McCullagh, D

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>According to Declan McCullagh, a libertarian blogger who works for CBS Interactive,</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> secret Obama administration documents reveal that the cost of clean energy cap-and-trade legislation would be $1,761 per household — despite official estimates from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Congressional Budget Office, and the Energy Information Administration of about a postage stamp a day.<b> Based on Treasury Department documents acquired by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI)</b>, McCullagh claims that “a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/15/taking_liberties/entry5314040.shtml">hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent</a>“:</span></font></p>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent</strong>. A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. <strong>At the upper end of the administration’s estimate, the cost per American household would be an <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">extra $1,761 a year</span></strong>.</font></p>

</blockquote>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This is pure twaddle. McCullagh is confabulating a “disclosure” out of whole cloth:</font></p>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>Obama’s Plan Would Have Established Tax Cuts For Working Families</strong>. In his State of the Union address, President Obama proposed a <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/02/24/obama-energy-leadership/">green economy plan</a> that would create a <strike>$100 to $200</strike> $80 billion carbon market and use the money raised from polluters for <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/02/27/obama-new-energy/">middle class tax cuts</a>.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>Congress Did Not Adopt President Obama’s Plan</strong>. The Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) is <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/03/31/green-economy-legislation/">comprehensive clean energy legislation</a>, coupling the carbon market with national renewable energy and energy efficiency standards. Unlike Obama’s plan, the ACES Act would establish a more limited carbon market, distribute most permits for free to polluting industry, with provisions that compel utilities to pass along their value to ratepayers, and provide further assistance for low-income consumers. One can’t use an analysis of Obama’s proposal to calculate the economic benefits of the legislation now being considered.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>The American Clean Energy and Security Act Builds A Clean Economy For A Postage Stamp A Day</strong>. The EPA estimates a net cost of about <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/23/waxman-markey-postcard/">$100 per household</a> per year, which would be fully offset for lower-income consumers.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> The Congressional Budget Office — which did not consider the energy efficiency measures or the cost of inaction — determined “that the net annual economywide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion—or about <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/103xx/doc10327/06-19-CapAndTradeCosts.pdf">$175 per household</a>.”</span></font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>The American Clean Energy and Security Act Cuts Electricity Bills And Dependence On Foreign Oil</strong>. The EPA has found that Waxman-Markey <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/23/waxman-markey-postcard/">cuts household electricity bills</a> by seven percent by 2020. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The EIA found the legislation would <a href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/09/10/eia-clean-air-clean-water-clean-energy-jobs-bill-energy-independent-oil-savings/">save Americans $5,600 per household</a> in reduced dependence on foreign oil.</span></font>

</blockquote>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">To come up with false claim that Obama’s plan was “the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent,” McCullagh ignored where the money would come from — polluting industries with billions of dollars in annual profits — and where the money would go — tax cuts for working people.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In reality, President Obama’s proposal would have amounted to tax cuts worth hundreds of dollars for working families, with the added benefits of greatly reduced dependence on toxic oil and coal, billions of dollars of investment in clean energy, and the avoidance of catastrophic climate change.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">McCullagh argues that his so-called “disclosures” will “probably not aid the political prospects of the Democrats’ cap and trade bill,” and <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">quotes CEI’s Chris Horner: </span>“It’s nice to see they’re not spinning each other behind closed doors.” <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Horner, who filed the FOIA request,</span> <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">runs <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Christopher_C._Horner">global warming denial blogs</a> for <a href="http://www.globalwarming.org/2009/09/15/treasury-department-cap-and-trade-is-a-huge-energy-tax/">CEI</a> and the <a href="http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTgyZDlkMWY2M2NhMGQ1NTliNWMwNWM4YTA0NGFiYWE=">National Review</a>. In June, McCullagh <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/29/inhofe-epa-denier/">breathlessly promoted</a> CEI’s other “scandal” of a global warming denier economist who works for the EPA.</span></font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Opponents of clean energy reform are inflating the costs of action by 1,000 percent, while minimizing that the threat of climate change and our dependence on fossil fuels. Ironically, these lies may actually aid the political prospects of action, as the American public grow more disgusted with the <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/09/13/operation-free-accce/">unethical tactics of polluters</a> and their right-wing allies.</font>

