7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cow-towed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.

mountain

So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.

David_Petraeus

And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up with little to no sense of shame.

disagree

2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.extremists

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?

No.

As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?

HELL NO!

2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and go away.

HELL NO!

They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

And these zombies have Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.

FEAR IS HOPE!

My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.

truth

The Best and Worst of 2015

Derek Hunter: As far as years go, 2015 certainly was one of them. The news was not wanting for content, and we columnists were not wanting for material. It was a year of tragedies and triumphs bookended by terrorist attacks in Paris. A reality TV star became the leading candidate of a major political party, “Star Wars” returned, and I got married. Yep, 2015 was quite a year.

I had a health scare that resulted in a pacemaker and a different view on mortality just months after my Dad died.

Not the best of times by far.

Politics:

The Best

Donald Trump. For all his problems, and they are legion, and the bluster, and it is constant, he’s done more than anyone in recent years to get people to pay attention to politics and just how corrupt the media and the Democrats have become. He’s been battering the media since the start, slamming his opponents since and changing how politics is done.

While, I’m still not a full on Trump guy I do like that he makes the Left and the RINOs crazy and just doesn’t give a damn. That really shakes them up.

Trump has been holding a clinic on how to run against Democrats and the media since his announcement. Aside from momentary flashes, none of the rest of the field appears to have learned a thing.

Because they are all stuck in their ways. They can’t see doing it any other way. Especially, Democrats, they have one playbook and they go to it every nanosecond of every day.

Expect all out nuclear war again on the Republicans. No atom will be lest un-nuked, no ethic or moral will not be cr0ssed in the quest for the Coronation of King Barack’s successor Queen Hillary.

The Republican RINOs are just plain lost.

If Trump is the nominee, Democrats may well win, but they will have been so battered and bruised they’d be hard-pressed to govern with any effectiveness. If he isn’t the nominee, whoever is will have learned how to be locked in a box with a rabid spider monkey and survive. The eventual nominee, whoever it ends up being, will be a much more devastating candidate thanks to Trump’s entry into the race.

The Media is still setting up the Coronation of Queen Hillary I like they have for 4 years now. I doubt they are going to change.

But maybe, just maybe, the sleeping stupid will recognize it for what it is.

That,and just maybe, the Republicans will actually run a campaign to WIN this time. Maybe.

 

The Worst

As awful as she is, Hillary Clinton is not the worst person on the national political stage. Until he leaves office, Barack Obama’s head wears the crown.

In a post-9/11, post-Paris, post-San Bernardino world, the president of the United States managed to go 12 months in which he used the words “radical Islamic terrorism” only to chastise others for saying them.

Well, you’re talking about his friends and mentors, the Muslims. They can’t be evil. That’s like Lule finding out Darth Vader is his Father…. 🙂

The economy continues to falter, our enemies are on the march, and the president has improved his short-game. The Obama presidency is a hilarious joke, but sadly it’s not the funny kind of joke.

But the Democrats continue to self-delude themselves that everything is awesome and we just need to get rid of those naybobs negativity.

One more year…

11 Months+ a few days. Don’t make it any longer than it has to be. Though if Queen Hillary wins we’re all doomed and you might as well close up shop and move to Fiji because it’s over.

Lie Of The Year

The “winner” of this category is obvious, which is why it hasn’t won any of these “awards” from the mainstream media: Hillary Clinton’s ever-evolving claims about classified material on her secret, unsecured email server.

Though I think her saying that the Benghazi families who have been ripping her for years about her You Tube cause of the incident are now lying because she never said it was pretty close.

“What Difference Does it Make?”

Her original statement at her press conference at the UN, was, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” High-stakes divorce settlements are less carefully worded.

Note how she specifically said she didn’t send any classified material, and how there “is” nothing classified on her server. She’d wiped it by then, though not thoroughly, so, in using present tense, she was telling her version of the truth.

After that original statement, Hillary’s story “evolved” at least two more times to she never “sent or received anything marked classified at the time.”

After that lie the media lost interest. Why wouldn’t they? Their candidate is ensnared in an FBI investigation that, were it anyone else, already would have led to an indictment and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees by now.

But we aren’t named Clinton; we haven’t been selling, or at least renting, our positions for sums of money that rival the worth of third-world economies, and a president of her party still controls the prosecutors.

No, we’re civilians, bound by truth, and she’s Hillary, utterly unburdened by such trivialities.

As we wind up 2015, I think we’ve dwelled enough on politics. So a few notes on a couple of other things.

Sports

The year started with a great Super Bowl. What a game! But it will be remembered as the game that gave us Deflategate. Tom Brady won – everything. He continues to live a charmed life, and good for him. Unless you bet against him.

And the Seahawks created a blunder for the ages that will be talked about until Liberals outlaw football altogether sometime later in the Century.

 

The Super Bowl was the highlight of the year for New England sports fans, but the rest of the world had to suffer until the World Series. After decades of miserable losing, New England (particularly in Boston) started winning. And their fans, both in baseball and football, became even more miserable to be around during a game. And I say that as someone with many friends who fit this description.

But the highlight of the year was the World Series.

The Kansas City Royals are a lot of fun to watch. They scrap and scrape together runs in a way no other team does.

Arizona Cardinals anyone? Anyone?? 🙂

Movies

I love “Star Wars,” saw it three times the weekend it opened. But it doesn’t win for movie of the year with me. There were a lot of great “art house” movies, and I’m sure one with $48 in box office receipts will win the Oscar. But “The Martian” was the most enjoyable movie of 2015. If you haven’t seen it yet, do yourself a favor. Even if you don’t care for Matt Damon (and I wouldn’t blame you), you’ll enjoy this movie.

I love “Star Wars” but I still think either Jurassic World or Avengers 2. I never saw “The Martian”.

Television

“The Walking Dead” remains TV’s best drama.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

The zombie aspect might turn your off, but it’s much more than that. Moreover, it’s a show that generates true suspense, in which no one knows what’s going to happen from week to week and no character, no matter who they are, is safe.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

If you’re a comic book nerd, or if you don’t mind super hero movies, might I also suggest checking out “Jessica Jones” on Netflix. It’s a surprisingly good series with humor, action and a great anti-hero. And, unlike “The Walking Dead,” you can binge-watch it over a weekend.

Haven’t got around to it yet. And that shows you how technology has changed so much.

I’m not sad to see 2015 go, though it does seem like it went fast. With 2016 being an election year, it will fly by as well. While I work and play in the first half of this column, life happens in the rest. Hope you had a great 2015, and I hope you have as much fun as possible in 2016. 

Here’s to 2016. The Hope of the future of our Country rests on your shoulders.

No pressure. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Star Wars Matters
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Follow The Money

Environmentalists like to claim skeptics are making money off hampering global warming regulations, but those same activists are making a lot of money promoting global warming alarmism.

A recent video from The Guardian claims that there is little money or power to be gained from environmental activism. The money behind activism pales in comparison to those of their fossil fuel-financed opposition, according to the video. The video even claims that “most of the money in solar and wind power comes from savings to the consumer.”

In the case of Al Gore, prominently featured in the video, the former vice president has levied his global warming activism from a net worth of $700,000 in 2000 into an estimated net worth of $172.5 million by 2015. He’s not alone in his financial endeavor.

Funding of science, in this particular case, climate change science, is dominated by the federal government. We assert that this will cause recipients of [government] grants to publish findings that are in-line with government policy preferences (i.e., don’t bite the hand that feeds you),” Chip Knappenberger, the assistant director of the Center for the Study of Science at the libertarian Cato Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an email.

After a while, the scientific literature becomes dominated by these types of research findings which then produces a biased knowledge base,” Knappenberger said. “This knowledge base is then ‘assessed’ by intergovernmental and federal science committees (i.e., IPCC, USGCRP) to produce authoritative reports that supposedly represent the scientific ‘consensus,’ which is then tapped by the federal government in determining policy and setting regulations, such as the CPP [Clean Power Plan].”

A Cycle of Financial and Political Incest. One feeds the other.

Studies that receive financial support from the public sector don’t have to disclose it as a conflict of interest, even when that support is in the millions of dollars. Recent studies that the Environmental Protection Agency is using to support the scientific case for its Clean Power Plan saw the EPA itself give $31.2 million, $9.5 million, and $3.65 million in public funds to lead authors according to EPA public disclosures.

The author who received $3.65 million, Charles Driscoll, even admitted to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the result of his study was predetermined, saying “in doing this study we wanted to bring attention to the additional benefits from carbon controls.”

Universities typically received about 50 percent of the money that their researchers get in public funds if their research finds positive results, making them deeply dependent upon federal funding and likely to encourage studies which will come to conclusions that the government wants.

Even counting only private money, environmental groups massively outspend their opposition. Opposition to global warming activism only raises $46 million annually across 91 conservative think tanks according to analysis by Forbes. That’s almost 6 times less than Greenpeace’s 2011 budget of $260 million, and Greenpeace is only one of many environmental groups. The undeniable truth is that global warming activists raise and spend far more money than their opponents.

And money talks and Bullshit Science walks away with “consensus”.

Attempts by governments to encourage solar and wind power have created incentives for corruption that even environmentalists acknowledge. The push to encourage “green” systems has already led to serious corruption, such as the Solyndra scandal, which “crowds out” investment dollars that could be better spent on more workable solutions. (Libertarian Republic)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

THE NARRATIVE IS THE NARRATIVE.

The End. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

The Court of AGW

At the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, participating nations have prepared a treaty that would create an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” giving Third World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers.

Congress would be bypassed – left out in the cold – by this climate deal, critics say.

Policies once left to sovereign nations could be turned over to a U.N. body if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris during the summit scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 11.

According to the proposed draft text of the climate treaty, the tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”

Buried on page 19 of the 34-page document is the critical text – still heavily bracketed with text that hasn’t been completely resolved and agreed upon – reads:

[An International Tribunal of Climate Justice as][A] [compliance mechanism] is hereby established to address cases of non-compliance of the commitments of developed country Parties on mitigation, adaptation, [provision of] finance, technology development and transfer [and][,] capacity-building[,] and transparency of action and support, including through the development of an indicative list of consequences, taking into account the cause, type, degree and frequency of non-compliance.

The U.N. held a preparatory conference in September in Bonn, Germany, that drafted language to be approved at the upcoming Paris climate summit. At the Bonn meeting the U.N. brought together more than 2,000 participants from governments, observer organizations and the media.

But none of those media chose to report on the proposed new global tribunal.

The Paris Conference is mandated to adopt “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties,” which is to come into force in 2020, according to IISD Reporting Services, which tracks the global sustainable development movement.

Like many initiatives that come out of the U.N., there has been a media blackout on coverage of the potential for a new world tribunal that would make binding decisions on a host of issues critical to the U.S. economy. The draft text has been available on the Internet since Oct. 20 for all to see.

“The only mentions one is likely to find with search engines are alarms being sounded by critics, the climate realists who reject the apocalyptic predictions (and discredited pseudo-science – see: here, here, and here) of the multi-billion dollar global warming lobby,” writes William F. Jasper for the New American magazine.

One such critic is the Craig Rucker, executive director and co-founder of CFACT.

Rucker points out that more than 130 developing nations – “led by South Africa and instigated by China and India” – are insisting they will not sign a climate deal in Paris unless it contains massive redistribution of wealth from developed to poor nations.

“Now they want the power to haul the U.S. and its allies before a U.N. Star Chamber to enforce compliance,” Rucker writes.

He also notes that this is not the first time the U.N. has tried to insert language creating a global climate court into a U.N. climate document. It happened in 2011 at a summit in Durban but was stripped at the last minute when CFACT blew the whistle and some media outlets picked up the story.

