Cooler Heads Digest 12 June 2009 | Myron Ebell, Inside the Beltway - GlobalWarming.org

I expect that the Democratic leadership will come up with enough votes to pass H. R. 2454 narrowly and with only a handful of Republican votes. They are rushing because they realize that the bill could implode at any time.
...
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, announced on Thursday that she plans to mark up the Senate version of Waxman-Markey in her committee before the August recess. Right now, there are probably enough votes to move the bill out of committee, but support in the full Senate looks far short of the 60 necessary to invoke cloture and proceed to a final vote. It’s not even clear to me that generic cap-and-trade legislation has majority support in the Senate.
...
California, the world leader in energy rationing (after North Korea, Cuba, etc.), now looks likely to go bankrupt by the end of July. Californians Pelosi, Waxman, and Boxer are actively promoting at the federal level the policies that are contributing to the decline of the once-Golden State.

Getting crabby – another missing NASA GISS station found, thanks to a TV show « Watts Up With That?

I’m reminded of this from John Christy:

“the use of a few popular stations for which the data are easy to find, leads to too much warming when the averages are constructed. I have published research for North Alabama, Central California and in a few months East Africa, in which I went back to the original sources of data to augment the number of stations by roughly a factor of ten – indeed, ten times more stations. This effort requires significant time in searching for and manually digitizing the records for scientific purposes. In each case, I’ve found that the data sets based on a few popular stations overstate the warming by up to a factor of three.”

American Thinker Blog: Kyoto Schmyoto II

As Drew Thornley quotes Gwyn Prins of the London School of Economics and Steve Rayner of Oxford University: "[the Kyoto Protocol] as an instrument for achieving emissions reductions, has failed . . . It has produced no demonstrable reductions in emissions or even in anticipated emissions growth."