<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/09/16/174427/mccullagh-cei-attack/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">thinkprogress.</span>org/climate/2009/09/16/174427/mccullagh-cei-attack/</font></a>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">comments:</font></p>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">,In a phone interview with the Wonk Room, CNet managing editor <a href="http://www.cnet.com/profile/Jon+Skillings/">Jon Skillings</a> explained that on the CNet site, “reporters self-edit” and “are generally expected to be their own fact-checkers.” Promising to follow up with McCullagh, he concluded, “We take our ethics very seriously.”</font></p></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">

 </font></p>

<h5><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Update</font></h5>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">,<a id="inflation" name="inflation"> </a>Declan McCullagh is also guilty of inflating his job title, claiming on his <a href="http://www.mccullagh.org/declan/">personal website</a> and his <a href="http://twitter.com/declanm">Twitter feed</a> to be <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“the chief political correspondent” for CBSNews</span>.com. <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/18/utility/main951749.shtml">Bill Martens</a>, Vice President of Product Development and Strategy for CBSNews.com, tells the Wonk Room that McCullagh’s actual CBSNews.<b>com</b> title is “<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">senior correspondent.”</span></font></p>

</div>

<h2 id="blog"><a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Pete Altman’s Blog</font></a></h2>

<h1 id="pagetitle"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Treasury Memo: Classic Spin-Job by Clean Energy Opponents</font></h1>

<div id="print"><a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/the_competitive_enterprise_ins.html#"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Print this page</font></a></div>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p class="posted"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Posted September 16, 2009 in <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/issues/solving_global_warming/">Solving Global Warming</a></font></p>

<dd><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="location.href='http://switchboard.nrdc.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=cei&limit=20';return false;" rel="tag">CEI</a>, <a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="location.href='http://switchboard.nrdc.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=climate&limit=20';return false;" rel="tag">climate</a>, <a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="location.href='http://switchboard.nrdc.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=competitiveenterpriseinstitute&limit=20';return false;" rel="tag">competitiveenterpriseinstitute</a>, <a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="location.href='http://switchboard.nrdc.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=globalwarming&limit=20';return false;" rel="tag">globalwarming</a>, <a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="location.href='http://switchboard.nrdc.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=smears&limit=20';return false;" rel="tag">smears</a></font></dd>

</dl>

<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style" style=" margin-top: 1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250" class="addthis_button_compact">Share</a> <span class="addthis_separator" style=" color: #ccc;"> | </span><a class="addthis_button_twitter"> </a> <span class="addthis_separator" style=" color: #ccc;"> | </span></font><span class="ie7" style=" float: left; width: 53px!important; overflow: hidden!important;"><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone="small" rel="nofollow" xmlns:g="g"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></a></span><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font><span class="ie7" style=" color: #ccc; border-bottom: none; display: block; float: left; margin: 0 5px!important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> | </font></span><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" style=" border-bottom: none;" /></font></div><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" style=" border-bottom: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">

</font></a><div id="entrybody"><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" style=" border-bottom: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">

</font></a><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" style=" border-bottom: none;">UPDATE: </a><a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/Cap_and_trades_price_tag.html?showall">Politico issued a correction </a>to their initial take on this, noting (as we do) that the spin is far greater than the actual content of the memo.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The clean-energy opponents at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) are back from their August vacation with a new "smoking gun" document that they say reveals the true costs of federal climate policy.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As reported by <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/taking_liberties/main504383.shtml?contributor=45134&tag=contentMain;contentBody">Declan McCullough</a>, CEI dug up a <a href="http://www.openmarket.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/FOIA-Cap-andTrade-2009-09-11.PDF">memo </a>by a Treasury Department staffer who evaluated the economic impacts of a proposal for federal climate legislation that would auction 100% of the pollution allowances. According to Declan (<a href="http://www.celsias.com/article/reporting-possibly-suppressed-epa-document-cbs-sup/">who has been confused by CEI-generated information before</a>) the plan would <em>cost </em>consumers $100-$200 billion per year, or $1,761 per household.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">CEI of course has a long history of combatting efforts to address global warming as discussed at <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php">ExxonSecrets</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Competitive_Enterprise_Institute/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute_And_Global_Warming">Sourcewatch</a>.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the claims about the memo don't really measure up to whats <em>in </em>the memo:</font></p>

<ol>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The memo<em> does not </em>say climate legislation will cost the public $100-$200 billion. It says "Given the administration's proposal to auction all emission allowances, a cap-and-trade program could generate federal receipts on the order of $100 to $200 billion annually." [emphasis mine]</font></li>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, the memo appears to argue for auctions, saying

</font><ul>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"One advantage of auctioning allowances is the potential for generating large revenues...that could be used to offset distortionary taxes on labor or capital, improving the economic efficiency of the tax system and reducing overall compliance costs to the economy."</font></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">No one is talking about 100% auction anymore anyway, as <a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200909160001">Media Matters </a>points out.</font></li>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The memo <em>never mentions</em> the amount of $1,761. Wherever that number came from, it isn't in the document that is supposedly behind this story.</font></li>

<li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In any case, this memo from 9 months ago about a hypothetical bill has been superseded by three independent studies of the bill that actually passed the House. The non-partisan <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dlashof/cheap_at_twice_the_price_epas.html">Congressional Budget Office</a>, the independent <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ljohnson/eia_study_confirms_climate_pro.html">Energy Information Administration</a>, and the <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dlashof/cheap_at_twice_the_price_epas.html">Environmental Protection Agency </a>all conclude that climate legislation will cost American households less than a postage stamp per day.</font></li>

</ol>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So one thing is clear - that opponents of clean energy legislation are claiming this memo says things it doesn't.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Just for the record, this appears to be the second in a series by McCullagh and CEI, who earlier this summer tripped over themselves attempting to explain another memo purportedly showing the <a href="http://www.celsias.com/article/reporting-possibly-suppressed-epa-document-cbs-sup/">EPA was hiding evidence </a>that global warming isn't so bad.</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And of course, this is just the latest in the string of "tax" accusations which all rely on the same faulty logic that moneys raised by a climate policy are the same as a tax levied on each American household. See previous discussions of the <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ljohnson/newts_voodoo_economics.html">$1,300 tax</a> and the <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ljohnson/boehners_climate_of_fear.html">$3,100 tax</a> by my colleague Laurie Johnson.</font></p>