But this time around, the globalists writing the text have substituted the world “tribunal” for “court” and insist the body will be “non-judicial.”

“The slight edit to the terminology offers little comfort,” Rucker said, cautioning that the word “tribunal” could get watered down further if it attracts too much attention.

“If the climate tribunal becomes the focus of public scrutiny, watch for the negotiators to pull a switch behind closed doors and try and accomplish the same thing by re-branding it an enforcement ‘mechanism,’” he said.

“Whatever they call it, countries who sign onto this agreement will be voting to expand the reach of the U.N. climate bureaucracy, cede national sovereignty, and create a one-way street along which billions will be redistributed from developed to poor nations,” Rucker says. “Developed nations would be expected to slash their emissions while the ‘poor’ countries expand theirs. China, which holds a trillion dollars in U.S. debt, would be counted among the poor.”

He said China and India are “delighted,” with the prospect.

“They would like nothing better than a world where the West cedes the competitive advantages their free market economies created,” Rucker writes. “They hope for a future where Asia does the manufacturing and the U.S. and Europe do the importing – until their wealth runs out, anyway.”

Obama, Kerry ‘desperate’ to claim treaty as success

Rucker said President Obama and John Kerry are desperate to claim the climate treaty as a foreign policy “success.”

“President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are mired in foreign policy failures,” Rucker notes. “They desperately want to get this agreement signed so they can claim a victory for their legacies.

“How far are they willing to sell out American interests to get this ill-begotten agreement signed?” (WND)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA

NO MATTER WHAT!

That’s how far…

It’s Bankrupting to be Green

A federal worker named Bob recently called our local talk-radio station, outraged that a failed budget deal could cause a government shutdown that leaves him unable to pay his bills. He blamed Republicans, failed to mention that compromise also involves Obama and Democrats – and left out another important detail: if there is a shutdown, when it ends he will get paid retroactively.

But when he and his fellow bureaucrats impose mountains of regulations, they cost businesses billions of dollars a year, kill millions of jobs, and leave thousands of families and hundreds of communities worse off, struggling to make ends meet. Those folks never get retroactive pay.

The Obama/EPA war on coal has shuttered power plants and mines across dozens of states, leaving thousands unemployed. That’s left truck and equipment makers, tool shops, steel mills and other suppliers – from Kentucky to Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wisconsin and beyond – struggling to find customers. That impacts restaurants, grocery and clothing stores, schools, hospitals and other businesses: every lost mining or power plant job affects four jobs in other sectors of our far-flung economy.

Reduced drilling, due to low oil and gas prices and the emerging EPA and Big Green war on natural gas, compound these problems. So does the Pandora’s Box of other federal regulations: ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank and FATCA financial rules, and seemingly endless EPA dictates on soot and dust, puddles and creeks, carbon dioxide and other alleged problems, often for minuscule or imaginary benefits.

Complying just with federal regulations already costs American businesses and families over $1.9 trillion a year, and EPA alone is tacking on an additional $100 billion in new costs this year.

EPA refuses to calculate how many private sector jobs all this has killed or kept from being created, or how many people’s financial, physical and psychological health has been bludgeoned when they are rendered unemployed and unable to pay their bills. Nor have any bureaucrats been held accountable for regulations that are based on ideological agendas, junk science or even outright fraud, or for abusing their powers to go after conservative groups (the IRS) or even members of Congress (the Secret Service).

And now, EPA has slapped us with yet another hugely expensive final rule – on ozone.

Just 18 years ago, the agency reduced allowable ambient ozone levels to 84 parts per billion (equivalent to 84 cents out of $10,000,000). In 2008, the Bush EPA lowered the standard again, to 75 ppb. But the Obama EPA wasn’t satisfied. In 2009, it said it would slash the standard to 70 or even 60 ppb.

However, this action would have been a political atomic bomb, so the White House postponed the decision until after the 2012 elections. Then, under yet another collusive sue-and-settle lawsuit between EPA and rabid environmentalists, EPA promised to finalize a new rule by October 1, 2015.

Now the agency has “compromised” at 70 ppb. A Business Roundtable study found that almost every US county met the 84 ppb ozone standard, and 90% met the 75 ppb standard. A 60 ppb rule would have put 96% of those counties out of compliance, buteven the 70 ppb rule will send many into noncompliance. It will hammer power generation, manufacturing and shale gas production, and raise electricity prices.

To understand how draconian it is, Grand Canyon National Park is now out-of-attainment, at 72 ppb. So are Mammoth Cave National Park at 75 ppb, Rocky Mountain National Park at 77, and Great Smokey Mountain National Park at 79. Yellowstone NP barely slips under the new EPA limbo bar at 66 ppb.

That’s because volatile organic compounds that are ozone precursors don’t come just from refineries, power plants, factories, automobiles and other hydrocarbon use. They come from volcanoes, hot springs and trees: deciduous trees emit VOCs on hot, sunny days; conifers emit them day and night. They also come from “clean, green” ethanol. A new NOAA study found that ethanol refineries emit up to 30 times more VOCs than originally assumed – and 170 times more than when ethanol is burned in cars.

Facts don’t matter to Sanctimonious Liberals. THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA. THE NARRATIVE IS ALL THAT MATTERS.

EPA doesn’t mention those inconvenient truths. It says its new standard will cost “only” $3.9 billion a year. That deliberately low-balled, out-of-thin-air number doesn’t even pass the laugh test. It is leagues removed from National Association of Manufacturers and other analyses that calculated a 65 ppb ozone standard would reduce America’s economic output by $140 billion annually and cost 1.4 million jobs lost or not created per year, for 25 years. Reality for 70 ppb is far closer to NAM than to EPA.

The simple fact is, the 70 ppb ozone rule is yet another rock shoved in the pocket of a drowning man. A measly 142,000 new jobs were created last month. Over 40 million Americans are unemployed, under-employed or have given up on finding a job. Over 47 million are on food stamps. The labor participation rate plunged to 62.4% in September, its lowest since October 1977, on a mere 34.5-hour work week.

So now EPA trumpets alleged health benefits. The new rule will reduce result in fewer asthma attacks among children and save lives, the agency insists.

So yet again “it’s for the children”! the oldest and lamest liberal excuse for anything on their agenda.

Hogwash. As physician Charles Battig explains, the new standard will only save theoretical lives.

BUT those are the lives that matter. Its all about liberals “feeling good”about themselves. FUCK YOU, if you object.

The supposedly fewer ozone-related deaths will occur “in a computer-generated fantasy world, where epidemiological data-torturing takes place by bits and bytes, not in the hospital admission records for real-life patients.”

In that EPA world, lives theoretically saved are concocted using higher pollution levels from decades ago, when ozone and other air contaminants really did affect human health. The faulty data are fed into a series of computer models, to generate garbage in-garbage out calculations used to justify regulatory edicts.

Just like Global Warming.

But in the real world, aggregate emissions of ozone, particulate matter (soot), carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and lead plummeted 63% since 1980. Refinery emissions of volatile organic compounds were slashed 69% between 1990 and 2013, ozone-forming emissions are projected to decline another 36% over the next decade, and ground-level ozone levels have already fallen by a national average of 18% since 2000. Meanwhile, reported asthma rates have risen – but not because of pollution.

Today’s kids likely have more asthma attacks because they spend more time indoors, enjoy less time outside in the dirt, and don’t get exposed to enough allergens during childhood to reduce their immune hyperactivity and allergic hypersensitivity. They respond more readily to allergen exposures that would have caused few reactions in previous generations. Cold air can also trigger asthma attacks, as can higher pollen and fungi spore levels, and perhaps low-fat diets that reduce surfactant layers on lung tissues.

But then the government has a government solution for the government problem the government created!

In short, national-park-level ozone is not the bogeyman that EPA claims.

But since facts are irrelevant to liberals…

However, the new rules will affect numerous states, counties, cities, industries – and highway safety projects that lose federal funding because natural sources, local emissions or even VOCs from China raise ozone levels above 70 ppb.

EPA claims “only” 358 counties around the US will be pushed into nonattainment status by the arbitrary new standard. But even that is too many, and another 1,500 counties could be at risk if EPA begins monitoring their ozone levels. That will affect job creation and preservation, especially in metro areas.

The National Association of Manufacturers, National Black Chamber of Commerce, American Association of Blacks in Energy, business owners and leaders, mayors, governors, state legislators, members of Congress, and health and traffic experts asked EPA to retain the 2008 standard.

As Small Business and Entrepreneurship president Karen Kerrigan has noted, they pointed out that areas like Chicago, Gary and Denver, with large poor and minority populations, would lose tens of thousands of jobs, see average household incomes decline by hundreds of dollars a year, and be forced to spend billions of dollars to comply with the new standard. People’s health and well-being would decline, they emphasized, instead of improve. Kerrigan’s Center for Regulatory Solutions provided many more facts.

EPA ignored them all, reiterated its false health benefit claims, and imposed the costly new standards.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA. THE TRUTH  BE DAMNED.

Affected parties should file lawsuits to prevent EPA from enforcing the new rule, courts should block the regulation, and Congress should delete EPA funding to implement this health-impairing program. (Paul Driessen)

THEY SHOULD.BUT we know this Congress has no balls.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

We’re Tired of Haters & Deniers

Did you know that Climate “Deniers” and The Tobacco Industry are related? 🙂

Warmist scientists including UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth to Obama: ‘We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.’

Via Politico: ‘Twenty climate scientists called for RICO investigation in a letter to Obama and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch. The scientists argue that the systemic efforts to prevent the public from understanding climate change resembles the investigation undertaken against tobacco. They draw inspiration from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse who said on the Senate floor that there might be a similar conspiracy here, and a civil trial could provide the tools of discovery needed to find out.’

Letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

September 1, 2015

Dear President Obama,Attorney General Lynch and OSTP Director Holdren,

As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture,and biodiversity.

We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking.

Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change–indeed, the world’s response to climate change–is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity–and potential strategies for addressing them–are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014),

Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress.

One additional tool–recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)–is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.

See Below

The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer-reviewed academic research (Brulle,2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010),The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015).

We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation. The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry.

A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking.

If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.

Sincerely,

Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ

Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park,MD

William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO

Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Ben Kirtman,

University of Miami, Miami, FL

Robert Dickinson, University of

Texas, Austin, TX

Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY

Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford,VT (

Click to access LetterPresidentAG.pdf

)

Our “The Sky is Falling!!! We’re all going to Die!!!!” unless you do exactly as we say hasn’t been working so now it’s time for the Hammer of Social Justice and The US Government to beat the infidels into submission.

The “good” Senator from Rhode Island in an Op-Ed in the Washington Post:

Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution.

Where’s the science? Oh right, it’s just evil Corporate Oil doing their mustache twirling evil deception. Unlike the disingenuous Chicken Little’s in the Global Cooling/Warming/Change holy mission of salvation. 🙂

Their activities are often compared to those of Big Tobacco denying the health dangers of smoking. Big Tobacco’s denial scheme was ultimately found by a federal judge to have amounted to a racketeering enterprise.

You mean the ones you probably supported and still take their money?

Well, Liberals are like Orwellian Nazis as they have “often been compared”. 🙂

The Big Tobacco playbook looked something like this: (1) pay scientists to produce studies defending your product; (2) develop an intricate web of PR experts and front groups to spread doubt about the real science; (3) relentlessly attack your opponents.

The Global Warming playbook goes something like this: (1) pay scientists to produce studies defending your product; (Climate Gate, anyone?) (2) develop an intricate web of PR experts and front groups to spread doubt about the real science; “97% Consensus” anyone? (3) relentlessly attack your opponents. Attack “Deniers” with RICO statutes and EPA regulations anyone?

