On The Cusp of 2014

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Victor Davis Hanson: That the president of the United States serially lied over Obamacare earns a “duh.” The NSA mess warrants a “whatever.” Each time we witness something akin to the NSA, IRS, AP, and ACA machinations in the future, the supporters of the next untruthful or immoral president will no doubt offer in defense, “But Obama did worse and nobody cared.”

Thomas Sowell: Whenever we stand on the threshold of a new year, we are tempted to forget the hazards of prophecy and try to see what may lie on the other side of this arbitrary division of time.

Sometimes we are content to try to change ourselves with New Year’s resolutions to do better in some respect.

Changing ourselves is a much more reasonable undertaking than trying to change other people. It may or may not succeed, but it seldom creates the disasters that trying to change others can produce.

When we look beyond ourselves to the world around us, peering into the future can be a very sobering, if not depressing, experience.

ObamaCare looms large and menacing on our horizon.

This is not just because of computer problems, or even because some people who think that they have enrolled may discover at their next visit to a doctor that they do not have any insurance coverage.

What ObamaCare has done, thanks to Chief Justice Roberts’ Supreme Court decision, is reduce us all from free citizens to cowed subjects whom the federal government can order around in our own personal lives, in defiance of the 10th Amendment and all the other protections of our freedom in the Constitution of the United States.

ObamaCare is more than a medical problem, though there are predictable medical problems — and even catastrophes — that will unfold in the course of 2014 and beyond.

Our betters have now been empowered to run our lives, with whatever combination of arrogance and incompetence they may have, or however much they lie.

The challenges ahead are much clearer than what our responses will be.

Perhaps the most hopeful sign is that increasing numbers of people seem to have finally — after nearly five long years — begun to see Barack Obama for what he is, rather than for what he seemed to be, when judged by his image and rhetoric.

What kind of man would blithely disrupt the medical care of millions of Americans, and then repeatedly lie to them with glib assurances that they could keep their doctors or health insurance if they wanted to?

What kind of man would set up a system in which people would be forced by law to risk their life savings by divulging their financial identification numbers to strangers who could turn out to be convicted felons?

With all the time that elapsed between the passage of ObamaCare and its going into effect, why were the so-called “navigators” who were to be handling other people’s financial records never investigated for criminal convictions?

What explanation could there be, other than that Obama didn’t care?

Caring is not a matter of words.

“By their fruits ye shall know them” — not by their rhetoric, image or symbolism.

Those who have still not yet seen through Obama will have many more opportunities to do so during the coming year, as the medical, financial and other painful human consequences of ObamaCare keep coming out in ways so clear that not even the mainstream media can ignore them or obscure them.

The question then is: What can be done about it? Nothing can be done about Obama himself. He has three more years in office and, as he pointed out to the Russians, he will no longer have to face the American voters.

ObamaCare, however, has no such immunity. It is always hard to repeal an elaborate program after it has gone into effect. But Prohibition was repealed, even though it was a Constitutional Amendment that required super-majorities in both houses of Congress and super-majorities of state legislatures to repeal.

In our two-party system, everything depends on whether the Republicans step up to the plate and act like responsible adults who understand that ObamaCare represents a historic crossroads that will determine what kind of people we are going to be, for this generation and generations yet unborn — citizens or subjects.

This means that Republicans have to decide whether their top priority is internal strife among the different wings of the party — another circular firing squad — or whether either wing puts the country first.

A prediction on how that will turn out in the new year would be far too hazardous to attempt.

My Guess: Circular Firing Squad. After all, it’s all about them, not us.It’s FOR them, not us, or even U.S. 🙂

Welcome to ObamaWorld, Comrade. Now you don’t want to be a Thought Criminal Do you, Citizen?

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Advertisements

Pajama Boy, WTF?

Year End Note:Egypt’s government has wisely designated the Muslim Brotherhood a “terrorist organization.”

