2 concentration is trending upward for the entire period. An even more sharp divergence occurred from 1940 to 1980 when temperature was trending down while CO2 was trending up (when some sources were indeed predicting an ice age). Global mean temperature moves slowly up and down with a major influence from aperiodic solar activity, indirectly conveyed through diversion of galactic cosmic rays by solar winds.

Thus the attempt to control global warming through crunching down on CO2 production is doomed to fail. Global warming, and cooling, is a natural aperiodic phenomena which has been documented for paleo times with geologic records over millions of years and human records based on proxy data over the past 2000 years. The Medieval Warming was greater than the XX Century warmng, yet there was no Anthropogenic CO2.

The fundamental solar source of global temperature change is reflected in the movement of major oceanic currents, particularly the Pacific-Indian-Antarctic Oceanic masses, which have a combined area of about 2/3s of the planet.

A second graph attached is a time-series plot over the same period as the first chart, repeating the global temperature data (HadCRUT = Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature data, Univ. of East Anglia), together with the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI). The SOI index is related to Pacific Ocean temperatures and the El Nino and La Nina phenomena, movement of giant streams of ocean currents along the equator and in the Northwest and Southeast Pacific. The fundamental driver influencing these indexes is again solar. The concentric parallel tendency of these trends is obvious from the plots, confirming that the source of warming and cooling is natural.

There are similar results available linking periodic trends in various oceanic currents and indexes to aperiodic temperature and precipitation trends in nearby land masses.

Frankly, the various anti-CO2 laws are founded on sand that will blow away, and the whole anti-CO2 structure will eventually fall down – it is only a matter of time. It has been said that after political laws are created, the laws of economics take over. This happened the last time the legislature messed with energy economics. AB 32, S 375, and now SB X 1 2 promise havoc in the market place an order of magnitude greater than the previous debacle.

The real problem for California is that the threat of regulation under these bills is enough to make many businesses close their doors and move out, with the jobs, and with the tax revenue that the state needs to balance its budget. The SB X 1 2 bill will blow power costs through the roof. I can assure you that the green jobs expectation will come to nil. The gadgetry (wind mills and panels) have zero system reliability and a capital cost 10x or more conventional fossil power. They have a negative value in any electric power system. And the people will be required to pay for this boondoggle, the utilities will just pass it through.

We are short $26 billion in the 2011 state budget. What will the state be short when the impact of these bills is felt? Risk aversion will cause businesses to pack up and leave well in advance of CARB’s implementation plan. By the way, CARB’s director Mary Nichols has publicly stated that AB 32 will not affect global CO2 concentrations. How obvious can be the question then, why are we doing this?
Well you have my professional opinion. I have been engaged in large-scale water and power resources planning and hydrology for over 50 years. I have a keen sense of the operation, planning, and economics of hydro-thermal power systems, having participated and managed such investigations for long-term planning in Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nicaragua and Luzon. As for climatic trends, I authored the first paper in English dealing with hydroclimatology as a needed cross discipline, a paper motivated by the recognition that climate has a major influence on water resources and needed to be inducted into the engineering planning process, which was not being done at the time (1960-70s).

I have no financial oar in this matter, other than hoping that I do not live to see California become a failed state, with all the adverse consequences to the people including my kids and grandkids. It would be a failure in my ethical professional duty, and my duty as a citizen, to sit silent in the face of the oncoming economic tsunami of these three pieces of legislation (including others which chase the carbon bogey man).

Please consider this plea to hold up on SB X 1 2 and AB 32 / S 375.


Ron Kilmartin, P.E.
Consulting Engineer
CA Civil 14411 Expires 3/31/2013

415 Turrin Drive
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523

Further discussion by this writer supporting the failed Proposition 23 can be found at https://ronkilmartin.wordpress.com.

Enclosed: Two charts (from the C3 website 3/30/2011).

By the way, here is an interesting quote:

“ Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are [snip] a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions…” Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, Islam and Western Democracies, February, 2006.

Gob Nrown do not sign 33 pct bill.doc

Arnold Schwarzenegger on Climate Control

November 25, 2010

Arnold Schwarzenegger on Climate Control
Bloomberg Business Week by Eric Pooley, 11/24/2010


Extended Comments by Ron Kilmartin

Arnold spins the out-of-state oil companies as big bad villains, but they were outspent over 3 to 1 by in- and out-of-state investors who will harvest huge subsidies and revenues from the people’s pockets. He also never mentions that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association with millions of members supported Proposition 23 and opposes AB 32.

It is surprising that he thinks Cap and Trade is successful in Europe. In fact it is a disaster in Europe, He is oddly misinformed on that issue.
Arnold spinned California on AB 32 just like he spinned Maria on the schnitzel. The fact is that most of the rest of the world has already or is now jettisoning the global warming hoax, as the climategate debacle of 2009 becomes subject to more and more intense global scrutiny debunking the theory on a daily basis.

Arnold and Jerry Brown both need to listen to what the “skeptics” are saying and writing in peer-reviewed technical papers, and check on what the rest of the world is doing re the carbon hoax. It makes no sense for California to be pursuing the Kyoto Treaty mandates when the rest of the world is rejecting them as being baseless. The lifeblood support for AB 32 is from people who will make money from it. It will have absolutely no effect of global climate.

AB 32 contains a provision whereby the governor can set it aside for a year for whatever reason. This option should be exercised by Arnold before he leaves, or if he doesn’t do it, by Jerry Brown when he assumes the office. In my opinion it borders on criminal to allow AB 32 to go into effect when it will choke the state economy even further. It is pure folly to wreck our energy systems in the face of such a weak economy. Soup lines? There may not be even any soup.

The Obama Administration is suspected by many of being a fan of the Cloward-Piven strategy to bring down our capitalistic system and substitute socialism. I do not believe that is Arnold’s intent for California, since I do not believe he is evil. Nor do I believe that of Jerry Brown. But Cloward and Piven, if they were still alive, could not find a better mechanism for California to self-destruct than AB 32