Thankfully, the government had a playbook, too: the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. In 1999, the Justice Department filed a civil RICO lawsuit against the major tobacco companies and their associated industry groups, alleging that the companies “engaged in and executed — and continue to engage in and execute — a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public, including consumers of cigarettes, in violation of RICO.”

Is the Tobacco Industry still around? Yep. They just are 1/10 the Lobbying juggernaut they used to be.

Do people still smoke? Yep.

Tobacco spent millions of dollars and years of litigation fighting the government. But finally, through the discovery process, government lawyers were able to peel back the layers of deceit and denial and see what the tobacco companies really knew all along about cigarettes.

You mean the million in lobbying money. And amazing how they can uncover all this and not be able to figure out Benghazi, or the IRS scandal, or Hillary’s Emails? 🙂

In 2006, Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided that the tobacco companies’ fraudulent campaign amounted to a racketeering enterprise. According to the court: “Defendants coordinated significant aspects of their public relations, scientific, legal, and marketing activity in furtherance of a shared objective — to . . . maximize industry profits by preserving and expanding the market for cigarettes through a scheme to deceive the public.”

The parallels between what the tobacco industry did and what the fossil fuel industry is doing now are striking.

Only in your fervently anti-capitalist Luddite little mind.

In the case of fossil fuels, just as with tobacco, the industry joined together in a common enterprise and coordinated strategy.

Just like the Sky is Falling Global Warming “Consensus” crowd.

He has his own Political Action group: Oceans PAC and he gets his primary support from tech company investors & lobbyists from Comcast.

I created the OCEANS PAC because candidates who support oceans and environmental issues need our support. Indeed, the other side is funded by big polluters who don’t hesitate to put millions of dollars behind their lies. As I’ve said many times – I’m tired of bringing a knife to a gun fight. The OCEANS PAC is one way we can fight back.

And fight we must, because climate change is not a problem that will go away. Climate change is not a problem that can wait. But climate change is a problem that can be solved.  We can and we must leave a healthy environment, which includes healthy oceans, to our children and grandchildren. The public is ready for action; unfortunately, the missing piece is Congress. Congress is sleepwalking through history. It is time for Congress to hear the alarms, roll up our sleeves, and do what needs to be done. It is time to wake up. But for Congress to wake up, it needs more members who will support ocean and environmental issues – OCEANS PAC will support those candidates.

This is certainly not something I can do alone. There are high stakes involved and I need your help. I hope you will accompany me on this new journey, and that I can count on your enthusiastic support as we go forward. 

Sincerely,

Sheldon Whitehouse
United States Senator

So no conflict of interest there. 🙂  All, pure science!

2011 – 2016 PAC Contribution Breakdown

legend Business $775,653 (58%)
legend Labor $212,450 (16%)
legend Ideological/Single Issue $345,195 (26%)

Based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on Monday, August 17, 2015.

All, pure science.

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00027533

Just pure as the driven snow and twice as virtuous!

In 1998, the Clinton administration was building support for international climate action under the Kyoto Protocol. The fossil fuel industry, its trade associations and the conservative policy institutes that often do the industry’s dirty work met at the Washington office of the American Petroleum Institute. A memo from that meeting that was leaked to the New York Times documented their plans for a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign to undermine climate science and to raise “questions among those (e.g. Congress) who chart the future U.S. course on global climate change.”

Climate Gate anyone?

The shape of the fossil fuel industry’s denial operation has been documented by, among others, Drexel University professor Robert Brulle. In a 2013 paper published in the journal Climatic Change, Brulle described a complex network of organizations and funding that appears designed to obscure the fossil fuel industry’s fingerprints. To quote directly from Brulle’s report, it was “a deliberate and organized effort to misdirect the public discussion and distort the public’s understanding of climate.” That sounds a lot like Kessler’s findings in the tobacco racketeering case.

The coordinated tactics of the climate denial network, Brulle’s report states, “span a wide range of activities, including political lobbying, contributions to political candidates, and a large number of communication and media efforts that aim at undermining climate science.” Compare that again to the findings in the tobacco case.

Funny, sounds just like the Global Warming crowd!

The tobacco industry was proved to have conducted research that showed the direct opposite of what the industry stated publicly — namely, that tobacco use had serious health effects. Civil discovery would reveal whether and to what extent the fossil fuel industry has crossed this same line. We do know that it has funded research that — to its benefit — directly contradicts the vast majority of peer-reviewed climate science. One scientist who consistently published papers downplaying the role of carbon emissions in climate change, Willie Soon, reportedly received more than half of his funding from oil and electric utility interests: more than $1.2 million.

To be clear: I don’t know whether the fossil fuel industry and its allies engaged in the same kind of racketeering activity as the tobacco industry. We don’t have enough information to make that conclusion. Perhaps it’s all smoke and no fire. But there’s an awful lot of smoke.

And he knows smoke when he sees it…

Senator Whitehouse stated (On the Iran Deal): “I thank the many Rhode Islanders who have contacted me on every side of this question. I appreciate their thoughtful input.  I’ve decided to support the P5+1 agreement with Iran, not because it assures anything on its own, but because — with persistent watchfulness and effort — it could open a new doorway in the precarious Middle East. I do not see a better credible option.

And since he knows a good deal when he sees it, he must be right about Global Warming! 🙂

It’s all a Vast Right-Wing Capitalist Conspiracy!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Heard it all before…

King Obama has decreed that we’ll all be huddling in the dark with our solar powered candle in the future that will cost us $300 a kwh and the liberal media’s playing the same tune all over again.

Killing the coal industry without a viable alternative is a good thing.

We’ll save you money. Just like the $2500 you were going to save with ObamaCare. 🙂

It will save mankind from itself!

You’ll be better off under our yoke of control.

They tried to work with Congress, but they wouldn’t kiss our ass fast enough and hard enough and capitulate to everything and anything we wanted so we’re going to go around them AGAIN. It’s all their fault!

Oh, aren’t we so much smarter and so much more grand and superior. We are so far ahead of the curve that it make you morons look like ants compared to our intelligence.

We are Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius Environmentalists! We’ll re-engineer the world!

CNN, kissing King Obama’s ass so hard they come out his anus…

Obama has full authority to make this move

Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency have 100% of the authority they need to do this. You know who gave them the power? Hippie environmentalists like Richard Nixon and John Robert’s conservative Supreme Court.

Nixon created the EPA. He also signed the Clean Air Act, which gave the executive branch authority to regulate air pollution. And in 2007, the Supreme Court found in Massachusetts vs. EPA that carbon counted as an “air pollutant.” Under that case, Obama has the authority — and perhaps the duty — to act boldly to protect public health.

So blame Nixon for this not us! 🙂

Somewhat ironically, Obama would have preferred to co-create a comprehensive solution with Congress. That’s why he has refrained from using his executive authority until now. That’s why he spent the better part of his first term begging members of Congress to pass climate legislation.

He was a patient dictator and he waited to see if they would kiss his ass and they wouldn’t so he now must be The King and do what he must because it’s what he wants that matters.

And House did pass a comprehensive “cap-and-trade” bill in the summer of 2009. But Republicans sided with well-heeled, pro-pollution donors like the Koch Brothers and blocked all progress in the Senate.

Pro-Pollution? Yes, if you disagree with me my King you want to kill everyone with pollution! Oh, and we had to throw in the boogieman- The Koch Brothers…Boo hiss! 🙂

Shaking off this defeat, the President is simply recognizing his responsibility to act under existing law. So today Obama is using powers granted to the president during the Nixon era and approved for this very purpose by the Supreme Court in the conservative Roberts era.

Love the “conservative” justification for liberal control freak mania.

Fact 2: Obama’s clean energy rules will save Americans money on the energy bills

This plan is going to save everyone money. Right now, your utility bill is going to inefficient, dirty energy. That will change.

Just Like the $2500 you were going to save a year on ObamaCare!

Under the Clean Power Plan, states will have incentives to bring down utility bills while putting up solar panels. It will also encourage energy producers to become more efficient.

More efficient production and cheaper energy sources will add up to saving. The EPA estimates consumers will save $8 per month. Another study finds some Americans will save $14 for month. The White House estimates the average American will save $85 on their utility bill by 2030.

Fact 3: Obama’s plan will help poor and minority communities

Well, of course, the Liberals have to make a race issue out of it. After all, if your against anything they do it must be because you’re a racist and/or hate poor people!!

Suddenly Republicans and polluters are sounding like #BlackLivesMatter activists — full of passion to defend people of color from Obama’s plan. Well, if you are feeling skeptical, you should.

Because all Republicans are racists! 🙂

The clean power plan will massively help minorities and low-income Americans. After all, one in six black kids and one in nine Latino children has asthma. Seventy-eight percent of African-Americans live within 30 miles of a dirty, polluting coal plant. African-Americans are also more likely to live in coastal areas and die during heat waves.

Just like Obamacare helped them… 🙂

In fact, health concerns are already driving a move away from coal. Since 2010, more than 200 coal plants have been shut down or had their retirements announced. Do not blame Obama. Communities most affected by polluted air led those fights.

So what’s the alternative? oh, right that tech isn’t available yet and it costs 3 times as much. But it’s so much better for you!

A grassroots movement, supported by organizations like the Sierra Club and Earthjustice, took the fight to the streets, courthouses, and legislatures. Hard-hit communities like Little Village in Chicago and North Omaha, Nebraska, led the way, organizing campaigns to retire the coal plants in their backyards and chart a course to a healthier, more sustainable future.

Obama’s clean power plan will save both lives and bucks spent on hospital bills. It also opens the door to clean-energy jobs for struggling communities. It rewards states that focus on helping low-income communities.

Low income Community Science PHd’s anyone see a problem with that statement? 🙂

Separately, the Obama budget includes a program, POWER+, to invest in coal workers affected by the transition to cleaner energy.

I get a tingle up my leg! 🙂

On top of it all, the administration recently announced a low-income solar program. This initiative will lower utility bills, raise solar panels, and make solar the most diverse energy sector in America. It will do so through a national partnership between solar companies, housing authorities, rural electric co-ops, and states and cities.

America’s government today limits the amount of mercury and arsenic that polluters can spew into our skies. But right now, carbon polluters can dump as much greenhouse gas as they want. They just pass the high costs along to the rest of us, in the form of dangerous weather, health risks, and higher utility bills.

Wow, that some Kool-Aid you’ve got there! Liberal Holy Water.

But the free ride for dirty energy is coming to an end. The clean power plan is dramatic leap toward a healthier, more prosperous America. If anyone tells you otherwise, help them get their facts straight.

Because they are a moron ton believe anything other than our Leftist propaganda!

This piece was written by the disgraced Obama Czar/Communist Van Jones.

So now cometh the Talking Points, the hateful “moron” comments and “you’re stupid” and that’s just from the Left when you disagree with they Holy mission to safe mankind from itself! 🙂

So buckle up, that power bill is about to skyrocket, but don’t worry, it will all be George W. Bush’s fault!

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

The Hitler Youth of AGW

Now remember, the Global Warming Goosesteppers always say it’s about “the science” and the “consensus” therein… <wink, wink nudge, nudge…>

If there were any doubt that we’ve entered a witch-hunt era when it comes to global warming, what happened in the state of Washington should remove it. Doug Ericksen, a state senator who represents the people of Ferndale as a duly elected lawmaker, has been the target of a student mob that wanted Western Washington University to revoke his master’s degree from that school because, as Watchdog.org put it, “he’s not radical enough on global warming.”

As chair of his state’s Senate Energy, Environment and Telecommunications Committee, Ericksen “has blocked efforts to force businesses and residents to go green,” though “he supports voluntary compliance.” He does, however, oppose “mandated cap-and-trade programs and low-carbon fuel standards.” All of this was enough for his antagonists to label him a “denier.” The next step is to outfit in him a tunic bearing a scarlet “D.”