You remember them, they were the ones that Obama backed despite all the warnings to the contrary. 🙂 Nothing to see there…so we turn to Social Media…

***

I guess this shows how much I don’t Tweet anything or miss out on a lot of Prime Time TV Ads because until today I hadn’t heard of this goof.

But apparently, like Julia (the computer sprite) this simplistic, and condescending messenger is getting whacked by politicos.

But he’s supposed to be simplistic and condescending!! That’s liberalism for you. You’re supposed to be simplistic and they are supposed to be condescending. That’s the way it works.

They are after all, the Superior Race of Humanity! 🙂

And you’re not!

embodying so much that is wrong with Obamacare and socialism in general – the infantilization of adults, the smirking know-it-all attitude of the nanny state, and the inappropriate intrusions in our private lives” as the American Thinker put it.

The fact that these ads are made by the Presidents own Campaign Committee, Organizing for America (even though he can’t run for a 3rd term-yet!) should tell you everything you’d need to know.

But apparently, our saintly hero of the left is a typical liberal extremist. At least typical to the ones I used to meet on message boards, before I stopped playing with them that is.

“I’m a liberal f***,” he wrote in the typical leftist vernacular on his now-deleted blog, according to research by the Daily Caller. “A liberal f*** is not a Democrat, but rather someone who combines political data and theory, extreme leftist views and sarcasm to win any argument while make (sic) the opponents feel terrible about themselves. I won every argument but one.”

In other words, he knows more than you as he arches his eyebrows with smug certainty to “persuade” you to buy ObamaCare.

Apparently, he’s been at it awhile and doesn’t take kindly to thoughtful discussion or argument. he dismissed his critics in an interview with the Badger Herald of Wisconsin by saying he gave them “a huge middle finger.” He summed up: “We have no morals, and we will attack you.”

If this doesn’t sum up the Obama administration’s smoldering contempt for the vast majority of voters who are now suffering under the incompetence and cost of the ObamaCare he’s now selling, what does?

Krupp’s views are those of a left-wing extremist, one who is certain he knows what’s better for voters than they do. We’ve seen his attitude in other pitches for ObamaCare, such as by Obama ally Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., who browbeat a group of students at Cal State Los Angeles earlier this month, and Internet ads that urge the young to buy ObamaCare by depicting a bunch of beer-swilling boobs.

At a Dec. 6 event, one of Obama’s staunchest allies, Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., looked over a group of about 200 young, mostly Hispanic students at California State University, Los Angeles, and asked how many of them had signed up for ObamaCare.

After no hands went up, he proceeded browbeat them about being potential burdens to “the rest of us taxpayers,” adding: “You want to be invincible! And you’re thinking you’ll stay so. Well, you’re going to get old.”

He also tried to explain away the no-sign-up phenomenon to his National Journal/Atlantic hosts as a matter of young people under 27 being on their parents’ plan — a questionable assumption, given that many of the students that day were the children of immigrants working their way through school and are past 27.

It was a despicable performance, seemingly aimed more at justifying the unpopular program’s existence than selling it to the young. And it was compounded by the bad information Becerra gave out about Social Security to those in attendance who wanted to know about that plan’s solvency when time came for them to retire.

Rather than answer the question, Becerra launched into a furious rant about how young people don’t vote and ought to. (“You mean for you,” whispered a cynical 20-something in the back row).

The irony was, the kids in the audience probably did vote, given they were attending the congressman’s presentation on their own time on a Friday afternoon.

They were probably Democrats!

We spoke to some of them. Did they have a problem with Becerra’s message? “I thought he looked down on us,” remarked a young Hispanic business major named George, the first in his family to go to college. “And that part about Social Security being there for us when we retire was just a lie.”

“Well, I’m not going to sign up,” said Sacha, a 20-something attendee who said she didn’t like “the position” of the congressman either.

It wasn’t just one smirking congressman who was the problem, however. Becerra is a close ally of President Obama and a member of the president’s “strike team” of House and Senate Democrats tasked with urging young people to sign up for ObamaCare coverage.

