The Confabulation of Dan Mulhern

WJIM, here in Lansing, has been kind enough to start providing stored audio of some of its programs. This is good, because it allows me to pick among some interviews from The Dan Mulhern Show without actually having to listen to it all. And, you’ve got to figure you’ll get the pieces they think are most worthy. Someday, they’ll probably even get around to providing the dates on which these snippets aired. For now we’ll take an undated example from the last few weeks: an interview with Senator John Kerry.

The piece begins to the fading strains of Joanie Mitchell’s “Big Yellow Taxi,” Mulhern takes that cue into:

…fears about the environment… those fears are still with us. They’ve taken on different forms. But we know we have to shepherd this universe that we’re in…

No job is too big for a dedicated statist.

…I was talking to some of the astronauts and some of the scientific people and I thought ,“What a coincidence that these issues of climate change are arising in the very, very same epoch, the very same period of time [for those of you in Ingham County] that we have these incredible pictures from the space station … that show us, hey, [Earth is] just one ball … ” [it] gives us a great perspective we otherwise never would have had. Speaking of perspective, we’ve got a great guest on the line, Senator John Kerry.

First, it is not at all remarkable that the science allowing us to take pictures of our planet from space would be cotemporaneous with the science allowing us to measure various gases in our atmosphere. We wouldn’t have the former if we hadn’t already got minimal expertise in the latter.

But, back to the perspective John Kerry brings. Here’s my view: He’s a Eurabiaphilic, elitist, gold-digger – who, by the way, served in Vietnam and has still not released the records of those four months. Mulhern tells us that Kerry “brings a lot of perspective to issues of the environment.” I thought that was Al Gore. Go figure.

But, Aha! John and Theresa have a new book out. It may be said in their favor that, aside from Dan Mulhern, nobody’s ever heard of it.

We’re informed that one hero of the book is Rachel Carson, notable primarily for an even larger contribution to human death and suffering (from malaria) than John Kerry denies happened in Southeast Asia after Democrats pulled funding in 1975. Kerry has this to say about the fact that 2 million people died in Cambodia and Vietnam as a direct result of that Congressional decision:

“We heard that argument over and over again about the bloodbath that would engulf the entire Southeast Asia, and it didn’t happen,” Kerry said.

He is apparently not up on the research:

Millions of lives changed forever with Saigon’s fall
Hung Huy Nguyen, 71, along with an estimated 1 million South Vietnamese, is a man who came to know death and torture in the years following a war that tore apart families, countries, generations.

Lessons from killing fields of Cambodia – 30 years on
During the nearly four years following that day – April 17, 1975 – Cambodia was radically transformed. Economic production and consumption were collectivized, as Pol Pot and his circle mobilized the entire population to launch a “super great leap forward.” The labor demanded was backbreaking, monotonous, and unceasing.

Everyday freedoms were abolished. Buddhism and other forms of religious worship were banned. Money, markets, and media disappeared. Travel, public gatherings, and communication were restricted. Contact with the outside world vanished. And the state set out to control what people ate and did each day, whom they married, how they spoke, what they thought, and who would live and die. “To keep you is no gain,” the Khmer Rouge warned, “To destroy you is no loss.”

In the end, more than 1.7 million of Cambodia’s 8 million inhabitants perished from disease, starvation, overwork, or outright execution in a notorious genocide.

This is important in fully appreciating the levitas of Jengis Khan John Kerry’s “perspective.”

Following the paean to Rachel Carson’s “leadership,” Mulhern pursues a local ecological angle – the danger of “invasive species” to the Great Lakes, but neglects to ask Kerry how he voted on enforcing US border security in the recent amnesty debate. (Kerry voted against.) OK, this would be asking too much of a book promotion interview, but the analogy is far from strained.

About 9 minutes into the interview Kerry mentions a list of things we’ve “gone backward” on environmental-wise. One of those is federally mandated gas mileage standards. This is a very big question for the auto-manufacturing jobs Mulhern’s wife is currently subsidizing at the expense of knowledge workers. Does Mulhern ask any kind of follow-up on this topic? Not exactly. The Mulhern-Granholms are conflicted in this regard.

Mulhern: We’ve talked on the show about how Exxon had, I believe, it was 45 billion dollars in profits last year …our gas prices today are up 25 cents as we head into the 4th of July… How do you explain the fact that the Senate voted down a tax last week on oil company profits to fund renewables? …Let’s take a piece of those profits and not have them go solely to shareholders …but have them go toward renewable fuel …How are voters supposed to understand how that got voted down, is big oil just [sic] got that big a grip on the Senate?

Well, if they did, we’d be drilling in ANWR, don’t you think? And maybe building a refinery or two?

Kerry: When the average American; when we’ve reached enough people who understand the oil companies, since 2005, have earned $255 billion dollars of profit – that we were asking them to satisfied with maybe $220 billion in profit … and this would have gone to helping America … I think people will be furious and they’ll hold those Senators accountable for those votes. At least I hope they do.

Me, too, but for different reasons. That many of those shareholders are depending on investments in Exxon, or GM, for their retirement does not seem to matter to Mulhern. That government definition of “excess profits” won’t stop with oil companies isn’t considered. That Mulhern’s question is a shameless promotion of his wife’s shameless grandstanding is not acknowledged:

Jennifer Granholm is a fool
State taxes in the U.S. average about 21 cents a gallon, while federal excise taxes are 18.4 cents a gallon. In Michigan the tax, if gasoline were given away by the oil companies, would about 40.5 cents a gallon (19.874 cents state excise tax + 18.4 cents federal excise tax, plus 6% sales Michigan sales tax on tax). Michigan also receives sales tax revenue on the actual product price which, of course, increases with that price. Talk about windfalls.

At a 9% margin, oil companies receive about 22 cents per gallon. Whose profits are obscene?

Since 1977, the obscene government profits were $1.34 trillion (that’s a “T”) while industry profits were $643 billion.

So why not just take some of the unconscionable government profits, collected over many years with apparently insufficient attention to funding renewable energy (or else we’d have it, right?), and use that money? It’s gone, you say?

3 thoughts on “The Confabulation of Dan Mulhern”

  1. Good post. I had not realized what an ignorant statist Mr. Mulhern is. The government makes almost three times the profit on gasoline sales as do oil companies, and just look at all the good they do with it. LOL.

  2. I realize this is an old post, but it came up in a google search.That whiny little social studies teacher tonight said that anyone who opposes tax hikes is “developmentally disabled”.I went to the WJIM website, and of course, no contact info to rip him a new one.Is it just me or is he the whiniest little weasel.Nice for the Governor’s wife to get his own little show like that. I mean, it’s not free political advertising or anything.