The students’ campaign against Ericksen forced a person with a sound mind who has some authority to step in, and one did. Western Washington University President Bruce Shepard said that the school was not going to “penalize a graduate for the positions they express” and found the mob’s objective to be “a disturbing misunderstanding of the intellectual freedoms any university worthy of the name must stand for. And protect.”

“Sen. Doug Ericksen is welcome to have whatever political views he wants, but by misinforming the public on the science of climate change, he is undermining the credibility of our own degrees and reflecting poorly on the caliber of education students receive here,” the students said in a statement to the Herald.

The students acknowledged they weren’t trying to change Ericksen’s mind on the issue.

“We’re framing it in a more radical way,” students said of the effort to revoke Ericksen’s degree. “We’re not just trying to have a conversation with him or hold him accountable. We’re trying to revoke his degree and get people to pay attention.” (Watchdog)

Translation: Fear Us! We want to destroy you if you disagree with us! The typical Leftist tactic on everything, fear & intimidation combined with a desperate need to censor people who disagree with their holier-than-thou views.

“The strength of our democracy is that all citizens, including students and leaders like Sen. Ericksen, have the freedom of expression to take positions with diverse viewpoints,” said Shepard.

This isn’t the first time that Ericksen has been the quarry for those invested in the global warming narrative. Watchdog.org says that billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer has invested “$1 million in the state races, with his primary goal of unseating Ericksen.”

Steyer is free to spend his money however he wants. But we hope that he’ll soon tire of funding environmentalist nonsense and go look for another toy. (IBD)

Let this be yet more evidence how weak the AGW case is that extremists must stoop to this level against those who dare think for themselves and do not march in lock-step with the enviro-nazis. (Midas Milligan, commentor n Watchdog)

Well, it’s about the Leftist control freak politics, they just hide it under “science” but you won’t get them to admit that’s The Agenda, no way. The Narrative has to be what they say it is, and that’s it and censoring and cause fear (and intimidation) are the only thing the weapons they want to use.

They are bullies, not “scientific”, that’s the only real consensus you can reach about them and their need to control you.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Tipping Point

The Chicken Little Review:

For decades now, those concerned about global warming have been predicting the so-called “tipping point” — the point beyond which it’ll be too late to stave off catastrophic global warming.

It seems like every year the “tipping point” is close to being reached, and that the world must get rid of fossil fuels to save the planet. That is, until we’ve passed that deadline and the next such “tipping point” is predicted.

Would you believe it was eight years ago today that the United Nations predicted we only had “as little as eight years left to avoid a dangerous global average rise of 2C or more.” This failed prediction, however, has not stopped the U.N. from issuing more apocalyptic predictions since.

To celebrate more than two decades of dire predictions, The Daily Caller News Foundation presents this list of some of the “greatest” predictions made by scientists, activists and politicians — most of which we’ve now passed.

 

1. 2015 is the ‘last effective opportunity’ to stop catastrophic warming

World leaders meeting at the Vatican last week issued a statement saying that 2015 was the “last effective opportunity to negotiate arrangements that keep human-induced warming below 2-degrees [Celsius].”

Pope Francis wants to weigh in on global warming, and is expected to issue an encyclical saying basically the same thing. Francis will likely reiterate that 2015 is the last chance to stop massive warming.

But what he should really say is that the U.N. conference this year is the “last” chance to cut a deal to stem global warming…  since last year when the U.N. said basically the same thing about 2014’s climate summit.

2. France’s foreign minister said we only have “500 days” to stop “climate chaos”

When Laurent Fabius met with Secretary of State John Kerry on May 13, 2014 to talk about world issues he said “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Ironically at the time of Fabius’ comments, the U.N. had scheduled a climate summit to meet in Paris in December 2015 — some 565 days after his remarks. Looks like the U.N. is 65 days too late to save the world.

3. President Barack Obama is the last chance to stop global warming

When Obama made the campaign promise to “slow the rise of the oceans” some environmentalists may have taken him quite literally.

In 2012, the United Nations Foundation President Tim Wirth told Climatewire that Obama’s second term was “the last window of opportunity” to impose policies to restrict fossil fuel use. Wirth said it’s “the last chance we have to get anything approaching 2 degrees Centigrade,” adding that if “we don’t do it now, we are committing the world to a drastically different place.”

Even before that, then-National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Hansen warned in 2009 that Obama only “has four years to save Earth.” I wonder what they now think about their predictions?

4. Remember when we had “hours” to stop global warming?

In 2009, world leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark to potentially hash out another climate treaty. That same year, the head of Canada’s Green Party wrote that there was only “hours” left to stop global warming.

“We have hours to act to avert a slow-motion tsunami that could destroy civilization as we know it,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Greens in Canada, wrote in 2009. “Earth has a long time. Humanity does not. We need to act urgently. We no longer have decades; we have hours. We mark that in Earth Hour on Saturday.”

5. United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown said there was only 50 days left to save Earth

2009 was a bad year for global warming predictions. That year Brown warned there was only “50 days to save the world from global warming,” the BBC reported. According to Brown there was “no plan B.”

Brown has been booted out of office since then. I wonder what he’d say about global warming today?

6. Let’s not forget Prince Charles’s warning we only had 96 months to save the planet

It’s only been about 70 months since Charles said in July 2009 that there would be “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.” So the world apparently only has 26 months left to stave off an utter catastrophe.

7. The U.N.’s top climate scientist said in 2007 we only had four years to save the world

Rajendra Pachauri, the former head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in 2007 that if “there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.”

“What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment,” he said.

Well, it’s 2015 and no new U.N. climate treaty has been presented. The only thing that’s changed since then is that Pachauri was forced to resign earlier this year amid accusations he sexually harassed multiple female coworkers.

8. Environmentalists warned in 2002 the world had a decade to go green

Environmentalist write George Monbiot wrote in the UK Guardian that within “as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world’s animals or it continues to feed the world’s people. It cannot do both.”

In 2002, about 930 million people around the world were undernourished, according to U.N. data. by 2014, that number shrank to 805 million. Sorry, Monbiot.

9. The “tipping point” warning first started in 1989

In the late 1980s the U.N. was already claiming the world had only a decade to solve global warming or face the consequences.

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

That prediction didn’t come true 15 years ago, and the U.N. is sounding the same alarm today.

The Food Police 2015

The federal committee responsible for nutrition guidelines is calling for the adoption of “plant-based” diets, taxes on dessert, trained obesity “interventionists” at worksites, and electronic monitoring of how long Americans sit in front of the television.

You’re fat, you’re lazy, and you eat too much and watch too much TV you fat slob so we are going to control you for your own good– signed Big Brother.

The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) released its far-reaching 571-page report of recommendations to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Thursday, which detailed its plans to “transform the food system.”

Just like Obama wants to “transform America”. 🙂

The report is open for public comment for 45 days, and will be used as the basis by the government agencies to develop the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The guidelines are used as the basis for government food assistance programs, nutrition education efforts, and for making “decisions about national health objectives.”

DGAC proposed a variety of solutions to address obesity, and its promotion of what it calls the “culture of health.”

We all become involuntary Vegans. The Vegan Police will see you now.

“The persistent high levels of overweight and obesity require urgent population- and individual-level strategies across multiple settings, including health care, communities, schools, worksites, and families,” they said.

Complete and total Government control of what you fat slobs eat.

In response, DGAC called for diet and weight management interventions by “trained interventionists” in healthcare settings, community locations, and worksites.

Vegan Activists.

“Government at local, state, and national levels, the health care system, schools, worksites, community organizations, businesses, and the food industry all have critical roles in developing creative and effective solutions,” they said.

Government doesn’t create “creative solutions” just bureaucratic hammers to your nuts.

DGAC also called for policy interventions to “reduce unhealthy options,” limit access to high calorie foods in public buildings, “limit the exposure” of advertisements for junk food, a soda tax, and taxing high sugar and salt items and dessert.

Translation: Ban anything the Government deems “unhealthy”. Liberals can’t think “creatively”.

“Align nutritional and agricultural policies with Dietary Guidelines recommendations and make broad policy changes to transform the food system so as to promote population health, including the use of economic and taxing policies to encourage the production and consumption of healthy foods and to reduce unhealthy foods,” its report read.

Make it so you can’t afford to eat anything but Vegan food. Which will hurt millions of jobs, but who cares, the end justifies the means and they “mean well”. 🙂

“For example, earmark tax revenues from sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods and desserts high in calories, added sugars, or sodium, and other less healthy foods for nutrition education initiatives and obesity prevention programs.”

Just like the tax increases in Phoenix were to go hiring more cops, and we have a cop shortage of 500 cops because the city keeps laying them off due to “budget cuts”. 🙂

The amount of sedentary time Americans spend in front of computers and TV sets is also a concern to the federal panel.

They recommended “coaching or counseling sessions,” “peer-based social support,” and “electronic tracking and monitoring of the use of screen-based technologies” as a way to limit screen time.

So we need Orwellian Telescreens and “net neutrality” to take them over and make Big Brother the monitor of your lifestyle 24/7/365.

The Federal Dept of Fat Ass Counseling.

It’s for your own good. 🙂

The screen-time recommendations came from The Community Guide, a group affiliated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which reviewed studies that used an “electronic monitoring device to limit screen time” of teenagers.

Well, if that doesn’t get them to understand the problem of Big Government Control, what will.

As expected, the committee recommended that Americans move toward “plant-based” diets, after months of discussions in meetings regarding environmentalism and food policy.

Translation: Vegan

DGAC said its recommendations to eat less meat are intended to “maximize environmental sustainability” out of concerns for climate change.

Oh, of course the Global Warming Control Freaks are in on this one! Humans are evil.

“The major findings regarding sustainable diets were that a diet higher in plant-based foods, such as vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds, and lower in calories and animal-based foods is more health promoting and is associated with less environmental impact than is the current U.S. diet,” DGAC said.

While true, the government running it like a Vegan Big Brother is not the way. It is for Control Freak “do-Gooder” Liberals because the Nanny State is their comfort zone.

DGAC recommended Mediterranean-style and vegetarian diets as the best options. Vegan, lacto-ovo vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, and Mediterranean diets are the most environmentally friendly, with the least greenhouse gas emissions, it said.

“All of these dietary patterns are aligned with lower environmental impacts and provide options that can be adopted by the U.S. population,” the report said. “Current evidence shows that the average U.S. diet has a larger environmental impact in terms of increased greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, and energy use, compared to the above dietary patterns. This is because the current U.S. population intake of animal-based foods is higher and plant-based foods are lower, than proposed in these three dietary patterns.”

97% of science have a “consensus” 🙂

The report added, “no food groups need to be eliminated completely to improve sustainability outcomes over the current status.”

Yet.

The committee also said that “altering individual and population dietary choices and patterns” would be necessary to meet its sustainability goals, as well as policy changes.

So government force will have to be applied.

“New well-coordinated policies that include, but are not limited to, agriculture, economics, transportation, energy, water use, and dietary guidance need to be developed,” DGAC said. “Behaviors of all participants in the food system are central to creating and supporting sustainable diets.”

And you are just a cog in that “food system” so you better shape up or else Big Brother is going to pound you into shape fatso!

The report did drop its recommendation to limit cholesterol intake to no more than 300 milligrams per day, after warning of its dangers for nearly 40 years. The panel also signed off on three to five cups of coffee a day, saying moderate caffeine consumption can reduce the risks of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

DGAC concluded that in order to achieve its goal of a population-wide “culture of health,” personal health must become a “human right.”