The strike team, according to Reuters, spreads White House talking points to young potential buyers of health insurance to persuade them to sign up. In the case of Becerra, the young people could tell his remarks were more about saving Obama than doing anything good for them. And many seemed to resent it.

Maybe that’s not so surprising. A Reuters survey released Friday found 57% of young people disapprove of ObamaCare. That followed a Dec. 15 USA Today/Pew poll showing only 41% approved of Obama’s signature health care policy while 54% disapproved.

Meanwhile, among Hispanics, to whom Becerra had probably been reaching out, Obama’s support has tumbled 23 percentage points in one year, from 75% to 52%, the steepest drop among all demographic groups, according to a Dec. 5 Gallup poll.

And yet this was the very group Becerra chose to browbeat, constantly defending ObamaCare instead of listening to the real concerns of the young and, more important, taking the message back to the White House.

For ObamaCare to work, it requires 7 million sign-ups in its own projected goals, with about one-third, or 2.3 million, healthy young people necessary to subsidize the older, sicker buyers.

So they have to con the young people into buying it, just like the last 2 Presidential elections! and Then there’s Hilary in 2016…

They aren’t going to get these numbers until the economics improve for them — not just at the ObamaCare exchanges, but in the job market too. And they sure as heck aren’t going to sign up with one of Obama’s minions scolding them.

The only thing that can be concluded from Becerra sorry performance is that, with friends like him, Obama-Care doesn’t need enemies. (IBD)

But you’re still too stupid to know how great and magnanimous they are and they will continue to beat you up until you understand just how great they really are and how small and stupid you were for doubting them.

Krupp wears soft, cuddly pajamas to appear presumably friendly, but based on his views stated elsewhere, he’d put you in a penal camp if he could.

The ends justify the means for someone who openly says he shuns morals. That’s the sort of coercion the ObamaCare campaign is coming to. (IBD)

Oh, and if you disagree with Pajama Boy, apparently you’re a racist! (anti-Semite which is funny if you think about).

Homo Superior Liberalis, folks. In all it’s glory! 🙂

Deep Impact!

Worst of The Year

Quote of the Year:

“One of the most comprehensive first-person accounts of slavery comes from the personal diary of a man called Thomas Thistlewood, who kept copious notes for 39 years….In 1756, he records that ‘a slave named Darby catched eating canes; had him well flogged and pickled, then made Hector, another slave, s-h-i-t in his mouth.’ This became known as ‘Darby’s Dose,’ a punishment invented by Thistlewood that spoke only of the slave owners’ savagery and inhumanity….When Mrs. Palin invoked slavery, she doesn’t just prove her rank ignorance. She confirms that if anyone truly qualified for a dose of discipline from Thomas Thistlewood, then she would be the outstanding candidate.”

— MSNBC host Martin Bashir on November 15, reacting to Sarah Palin’s comparison of excessive debt to slavery. Bashir apologized the following Monday, but MSNBC permitted him to stay on the air that entire week. After an extended Thanksgiving “vacation,” he quit on December 4.

Maybe he’ll go work for Al-Jazeera America… 🙂

“This is the Web site folks, HealthCare.gov. If you go to this Web site, you will find out how easy it is to read, how easy it is to navigate all the information, all the basic questions, and all the direction you need to take to get involved, to get health care. This is a great guide, if I may say, for any of you out there who feel so confused by all of these right-wing commercials that are just permeating through your television screen.”— Host Ed Schultz on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, September 30.

Which of Course follows on from the Lie of the Year:http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

‘If you like your health care plan, you can keep it’

Pants on Fire!

 

 

Which will go nicely with: “I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

Which is also screamingly false and 2014 will showcase it in your wallet.

And then there’s this old rage, called The Constitution that our King despises because it just gets in the way of his Lordship over his vassals…

Ilya Shapiro outlines President Barack Obama’s “top 10 constitutional violations of 2013.” The list includes everything from the the delay of Obamacare’s “out-of-pocket caps” to political profiling by the IRS.

