Republicans’ War on Green Energy and Their Curious Born-Again Populism

While the last couple of weeks have been absorbed with gun control and the “fiscal cliff,” the Wall Street Journal editors have also been uncommonly obsessed with energy issues, mostly contrasting “green energy” with fracking.  The five editorials between Dec. 17-Jan 4 on these two subjects paint the usual Manichean world of growth vs. regulation, and “market-driven” natural gas investments vs. “trendy eco projects”. The key editorial in this sequence, “The Jackson Damage” (12/27), lays all the blame for high unemployment at the feet of retiring EPA Director and she-devil Lisa Jackson, whose “aggressive and punitive” regulators have “contributed to business uncertainty and stole dollars otherwise available for private investment.”

At the beating heart of this robbery are Obama’s “repressed green id” and the risible Democratic bias toward “racial justice and economic redistribution”. This bizarre psychoanalysis of the environmental movement seems confused insofar as it pits the desire for social justice, labeled as elitist and “anti-growth”, against American workers’ best interests.

A further twist of this inverted logic occurs in the Jan. 2 editorial, “Crony Capitalism Blowout,” which summons Republicans to a “new populist message” based on–wait for it- less corporate regulation, fewer constraints on corporate profit, lower taxes and less government. In this brave new populist America, “the social service planners who can’t run health care, education, or public housing” will be eclipsed by small businesses, investors, and the affluent. The ants (“those who save their money”) will triumph over the grasshoppers (“those who spend their money”).

But the ants are also due a huge tax break because the $5 million exemption on the estate tax is a “pittance for 50 years of work and thrift”, and should be raised. Only in GOP la-la-land is $5 million a “pittance”. Populism spreads to the 1%!

Glossary, Early January, 2013

an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in Wall Street Journal editorials, Dec. 19-Jan. 4

assault weapons: gun-control talk. “Assault” is always to be in quotation marks, perhaps because guns don’t assault people, people do. See also “gun control”.

fracking: “the best way to fight carbon emissions”.

green energy: no less than a “re-engineering of the US energy system”; aka, “Obama’s repressed green id,” and a “shapeless concept” that is “stealing dollars from private investment”.

gun control. The wet dream of “the social service planners who can’t run health care, education, or public housing” (Dec. 25). A term to be used very sparingly (use “second-amendment rights” instead).  Gun control will not lessen violent massacres because they are primarily caused by too many “civil liberties” for the mentally disturbed. (Apparently, the individual rights mandate of the second amendment for gun owners does not apply to other groups).

industrial policy: federal subsidies for any industry the Journal doesn’t like, especially anything having to do with “green power”, aka, “taxpayer handout”. Subsidies for the oil, nuclear, coal and natural gas industries are of course not “industrial policy”, but, rather, the encouragement of “market forces”. Most other federal subsidies are “market-distorting follies,” “coddling” or “profiting from political agendas”.

Islamists: any foreign leader or country critical of American policy. Always characterized as “anti-democratic”. Synonymous with “Benghazi,” “ramming through” laws the Journal doesn’t like and “turmoil”.

judicial restraint: any position taken by the sons of Robert Bork. (see “originalism,” below)

originalism: The Republican myth of an “enduring Constitution”, complete and whole in itself, and not open to interpretation. A text without a context. As opposed to the “judicial left,” for whom the law is “whatever they say it is..the legal inventions of the moment”. They dusted this old chestnut off for their Dec. 19 homage to “The Great Robert Bork”.

productivity: limited to the “private, productive part of the economy,” the “small businesses, investors and the affluent” that Obama is inexplicably intent on destroying through his “redistributionist tax agenda”. (“Obama’s Tax Bill Comes Due,” 1-1-13).

profiting from political agendas: any Democratic policy, especially in regards to “green energy”. Republican political agendas that also enhance corporate profits–deregulation, lower taxes, weakening trade unions–is somehow immune to this charge.

regulatory binge: any new federal policy, law or mandate. Always “abusive”, “reckless”, “aggressive” and “punitive”.  Republican laws and regulations, on the other hand, are always “good governance”.

smear: a Democratic attack on a Republican.  In relation to Bork, “Democrats cast the first smear.”