OH GOD! NOT ANOTHER HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN!! WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

“In such a culture, preventing diet- and physical activity-related diseases and health problems would be much more highly valued, the resources and services needed to achieve and maintain health would become a realized human right across all population strata, the needs and preferences of the individual would be seriously considered, and individuals and their families/households would be actively engaged in promoting their personal health and managing their preventive health services and activities,” they said.

WE ARE FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU!

Whether you want it or not, you vill comply with all rules and regulations!

It’s for your own good because you cannot be trusted to do it on your own.

Hail Big Brother, savior of the Human Race! 🙂

sowell- liberal carepro-choice but

The Sowell of Equality

Some time ago, burglars in England scrawled a message on the wall of a home they had looted: “RICH BASTARDS.”

Those two words captured the spirit of the politicized vision of equality — that it was a grievance when someone was better off than themselves.

That, of course, is not the only meaning of equality, but it is the predominant political meaning in practice, where economic “disparities” and “gaps” are automatically treated as “inequities.” If one racial or ethnic group has a lower income than another, that is automatically called “discrimination” by many people in politics, the media and academia.

It doesn’t matter how much evidence there is that some groups work harder in school, perform better and spend more postgraduate years studying to acquire valuable skills in medicine, science or engineering. If the economic end results are unequal, that is treated as a grievance against those with better outcomes, and a sign of an “unfair” society.

The rhetoric of clever people often confuses the undeniable fact that life is unfair with the claim that a given institution or society is unfair.

Children born into families that raise them with love and with care to see that they acquire knowledge, values and discipline that will make them valuable members of society have far more chances of economic and other success in adulthood than children raised in families that lack these qualities.

Studies show that children whose parents have professional careers speak nearly twice as many words per hour to them as children with working class parents — and several times as many words per hour as children in families on welfare. There is no way that children from these different backgrounds are going to have equal chances of economic or other success in adulthood.

The fatal fallacy, however, is in collecting statistics on employees at a particular business or other institution, and treating differences in the hiring, pay or promotion of people from different groups as showing that their employer has been discriminating.

Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics! 🙂

Too many gullible people buy the implicit assumption that the unfairness originated where the statistics were collected, which would be an incredible coincidence if it were true.

Worse yet, some people buy the idea that politicians can correct the unfairness of life by cracking down on employers. But, by the time children raised in very different ways reach an employer, the damage has already been done.

What is a problem for children raised in families and communities that do not prepare them for productive lives can be a bonanza for politicians, lawyers and assorted social messiahs who are ready to lead fierce crusades, if the price is right.

Many in the media and among the intelligentsia are all too ready to go along, in the name of seeking equality. But equality of what?

Equality before the law is a fundamental value in a decent society. But equality of treatment in no way guarantees equality of outcomes.

On the contrary, equality of treatment makes equality of outcomes unlikely, since virtually nobody is equal to somebody else in the whole range of skills and capabilities required in real life. When it comes to performance, the same man may not even be equal to himself on different days, much less at different periods of his life.

What may be a spontaneous confusion among the public at large about the very different meanings of the word “equality” can be a carefully cultivated confusion by politicians, lawyers and others skilled in rhetoric, who can exploit that confusion for their own benefit.

Regardless of the actual causes of different capabilities and rewards in different individuals and groups, political crusades require a villain to attack — a villain far removed from the voter or the voter’s family or community. Lawyers must likewise have a villain to sue. The media and the intelligentsia are also attracted to crusades against the forces of evil.

But whether as a crusade or a racket, a confused conception of equality is a formula for never-ending strife that can tear a whole society apart — and has already done so in many countries. (Thomas Sowell)

Thank you, Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, and King Obama. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Happy New Tax Year

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

The pace of agencies issuing new rules and regulations has hit a record high under President Obama, whose administration’s rules have filled 468,500 pages in the Federal Register.

And, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the president is poised to unleash another 2,375 new rules on American businesses without first giving Congress an up or down vote.

CEI’s Clyde Wayne Crews, vice president for policy, told Secrets Wednesday that of the top six biggest Federal Register page tallies since 2002, the Obama administration owns five. This year, he said, the Federal Register ended up printing 79,066 pages — 78,978 when blank pages are removed. (WE)

In California, 930 new laws will go into effect in 2015.

Five states will see gas tax rates increase: Pennsylvania (9.8), Virginia (5.1), Maryland (2.9), North Carolina (1.0), and Florida (0.3). Gas tax rates will decrease due to declining gas prices in Kentucky (-4.3), West Virginia (-0.9), Vermont -(0.83), Nebraska (-0.8), and New York (-0.6).

In California, “gasoline and diesel producers will be subject to the state’s cap-and-trade system,” according to the San Jose Mercury News “forcing them either to supply lower-carbon fuels — which are more expensive to produce — or to buy pollution permits for the greenhouse gases created when the fuel is burned. In the short term, at least, that will mean higher prices at the pump.”

Employer mandate: After a one-year delay in implementation, on January 1, the ACA “Pay-or-play” requirements go into effect for employers with 100 or more full-time employees (average 30 hours per week). Employers who do not offer health insurance that meets the minimum requirements may be subject to an assessment (read more from the Small Business Administration and the Internal Revenue Service). According to the SBA, “Employers with at least 50 but fewer than 100 full-time or full-time equivalent employees will generally have an additional year, until 2016, before these rules apply.”

Value-based payments for doctors: The Affordable Care Act requires that Medicare include cost and quality data in calculating payments for physicians. This will start in 2015 with a “Value-based Payment Modifier” for physicians in group practices of 100 or more (with practices of 10 or more following in 2016 and all Medicare physicians in 2017.)

But some good news for the “Soak the Rich” crowd:

PARIS (AP) — It was supposed to force millionaires to pay tax rates of up to 75 percent: “Cuba without the sun,” as described by a critic from the banking industry. Socialist President Francois Hollande’s super tax was rejected by a court, rewritten and ultimately netted just a sliver of its projected proceeds. It ends on Wednesday and will not be renewed.

And that critic of the tax? He’s now Hollande’s economy minister, trying mightily to undo the damage to France’s image in international business circles.

The tax of 75 percent on income earned above one million euros ($1.22 million) was promoted in 2012 by the newly-elected Hollande as a symbol of a fairer policy for the middle class, a financial contribution of the wealthiest at a time of economic crisis.

But the government was never able to fully implement the measure. It was overturned by France’s highest court and rewritten as a 50 percent tax paid by employers.

Faced with a stalling economy and rising unemployment, the government reversed course in 2014 with a plan to cut payroll taxes by up to 40 billion euros ($49 billion) by 2017, hoping to boost hiring and attract more investments.

All the while, Prime Minister Manuel Valls kept repeating his new credo: “My government is pro-business”.

Ultimately, while the super tax affected only a small number of taxpayers, it triggered huge protests in business, sporting and artistic communities.

French actor Gerard Depardieu decried it vociferously and took Russian citizenship. Soccer clubs threatened to boycott matches for fear that 114 of their players or coaches would be taxed. The final version of the tax allowed them to minimize the burden.

The announcement of the 75 percent tax had “a very bad psychological effect” in business circles, says Sandra Hazan, a lawyer who heads Dentons Global Tax Group. Even if most of the companies were able to minimize or avoid the tax, “I think it had an extremely devastating impact on the attractiveness of France for foreigners.”

At the time of its proposal, British Prime minister David Cameron ironically proposed to “roll out the red carpet” to French companies willing to avoid the tax.

Economist Thomas Piketty, author of the book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”, criticized it as “a millstone around the neck” of the government, asking instead for global reform of tax laws.

Proceeds from the tax are estimated to total 420 million euros ($512 million) for about 1,000 employees in 470 companies, according to the government. By comparison, France’s budget deficit has soared well over 80 billion euros ($97 billion). (townhall)

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Climate Racism

It had to happen eventually, with the Left it always does. Now if you disagree with global cooling/warming/climate change/disruption you’re a racist! 🙂

You can’t argue with global warming zealots: Whatever the thermometer reads, they’re right and you’re wrong. Whatever the short-term, intermediate or long-term data suggest, all these eco-radicals see is additional proof of their distorted worldview.

Hot summers? Mild winters? That’s global warming. Mild summers? Frigid winters? That’s global warming, too.

You see, if you’re a disciple of climate change, it all makes perfect sense — every measurement is further validation, and every validation is an excuse to impose costlier obligations on taxpayers (and more onerous restrictions on what’s left of our free market).

Responding to an unseasonably cool summer in New England (and predictions of a colder-than-usual winter), columnist Tom Keane of the Boston Globe assured his liberal readers that “climate change proceeds apace.”

“We’re like a guy with his head in the refrigerator while his house is burning down, thinking nothing’s wrong,” Keane wrote.

Never mind that satellite data released this spring by NASA showed no statistical change in the Earth’s temperature over the past 17-1/2 years. (IBD)

Actor Emma Thompson says climate change deniers are ‘bonkers’. She speaks as she joins thousands of protesters marching to the steps of the Houses of Parliament on Sunday to demand action to halt climate change. ‘Anyone who tries to deny it looks a little bit bonkers. It’s a form of collective suicide,’ she says (Guardian)

Trapped In Ice

Or that a leaked report to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year revealed that Earth was headed for a period of sustained cooling over the next few decades.

Or that as of last fall, the Antarctic sea ice extent was at record-high levels.

In fact, the research vessel Akademik Shokalskiy  — which was dispatched to the South Pole last December ostensibly to document melting polar ice caps — instead found itself trapped in frozen seas.

And yes, the boat’s top researcher blamed his crew’s ironic predicament on “global warming.”

“We were just in the wrong place at the wrong time,” he said, insisting climate change caused ice up to 10 feet thick to envelop his fossil fuel-powered boat, making it impossible for fossil fuel-powered ice breakers to get within 10 miles of the ship (forcing the crew to be rescued by a fossil fuel-powered Chinese helicopter).

If you missed that story, you’re not alone: Most mainstream media outlets refused to cover it.

Of course, when the head of Barack Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency — avowed eco-radical Gina McCarthy — played the race card in an effort to pressure lawmakers into adopting harsher anti-free market regulations, her pronouncements were broadly disseminated and treated as gospel.

“Carbon pollution standards are an issue of justice,” McCarthy said recently. “If we want to protect communities of color, we need to protect them from climate change.”

McCarthy’s bizarre comments were offered on a conference call sponsored by Green For All, a group that publicly supports “the need to disrupt the current economy” — which it claims is “based upon human trafficking, the exploitation of labor and violent racism.”But are “climate change” and “violent racism” really the issues responsible for the destruction of America’s “communities of color?” Or is the problem the reckless, feckless, unsustainable and un-American policies being advanced by McCarthy and Obama?

Thanks to the Obama administration’s policies, black unemployment is more than twice as high as white unemployment (11.4% to 5.3%). The black labor force has shrunk from 63.2% to 61.7% of the working-age population. The median household income for blacks is nearly $25,000 less per year than whites — a gap that continues to widen.

White homeownership outpaces black homeownership by nearly 30 percentage points (72.9% to 43.5%) — and record numbers of blacks are living in poverty.

Rather than addressing any of these pernicious realities, Obama is busy scheming of ways to introduce more illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America into our workforce — which would compound the employment dilemma for all American workers.

The fuzzy science of climate change isn’t what’s harming “communities of color.” It’s a fundamental lack of opportunity — deteriorating economic conditions that are being exacerbated by Obama, and by rogue bureaucracies such McCarthy’s EPA. (IBD)

But what do we know, we’re all racists and not “of the body” anyhow… 🙂

Addendum: Eric Massey is the director of the Air Quality Division for the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. He says the federal haze plan is too aggressive.