“Unfortunately, the president fomented this upswing in civic interest not by talking up the constitutional aspects of his policy agenda, but by blatantly violating the strictures of our founding document,” Shapiro writes in the Dec. 23 op-ed. “And he’s been most frustrated with the separation of powers, which doesn’t allow him to ‘fundamentally transform’ the country without congressional acquiescence.”

1. Delay of Obamacare’s out-of-pocket caps. The Labor Department announced in February that it was delaying for a year the part of the healthcare law that limits how much people have to spend on their own insurance. This may have been sensible—insurers and employers need time to comply with rapidly changing regulations—but changing the law requires actual legislation.

2. Delay of Obamacare’s employer mandate. The administration announced via blogpost on the eve of the July 4 holiday that it was delaying the requirement that employers of at least 50 people provide complying insurance or pay a fine. This time it did cite statutory authority, but the cited provisions allow the delay of certain reporting requirements, not of the mandate itself.

3. Delay of Obamacare’s insurance requirements. The famous pledge that “if you like your plan, you can keep it” backfired when insurance companies started cancelling millions of plans that didn’t comply with Obamacare’s requirements. President Obama called a press conference last month to proclaim that people could continue buying non-complying plans in 2014—despite Obamacare’s explicit language to the contrary. He then refused to consider a House-passed bill that would’ve made this action legal.

4. Exemption of Congress from Obamacare. A little-known part of Obamacare requires Congressmen and their staff to get insurance through the new healthcare exchanges, rather than a taxpayer-funded program. In the quiet of August, President Obama directed the Office of Personnel Management to interpret the law to maintain the generous congressional benefits.

5. Expansion of the employer mandate penalty through IRS regulation. Obamacare grants tax credits to people whose employers don’t provide coverage if they buy a plan “through an Exchange established by the State”—and then fines employers for each employee receiving such a subsidy. No tax credits are authorized for residents of states where the exchanges are established by the federal government, as an incentive for states to create exchanges themselves. Because so few (16) states did, however, the IRS issued a rule ignoring that plain text and allowed subsidies (and commensurate fines) for plans coming from “a State Exchange, regional Exchange, subsidiary Exchange, and federally-facilitated Exchange.”

6. Political profiling by the IRS. After seeing a rise in the number of applications for tax-exempt status, the IRS in 2010 compiled a “be on the lookout” (“BOLO”) list to identify organizations engaged in political activities. The list included words such as “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” and “Israel”; subjects such as government spending, debt, or taxes; and activities such as criticizing the government, educating about the Constitution, or challenging Obamacare. The targeting continued through May of this year.

7. Outlandish Supreme Court arguments. Between January 2012 and June 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Justice Department’s extreme positions 9 times. The cases ranged from criminal procedure to property rights, religious liberty to immigration, securities regulation to tax law. They had nothing in common other than the government’s view that federal power is virtually unlimited. As a comparison, in the entire Bush and Clinton presidencies, the government suffered 15 and 23 unanimous rulings, respectively.

8. Recess appointments. Last year, President Obama appointed three members of the National Labor Relations Board, as well as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, during what he considered to be a Senate recess. But the Senate was still holding “pro forma” sessions every three days—a technique developed by Sen. Harry Reid to thwart Bush recess appointments. (Meanwhile, the Dodd-Frank Act, which created the CFPB, provides that authority remains with the Treasury Secretary until a director is “confirmed by the Senate.”) In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional, which ruling White House spokesman Jay Carney said only applied to “one court, one case, one company.”

9. Assault on free speech and due process on college campuses. Responding to complaints about the University of Montana’s handling of sexual assault claims, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, in conjunction with the Justice Department, sent the university a letter intended as a national “blueprint” for tackling sexual harassment. The letter urges a crackdown on “unwelcome” speech and requires complaints to be heard in quasi-judicial procedures that deny legal representation, encourage punishment before trial, and convict based on a mere “more likely than not” standard.