</div>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> =</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">alex and lew rockwell:</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>ClimateGate Could Threaten Copenhagen Climate Deal</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">By Declan McCullagh</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">December 8, 2009</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no links</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Widening concern about the state of climate science after thousands of internal e-mails and computer files were posted on the Internet could jeopardize any agreement at this week’s summit in Copenhagen.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Although a sweeping international deal already appeared unlikely, agreement on even less ambitious measures will be complicated by the growing ClimateGate scandal and questions that have been raised about the reliability of computer models linking global warming to man-made activities.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> No less an authority than the U.N.’s top climate official, Yvo de Boer, acknowledged on Sunday that the data leak was damaging; domestically, Republicans are pressing the Obama administration to reevaluate its position. (See CBS News’ previous coverage.)</span></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The summit in Denmark that began Monday, properly titled the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, is expected to draw some 100 heads of state, including President Obama. One unanswered question: How willing are wealthier, developed nations to curb their economic output and tax their citizens to pay poorer countries to emit less carbon dioxide?</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">A November 20 report from a U.N. working group outlines what many nations would like to see in a final treaty. Wealthier nations including the United States will make “mandatory contributions” to a “multilateral climate change fund” paid for by the requirement that “developed country parties shall restructure their taxation regime.” The report warns: “Delay by developed country parties in implementing their commitments to reduce emissions will increase their climate debt to the developing country parties.”</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The leaked electronic files have proven problematic because the argument for an international treaty is attached to this chain of reasoning: the earth is warming, the primary cause is man-made carbon dioxide emissions, the effect is harmful and can be remediated by limiting CO2 output, and, finally, it’s worth spending billions or even trillions to do so. If foundational data about temperature measurements is in error, as critics now say is the case – well, we might as well cancel the Copenhagen summit and tell all those inbound private jets to turn around and return home</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">To be sure, many – perhaps even most – climate researchers say any flaw in the leaked data assembled by the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) does not mean the theory of man-made global warming is false. Nicholas Stern, chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, calls evidence for that theory “overwhelming,” and Obama administration scientists last week downplayed the scandal, as did a U.N. panel. Tempers are flaring: one of the East Anglia academics resorted to calling a skeptic “an asshole” on a live BBC television interview.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">And the scandal seems to be broadening. Internal investigations are underway at the CRU and Penn State (with the state senate warning that the school’s budget may be at risk), one estimate from a free-market group says that 12 of the 26 scientists who wrote the relevant section of a U.N. global warming report are “up to their necks in ClimateGate,” and the BBC and independent analysts are evaluating the CRU’s computer code and finding it lacking.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Read the rest of the article</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">December 8, 2009</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The Best of Declan McCullagh:</font></font></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></font></font></p><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-140349" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig10/mccullagh7.1.1.html" rel="bookmark" title="Senators Propose Granting President Emergency Internet Power" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); outline: none; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Senators Propose Granting President Emergency Internet Power</font></a></h2><div class="blog-content clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 16px; color: rgb(43, 27, 23); background: transparent;" /><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box-right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: right; width: 124px; text-align: right; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 24px; background: transparent;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">6/19/2010</font></span></div><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-140347" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig10/mccullagh6.1.1.html" rel="bookmark" title="Amazon Fights Demand for Customer Records" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Amazon Fights Demand for Customer Records</font></a></h2><div class="blog-content clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 16px; color: rgb(43, 27, 23); background: transparent;" /><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box-right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: right; width: 124px; text-align: right; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 24px; background: transparent;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4/21/2010</font></span></div><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-140346" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig10/mccullagh5.1.1.html" rel="bookmark" title="Census Time Heightens Privacy Concerns" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Census Time Heightens Privacy Concerns</font></a></h2><div class="blog-content clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 16px; color: rgb(43, 27, 23); background: transparent;" /><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box-right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: right; width: 124px; text-align: right; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 24px; background: transparent;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">3/23/2010</font></span></div><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-140345" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig10/mccullagh4.1.1.html" rel="bookmark" title="ClimateGate Could Threaten Copenhagen Climate Deal" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ClimateGate Could Threaten Copenhagen Climate Deal</font></a></h2><div class="blog-content clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 16px; color: rgb(43, 27, 23); background: transparent;" /><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box-right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: right; width: 124px; text-align: right; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 24px; background: transparent;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">12/8/2009</font></span></div><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-140344" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig10/mccullagh3.1.1.html" rel="bookmark" title="Congress May Probe Leaked Global Warming E-Mails" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Congress May Probe Leaked Global Warming E-Mails</font></a></h2><div class="blog-content clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 16px; color: rgb(43, 27, 23); background: transparent;" /><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box-right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: right; width: 124px; text-align: right; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 24px; background: transparent;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">11/25/2009</font></span></div><div class="clearfix" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; zoom: 1; background: transparent;" /></div><div class="blog-box list-box" id="post-145034" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; clear: both; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="blog-box-left" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; float: left; width: 496px; background: transparent;"><h2 class="blog-title" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 23px; letter-spacing: 0.05em; background: transparent;"><a href="http://archive.lewrockwell.com/spl/obama-to-control-internet.html" rel="bookmark" title="Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 0, 128); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgb(71, 143, 178); background: transparent;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet</font></a></h2></div></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.lewrockwell.com/2009/12/declan-mccullagh/climategate-could-threaten-copenhagen-climatedeal/</font></font></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">

</font></font>