“It’s my understanding that EPA’s proposed plan costs significantly more money — in the hundreds of millions of dollars to Arizona’s economy through controls that don’t actually achieve a visibility improvement that any human being could see … We felt like our solution was more economically balanced and still achieved basically the same environmental impact,” Massey says.

The notice said the new emission guidelines will take effect Oct. 3.

“The companies have to decide how they’re going to meet the rules,” Webb said. “We aren’t telling them how to do it, we’re just telling them they have to do it.”

We are from the Government and we are here to make your life better… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

154009 600 Obama Promises cartoons

King Coal

The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

Like that matters to King Fiat…

In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

Like that matters to King Fiat….

To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

“If you want a deal that includes all the major emitters, including the U.S., you cannot realistically pursue a legally binding treaty at this time,” said Paul Bledsoe, a top climate change official in the Clinton administration who works closely with the Obama White House on international climate change policy.

But the biggest emitter isn’t going to go for it… 🙂 So if you want to cut your head off, they will gladly take it.

Lawmakers in both parties on Capitol Hill say there is no chance that the currently gridlocked Senate will ratify a climate change treaty in the near future, especially in a political environment where many Republican lawmakers remain skeptical of the established science of human-caused global warming.

You mean because Global Warming Caused by Man is a Farce! Nah, you couldn’t mean that… 🙂

“There’s a strong understanding of the difficulties of the U.S. situation, and a willingness to work with the U.S. to get out of this impasse,” said Laurence Tubiana, the French ambassador for climate change to the United Nations. “There is an implicit understanding that this not require ratification by the Senate.”

American negotiators are instead homing in on a hybrid agreement — a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges. The mix would create a deal that would update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, not require a new vote of ratification.

Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies — but would voluntarily pledge to specific levels of emissions cuts and to channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change. Countries might then be legally obligated to report their progress toward meeting those pledges at meetings held to identify those nations that did not meet their cuts.

“There’s some legal and political magic to this,” said Jake Schmidt, an expert in global climate negotiations with the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group. “They’re trying to move this as far as possible without having to reach the 67-vote threshold” in the Senate.

The strategy comes as scientists warn that the earth is already experiencing the first signs of human-caused global warming — more severe drought and stronger wildfires, rising sea levels and more devastating storms — and the United Nations heads toward what many say is the body’s last chance to avert more catastrophic results in the coming century.

That’s why we had one of the most severe winters on record! 🙂

At the United Nations General Assembly in New York next month, delegates will gather at a sideline meeting on climate change to try to make progress toward the deal next year in Paris. A December meeting is planned in Lima, Peru, to draft the agreement.

In seeking to go around Congress to push his international climate change agenda, Mr. Obama is echoing his domestic climate strategy. In June, he bypassed Congress and used his executive authority to order a far-reaching regulation forcing American coal-fired power plants to curb their carbon emissions. That regulation, which would not be final until next year, already faces legal challenges, including a lawsuit filed on behalf of a dozen states.

But unilateral action by the world’s largest economy will not be enough to curb the rise of carbon pollution across the globe. That will be possible only if the world’s largest economies, including India and China, agree to enact similar cuts.

The Obama administration’s international climate strategy is likely to infuriate Republican lawmakers who already say the president is abusing his executive authority by pushing through major policies without congressional approval.

“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like — and to ignore the elected representatives of the people when they don’t agree,” Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, said in a statement.

Like The King cares!

A deal that would not need to be ratified by the United States or any other nation is also drawing fire from the world’s poorest countries. In African and low-lying island nations — places that scientists say are the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change — officials fear that any agreement made outside the structure of a traditional United Nations treaty will not bind rich countries to spend billions of dollars to help developing nations deal with the forces of climate change.

Seventeen years later, the Senate obstacle remains. Even though Democrats currently control the chamber, the Senate has been unable to reach agreement to ratify relatively noncontroversial United Nations treaties. In 2012, for example, Republican senators blocked ratification of a United Nations treaty on equal rights for the disabled, even though the treaty was modeled after an American law and had been negotiated by a Republican president, George W. Bush.

This fall, Senate Republicans are poised to pick up more seats, and possibly to retake control of the chamber. Mr. McConnell, who has been one of the fiercest opponents of Mr. Obama’s climate change policy, comes from a coal-heavy state that could be an economic loser in any climate-change protocol that targets coal-fired power plants, the world’s largest source of carbon pollution.

The world’s largest source is CHINA. But they aren’t going for it, so this farce is the just cutting off your head and handing it to them. But it will make all the liberals “feel good” about “doing something” even if it’s the wrong thing. That’s what liberal do.

And we all get to suffer for it.

Don’t worry, be happy.

global warming infidels

 

Opportunity

According to a major new report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), net employment growth in the United States since 2000 has gone entirely to immigrants, legal and illegal. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CIS scholars Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler found that there were 127,000 fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level.

The rapidity with which immigrants recovered from the Great Recession, as well as the fact that they held a disproportionate share of jobs relative to their share of population growth before the recession, help to explain their findings, the authors report. In addition, native-born Americans and immigrants were affected differently by the recession.

Other significant findings include:

  • Because the native-born population grew significantly, but the number working actually fell, there were 17 million more working-age natives not working in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000.
  • The share of natives working or looking for work, referred to as labor force participation, shows the same decline as the employment rate. In fact, labor force participation has continued to decline for working-age natives even after the jobs recovery began in 2010.
  • Immigrants have made gains across the labor market, including lower-skilled jobs such as maintenance, construction, and food service; middle-skilled jobs like office support and health care support; and high­er-skilled jobs, including management, computers, and health care practitioners.
  • The supply of potential workers is enormous: 8.7 million native college graduates are not working, as are 17 million with some college, and 25.3 million with no more than a high school education.

According to the study, 58 million working-age natives are not employed.

Camarota and Zeigler report three conclusions:

  • First, the long-term decline in the employment for natives across age and education levels is a clear in­dication that there is no general labor shortage, which is a primary justification for the large increases in immigration (skilled and unskilled) in the Schumer-Rubio bill and similar House proposals.
  • Second, the decline in work among the native-born over the last 14 years of high immigration is consis­tent with research showing that immigration reduces employment for natives.
  • Third, the trends since 2000 challenge the argument that immigration on balance increases job oppor­tunities for natives. Over 17 million immigrants arrived in the country in the last 14 years, yet native employment has deteriorated significantly.

The Center for Immigration Studies is a non-profit research institute. Founded in 1985, the organization is regularly consulted by policymakers, the academic community, and the media on matters of immigration policy. (NRO)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne


Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Scalped By Big Brother

The United States Patent and Trademark Office canceled six federal trademark registrations for the NFL’s Washington Redskins on Wednesday, saying the nickname is “disparaging to Native Americans” and cannot be trademarked under federal law that prohibits trademark protection on offensive or disparaging language.

Big Brother and his Politically Correct radical cronies are mad at you and you won;t do what they want so we’ll just have to push you. And if you still won’t do it we’ll have to come up with something else.

I personally could care less, I’m not a football fan anymore, but I am not a fan of President Fiat and his Regulatory army of Leftists.

But my contribution to the Politically Correct Hyperventilating Crowd:  I think they should change it to “Code Talkers” (after the WWII Hero Navajos) or “NAW- The Native American Warriors” That way if anyone has a problem they can just “NAW, no problem.” 🙂

After all, the same Administration, along with it’s lapdogs in Congress, want to increase the gas tax from 18 cents to 30 cents. Doesn’t sound like a lot until you start thinking volume, like truckers (who deliver your goods to stores) or “Poor people” who are already strapped by Obama.

The Feds already make more profit from a gallon of gas that the company that produced it. Also, since Government won’t cut spending they have to increase taxes on you. So do you like paying more because the drug addicts in Washington can’t stop themselves?

And why is the Federal Highway Fund almost bankrupt (other than just the usual government inefficiency)?  Because the cars today get better gas mileage so they use less gas, thus less tax money.

Now who has been pushing that?  Government.

Obama himself is pushing hard for even more withing the next few years, or else Uncle Sam was going to be very cross with the Car companies.

So in a few years if they raise the tax again because it will dry up again and they’ll want to raise it again!

Again, cutting spending will never have occurred to drug addicted darlings in Washington or their cohorts.

Reaching into your pocket does. Doesn’t that make you happy? 🙂

After all, Obama is going to make your electricity rates “skyrocket”. You can afford it. 🙂

Then there’s ObamaCare. 🙂

Well, They ain’t done yet. Your Job may be Next. Be Happy.

The head of a leading environmental group recently defended job losses from the Obama administration’s new anti-carbon regulations as “collateral damage” in the fight against global warming. Joseph Schumpeter must be turning over in his grave.Writing in the Huffington Post, William Becker of the Climate Action Project praised the new Environmental Protection Agency regulations to stop climate change, and wrote that “there is nothing explicit in the (Obama) plan to mitigate or adapt to the economic disruption the clean energy transition will cause for coal and oil-country families.”

Translation: F*Ck ’em all! (That’s that famed and much touted liberal “compassion”).

These families thrown out of work, he said, are an “evolutionary step in technology and the economy” and a move toward “economic progress.”

Despite the fact that the “new technology” doesn’t actually work or is grossly more expensive, who cares! THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA and anyone who gets in our way is going to get mowed down!! (More of that famed liberal “sensitivity”)

And his solution to the increase in unemployment in West Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio is to create yet another job training program, as if that will compensate for turning workers’ lives upside down.

They can train them how to be good Welfare Democrats. 🙂

These comments may seem offensive and elitist (imagine the media outcry if an industry representative described workers laid off as “collateral damage”). But at least Becker is honest about the negative impact of the radical anti-carbon lobby’s crusade on middle class families.

Yeah, he honestly doesn’t care. 🙂

The Obama administration fantasizes that this knife to the throat of our domestic energy industry will somehow create “green” jobs. On the contrary.

A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce finds that the new EPA regulations will destroy 200,000 mostly blue-collar energy jobs, reduce the U.S. GDP by about $50 billion a year and cost families thousands of dollars over the next decade in higher energy costs.

Becker writes that this disruption to the lives and livelihoods of middle-class blue-collar Americans is a natural “evolutionary” step toward a mature 21st-century economy, and likens the new government rules to the typewriter industry being displaced in the 1980s by the computer.

But he doesn’t get the Schumpeterian concept of “creative destruction.”

Economic modernization is beneficial and wealth-enhancing if it is driven by a free market in ways that reduce costs and increase output. Obama’s green “evolutionary” step is due not to market forces but an edict from the government that will force people to use more inefficient sources of energy.

How is using a 500-year-old technology (wind power) — which is two to three times more costly than fossil fuel electricity — an evolutionary step toward anything but the poor house? This is anti-progress.

It’s easy for wealthy elites in the green movement to be so cavalier about destroying high-paying energy industry jobs. This won’t disrupt their lives much at all. They aren’t facing the collateral damage from the loss of their jobs as university professors, hedge fund managers, community activists and heads of “charitable” research organizations.

Hopefully, statements such as those from Becker will awaken workers in blue-collar industries across the country to the fact that they can no longer coexist in a political movement whose leadership views the squeeze on the middle class and the loss of jobs as acceptable “collateral damage.” (IBD)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA! Damn The Consequences Full Steam Ahead!

Scalp ’em if you have to!

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Michael Ramirez Cartoon

This is Your Money

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) spent almost $29 million to cover Medicare Part D prescription drugs for 4,139 individuals “unlawfully present” in the U.S. and thus ineligible to receive federal health care benefits, according to an audit by Daniel Levinson, inspector general of the Department of Health & Human Services.

CMS “inappropriately accepted 279,056 PDE [prescription drug event] records with unallowable gross drug costs totaling $28,990,718” between 2009 and 2011, Levinson reported. Total federal expenditures under Medicare Part D during that same two-year time period came to $227 billion.