10. Mini-DREAM Act. Congress has shamelessly failed to pass any sort of immigration reform, including for the most sympathetic victims of the current non-system, young people who were brought into the country illegally as children. Nonetheless, President Obama, contradicting his own previous statements claiming to lack authority, directed the Department of Homeland Security to issue work and residence permits to the so-called Dreamers. The executive branch undoubtedly has discretion regarding enforcement priorities, but granting de facto green cards goes beyond a decision to defer deportation in certain cases.

It was hard to limit myself to 10 items, of course—Obamacare alone could’ve filled many such lists—but these, in my judgment, represent the chief executive’s biggest dereliction this year of his duty to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution, and to “take care that the law be faithfully executed.”

Alas, things may get worse before they get better. New presidential “counselor” John Podesta’s belief in governance by fiat is no secret; in a 2010 report, he wrote that focusing on executive power “presents a real opportunity for the Obama administration to turn its focus away from a divided Congress and the unappetizing process of making legislative sausage.” (Forbes)

Happy New Year, and don’t forget to bow to your Lord and Master… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Lighting The Way

If your New Year’s resolution is to change your light bulbs, don’t worry—the federal government’s here to help.

Beginning January 1, 2014, the federal government will ban the use of 60-watt and 40-watt incandescent light bulbs. The light bulb has become a symbol in the fight for consumer freedom and against unnecessary governmental interference into the lives of the American people.

In 2007, Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law an energy bill that placed stringent efficiency requirements on ordinary incandescent bulbs in an attempt to have them completely eliminated by 2014. The law phased out 100-watt and 75-watt incandescent bulbs last year.

Proponents of government-imposed efficiency standards and regulations will say, “So what? There are still plenty of lighting options on the shelves at Home Depot; we’re saving families money; and we’re reducing harmful climate change emissions.”

The “so what” is that the federal government is taking decisions out of the hands of families and businesses, destroying jobs, and restricting consumer choice in the market. We all have a wide variety of preferences regarding light bulbs. It is not the role of the federal government to override those preferences with what it believes is in our best interest.

Families understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly. Energy efficiency has improved dramatically over the past six decades—long before any national energy efficiency mandates.

If families and firms are not buying the most energy-efficient appliance or technology, it is not that they are acting irrationally; they simply have budget constraints or other preferences such as comfort, convenience, and product quality. A family may know that buying an energy-efficient product will save them money in the long term, but they have to prioritize their short-term expenses. Those families operating from paycheck to paycheck may want to opt for a cheaper light bulb and more food instead of a more expensive light bulb and less food.

Some may read this and think: Chill out—it’s just a light bulb. But it’s not just a light bulb. Take a look at the Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program. Basically anything that uses electricity or water in your home or business is subject to an efficiency regulation.

When the market drives energy efficiency, it saves consumers money. The more the federal government takes away decisions that are better left to businesses and families, the worse off we’re going to be. (Heritage)

With millions of people still supporting the use of incandescent bulbs, Birnbaum found a loophole in the Energy Independence and Security Act. The ban applies to general service incandescent light bulbs but not rough service incandescents.

While frequently used in automobiles, subway systems and other applications that require a heavy-duty, vibration-resistant bulb, rough service bulbs can still be used in a general application, according to Birnbaum.

The website Bulbs.com breaks it down this way: “Rough service lamps function identically to regular incandescent lamps, but generally have additional wire within the glass enclosure that serves to protect and support the filament.” [emphasis added]

Birnbaum’s company was one of two awarded a license to produce these bulbs in the country. After designing a bulb to meet the new specifications for rough service bulbs established in the law, the American-made Newcandescent was born.

Overall, they’re ”not any diff than bulbs over the years,” Birnbaum said.

The Newcandescent bulb does, however, last 12 times longer than the traditional bulb.

“That’s about 10,000 hours based on three hours of use per day,” Birnbaum added.

But even Birnbaum, a die-hard fan of incandescents, thinks newer lighting technology is worth investing his time. He is working on developing an LED that gives off the look of an incandescent. Part of the challenge is making sure it is inexpensive compared to others on the market.

“We’re trying to make it available to the average person,” Birnbaum said.

“When you break it down it’s actually a lot cheaper than CFLS,” he added of the current Newcandescent bulb.

Newcandescent bulbs range from $2.88 to $7.50. LEDs start around $10 and head up into the teens, while CFLs can be a bit cheaper or just as expensive as an LED, depending on a variety of factors.

Entrepreneurial Spirit, we can’t have that! It’s evil. Government is supposed to provide everything, including spirit!

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

The Tax Man Cometh Soon

WASHINGTON — Here comes the ObamaCare tax bill.

The cost of President Obama’s massive health-care law will hit Americans in 2014 as new taxes pile up on their insurance premiums and on their income-tax bills.

Most insurers aren’t advertising the ObamaCare taxes that are added on to premiums, opting instead to discretely pass them on to customers while quietly lobbying lawmakers for a break.

But one insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama, laid bare the taxes on its bills with a separate line item for “Affordable Care Act Fees and Taxes.”

The new taxes on one customer’s bill added up to $23.14 a month, or $277.68 annually, according to Kaiser Health News. It boosted the monthly premium from $322.26 to $345.40 for that individual.

The new taxes and fees include a 2 percent levy on every health plan, which is expected to net about $8 billion for the government in 2014 and increase to $14.3 billion in 2018.

There’s also a $2 fee per policy that goes into a new medical-research trust fund called the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Insurers pay a 3.5 percent user fee to sell medical plans on the HealthCare.gov Web site.

ObamaCare supporters argue that federal subsidies for many low-income Americans will not only cover the taxes, but pay a big chunk of the premiums.

But ObamaCare taxes don’t stop with health-plan premiums.

Americans also will pay hidden taxes, such as the 2.3 percent medical-device tax that will inflate the cost of items such as pacemakers, stents and prosthetic limbs.

Those with high out-of-pocket medical expenses also will get smaller income-tax deductions.

Americans are currently allowed to deduct expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of their annual income. The threshold jumps to 10 percent under ObamaCare, costing taxpayers about $15 billion over 10 years.

Then there’s the new Medicare tax.

Under ObamaCare, individual tax filers earning more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000 will pay an added 0.9 percent Medicare surtax on top of the existing 1.45 percent Medicare payroll tax. They’ll also pay an extra 3.8 percent Medicare tax on unearned income, such as investment dividends, rental income and capital gains.

ACA supporters say the federal subsidies program under the bill should offset the taxes and much o the premium for low-income families.

But where do the “subsidies” come from? TAXES!

And when they go away… 🙂

After all, Drug addicts just want more drugs! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

The Day After

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

A Bit of After Christmas Humor:

A woman from Los Angeles who was a tree hugging, liberal Democrat and an anti-hunter purchased a piece of timberland near Colville, WA . There was a large tree on one of the highest points in the tract. She wanted a good view of the natural splendor of her land so she started to climb the big tree. As she neared the top she encountered a spotted owl that attacked her. In her haste to escape, the woman slid down the tree to the ground and got many splinters in her crotch. In considerable pain, she hurried to a local ER to see a doctor. She told him she was an environmentalist, a Democrat, and an anti-hunter and how she came to get all the splinters. The doctor listened to her story with great patience and then told her to go wait in the examining room and he would see if he could help her. She sat and waited three hours before the doctor re-appeared. The angry woman demanded, “What took you so long?” He smiled and then told her, “Well, I had to get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management before I could remove old-growth timber from a ‘recreational area’ so close to a Waste Treatment Facility. And I’m sorry, but due to Obama-Care they turned you down too.

NOW ONTO MORE…

Those humming the words to “White Christmas” got their wish big-time as snow covered more than half the lower 48 states as of mid-December, putting snowless winters on the pile of failed climate predictions.

More than half of the continental U.S. had snow cover as of Dec. 15, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the most in 11 years. That exposes as worthless the predictions of the climate scammers of snowless winters as far as the eye can see. In 2006, by comparison, snow covered just 12% of these states.

There are many reasons for this, but climate change is not one of them, even though the warm-mongers cite high temperatures in Alaska and claim record snow cover merely reflects the fact that warmer air can carry more moisture.

Alaska is warm right now, and warmer air does carry more moisture. But what we are seeing is a function of an ever-shifting jet stream, not climate change.

“With the noteworthy exception of Alaska, nearly every state was affected by the unusually cold air at some point during the November-to-December timeframe,” reports Climate Central, a climate website.

This is because, as NOAA notes, the current configuration of the jet stream is bringing warm Pacific air to Alaska, as cold Arctic air is funneled into the lower 48 states.

Jet streams are naturally occurring, fast-flowing air currents that occur on some planets, like ours, and in our case predate the Industrial Revolution by a few years.

As we have pointed out many times, there is no weather condition that climate-change true believers do not cite as proof of climate change. If it is too dry, too wet, too warm or too cold, it is all due to climate change.

So reports of record snow cover do not dismay them. They, too, prove global warming. Everything does.

We recall the prediction in 2000 by Dr. David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, that winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” and claiming, “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

Of course, we all remember that researchers with the CRU at East Anglia were responsible for omitting climate data with the purpose, according to uncovered email, to “hide the decline” in global temperatures.

The temperatures that have flatlined over the last 15 years can no longer be hidden, and neither can the whir of snowblowers all across America this Christmas, as state after state gets hit with bitter cold and snow.

Using computer models seemingly based on that old computer adage “garbage in, garbage out,” models that cannot even predict the past, the climate Chicken Littles are prone to predict snowless winters, glacier-free Himalayas and an ice-free North Pole. Polar bears would drown and Santa would have no place to land.

In his Dec. 10, 2007, “Earth has a fever” speech as he accepted his Nobel Prize, climate extremist Al Gore mentioned a prophecy of doom by U.S. climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski.

Maslowski said the Arctic’s summer ice could “completely disappear” by 2013 due to global warming arising from carbon emissions. He was off by only a little. The Arctic had 920,000 square miles of ice more than it had in 2012, the largest year-to-year increase on record.

German scientists Carl-Otto Weiss and Horst-Joachim Luedecke of the European Institute for Climate and Energy reported recently that two naturally occurring cycles would combine to lower global temperatures this century and that temperature levels would decline to levels similar to the “little ice age” of 1870.

These inconvenient truths didn’t stop Greenpeace from producing a video, “Save The Arctic,” showing a less than jolly Santa promising empty stockings forevermore unless we stop roasting chestnuts on open fires using fossil fuels.

Instead, it is the warm-mongers, not Santa, who find it tough sledding these days. Global warming? Bah, humbug! (IBD)

That’s why they changed it to “Global Climate Change” like that had never ever happened before in the last 5 1/2 billion years!! That explains the Dinosaurs! 🙂

Santa Obama

Feder: Too many of my fellow Americans believe in Obama Claus – the smug community-organizer elf who stuffs stockings with Obama-phones, food stamps, extended unemployment benefits, health insurance for “30 million uninsured” and other welfare state goodies.

But does Santa steal to pay for the presents he leaves? Does he pick the pockets of parents to buy toys for kids? Does he spy, harass, lie and intimidate? Does he monetize the debt by inflating the currency? Is his sleigh loaded with 7% unemployment, growing dependency, and fatherless families? Does he promote poverty, which increased 16.7% under Obama?

Does Santa vacation at posh Martha’s Vineyard digs, spend more time on the links than in the workshop, and then lecture us on our obligation to the less-fortunate?

Where do the presents in Obama Claus’s bag come from? Do elves in the North Pole make them, or are they extracted from the peasantry? Are the “rich” the reindeer harnessed to this Santa’s sleigh? With the energy expended in pulling it, is there any left over for creating wealth and generating jobs?

The spirit of human kindness does not drive us to larceny, regimentation and destruction of the economy.

But it makes Liberals happy…and that is never a bad thing…right?