Medicare Parts A and B cover hospitalization, skilled nursing care, doctor visits, and other medical services and supplies. The IG previously reported in January that CMS had also paid $91.6 million to health care providers to cover 2,600 ineligible illegal aliens.

And with them flooding the border in record numbers and ObamaCare and besides:

“When a Mexican, or any other citizen, crosses a boarder, let’s say illegally, they are not committing a crime. They are doing it illegally, but they are not committing a crime. No, they are not. Check your law,” Public Affairs Minister Ariel Moutsatos-Morales says. (CNS)

The unallowable payments were made by CMS despite the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which prohibits illegal aliens from receiving federal health care benefits, and CMS’ own 2003 memo warning: “Make no payments for Medicare services furnished to an alien beneficiary who is not lawfully present in the United States.”

Like Liberals care about The Rule of Law. They care about the Rule of The Agenda.

Medicare Part D is a voluntary program that requires individuals who are entitled to benefits under Part A or enrolled in Part B to opt in by filling out a form to enroll in a federally approved prescription drug plan that has a contract with CMS. Enrollee premiums cover about a quarter of the overall cost, with Medicare picking up the rest.

Each time a Medicare Part D beneficiary fills a prescription, his or her plan sponsor is required to fill out a PDE and submit it to CMS. Medicare Part D providers receive “prospective payments…based on information in the sponsors’ approved annual bids” which are later reconciled with actual prescription costs.

CMS uses data from the Social Security Administration to determine Medicare eligibility, but “CMS did not have a policy addressing payments for unlawfully present beneficiaries under Medicare Part D that was equivalent to the existing policy that covers payments for these beneficiaries under Parts A and B,” the IG reported.

“Because CMS did not have such a policy, it did not have internal controls to identify and disenroll unlawfully present beneficiaries and to automatically reject PDE records associated with them,” auditors noted.

The IG recommended that CMS “develop and implement controls to ensure that Medicare does not pay for prescription drugs for unlawfully present beneficiaries” by preventing them from enrolling, disenrolling those already in the Medicare Part D system, and “automatically rejecting PDE records submitted by sponsors for prescription drugs provided to this population.”

The IG also recommended that CMS take steps to recover the $29 million. However, CMS said that “there was no effective way to fully recover the improper payments in question without first implementing the appropriate policies and procedures” that would have prevented the overpayment problem in the first place. (CNS)

The electricity price index and the average price for a kilowatthour (KWH) of electricity both hit records for May, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The average price for a KWH hit 13.6 cents during the month, up about 3.8 percent from 13.1 cents in May 2013.

The seasonally adjusted electricity price index rose from 201.431 in May 2013 to 208.655 in May 2014—an increase of about 3.6 percent.

If the prevailing trend holds, the price of electricity will hit an all-time record high this summer, when demand for electricity is at its peak.

And remember Obama is having the EPA screw these producers of electricity for his “green” agenda so that they’ll go even higher. But hey, that’s “fighting” “Global Warming” for you… 🙂

In 2008, President Obama said he would “bankrupt” coal plant owners and force energy prices across the U.S. to “skyrocket” as part of his plan to combat global warming – and now a new EPA rule on power plant emissions promises to do just that, slashing as much as 40 percent of the nation’s power supply and possibly even doubling Americans’ energy bills.

“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted” Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board in January 2008.

He added, “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to, uh, retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.” (WND)

The Agenda is The Agenda!

Daniel Simmons, vice president of policy at the Institute for Energy Research  told WND the new rule slashes emissions standards in half from existing levels, and he believes future coal plants are not the only targets here.

“If they are able to do this, and if they get away with it, they will then go after existing coal-fired power plants,” Simmons warned.

According to Simmons, coal provides about 40 percent of the nation’s power supply, and it is not at all clear how that would be replaced.

“That’s a heck of a lot of electricity that would have to be made up somewhere. We’re talking about dramatically increasing the cost of electricity all to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. I think that is the real goal,” said Simmons, who has not officially crunched the numbers but firmly believes if the EPA proceeds with the rule it will have disastrous effects on American pocketbooks and the economy at large.

“It could get awfully expensive,” he said. “Some people might see their electricity rates double. If there’s no backup power plants, that means electricity is going to get awfully expensive when you have shortages around the country. If we want to build manufacturing in this country again, the cost of electricity is critical. Otherwise, companies are going to go places where electricity is reliable and inexpensive, and the EPA is trying to make it so that the electricity in the United States is neither reliable nor inexpensive.” (WND)

But you’ll get stuck with the bill!! 🙂

Don’t worry, Be Happy…

149872 600 IRS Lost Emails cartoons

149873 600 Migrant children cartoons

 

 

Bless The Reigns Down In Africa

President Obama had some unsolicited advice for Africans on Sunday: Be wary of foreign powers — including the United States. So this is what our $100 million presidential junket is buying us?

In the most mind-boggling statement yet on his latest trip abroad, America’s chief spokesman and the leader of the free world warned the African continent against assuming “folks come here and they’re automatically benefiting Africans. And that includes the United States. Ask questions in terms of what we do.”

It was as patronizing to Africans, who know all about Western aid rackets and do-gooder carpetbaggers, as it was insulting to Americans.

What kind of president goes overseas to warn the locals about the people who elected him? Yet, that was pretty much the message he delivered in Capetown, South Africa, in the same week the nation that has done more to help more people in more countries all over the world celebrates its 237th birthday.

Somehow, in the president’s thinking, Americans are prone to dishonesty and out to cheat Africans even as global rankings show the U.S. is held in the highest regard for honesty and transparency.

Only a leader with deep misgivings about America’s role in the world — evidenced in everything from his own apology tours to the first lady’s admission that she wasn’t proud of America until her husband won the presidential nomination — would say such a thing , anywhere.

Ironically, Obama’s “don’t trust, verify” advice also undercut the big initiative he hopes will leave a lasting legacy on the continent — a $7 billion Power Africa project.

“If somebody says they want to come build something here, are they hiring African workers? If somebody says that they want to help you develop your natural resources, how much of the money is staying in Africa?” the president asked circumspectly.

These are odd questions, because Power Africa is a consortium whose biggest donor is the U.S. Export-Import Bank, which is contributing $5 billion. Ex-Im Bank, in response to criticism of its financing oil development in Brazil, has pointedly defended itself by stating its cash goes to U.S. workers and U.S. exports. (IBD)

Forbes:The president implied that the U.S. government will invest $7 billion in taxpayer money to help bring 10,000 mw of electricity to sub-Saharan Africa. Electricity, he said, is “the lifeline for families to meet their most basic needs and it’s the connection needed to plug Africa into the grid of the global economy. You’ve got to have power.”

Providing that power could be a real boon to American (and global) companies focused on power generation and energy management. Indeed, as the president said, “my own nation will benefit enormously if you reach full potential.”

One of the big partners for the president’s plan is General Electric  Among the private companies that the president said have “committed more than $9 billion in investment” to the Power Africa project, G.E. appears to be front and center. According to the White House statement on Power Africa, “General Electric commits to help bring online 5,000 megawatts of new, affordable energy through provision of its technologies, expertise and capital in Tanzania and Ghana.”

GE, heard that somewhere else with Obama, Oh! right..The Chevy Volt! And GE CEO Jeffrey Imhelt, the former “Job Creation” Czar and big time Obama $$$ buddy.

Federal guarantees will reduce G.E. financial risks in Africa and will help it compete better against Chinese companies, which have been falling over themselves to invest in Africa.

Nope, no crony capitalism here… 🙂

And then there’s Symbion Power, which is run by Lord Richard Westbury, a former officer with the British special forces, and which counts former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson (husband of outed CIA agent Valerie Plame) as a director. Symbion has done a handful of power projects in Iraq, and recently completed a 55 mw diesel-powered electricity project in Tanzania.

Some of this investment is already in the works. In late June G.E. signed a tentative deal with the government of Ghana to build a 1,000 mw power plant. This plant would likely be fueled with natural gas sourced from the Jubilee offshore field, a multi-billion-dollar project, in which Texas-based Anadarko Petroleum  has a large stake.

An evil Oil Company, say it ain’t so O! There evil and all must be destroyed! 🙂

IBD:“The mandate of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. is to help create and sustain U.S. jobs by financing U.S. exports,” Ex-Im Bank stressed in a press release during its controversial funding of Brazilian energy in 2009. “This increases the likelihood that American — not foreign — workers will be employed.”

So if African states are to accept Obama’s Power Africa initiative, they’ll have to say ‘no’ to Ex-Im Bank financing if they were to take Obama’s advice, and simply go without electricity.

The propensity of this president to undercut American presence abroad — not just of the private sector, but even his own initiatives — is disturbing. But not nearly as disturbing as his tendency to bad-mouth America every chance he gets.

I guess they will have to build it to find out what’s in it for them? if anything… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

 

A New Set of Jackboots

President Barack Obama will target carbon emissions from power plants as part of a second-term climate change agenda expected to be rolled out in the next few weeks, his top energy and climate adviser said on Wednesday.

And of course, what will that do to energy prices? Skyrocket them. Which won’t be his fault according to the Ministry of Truth.

So the poor, the middle class, everyone that the Democrats pander to and expect to vote for them because they kiss each other ass is going to get socked and socked hard for a Political Agenda masquerading as “science”.

“Our dangerous carbon emissions have come down, but we know we have to do more. And we will do more,” he said in a speech.

Of course, who produces much more than we do?  The Chinese.

Who’s ass was he just recently kissing in Person: The Chinese.

Who benefits the most: The Chinese.

Hmmm…I walks like Peking Duck…Quacks like Peking Duck…It must be GLOBAL WARMING!

And the sauce for the is duck: think of all the jobs lost and the unemployment and dependency that will rise. Certainly a good Democrat outcome. 🙂

She said the administration plans to expand energy efficiency standards for appliances, accelerate clean energy development on public lands and use the Clean Air Act to tackle greenhouse gas emissions in the power and energy sectors.

The Environmental Protection Agency is working to finish carbon emissions standards for new power plants. It is then expected to tackle regulations on existing power plants.

The Next Jackboots are being fitted for Big Brother Wardrobe…And of course, this will have no effect on energy prices like what you pay at the pump (After all the government wants everyone to drive an ObamaCar- The Chevy Volt) or at the thermostat (gotta have those solar panels or wind turbines).

What the world needs now is higher energy prices! That’s the ticket! 🙂

Remember 1979? That was the year of “We Are Family” by Sister Sledge, of “The Dukes of Hazard” on TV, and of “ Kramer vs. Kramer” on the silver screen. It was the year the Shah was forced out of Iran. It was before the web, before the personal computer, before the cell phone, before voicemail and answering machines. But not before the global warming campaign.

In January of 1979, a New York Times article was headlined: “Experts Tell How Antarctic Ice Could Cause Widespread Floods.” The abstract in the Times archives says: “If the West Antarctic ice sheet slips into the sea, as some glaciologists believe is possible, boats could be launched from the bottom steps of the Capitol in Washington and a third of Florida would be under water, a climate specialist said today.”

Mind you, 4 years earlier it was on the cover of Newsweek about Global Cooling!

By 1981 (think “Chariots of Fire“), the drum beat had taken effect. Quoting from the American Institute of Physics website: “A 1981 survey found that more than a third of American adults claimed they had heard or read about the greenhouse effect.”

So where’s the warming? Where are the gondolas pulling up to the Capitol? Where are the encroaching seas in Florida? Or anywhere? Where is the climate change which, for 33 years, has been just around the corner?

A generation and a half into climate change, née global warming, you can’t point to a single place on earth where the weather is noticeably different from what it was in 1979. Or 1879, for that matter. I don’t know what subliminal changes would be detected by precise instruments, but in terms of the human experience of climate, Boston is still Boston, Cairo is still Cairo, and Sydney is still Sydney.

After all this time, when the continuation of industrial civilization itself is on the table, shouldn’t there be some palpable, observable effect of the disaster that we are supposed to sacrifice our futures in order to avoid? Shouldn’t the doom-sayers be saying “We told you so!” backed up by a torrent of youtube videos of submerged locales and media stories reminding us about how it used to snow in Massachusetts?

Climate panic, after all, is fear of dramatic, life-altering climate changes, not about tenths of a degree. We are told that we must “take action right now before it’s Too Late!” That doesn’t mean: before it’s too late to avoid a Spring that comes a week earlier or summer heat records of 103 degrees instead of 102. It was to fend off utter disaster that we needed the Kyoto Treaty, carbon taxes, and Priuses.

With nothing panic-worthy–nothing even noticeable–ensuing after 33 years, one has to wonder whether external reality even matters amid the frenzy. (It’s recently been admitted that there has been no global warming for the last 16 years.) For the climate researchers, what matters may be gaining fame and government grants, but what about the climate-anxious trend-followers in the wider public? What explains their indifference to decade after decade of failed predictions?  Beyond sheer conformity, dare I suggest a psychological cause: a sense of personal anxiety projected outward? “The planet is endangered by carbon emissions” is far more palatable than “My life is endangered by my personal evasions.” Something is indeed careening out of control, but it isn’t the atmosphere.

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: “I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: ‘The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.’ In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?”

In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the “pollutant” carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific “heretics” is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.

Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 “Climategate” email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” But the warming is only missing if one believes computer models where so-called feedbacks involving water vapor and clouds greatly amplify the small effect of CO2.

The lack of warming for more than a decade—indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections—suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause. Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2.

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere’s life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today. Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere.

Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted—or worse. They have good reason to worry. In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years. The international warming establishment quickly mounted a determined campaign to have Dr. de Freitas removed from his editorial job and fired from his university position. Fortunately, Dr. de Freitas was able to keep his university job.

This is not the way science is supposed to work, but we have seen it before—for example, in the frightening period when Trofim Lysenko hijacked biology in the Soviet Union. Soviet biologists who revealed that they believed in genes, which Lysenko maintained were a bourgeois fiction, were fired from their jobs. Many were sent to the gulag and some were condemned to death.

Why is there so much passion about global warming, and why has the issue become so vexing that the American Physical Society, from which Dr. Giaever resigned a few months ago, refused the seemingly reasonable request by many of its members to remove the word “incontrovertible” from its description of a scientific issue? There are several reasons, but a good place to start is the old question “cui bono?” Or the modern update, “Follow the money.”

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them.

Trade more freedom for security. It will cost you more than money!

Speaking for many scientists and engineers who have looked carefully and independently at the science of climate, we have a message to any candidate for public office: There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to “decarbonize” the world’s economy. Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC, aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.

Princeton physics professor William Happer on why a large number of scientists don’t believe that carbon dioxide is causing global warming.

A recent study of a wide variety of policy options by Yale economist William Nordhaus showed that nearly the highest benefit-to-cost ratio is achieved for a policy that allows 50 more years of economic growth unimpeded by greenhouse gas controls. This would be especially beneficial to the less-developed parts of the world that would like to share some of the same advantages of material well-being, health and life expectancy that the fully developed parts of the world enjoy now. Many other policy responses would have a negative return on investment. And it is likely that more CO2 and the modest warming that may come with it will be an overall benefit to the planet.

If elected officials feel compelled to “do something” about climate, we recommend supporting the excellent scientists who are increasing our understanding of climate with well-designed instruments on satellites, in the oceans and on land, and in the analysis of observational data. The better we understand climate, the better we can cope with its ever-changing nature, which has complicated human life throughout history. However, much of the huge private and government investment in climate is badly in need of critical review.

Every candidate should support rational measures to protect and improve our environment, but it makes no sense at all to back expensive programs that divert resources from real needs and are based on alarming but untenable claims of “incontrovertible” evidence. (WSJ)

Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.

But as I have said many times, to many Global Warming and it’s attendant Authoritarian and Ludite/Hippy views are almost religion and it’s heresy to defend to your death to defend their belief. Science, that agrees with them is only an excuse.

“For Proof Denies Faith and without Faith I am Nothing”– Douglas Adams

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
 Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

The Agenda

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

King Fiat I Strikes again:

According to Bloomberg media, “President Barack Obama is preparing to tell all federal agencies for the first time that they should consider the impact on global warming before approving major projects, from pipelines to highways.”

Bloomberg says Obama plans to “expand the scope of a Nixon-era law,” the National Environmental Policy Act, “that was first intended to force agencies to assess the effect of projects on air, water and soil pollution.”

It’s happening just as Obama threatened it would: If Congress won’t pass the laws he wants — in this case limits on greenhouse gas emissions — he will just make law on his own, without constitutional restraint.

At risk under such a regime are “natural gas export facilities, ports for coal sales to Asia, and even new forest roads,” Bloomberg reports industry lobbyists as saying.

To that list we’d add fracking, which has produced a historic domestic energy, economic and employment boom.

Well, we can’t have that. It’s Politically incorrect so we must stop that immediately!

We only want Politically Correct, Agenda Correct Jobs.

Another example: He wants to screw Military people out of Tuition assistance but he wants to create more assistance for Illegal Aliens.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

Whether Obama’s order results in delays or outright shutdowns of projects, it’s bound to have a negative economic effect. One senses yet another hang up of the Keystone Pipeline is coming, as well as countless delays in enterprises the administration doesn’t like.

The Obama economy, which is slogging through the weakest recovery in modern history, needs a jolt of commerce and industry. But the red tape made inevitable by Obama’s further appropriation of power will depress the capital that’s needed for projects that would have otherwise been started.

Rather than liberate the economy, it appears that Obama, who said Friday he wants another $2 billion from the taxpayers to pay for green vehicle technology, would rather have as many Americans as possible dependent on government — a government that he continues to expand and have greater executive power over.

It could be different.

By employing both his constitutional executive powers and his role as a leader Congress would follow, Obama could move government out of the way.

He won’t. But he should. Because the stimulus doesn’t come from more government spending. It comes from the private sector, where the action really takes place.

Keystone XL could play a role in moderating high gas prices by increasing the supply of crude oil. Millions of hardworking Americans are feeling pain at the pump and we should do everything we can to expand access to stable and affordable energy supplies.

The Trans-Alaska Pipeline was subjected to a host of challenges from outside groups and multiple rounds of costly litigation delays, before Congress…

The project is more than safe. It has been the subject of extensive environmental reviews, all of which demonstrate it will follow strict safeguards to protect the public interest. This month the State Department confirmed in its exhaustive Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement that the pipeline would have negligible environmental impact.

For these reasons, the project enjoys broad public support.

Despite these demonstrable benefits, the Obama administration has held up approval for four years with unfair, bureaucratic delays. Instead of approving this massive jobs and energy affordability project, the president has manufactured his own assembly line of excuses, intended more to build capital with environmental special interests than produce economic growth and lower energy prices for those who feel the squeeze of lower take-home pay. (IBD)

But again it’s not Politically Correct or Agenda Correct so it must be evil and must be stopped, tied up, demonized or made untenable until they get there way.
Pettiness and Petulance about getting only what THEY Want is a true hallmark of a Liberal.
After all, They want to Spend even More regardless of a nearly $17 Trillion Dollar debt.
Why?
Because Tax and Spend are at the core of a Liberal. They can’t do anything else.
And since they consider themselves so superior to you mere peasants everything they want they want it now and they you to want it because THEY want it.
OBAMACARE
Health care spending  (and everything touched by it-like Insurance) in this country has been growing at twice the rate of growth of our income on a real, per capita basis. Although there has been modest slowing during the Great Recession, that’s been the trend for the past 40 years and the United States is not unique. Our health care spending growth rate is in the middle of the pack among developed countries.Clearly we are on an unsustainable path. With each passing year, health care crowds out more and more other goods and services we want to consume. If it were possible to stay on the path we are on, eventually we would have nothing to eat, nothing to wear and no place to live — but we would all have really great health care.

Now even though the path is unsustainable, it is still the path we are currently on. Private health care spending, Medicare, Medicaid — the entire health care system ? is growing twice as fast as our ability to pay for its growth.

But the Obama administration, desperate to promise benefits that it knows it cannot pay for, has found a solution: making up budget numbers.

The problem begins with the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare). Every time the administration talks about this new entitlement, they make it sound like it’s an enormous free lunch. Everyone in America has been promised affordable health insurance and the only people who are going to suffer are a few rich people.

Unwilling to raise the taxes needed to pay for this entitlement, the administration decided to fund almost half the cost by robbing Medicare. The figure is $716 billion over the next decade, but that’s just the beginning. Under the Affordable Care Act, Medicare is set to grow only a tiny bit faster than the growth of national income — forever!

So let’s recap. Spending on the elderly and the disabled will be growing at one rate while the rest of the health care system will be growing at twice that rate. The Medicare Office of the Actuaries has included two graphs in the latest Medicare Trustees report showing what this will mean. These graphs — which have never appeared in the mainstream media or even been referred to by the mainstream media — show Medicare doctors’ fees dropping below Medicaid fees in the near future and falling progressively behind Medicaid and private sector payments, indefinitely into the future.

One out of seven hospitals will leave Medicare in the next seven years, say the actuaries, and beyond that things just get worse and worse. Access to care will become a huge issue as waiting times to see doctors and enter hospitals grows. Harvard economist Joe Newhouse foresees senior citizens seeking care where Medicaid patients and the uninsured now go — to community health centers and to the emergency rooms of safety net hospitals. From a financial point of view, seniors will be less attractive to doctors than welfare mothers.

Now if the administration had been willing to come clean about all of this, I would say that’s what leadership is all about. It’s about making tough choices. Seniors will have to have less so that younger folks can have more. But that of course, is not what the president is saying. Time and again, the president, the vice president and every leading Democrat in Congress have referred to the Medicare spending reductions as “savings” that will not harm the elderly in any way.

This is not leadership. This is not making tough choices. This is bait and switch. And if the administration won’t own up to what it has done today — when there is no obvious pain — what do you think future politicians are going to do when real seniors can’t find a doctor who will see them?

Even after robbing Medicare, the administration still did not have enough money to pay for its new entitlement. So what did it do? It pulled another bait and switch. Buried deep in the 2,700 page legislation is the little reported fact that after 2018 the subsidies for private health insurance are going to grow at the same rate as Medicare — i.e., just a tad faster than national income is growing.

Remember the Democrats’ complaint about Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform plan? The “premium support” seniors would get to buy private insurance would grow at a slower rate than the actual premiums — shifting more and more of the cost to seniors through time. Well, that’s exactly what the Democrats are planning to do under ObamaCare to young people. The difference is that the Ryan plan was an undeveloped concept, whereas ObamaCare is the law of the land.

Think about this for a moment. The new law will force all of us to purchase insurance whose cost is likely to grow at twice the rate of growth of our incomes. But after a few years, the subsidies will drop down to the lower growth path as we are all forced to spend more and more of our disposable income on a health plan that will become increasingly unaffordable!

And if you get insurance from your employer, there are no subsidies at all — except for the smallest firms.

If you think any of this is politically sustainable, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you.

If you don’t think what I am describing is sustainable, then beware that all the budget numbers coming out of Washington are wrong. The real budget crisis is much, much worse. (John C Goodman)

But THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

And Liberals want what they want and they will force you to want them too and if you don’t they find a way to do it anyways.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez