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

How I Can Help YOU

Recommendations of Working Group III of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (whew!):

More regulation from “experts”, technocrats and bureaucrats at supranational organizations, such as the one whose initials begin with U and end with N
More taxpayer subsidies for expensive, inefficient renewable energy (but it make environmentalist and greenie-weenie liberals feel better that poor people are paying more for their energy so that’s why people who produce an income have to pay higher taxes to support that too!!)
More nuclear power (with shale gas used as a transitional fuel to replace coal) The last nuclear Plant built in this country? 1978.
The abandonment of fossil fuels (North Dakota, which has seen a boom on account of the oil and gas industry, had the lowest unemployment rate of 2.6 percent, which has been stable since January. But they are politically incorrect jobs so they don’t count, ignore them.
—Boo Hiss! That’s that “laser like focus” on Jobs the Democrats keep talking about…)

Less meat consumption (Are you now or have you ever been a meat eater! Boo Hiss!)
A single, globally-regulated price for carbon dioxide (hey, you want some black market CO2??) The Air Police!!!
More local-**government-enforced** walking, cycling and public transportation (But hey, who needs freedom after all. Government will control you for your own good!!)
More back-door wealth redistribution from the West to the developing world in the name of “sustainability” (otherwise you “hate poor people” you know!

Now doesn’t that just make your heart flutter and you cheeks flush with pride at how superior you are??

Then you’re not a Progressive Liberal, you planet-destroying, evil , greedy bastard! 🙂

Oh and…

But according to the FDA, we don’t pay attention to the calorie counts, and we eat things that are bad for us and regret it later.

If only we knew ahead of time and actually appreciated the impact that food might have on our waist, we’d make better decisions and walk away from the Cheetos that are begging us to buy.

It’s as if the government thinks we don’t already know that a bag of chips or a candy bar — or those really disgusting-but-oh-so-satisfying-frosting-coated cinnamon rolls — aren’t good for us.

Aye, and there’s the rub. We don’t do what bureaucrats and politicians in Washington, D.C., think we should.

That means, according to the FDA, the market has failed.

Yes, when consumers don’t want something and companies aren’t forcing it on us, that’s a market failure.

Funny, but I thought that meant the market was actually succeeding.

Not according to the FDA, which arrogantly thinks it can correct this market failure.

“Although many of the usual market failures that justify regulatory action … do not apply here, the primary support for regulatory intervention is that there are systematic biases in how consumers process information and weigh current benefits (from consuming higher calorie foods) against future costs (higher probability of obesity and its comorbidities). The bias is more directly related to the requirements of this proposed rule: Consumer demand for calorie information does not create incentives for the provision of calorie information at the vending machine. This market failure occurs because at the time of purchase, consumers do not value calorie information as much as they do later, when the effects of excess calorie consumption are evident.” (so we the government must save you from yourself!)

We don’t want to know how much that Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup is going to impact our experience with the weight scale the next morning, and we’re OK with eating it today.

That’s because we’re biased in how we act and government must counter us.

“…(S)tudies suggest that calorie information often lacks salience, or relevance, for consumers at the time of purchase and consumption, even though they may experience regret about their decisions at a later date. This tendency may explain why consumers have not generally demanded calorie and other nutrition information for food sold from vending machines before, or at, the point of purchase, even if they may, at a later point in time, value that information.”

Look at us!  We are so terrible.

Government must save us from ourselves! And liberals must save us all, it’s their holy mission. So they must control every aspect of our lives from birth to beyond death because we are just not competent enough to do it on our own and they are just so vastly superior in every aspect that they must rule over us for our own good!

Thankfully, the government is going to step in. They’re going to make that calorie information so obvious we can’t possibly ignore it. Then we’ll happily do what they want and forgo the barbecued kettle chips.

So what if you crave salt and fat, have some Tofu and soybean paste instead!

Yeah, right.

You’d think that was bad enough — until you read further and find out they don’t know if it will work.

According to the FDA, obesity is a problem and since many Americans get food and snacks from vending machines, putting calorie information on the machines will result in a “significant effect on calorie intake, the prevalence of obesity, and thus the cost of health care and lost productivity.”

But there’s a problem with that theory.

The proposed requirements mitigate the apparent market failure in information provision stemming from present-biased preferences, although not necessarily the tendency of consumers to underutilize that information.”

The FDA admits it “lacks data on how consumers will substitute among caloric sources.”

And doesn’t really care because this makes them feel superior and that “they did something” to fight the even fat merchants!

Getting people off their fat asses on the coach )collecting government welfare) and getting a job doesn’t occur to them, apparently.

That means the administration has no idea if you’ll see the calorie signs and go without your afternoon Snickers only to pig out on gelato after dinner to make up for it.

But at least they warned you! And when you ignore their stern warnings they will have to step it up and ban them next! 🙂

The FDA admits it doesn’t know if posting calorie counts will reduce obesity. It didn’t test its theory to see if posting the calories will actually cause people to choose differently. Plus, officials point out, only 5 percent of money spent outside the home goes to food in vending machines.

But it makes them feel better, and to a Liberal, that’s all that matters in life.

This isn’t the market — you — deciding what you want. This is nanny-state government deciding you’re not making the right decisions about the food you eat and imposing costly regulations with the hope maybe you’ll make their choice for you instead.

And what if you don’t? What if you continue to eat chips and candy from a vending machine? What regulation will they come up with next?

Well, that’s where The Food Police come in. 🙂

But hey, if the bureaucratic elitists can save just one person from becoming obese, isn’t it worth it? (Ohio watchdog.org)

And you can sit there and pay multiple times more for the energy to light and heat/cool that house of yours as you enjoy that over-price unhealthy snack and the Food Police, The Air Police, and The Health Care Police all come rushing to your door to stop you!

Congrats, Citizen., You’re in Orwell’s world now. Be Happy.

They are the Government and they are here to help you! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

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

Hi Froggie!

According to the Martin-Niemöller-Foundation the text is as follows:[2]

First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

In the United States, the quotation is more commonly known as:

First they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller was a German pastor and theologian born in Lippstadt, Germany, in 1892. Niemöller was an anti-communist and supported Hitler’s rise to power at first. But when Hitler insisted on the supremacy of the state over religion, Niemöller became disillusioned. He became the leader of a group of German clergymen opposed to Hitler.

He was arrested in 1937 for his crime was “not being enthusiastic enough about the Nazi movement”. He was in a concentration camp until the end of World War II.

First, they came for the smokers.

No one would argue smoking is good for you. But it’s legal; growing tobacco is even subsidized by the government. Yet, when governments started limiting the right of people to smoke in places public and private, non-smokers did nothing. They didn’t like smoke; they’d heard second-hand smoke was dangerous. Why should they allow owners of private establishments to choose whether those establishments allowed people to engage in a legal – in fact, subsidized — activity?

Then, they came to “clean up” the healthcare mess. They would take the sick and poor off our hands. We would no longer have to join together as a community to provide for those who can’t provide for themselves; dear, benevolent government would do this for us. First, with Medicare for the old. Then, with Medicaid for the poor. Then, the definition of poor would expand … and expand … and expand … and nobody would speak up because who wants to come out against the old, the sick and the poor?

And then it wasn’t just the poor. It also was the uninsured. Some were uninsured because they were unemployed. Others because their income level didn’t permit them to buy health insurance. Can’t be for allowing them to just hang there. No convincing evidence they were dying in the streets or were significantly underserved by the healthcare system regardless of their health insurance status. And plenty had the money to buy health insurance and chose not to.

But hey, when you’re a Progressive, and you’ve tried for a half-century to take over health care, who are you to let minor details such as this stand in the way? And when you get your chance – so much disaffection with a spendthrift Republican president that Democrats could grab control of both houses of Congress and both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, you grab that chance and you pass the most sweeping Progressive legislation since the New Deal – Obamacare.

And when the rest of us find we can’t afford our health insurance because of all the new requirements placed on it by our Progressive friends and their enlightened legislation, nobody can do much more than complain. Who defends greedy insurance companies? Who defends faceless corporations when costs finally reach the point where they drop their plans, forcing their employers into the Obamacare system where Progressives have wanted them all along, or even drop their employees?

The secret is the impact is felt gradually. It’s like a boa constrictor. By the time you realize you’re in trouble, it’s too late.

Or the old adage about if you throw a frog in boiling water he’ll jump out immediately. But put him in warm water and turn it up you’ll soon have boiled frog…Yum! 🙂

Hi, Froggie! How’s the Jacuzzi! 🙂

Now, they come for our guns. It’s for our own good. Otherwise, we’ll have more school shootings, such as the terrible incident in Connecticut. Never mind the guns used that day were stolen. We hear about the need Newtown illustrates to limit weapons and ammunition clips that can fire several rounds per minute. We are never reminded the killer at Newtown shot 24 people in 22 minutes. Speed or power of the weapon was not an issue. One person somewhere in that school with a weapon would’ve saved many lives.

But most of us don’t think of those details, and we don’t own guns … particularly the geniuses in Washington who make these decisions. So we don’t complain sufficiently, and the Progressive agenda advances.

They also have come for the rich people. I’m not rich; what do I care if the rich get taxed a little more? Never mind that I might like to be rich one day or that almost certainly a rich person pays my salary. Never mind what it might mean to him paying salaries that his taxes keep going up. He is indefensible. He’s taken more than his fair share. Tax him. And tax him some more. And when that’s not enough, tax the rest of us … but do it in a way we don’t really see it. Not income taxes. Payroll taxes. They’re gone before we even get our checks.

If there’s one thing progressives love it’s a power grab in the name of “doing good,” and the “good” they most often wrap themselves in is “for the children.” When they eventually discover the “good” they sought to accomplish by quashing a little piece of our personal liberty did not come to pass, they never reverse course and retract their government intrusion. Instead, they offer a solution that seizes a little bit more. It’s a never-ending cycle of self-fulfilling prophecies, a Yellow Brick Road that leads to an Emerald Prison of mini-tyrannies populated by a disconnected people who stood by doing nothing because the power government was exerting did not affect them.

But sooner or later government will run out of other people to tax, other things to ban, other choices to regulate and, like a caged tiger, it will turn on the hand that feeds it. It’s its nature.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg doesn’t want his people to be fat. So he tried to ban “sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces” but was rebuffed by a court, at least temporarily. Progressives do not quit, or get deterred, when voters reject their ideas, what chance does a court have?

He’s now going after Styrofoam containers to leave a “better” planet for the children. This will lead to higher costs to restaurants, which will lead to higher prices for customers. Customers will ignore it or blame the restaurants. There’s always another kabuki dance.

What do the non-rich care if taxes were raised on people who were not them? What do those with health insurance care if government enacts a requirement that everyone who doesn’t have it buy health insurance?

Tyranny seldom comes all at once, it comes slowing, incrementally, in small doses cloaked as something else, something good. Each thread appears innocuous and unimportant but is part of a tapestry rarely recognized as what it is until too late.

You may not care about any of the targets progressives are pursuing now or in the near future, but they will run out of things you don’t care about before they run out of will to control. Sooner or later they will come after something you like or do. If you sit by do nothing as the individual liberty of others is continually limited, you’d better hope there are enough people left able and willing to speak up when they get around to you. (Derek Hunter)

Next up your Food. Your Energy (aka “environment”) when will you Boil froggie???

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Does it Matter?

Benghazi Update: Britons and all other westerners were told to leave the Libyan city of Benghazi on Thursday after diplomats received warning of an “imminent” terror threat in the wake of the Algerian hostage siege.

By the way, “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Brits? What difference at this point does it make? 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

A day after President Obama vowed an aggressive global war on global warming, Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman delivered a political hot potato to the White House in the form of state approval of a re-routed Keystone XL pipeline.

Given the pressing domestic need for a) more reliable sources of oil and b) thousands of long-delayed, good-paying jobs, you might think federal approval of the endeavor with our closest neighbor and best friend is a gimme.

Ah, but we are just three days past the middle of the 2,922-day Obama era. So, it’s much more complicated.

The 1,700-mile long pipeline is designed to carry 700,000 barrels a day of Canadian heavy crude oil from Alberta tar sands excavations to Gulf Coast refineries. The project would create thousands of construction jobs and reduce U.S. dependence on unreliable foreign oil sources, often cited by both American political parties as a good thing.

Heineman, a Republican, had rejected Trans-Canada’s original route through important aquifers and the state’s fragile Sand Hills region, a step the Obama crowd cited for its initial parallel rejection of the facility. A new study by the State Department, which must approve pipelines crossing international borders, isn’t due until late March at the earliest.

By that time, of course, the Obama administration will have a new secretary of State in the form of John Kerry. The about-to-be-former senator has fallen hook, line and sailboat for the global warming bunkum, making approval appear iffy.

Environmentalists, who plan a White House pipeline protest next month, claim the extraction and combustion of such oil volumes would contribute catastrophically to global warming.

Unfortunately for that argument, it’s not like a pipeline defeat will keep that oil in Canadian soil. It will just be exported through another pipeline to the West Coast for sale to China, while alienating the United States’ best neighbor, closest ally and largest trading partner.

Both Republican congressional leaders sought to add approval pressure on Obama Tuesday. Said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

“The President says he’s for an all-of-the-above approach to energy and now it’s time for him to live up to it. Nebraska has taken care of the issues the President raised when he denied the permit, so there’s no more room for excuses or delays and it should be expeditiously approved.”

Added House Speaker John Boehner:

“Nebraska’s approval of a new Keystone XL pipeline route means there is no bureaucratic excuse, hurdle, or catch President Obama can use to delay this project any further. He and he alone stands in the way of tens of thousands of new jobs and energy security.

“Every state along the proposed route supports this project, as does a bipartisan coalition in Congress and a majority of Americans. I recognize all the political pressure the president faces, but with our energy security at stake and many jobs in limbo, he should find a way to say yes.”

In his inaugural address Monday Obama gave numerous nods to his liberal base. “We will respond to the threat of climate change,” he said, “knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”

His full text and a complete C-SPAN video are available here.

But the Democrat, who has only 1,458 days left in office, also called for large-scale investments in the nation’s infrastructure to stimulate new jobs and rebuild the country after a decade of war-drained finances.

Although Obama has never appeared bothered by adding some $6 trillion so far to the national debt, now north of $16.3 trillion, the job-creating pipeline expenditures would be private.

So, do you think Obama will choose to come down in favor of his jobs vow or his environmental vow?

Given Obama’s long record of, shall we say, flexible vow-keeping, the answer is most likely, Yes. (IBD)

🙂

After all, he raised the payroll tax on everyone but it was the same as 2 years ago so he didn’t “increase” it.
🙂

So expect doublespeak and much gnashing of someone elses teeth and blaming someone else for it.
That is only if they can’t just ignore it all together.
What does it Matter? 🙂
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
 Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Progress

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

The Fruits of Obama’s “better relations” and “destruction” of Al-Qaeda:

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has urged Egyptians to restart their revolution to press for Islamic law and called on Muslims to kidnap Westerners, the SITE Intelligence Group said Friday.

In a video released on jihadist forums and translated by the US monitoring service, Zawahiri also lashed out at President Barack Obama, calling him a liar and demanding he admit defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan and North Africa.

Criticizing the new Egyptian government — led by a president drawn from the Muslim Brotherhood — as corrupt, he said a battle is being waged in Egypt between a secular minority and Muslims seeking implementation of Shariah law. (france24)

Despite real-time video, emails to the White House and desperate cries for help, our defense secretary says we didn’t send rescue forces to our Benghazi consulate because we didn’t know what was going on.

In a statement bordering on the Kafkaesque, Leon Panetta told a news conference Thursday that four Americans, including our Libyan ambassador Chris Stevens, were left to die without a rescue attempt by nearby U.S. military forces because there’s “a basic principle here, and the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place.”

That would seem to sum up the Obama administration’s assessment of and story line about the Middle East — it has no real-time clue about what’s going on. Osama bin Laden is dead, but Islamofascism is very much alive, and to send an ambassador and his diplomatic mission into harm’s way without so much as a Marine security detachment with bayonets is unconscionable.

Excuse us, Mr. Secretary, but your administration had a drone over the consulate on Sept. 11, and you and President Obama had a meeting that included Vice President Joe “Nobody Told Us” Biden in the Oval Office at 5 p.m. Washington time, a little more than an hour after the onset of the attack. There were at least 50 minutes of real-time video of the attack as the battle was sent streaming directly to the Situation Room in the White House.

Real-time emails were also pouring into the Situation Room detailing that 20 armed terrorists were attacking our Benghazi consulate, that Ambassador Stevens was crouched in a safe room waiting for help as the al-Qaida terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia was taking credit for the attack. Most claims of responsibility for a terrorist attack come days after the event. This was, as they say, in “real-time.”

If indeed you had insufficient knowledge concerning the attack itself, you certainly had knowledge of the threat. Ambassador Stevens had been begging for even the most basic security, and all his requests for additional security were denied. And how about this little factoid: the Benghazi consulate was and is sovereign U.S. territory that you and President Obama had a responsibility and duty to defend. (IBD)

But the only thing they want to defend is Barack’s political ass.

A Famous  Quote from our Dear Leader:

“I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”

An Even Better one for all of us:

“The punishment which the wise suffer who refuse to take part in the government, is to live under the government of worse men.” — Plato

So If you want better, VOTE. If you want Obama out, VOTE. If you want Democrats defeated, VOTE.

It’s that simple. If you don’t vote, don’t Bitch.

I vote. I really bitch! 🙂

His ALL-IN (the shit) Energy Policy:

It’s not that Obama necessarily hates profits. What he’s really concerned about is where they end up.

“Greater profits,” he said in February 2011, “have to be shared by American workers.” So rather than letting profits accrue to those who earned them, the president wants them to be “shared” in a way that he approves.

Profit-loathing isn’t limited to the White House. It’s partywide. Democrats from top to bottom are agitated when corporations profit, especially oil companies.

This couldn’t have been more clear than when earlier this year, six House Democrats — Reps. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), John Conyers Jr. (Mich.), Bob Filner (Calif.), Marcia Fudge (Ohio), Jim Langevin (R.I.), and Lynn Woolsey (Calif.) — proposed a Reasonable Profits Board that would levy a 50% to 100% tax on oil company earnings that exceeded a “reasonable profit” limit.

Former House speaker and current Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was not among those who put together the totalitarian-sounding Reasonable Profits Board. But she’s been known to spit out phrases such as “record profits,” “profiteering,” “highly profitable,” when describing oil companies’ earnings.

On the other side of the Capitol, Sen. Harry Reid, who still runs the Senate for the Democrats, has similar ill feelings toward health insurance companies.

In Reid’s mind, the “profit motive” of insurers has “almost destroyed our economy.” He’s complained — incorrectly — “they make more money than any other business in America today,” implying that there is something wrong with making more than everyone else and forgetting that some industry has to come out on top.

Unless, of course, we live in a nation in which the government uses its force to even all outcomes. Could it be that’s what the Democrats are really trying to achieve?

The Democrats’ war on profits is just as shameful at the grass-roots level. Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, discovered just how intense the animosity is when he spoke to Democrats at their convention this year in Charlotte, N.C. He was told that Washington should mandate “corporate losses,” ban corporate profits, “limit” corporate profits and put a “cap” on them.

Predictable. And so, unfortunately, was the response of a woman who initially said she didn’t know enough about banning corporate profits to offer an opinion, only to later say she would favor a ban if Obama approved of one. Why? Because, she gushed, “I will support anything my president wants to do.”

There is an ugly jealousy and spitefulness that runs deep and wide through today’s Democratic Party.

It shows in the desperation of the Obama re-election campaign. It’s supposed to be the party of peace and unity. But it’s become a party of division and disunity. (IBD)

I would add Disrespect, distraction, disgust, and Disharmony.

The Past, Present, and Future Smear King

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Recall the insane levels that Liberals and the Ministry of Truth Media went to over George W. Bush Drinking and alleged drug use. (The Liberal media won’t).

The smear was in full tilt.

Huffington Post 1/4/2007: Fox News Reporter Kirian Chetry blurted out what she assumed was common knowledge among the media cognoscenti: that George W. Bush had used cocaine in his past and yet had politically survived the exposure of that (criminal) indiscretion. Her on-air colleagues scrambled to “correct” the record: no, no, no, the cocaine accusations against Bush have never been proven beyond a doubt–so let’s quickly shift the conversation away from Bush’s drug past and instead bring up, for one more go around, Bill Clinton’s admitted marijuana use alongside the recent revelation about Barack Obama’s possible cocaine use. Let’s blow some smoke in Bill’s direction, he never inhaled, ha, ha, ha.

Whew, that was a close one! Fox News surely didn’t want to open that door into Bush’s creepy closet, and they tried to slam it shut.

Then there’s: Here’s the passage from his (Obama’s) book, Dreams from My Father, where he discusses his drug use:
“I had learned not to care. I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though—Mickey, my potentional intiator had been just a little too eager for me to go through with that. Said he could do it blindfolded, but he was shaking like a faulty engine when he said it. Maybe he was just cold; we were standing in a meat freezer in the back of the deli where he worked, and it couldn’t have been more than twenty degrees in there. But he didn’t look like he was sweating, his face shiny and tight. He had pulled out the needle and the tubing, and I’d looked at him standing there, surrounded by big slabs of salami and roast beef, and right then an image popped into my head of an air bubble, shiny and round like a pearl, rolling quietly through a vein and stopping my heart… Junkie. Pothead. That’s where I’d be headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. Except the highs hadn’t been about that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was. Not by then anyway. I got just the opposite effect, something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind, something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory. I had discovered that it didn’t make any difference whether you smoked reefer in the white classmmate’s sparkling new van, or in the dorm room of some brother you’d met at the gym, or on the beach with a couple of Hawaiian kids who had dropped out of school and now spent most of their time looking for an excuse to brawl.

Nobody asked you whether your father was a fat-cat executive who cheated on his wife or some laid-off joe who slapped you around whenever he bothered to come home. You might just be bored, or alone. Everybody was welcome into the club of dissaffection. And if the high didn’t solve whatever it was that was getting you down, it could at least help you laugh at the world’s ongoing folly and see through all the hypocrisy and bullshit and cheap moralism.–Barack Obama Dreams of My Father.

Liberal Response: Crickets. They never even bothered. And besides if you brought it up, you were just a racist and wanted to keep this black man down and now it’s just silly, it doesn’t matter.

More Huffington Post 2007: What amazes me is that here we are, six years into Bush’s presidency, and the press still refuses to treat the longstanding stories about Bush’s cocaine use with the severity and scrutiny that such charges surely deserve, given the high level stakes involved. The issue is no longer simply how and why Bush has successfully dodged the topic for his entire political career. The story now should be why the press has treated him with kid gloves for so long.

But yet, Dreams of my Father was first published in July 1995 by Community Organizer Barack Obama.

Obama 1995: “In America,” Obama says, “we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.”

<<Crickets>>

Liberals won’t tell you things they don’t want you to know. Especially, if it’s a divide and conquer lie, half-truth, lie of omission or just plain old bullsh*t!

Then: These are mean, cruel times, exemplified by a ‘lock ‘em up, take no prisoners’ mentality that dominates the Republican-led Congress. Historically, African-Americans have turned inward and towards black nationalism whenever they have a sense, as we do now, that the mainstream has rebuffed us, and that white Americans couldn’t care less about the profound problems African-Americans are facing.”

2011: “And so tonight, it is my fervent hope that we can harness some of that unity and some of that pride to confront the many challenges that we still face.”–Obama the Day after Bin Laden was killed and a year before he “spiked” the football and took all the credit.

Then: “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”- Obama 2008

Now: The Obama campaign added a section on “clean coal” to its website this week after House Republicans alleged that the president’s “all-of-the-above” energy plan neglected the fossil fuel.

“President Obama has set a 10-year goal to develop and deploy cost-effective clean coal technology,” the website now says.“The Recovery Act invested substantially in carbon capture and sequestration research, including 22 projects across four different areas of carbon capture-and-storage research and development.”  (The Hill)

Say Anything to get Re-elected. It’s not like the Liberal Media will care and no one in the Liberal Media will take you seriously if you do. They will likely HELP you do it.
They are not  going to asks questions that violate the Party Meme.

There were uproars about Sarah Palin on Magazine covers. Now we have an effectively nude woman on Time Magazine.

The Response From the Liberal Media: YAWN!

I ‘m still waiting for the “War on Women” response that because this cover is offensive it must be because of misogynistic rich white male Republicans. 🙂

Then there’s the smear of Romney as a bully 50 years ago in High School.

The family of the “victim” (who by the way is dead!) calls the whole thing appalling and the Liberal media yawns again.

Facts don’t matter. And so what if the “victim” is dead. Who cares. It’s all about perception, not reality.

They put it out so that they could get that tabloid-y reaction.

It’s like the kid that acts out in class for the negative reinforcement.

Vote for Me! I’m not a racist, misogynist rich white privileged kid bully.

Are you?

Al Sharpton: “It’s war on black people, it’s war on women, it’s war on immigrants… We have got to turn this around and start targeting in Missouri those legislators that want to roll back our right to vote!”

Don’t vote for Republicans- They are Mean, racist, misogynists who hate women, poor people,grandma,blacks,and hispanics. Want dirty air, dirty water and for you to “just die!” (to quote former Rep. Grayson).

Damn! They hate everyone except “intolerant” right wing religious whackos and “rich” white people.

And the Ministry of Truth will beat the drum 24/7. They’ll lead the parade.

But don’t you dare rise up against them or question their journalistic integrity. Oh, now your just being “divisive” and “partisan”. 🙂

“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do,” he said, “it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” -President Obama in Tucson January 2011.

That is until I’m running for re-election and all bets are off.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

All Hail Big Brother!  Boo Hiss everyone else! Two Minute Hate all around!

And this is only the warm up act.

Surprises

Getty Images
Finding out Davy Jones passed away yesterday was a blow to my childhood. “The Monkees” was one of those things that was magical for my childhood. The insane gags, jokes, and the music I loved dearly.
My condolences to his family and his former band mates.
I do feel old now.

“David’s spirit and soul live well in my heart, among all the lovely people, who remember with me the good times, and the healing times, that were created for so many, including us,” Michael Nesmith explained, reports ABC. “I have fond memories. I wish him safe travels.”

But being a bit political, Davy Jones was a Vegetarian, a runner and led a “healthy” lifestyle but he still died of a heart attack.
Meaning, The Food Police are not right all the time. Just because you do everything they want doesn’t guarantee you a long life.
Moderation and healthy eating is recommended, but it’s not a cure.
It’s just another avenue by Liberals to control everyone and everything.
Do it our way or else!
But life, genetics, and other factors will be there to get you anyhow.
********************************
HERE’S A SURPRISE!!  NOT!

President Barack Obama’s Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu uttered the kind of Washington gaffe that consists of telling the truth when inconvenient. According to Politico, Chu admitted to a House committee that the administration is not interested in lowering gas prices.

2008: “Somehow,” Chu said, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

So yet another Obama Liberal telegraphed his intention but the Liberal Kiss ass media missed it deliberately.

Chu, along with the Obama administration, regards the spike in gas prices as a feature rather than a bug. High gas prices provide an incentive for alternate energy technology, a priority for the White House, and a decrease in reliance on oil for energy.

Instead, DOE is working to promote alternatives such as biofuels and electric vehicles (and algae), Chu told House appropriators during a hearing on DOE’s budget.

“But is the overall goal to get our price” of gasoline down, asked Rep. Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss.)

No, the overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil, to build and strengthen our economy,” Chu replied. “We think that if you consider all these energy policies, including energy efficiency, we think that we can go a long way to becoming less dependent on oil and [diversifying] our supply and we’ll help the American economy and the American consumers.”

Anything but Oil. None of them economically viable, all of them vastly more expensive to the American People. But they make Liberals “feel” good. And that’s all that really matters in the end.

The pain and suffering doesn’t matter as long as a liberal “feels” good about it.

Much Like Michelle “Marie Antionette” Obama and her Food Police.

And if they do feel good, you are going to suffer!!!

The Heritage Foundation points out that hammering the American consumer with high gas prices to make electric and hybrid cars more appealing is consistent with Obama administration policy and Chu’s philosophy. That explains the refusal to allow the building of the Keystone XL pipeline and to allow drilling in wide areas of the U.S. and offshore areas.

The consequences of the policy are not likely to be of benefit to the Obama administration. The Republican National Committee has already issued a video highlighting the spike in gas prices and the failure of the administration to address the issue.

ANOTHER OBAMA SUPPORTED SOLAR COMPANY GOING BUST

The solar company Abound Solar, a taxpayer backed company Obama touted in 2010 as the energy of the future, will be laying off 70 percent of its work force.

President Obama used a weekly address in July 2010 to tout his stimulus package’s support for the solar industry. One of the companies he mentioned specifically, Abound Solar, just announced that it will lay off 70 percent of its workforce.

Abound would “creat[e] more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs,” Obama claimed, and would be integral to the administration’s quest to “create whole new industries and hundreds of thousands of new jobs in America.”

But a year and a half later, the company’s staff numbers only 120. It announced Tuesday that it would lay off 180 full time and 100 part time employees, halt solar panel production, and delay the construction of a manufacturing plant in Indiana

Abound received a $400 million loan guarantee under the Energy Department’s Section 1705 renewable energy loan program, which also gave a $535 million guarantee to now-bankrupt Solyndra. Abound has drawn $70 million of its loan guarantee, and won’t be able to draw any more until it resumes production. (Townhall)

The Liberals would complain that it’s the fault of Chinese competition, not incompetence and/or the economic unreliability of the industry.

ILLEGALS CAN BLOCK TRAFFIC

Liberal Judge Susan Bolton who started the fight over SB1070 with her ruling in 2010 is at it again.

A judge blocked police in Arizona from enforcing a section of the state’s immigration enforcement law that prohibited people from blocking traffic when they seek or offer day labor services on streets.

Gov. Jan Brewer’s lawyers had argued the restrictions are meant to confront safety concerns and distractions to drivers.

So if you’re a gaggle of Illegals and you congregate to get day labor and block traffic and cause a traffic hazard, that’s ok!

Arresting them while they are standing there and everyone knows who and what they are, is of course, RACIAL PROFILING! 🙂

And you’re obviously a racist if you don’t want a traffic snarl created by illegals.

So yet again, the Liberals will allow you to do anything THEY want you do, and nothing else. And if you object, they will find a judge to crush you!

So just shut up, sit down, do as your told and pay homage to your Superior Masters.

End of Story.

What a Surprise that is. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Larry Wright

 

We Can’t Wait

“The President’s plan is to simply say ‘no’ to new energy production,” House Natural Resources Committee chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash, said to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar during a hearing pertaining to hydraulic fracturing. “It’s a plan that is sending American jobs overseas, forfeiting new revenue, and denying access to American energy that would lessen our dependence on hostile Middle Eastern oil.”

But it make environmentalist wackos happy and brings us more Solyndras. That can’t be bad, can it?

President Obama’s United States Department of Agriculture has delayed shale gas drilling in Ohio for up to six months by cancelling a mineral lease auction for Wayne National Forest (WNF). The move was taken in deference to environmentalists, on the pretext of studying the effects of hydraulic fracturing.

“Conditions have changed since the 2006 Forest Plan was developed,” announced WNF Supervisor Anne Carey on Tuesday. “The technology used in the Utica & Marcellus Shale formations need to be studied to see if potential effects to the surface are significantly different than those identified in the Forest Plan.” The study will take up to six months to complete. The WNF study reportedly “will focus solely on how it could affect forest land,” despite the significance of hydraulic fracturing to united proponents of the delay, “and not how it could affect groundwater.” …

The Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP) recently estimated that drilling in the Utica shale, which is affected by the suspension of the mineral lease auctions, would produce up 204,500 jobs by 2015.

And what about the jobs and the energy from Canada that the President refused earlier in the month, The Keystone Pipeline?

Keystone XL also has been challenged by lawmakers and activists in Nebraska who say the pipeline might break and spill oil into the Ogallala aquifer, a major source of water for Nebraska ranchers. This is not impossible, but after the world’s many years of experience with operating oil pipelines, it’s a bit like refusing to allow airplanes to fly over Nebraska for fear they might crash. (Barrons)

But the most nakedly political part of it is, they just delayed it until after the 2012 election, like most decision today. Because no one wants to confront them during a campaign. And a campaign is all we have now.

On Nov. 12, the White House and the State Department decided to give the pipeline route more study, at least until after the election in November, 2012. “This was not a political decision,” said an assistant secretary of state who must have practiced in front of a mirror to keep a straight face.

Political or not, final or not, investors and consumers should hope that the Keystone XL non-decision will not much hamper the development of the Alberta oil resource. Petroleum can be shipped to the U.S. by truck or train, and the capacity of existing pipelines can be increased, all without a pass from the State Department or the president.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, offered another possibility. He said that his government will work with pipeline companies to ship more Alberta oil to the Pacific coast for export to Asia. Harper observed, however, that the Keystone XL pipeline or something like it will eventually go through “because it makes eminent sense.”

But as the U.S. government has shown, making sense doesn’t have the same priority as political survival.

Charles Krauthammer: In 2008, the slogan was “Yes We Can.” For 2011-12, it’s “We Can’t Wait.” What happened in between? Candidate Obama, the vessel into which myriad dreams were poured, met the reality of governance.

His near-$1 trillion stimulus begat a stagnant economy with 9 percent unemployment. His attempt at Wall Street reform left in place a still too-big-to-fail financial system as vulnerable today as when he came into office. His green energy fantasies yielded Solyndra cronyism and a cap-and-trade regime not even a Democratic Congress would pass.

And now his signature achievement, Obamacare, is headed to the Supreme Court, where it could very well be struck down, just a week after its central element was overwhelmingly repudiated (2-1) by the good burghers of Ohio.

So what do you do when you say you can, but, it turns out, you can’t? Blame the other guy. Charge the Republicans with making governing impossible. Never mind that you had control of the Congress for two-thirds of your current tenure. It’s all the fault of Republican rejectionism.

Hence: “We Can’t Wait.” We can’t wait while they obstruct. We can’t wait while they dither with my jobs bill. Write Congress today! Vote Democratic tomorrow!

We can’t wait. Except for certain exceptions, such as the 1,700-mile trans-USA Keystone XL pipeline, carrying Alberta oil to Texas refineries, that would have created thousands of American jobs and increased our energy independence.

For that, we can wait, it seems. President Obama decreed that any decision must wait 12 to 18 months — postponed, by amazing coincidence, until after next year’s election.

Why? Because the pipeline angered Obama’s environmental constituency. But their complaints are risible. Global warming from the extraction of the Alberta tar sands? Canada will extract the oil anyway. If it doesn’t go to us, it will go to China. Net effect on the climate if we don’t take that oil? Zero.

Danger to a major aquifer, which the pipeline traverses? It is already crisscrossed by 25,000 miles of pipeline, enough to circle the Earth. Moreover, the State Department had subjected Keystone to three years of review — the most exhaustive study of any oil pipeline in U.S. history — and twice concluded in voluminous studies that there would be no significant environmental harm.

So what happened? “The administration,” reported The New York Times, “had in recent days been exploring ways to put off the decision until after the presidential election.” Exploring ways to improve the project? Hardly. Exploring ways to get past the election.

Obama’s decision was meant to appease his environmentalists. It’s already working. The president of the National Wildlife Federation told The Washington Post (online edition, Nov. 10) that thousands of environmentalists who were galvanized to protest the pipeline would now support Obama in 2012. Moreover, a source told the Post, Obama campaign officials had concluded that “they do not pick up one vote from approving this project.”

Sure, the pipeline would have produced thousands of truly shovel-ready jobs. Sure, delay could forfeit to China a supremely important strategic asset — a nearby, highly reliable source of energy. But approval was calculated to be a political loss for the president. Easy choice.

It’s hard to think of a more clear-cut case of putting politics over nation. This from a president whose central campaign theme is that Republicans put party over nation, sacrificing country to crass political ends.

Nor is this the first time Obama’s election calendar trumped the national interest:

• Obama’s decision to wind down the Afghan surge in September 2012 is militarily inexplicable. It comes during the fighting season. It was recommended by none of his own military commanders. It is explicable only as a talking point for the final days of his re-election campaign.

• At the height of the debt-ceiling debate last July, Obama pledged to veto any agreement that was not long term. Definition of long term? By another amazing coincidence, any deal large enough to get him past Election Day (and thus avoid another such crisis next year).

• Tuesday it was revealed that last year the administration pressured Solyndra, as it was failing, to delay its planned Oct. 28 announcement of layoffs until Nov. 3 — the day after the midterm election.

A contemporaneous email from a Solyndra investor noted: “Oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.” The writer was clearly born yesterday. The American voter was not — and (s)he soon gets to decide who really puts party over nation and re-election above all.

We can’t wait.

Additionally: “Well, no one is asking him to go out there and asking him to be a jingoistic cheerleader. But when you call your own country ‘lazy’ when you are abroad and you call it unambitious and soft when you’re home, I think what you are showing is not tough love, but ill-concealed contempt,” Krauthammer said on FOX News’ “Special Report.”

“Obama is ready to blame everybody except himself for the lousy economy. And the lack of investment. Look, why are people reluctant to invest? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, in the industrialized world. Obama has spoken about it. It’s the one issue on which the Republicans would have agreed on lowering that rate, eliminating loopholes. In three years in office, he’s done nothing. He has an NLRB trying to shut down a $1 billion plant Boeing has constructed, as a favor to Obama’s union allies. People look abroad and say this isn’t a place I want to do business. Its his issues, his over-regulation over taxation and all the red tape he has added. And now he blames Americans’ laziness. I think it’s unseemly.”

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1283879431001/obama-putting-his-campaign-ahead-of-his-job-part-1

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1283879437001/obama-putting-his-campaign-ahead-of-his-job–part-2/?playlist_id=87937&intcmp=obinsite

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

 Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Free

President Obama to Congress on Solyndra:

F*UCK YOU!

President Obama’s attorney sent a letter to Congressional investigators on Friday, saying the White House would not cooperate with a subpoena requesting documents related to its doling out a $535 million loan guarantee to now bankrupt solar panel manufacturer Solyndra.

“I can only conclude that your decision to issue a subpoena, authorized by a party-line vote, was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to conduct a responsible investigation,” Obama’s counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler, wrote in a letter to the top Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce committee. (Read Ruemmler’s full letter here).

Gee, I wonder what would have happen if they said that about, oh, Valerie Plame?

Oh, that’s right they did and the Democrats just kept right on coming because it’s “don’t do as I do do as I say”… 🙂

Committee chairman Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich, blasted the White House response:

“We have been reasonable every step of the way in this investigation, and it is a shame that the Obama Administration and House Democrats continue to put up partisan roadblocks to hide the truth from taxpayers. Solyndra was a jobs program gone bad, and we must learn the lessons of Solyndra as we work to turn our economy around and put folks back to work. Our judicious and methodical work over the last eight months has garnered tens of thousands of pages of documents from DOE and OMB that have proven we are on the right track. Now, we need to know the White House’s role in the Solyndra debacle in order to learn the full truth about why taxpayers now find themselves a half billion dollars in the hole. The White House could have avoided the need for subpoena authorizations if they had simply chosen to cooperate. That would have been the route we preferred, and frankly, it would have been better for the White House to get the information out now, rather than continue to drag this out. Our request for documents is reasonable – we are not demanding the President’s blackberry messages as we are respectful of Executive Privilege. What is the West Wing trying to hide? We owe it to American taxpayers to find out.”

I can’t wait for the race card on this one… 😦

Massachusetts brought you State Required Health Insurance. Now they can bring you a free car!!

Gov. Deval Patrick’s free wheels for welfare recipients program is revving up despite the stalled economy, as the keys to donated cars loaded with state-funded insurance, repairs and even AAA membership are handed out to get them to work.

But the program – fueled by a funding boost despite the state’s fiscal crash – allows those who end up back on welfare to keep the cars anyway.

“It’s mind-boggling. You’ve got people out there saying, ‘I just lost my job. Hey, can I get a free car, too?’ ” said House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading).

The Patrick administration decided last month to funnel an additional $30,000 to the nearly $400,000 annual car ownership program.

The program, which is provided by the State Department of Transitional Assistance, gives out about 65 cars a year, said DTA Commissioner Julia Kehoe.

The state pays for the car’s insurance, inspection, excise tax, title, registration, repairs and a AAA membership for one year at a total cost of roughly $6,000 per car.

“If you look at the overall picture, this helps make sure people aren’t staying on cash assistance. It’s a relatively short payment for a long-term benefit,” Kehoe said.

But Kehoe admitted about 20 percent of those who received a car ended up back on welfare, and while they lose the insurance and other benefits, they don’t have to return the car.

Mark Steyn

Corporate Collaborators
Standing with “the 99%” means supporting the destruction of civilized society.

Way back in 1968, after the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago, Mayor Daley declared that his forces were there to “preserve disorder.” I believe that was one of Hizzoner’s famous malapropisms. Forty-three years later Jean Quan, mayor of Oakland, and the Oakland city council have made “preserving disorder” the official municipal policy. On Wednesday, the “Occupy Oakland” occupiers rampaged through the city, shutting down the nation’s fifth-busiest port, forcing stores to close, terrorizing those residents foolish enough to commit the reactionary crime of “shopping,” destroying ATMs, spraying the Christ the Light Cathedral with the insightful observation “F**k,” etc. And how did the Oakland city council react? The following day they considered a resolution to express their support for “Occupy Oakland” and to call on the city administration to “collaborate with protesters.”

That’s “collaborate” in the Nazi-occupied-France sense: The city’s feckless political class are collaborating with anarchists against the taxpayers who maintain them in their sinecures. They’re not the only ones. When the rumor spread that the Whole Foods store, of all unlikely corporate villains, had threatened to fire employees who participated in the protest, the regional president, David Lannon, took to Facebook: “We totally support our Team Members participating in the General Strike today — rumors are false!” But, despite his “total support,” they trashed his store anyway, breaking windows and spraypainting walls. As the Oakland Tribunereported:

A man who witnessed the Whole Foods attack, but asked not to be identified, said he was in the store buying an organic orange when the crowd arrived.

There’s an epitaph for the republic if ever I heard one.

The experience was surreal, the man said. “They were wearing masks. There was this whole mess of people, and no police here. That was weird.”

No, it wasn’t. It was municipal policy. In fairness to the miserable David Lannon, Whole Foods was in damage-control mode. Men’s Wearhouse in Oakland had no such excuse. In solidarity with the masses, they printed up a huge poster declaring “We stand with the 99%” and announcing they’d be closed that day. In return, they got their windows smashed.

I’m a proud member of the 1 percent, and I’d have been tempted to smash ’em myself. A few weeks back, finding myself suddenly without luggage, I shopped at a Men’s Wearhouse, faute de mieux, in Burlington, Vt. Never again. I’m not interested in patronizing craven corporations so decadent and self-indulgent that as a matter of corporate policy they support the destruction of civilized society. Did George Zimmer, founder of Men’s Wearhouse and backer of Howard Dean, marijuana decriminalization, and many other fashionable causes, ever glance at the photos of the OWS occupiers and ponder how many of “the 99%” were ever likely to be in need of his two-for-one deal on suits and neckties? And did he think even these dummies were dumb enough to fall for such a feebly corporatist attempt at appeasing the mob?

I don’t “stand with the 99%,” and certainly not downwind of them. But I’m all for their “occupation” continuing on its merry way. It usefully clarifies the stakes. At first glance, an alliance of anarchists and government might appear to be somewhat paradoxical. But the formal convergence in Oakland makes explicit the movement’s aims: They’re anarchists for statism, wild free-spirited youth demanding more and more total government control of every aspect of life — just so long as it respects the fundamental human right to sloth. What’s happening in Oakland is a logical exercise in class solidarity: The government class enthusiastically backing the breakdown of civil order is making common cause with the leisured varsity class, the thuggish union class, and the criminal class in order to stick it to what’s left of the beleaguered productive class. It’s a grand alliance of all those societal interests that wish to enjoy in perpetuity a lifestyle they are not willing to earn. Only the criminal class is reasonably upfront about this. The rest — the lifetime legislators, the unions defending lavish and unsustainable benefits, the “scholars” whiling away a somnolent half decade at Complacency U — are obliged to dress it up a little with some hooey about “social justice” and whatnot.

But that’s all it takes to get the media and modish if insecure corporate entities to string along. Whole Foods can probably pull it off. So can Ben & Jerry’s, the wholly owned subsidiary of the Anglo-Dutch corporation Unilever that nevertheless successfully passes itself off as some sort of tie-dyed Vermont hippie commune. But a chain of stores that sells shirts, ties, the garb of the corporate lackey has a tougher sell. The class that gets up in the morning, pulls on its lousy Men’s Wearhouse get-up, and trudges off to work has to pay for all the other classes, and the strain is beginning to tell.

Let it be said that the “occupiers” are right on the banks: They shouldn’t have been bailed out. America has one of the most dysfunctional banking systems in the civilized world, and most of its allegedly indispensable institutions should have been allowed to fail. But the Occupy Oakland types have no serious response, other than the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by government-funded inertia.

America is seizing up before our eyes: The decrepit airports, the underwater property market, the education racket, the hyper-regulated business environment. Yet curiously the best example of this sclerosis is the alleged “revolutionary” movement itself. It’s the voice of youth, yet everything about it is cobwebbed. It’s more like an open-mike karaoke night of a revolution than the real thing. I don’t mean just the placards with the same old portable quotes by Lenin et al., but also, say, the photograph in Forbes of Rachel, a 20-year-old “unemployed cosmetologist” with remarkably uncosmetological complexion, dressed in pink hair and nose ring as if it’s London, 1977, and she’s killing time at Camden Lock before the Pistols gig. Except that that’s three and a half decades ago, so it would be like the Sex Pistols dressing like the Andrews Sisters. Are America’s revolting youth so totally pathetically moribund they can’t even invent their own hideous fashion statements? Last weekend, the nonagenarian Commie Pete Seeger was wheeled out at Zuccotti Park to serenade the oppressed masses with “If I Had a Hammer.” As it happens, I do have a hammer. Pace Mr. Seeger, they’re not that difficult to acquire, even in a recession. But, if I took it to Zuccotti Park, I doubt very much anyone would know how to use it, or be able to muster the energy to do so.

At heart, Oakland’s occupiers and worthless political class want more of the same fix that has made America the Brokest Nation in History: They expect to live as beneficiaries of a prosperous Western society without making any contribution to the productivity necessary to sustain it. This is the “idealism” that the media are happy to sentimentalize, and that enough poseurs among the corporate executives are happy to indulge — at least until the window-smashing starts. To “occupy” Oakland or anywhere else, you have to have something to put in there. Yet the most striking feature of OWS is its hollowness. And in a strange way the emptiness of its threats may be a more telling indictment of a fin de civilisation West than a more coherent protest movement could ever have mounted.

Mindless IV: The Circle of Cronyism

And the light WAS train anyhow, but because it was politically incorrect (fossil fuels you know) it was discontinued because it cost too much with all the new taxes and regulations and ObamaCare it was too much for the evil corporate greedy bastards to care about anymore and all the employees went to work for Solyndra…That went bankrupt you say? Taking $535 Million dollars in taxpayer money with it down the rat hole…well, isn’t that just depressing. 🙂
2 Notes: 1 Yes, there was no blog yesterday. Long Story. 2) Today is the first anniversary of my mother’s death, I still miss you dearly.
Now back to the show… Oh, and more head against wall, breaking wall Liberalism.

The Energy Department announced Wednesday that is has finalized more than $1 billion in loan guarantees for two separate solar energy projects. (Meaning, when they go bust we get stuck with the check AGAIN!).

The decision comes several weeks after Solyndra, a California-based solar manufacturer that received a $535 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration in 2009, filed for bankruptcy and laid off 1,100 workers, setting off a firestorm in Washington.

DOE announced a $737 million loan guarantee to help finance construction of the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, a 110-megawatt solar-power-generating facility in Nye County, Nev. The project is sponsored by Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve.

The Energy Department said the project will result in 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs.

OOH!!! 45 jobs!!! WOW!!! Impressive.
Lost 1100 jobs and $535 Million on Solyndra so lets do it again with even more more money and create 45!!
That sounds like Obamanomics to a tee doesn’t it!?
Only 14 Million more to go!
Head, meet Wall. Wall, you’re going down! 🙂
Oh, and just in case you forgot about Obama’s “agenda” cronyism…

A Daily Caller investigation has found that in addition to the failed company Solyndra, at least four other solar panel manufacturing companies receiving in excess of $500 million in loan guarantees from the Obama administration employ executives or board members who have donated large sums of money to Democratic campaigns.

And as questions swirl around possible connections between political donations and these preferential financing arrangements, the Obama White House suddenly began deflecting The Daily Caller’s questions on Wednesday to the Democratic National Committee.

We have nothing to hide. We are the “most transparent administration ever”. Yeah, but what it’s transparent about is not good. 🙂

Companies like First Solar, SolarReserve, SunPower Corporation and Abengoa SA have already, collectively, received billions in loans through Obama administration stimulus programs to build solar power plants in the southwestern United States.

Yet each, with the exception of the privately held SolarReserve, has seen its stock price hammered at the same time it was lobbying the Obama administration and Congress for billions in loan guarantees.

The Hill newspaper reported Wednesday that the Santa Monica, Calif.-based SolarReserve has secured a $737 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy for a Nevada solar project.

That company has ties to George Kaiser, the Oklahoma billionaire who raised $53,500 for President Obama’s campaign in 2008. Through his Argonaut Private Equity firm, Kaiser holds a majority stake in Solyndra.

Argonaut has a voting stake on SolarReserve’s board of directors in the person of Steve Mitchell, who also serves on Solyndra’s board of directors.

Ah, Circle of Cronyism Life…

But don’t worry, Obama doesn’t allow lobbyists in his administration. He said so. You trust him, don’t you? He’s never lied to you.

It was George Bush who cut down the Cherry tree. Or was it The Tsunami, ATMS, Tea-baggers, racists,Bankers, “rich” people,or Republicans. 🙂
FAST AND FURIOUS
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Evasion.

During a White House roundtable with three Spanish-language media outlets on Wednesday, President Barack Obama skated around questions about Operation Fast and Furious.

“We’re working very hard to have a much more effective interdiction effort … we are checking southbound transit … to capture illegal guns, illegal cash transfers to cartels,” he said at the morning event with representatives from Yahoo!, MSN Latino, and AOL Latino/Huffington Post Latino Voices. “It is something we’ve been building … it’s not yet finished, and there’s more work to do,” he said. (DC)

That’s why we forceably sold 1700 of them to know criminals and forced agents to let them cross the border so they could be lost in Mexico and kill people. Yeah!!

So he’s looking in to it. Just have patience. Sounds familiar some how?

Oh, it’s that “laser like focus”. That’s the ticket! 🙂

Obama blamed budget problems, in part, for what some see as ATF’s incompetence. “Part of the problem is budgetary [and] … we are going to have to figure out ways to operate smarter and more efficiently in investigations without a huge expansion of resources  because those resources are aren’t there.”

In other words, lets spend as little as possible looking into this embarrassing screw up. That’s the budgetary problem.

PASS THE BILL

“A chief economist at Moody’s [Mark Zandi] (The people who downgraded us and let the mortgage mess go unchecked) — someone who has advised both Republicans and Democrats — very recently has said that the American Jobs Act will add two percent of growth to the American economy and create almost 2 million badly needed jobs,” Sebelius said at the U.S. Commerce Department’s Annual Minority Enterprise Development Week conference on Wednesday.

Mark Zandi: “The fiscal boost from the jobs package next year would be larger than in the first year of the 2009 economic stimulus,” Zandi said in a statement released by the White House last week.

The only impact the stimulus had was to raise the deficit and more people LOST their jobs. So it’s go big and go home! 🙂

The Stimulus was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%
ObamaCare was supposed to create 4 Million Jobs.
And now the new solar deal will create 45!
So naturally, you have to believe them, right?
Head….Wall! 🙂

Always beware of Democrat who like a “republican/conservative economist”. There’s a RINO in the tent. Or in this case, the Democrats have made it all up.

To his credit, Zandi has never tried to hide his ideological beliefs. “I’m a registered Democrat,” he told The Washington Post in a 2009 profile. He worked with McCain not because he agreed with the GOP’s economic agenda but because of his policy of “help(ing) any policymaker who asks, whether they be a Republican or a Democrat.” According Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain’s chief economic advisor, Zandi was brought on to the campaign to provide instant analysis of economic news, not to set policy.

Democrats first began citing Zandi’s tenuous conservative credentials and support for government spending during the debate over Obama’s original stimulus plan. “I’m just saying what Mark Zandi from Moody’s, an adviser to John McCain, is saying: You have to have a package of this robustness if you’re going to make a difference,” then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi said during a press conference in early 2009.

New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer had referred to him as a “conservative Republican” in an interview with Fox News the month before.

Orwellian dishonesty from Democrats, jeez whodathunkit?! 🙂
Barney Keller, a spokesman for the influential Club for Growth. “He’s about as conservative as Paul Krugman, and wrong just as often.” (DC)
After all, Obama is the President of all “57 States”. 🙂
The White House mixed up Wyoming and Colorado when issuing press credentials for President Barack Obama’s tour of Western states this week. The press credentials show California, Washington, and Wyoming highlighted in white. However, the president spoke Tuesday in the other rectangular-shaped state: Colorado.  (where he was met by protesters from the Left who were mad at him for not be Leftist enough).
All those square states look the same anyway. (NRO)
Trust Us, We are from the Government and we are here to help you! 🙂
OBAMACARE
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

The signature legislation of the Obama Administration, the Affordable Care Act, came under damaging assault Wednesday from a Kaiser Family Foundation survey that found it has already partially contributed to increasing health care costs.

The Kaiser survey helps to shed some light on why so few employers are hiring, as health care costs for employers are spiraling upwards.

The survey found that insurance premiums rose by 9 percent in 2011. Healthcare costs for a single worker went up on average from $5,049 to $5,429, and for a family, costs rose from $13,770 to $15,073, on average.

The survey also found that some provisions of the Affordable Care Act already in place — including the allowance for young people up to 26 years of age to remain on their parents insurance policy — contributed to 20 percent of that increase.

And in case you were wondering, the majority of Americans still hate ObamaCare and favor repeal.

But don’t tell the Mainstream Media or the Democrats, they are too busy with “pass the bill” and pass the buck to care what you think. They just want you to think what they want you to think. That’s all. 🙂
Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Been Here, Done This

Green Jobs Vs Reality: Green Jobs

President Obama is expected to seek another $250 billion or so in new stimulus funds next week, with plenty of money for clean energy and the creation of so-called green jobs.

Never mind that no one can seem to find many Americans who got green jobs as a result of the original stimulus spending. Consider two stories.

In the 2009 stimulus, the feds gave nearly $3.2 million in green-energy grants to my county of Arlington, Va., with almost $300,000 used to install solar paneling on the roof of our local library. (Don’t ask why the feds are giving one of the five wealthiest counties in America free money.)

Arlington officials boast the project will save $14,000 in annual electricity costs, but the solar panels have a life span of no more than 10 to 15 years. So the feds spent $300,000 to shave at most $150,000 off the net present value of Arlington’s electric bills. Some 3,000 counties across the country received federal funds for the same kind of negative-return energy conservation “investments.” This is the kind of “clean energy” program the administration wants to expand.

Oh, and the Company that got $535 Million in Stimulus Money and was the golden boy of Obama’s plan, just went bankrupt and we lost all the money and the jobs!

Wind, waves, and solar which are all the hippie liberals will consider in their “all in” energy plans are not viable. But they don’t care. They will make them work and if you have to suffer for it until they do (or don’t)–well by god you’ll suffer!

Obama instead touted steps his administration has taken without Congress, including the new vehicle-fuel economy standards announced in recent weeks. (The one that some economics predict will make your next car cost $11,000 more and may not be technologically viable at this point without everyone being forced to by a hybrid or an electric car–gee I never thought of that… 🙂 ).

Think about it. That’s what we got done — and by the way, we didn’t go through Congress to do it,” Obama told workers at an advanced battery plant. “But we did use the tools of government — us working together — to help make it happen.” (The Hill)

Congress (aka The Republicans) are evil and get in his way!

“I think the White House continues to believe that oil politics are very important to the economy and the next election, and they are determined to enact whatever policies they can, especially those that have a populist bent,” Paul Bledsoe, a senior adviser at the Bipartisan Policy Center said. (The Hill)

Whether they work or not is inconsequential. They just have to sound good, feel good, and get him re-elected. So that when he’ not facing a re-election campaign from 2013-2016 he can do whatever the hell he wants and Congress can go pound sand!

Don’t doubt it.

Now for a good energy news story. I recently traveled to Wheeling, W.V., which is 45 minutes down the road from Pittsburgh along the Ohio River and smack in the heart of the old Rust Belt. Unlike most places you go to these days, the town is booming. Defying the national mood, people are optimistic about the future. Why? It’s what residents are calling the “West Virginia gold rush.”

Except it’s not gold, it’s natural gas. Wheeling sits atop the famous Marcellus shale formation—one of the biggest treasure troves of natural gas ever discovered in America. With recent breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing technology, that gas can be extracted at very affordable prices. A few years ago Wheeling farmers and land owners were getting about $50 to $100 an acre for drilling rights. Now they get up to $3,000, plus monthly royalties. What was once a dying town now has jobs and new funds for schools and roads, while West Virginian farmers and land owners are getting rich. The same story of economic revival can be told about counties in Pennsylvania and Ohio sitting atop the Marcellus bonanza.

Then there the oil in the Dakotas, possibly more than Saudi Arabia…

Even the White House acknowledges that the natural gas deposits in the Midwest and Texas contain potentially 100 years worth of cheap natural gas. Yet as far as I can tell, President Obama has never even uttered the words “Marcellus shale” in a major speech. Incredible.

In early August a Department of Energy advisory panel reported that fracking for natural gas poses risks to air and water quality and so should be subject to tighter regulations—hardly a ringing endorsement. The green movement wants it stopped completely because of dangers to water, even though continued technological progress will reduce these risks.

The White House’s hostility toward fossil fuels seems to know no bounds. Exxon has made some of the largest oil finds in a decade, in the Gulf of Mexico, and yet the Obama administration is holding up the leases and permitting process. In North Dakota, an Obama-appointed U.S attorney has brought criminal charges against seven oil companies (with penalties of up to six months in prison) for causing the deaths of 28 migratory birds found in oil waste pits.

According to data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Industrial Production Indexes, the oil and gas industry, which the Obama Energy Department loathes, has had more growth in output than any other manufacturing industry in the U.S. from 2005 through 2011. As a reward, the administration is proposing $35 billion in new taxes on the industry to slow it down. Even if we accept the dubious White House claim that all the oil and gas tax write-offs are unwarranted loopholes, a 2011 Congressional Research Service study finds that per unit of electricity produced, for every two cents of tax subsidy to Big Oil, Big Green (wind and solar) get closer to $1 in handouts.

The environmentalists are for any energy source unless it actually works,” notes Stephen Hayward, an energy expert at the American Enterprise Institute. A few years ago the Democrats were all in favor of natural gas at least as a “bridge” energy source. That abruptly changed when the extent of America’s abundant natural gas resources became fully known and more affordable drilling techniques opened up a superhighway to energy security. The irony of the green movement’s reactionary antifracking crusade is that one of the most important developments in cutting U.S. carbon emissions has come from replacing coal-burning fire plants with natural gas.

So we now have a national energy policy directing our resources away from cheap, efficient and increasingly abundant fuels like coal, oil and natural gas while we channel billions of tax dollars to 500-year-old energy technologies like wind power that can’t possibly scale up to power a modern-day industrial economy. That’s a shame. (Stephen Moore)

But it “feels” good.:) It’s all touchy feely…

For more than two years the president has been giving “important” jobs speeches — and no wonder. After an $830 billion stimulus and multiple “jobs” bills since, the employment picture has only deteriorated. The economy added zero jobs in August, and 2.4 million fewer people work today than when Obama took office.

Yet despite the advance billing on all those previous speeches, none was anything remotely “bold” or “imaginative,” something Democratic lawmakers and Obama’s liberal media cheerleaders are now hoping for with his next one.

Instead, in every speech, Obama simply dusted off the same crabbed list — more money for roads and “clean energy,” various temporary tax credits, more unemployment insurance, temporary payroll tax cuts — despite the fact that each has already been tried on his watch, and all proved to be expensive failures. A rundown:

• In December 2009, Obama’s big jobs speech called for billions more on roads, extended unemployment benefits, tax credits for weatherizing homes and some temporary help for small companies.

• In his 2010 State of the Union address, Obama said “jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010” and touted his “new jobs bill.” What was in it? Money for roads, a small-business tax credit, weatherization credits and investment in clean energy.

• On Labor Day that year, Obama delivered yet another jobs speech, but offered only one idea — $50 billion more for roads.

• His 2011 State of the Union speech was also supposed to focus on jobs, but all he had to offer was a vague “innovation agenda,” another push for clean energy and — you guessed it — more money for roads.

• And then in July 2011, Obama argued that once the debt-ceiling debate was finished, the country could turn again to jobs. His big ideas: extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits, and spend more on roads.

Maybe this speech will be different. But unless Obama has kept some secret breakthrough job-creating idea hidden in his closet all this time, would it be a surprise if he just puts a fresh rhetorical gloss on these same proposals?

The problem isn’t just that these ideas aren’t “bold,” it’s that they’ve all been tried since Obama took office, and they’ve all failed. Among those he’s expected to include this time around:

More infrastructure spending. The stimulus bill spent nearly $100 billion on infrastructure. Yet when the bulk of that money started to get spent in the “Recovery Summer” of 2010, the economy shed 329,000 jobs.

A new-hire tax credit. Obama signed the $17.5 billion HIRE Act in March 2010 that offered companies up to $6,000 in credits and exemptions for hiring unemployed workers. Obama said this would “encourage businesses to hire and put Americans back to work.”

Employers apparently didn’t get that memo, since the number of private-sector jobs climbed a meager 0.6% by the end of the year.

More unemployment benefits. These have been extended several times in the past few years. The administration thinks they will create jobs. But every credible economic study says that extending unemployment benefits mainly extends unemployment as many workers wait until benefits run out before taking that next job.

Extending the payroll tax cut. In January, Vice President Biden claimed the one-year payroll tax cut that had just kicked in would “put $112 billion into the pockets of 155 million workers … spurring growth and creating jobs.”

The results so far this year: virtually no GDP growth and 104,000 more unemployed. Economist Bruce Bartlett summed it up: “There is no evidence that the lower payroll tax has done much of anything to stimulate either spending or hiring.”

Money for clean-energy jobs. In January 2010, Obama announced a $2.3 billion clean-energy tax-credit plan that would, he said, “give a much needed boost” to this industry.

Today, the landscape is increasingly littered with failed clean-energy companies, including Solyndra, a solar panel manufacturer that got $535 million in stimulus-backed loans but which is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Will Obama go bold this time? What other options does he have? The nation’s in no mood for another massive “stimulus” plan after the last one mainly just doubled the nation’s debt.

But he’ll give us one anyways, he’ll just manipulate the words but the meaning will be the same. His ideological playbook doesn’t have any other pages in it.

And he and his economic advisers don’t appear ideologically capable of embracing genuine free-market solutions that would generate actual growth — real tax reform that cuts rates and dramatically simplifies the code, significant relief from Obama’s own out-of-control regulatory machinery, an end to the looming ObamaCare nightmare, major entitlement reform, among them.

Instead, the administration appears eternally wedded to the idea that endless government meddling and tinkering in the private sector with targeted spending, temporary tax credits, and eye-of-the-needle tax relief will somehow, someday miraculously combine to spark growth.

In a piece published almost exactly one year ago, Obama’s newly appointed chief economic adviser, Alan Krueger, boasted that the HIRE Act was “an example of the kind of temporary, targeted and responsible policy that has been the hallmark of this administration.”

We hope Obama has learned by now that this approach isn’t responsible at all, and that he would offer some truly bold proposals that break from his failed Keynesian past. But given what we’ve seen over the past 2 1/2 years, we’re not holding our breath. (IBD)

I wouldn’t. He’s too ideologically rigid to notice. If we just SPEND EVEN MORE  (“Infrastructure”) eventually banging our ideological head against the wall will break the wall! 🙂

Don’t doubt it.

The Punch Line at The Gas Line

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

8/4/2009:

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year…

— which includes a 98 percent of small-business owners, you will not see your taxes increase one single dime under my plan.

Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax, no tax. We don’t need to raise taxes on the middle class!

You will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat, not one single dime.

Fast Forward…

The Obama administration has floated a transportation authorization bill that would require the study and implementation of a plan to tax automobile drivers based on how many miles they drive.

I guess as long as it was more than a dime… 🙂

Oh, and I have harped on this one before. And it still keeps coming up.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/government-awesomeness/\

Stick around, there’s a punch line at the end.

The plan is a part of the administration’s Transportation Opportunities Act, an undated draft of which was obtained this week by Transportation Weekly.

Needless to say, the White House immediately showered the VMT section of the Transportation Opportunities Act with gasoline and threw matches all over it. 

The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration.

“This is not an administration proposal,” White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. “This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”

Methinks they doest protest too much. 🙂

Especially for a well just “trade it in” President who hates Oil companies anyhow.

News of the draft follows a March Congressional Budget Office report that supported the idea of taxing drivers based on miles driven.

Among other things, CBO suggested that a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax could be tracked by installing electronic equipment on each car to determine how many miles were driven; payment could take place electronically at filling stations.

“In the past, the efficiency costs of implementing a system of VMT charges — particularly the costs of users’ time for slowing and queuing at tollbooths — would clearly have outweighed the potential benefits from more efficient use of highway capacity,” CBO wrote. “Now, electronic metering and billing are making per-mile charges a practical option.”

The CBO report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who has proposed taxing cars by the mile as a way to increase federal highway revenues.

The proposal seems to follow up on that idea in section 2218 of the draft bill. That section would create, within the Federal Highway Administration, a Surface Transportation Revenue Alternatives Office. It would be tasked with creating a “study framework that defines the functionality of a mileage-based user fee system and other systems.”

The department seemed to be aware of the need to prepare the public for what would likely be a controversial change to the way highway funds are collected. For example, the office is called on to serve a public-relations function, as the draft says it should “increase public awareness regarding the need for an alternative funding source for surface transportation programs and provide information on possible approaches.”

The draft bill says the “study framework” for the project and a public awareness communications plan should be established within two years of creating the office, and that field tests should begin within four years.

The office would be required to consider four factors in field trials: the capability of states to enforce payment, the reliability of technology, administrative costs and “user acceptance.” The draft does not specify where field trials should begin.

The new office would be funded a total of $300 million through fiscal 2017 for the project.

But here’s the funny part:

“Do we do gas tax?”  Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), asked. “Do we move to some kind of an assessment that is based on how many miles vehicles go, so that we capture revenue from those who are going to be using the roads who aren’t going to be paying any gas tax, or very little, with hybrids and electric cars?

Get it?

The government wants to force you into an electric car or a hybrid, but that will lower the tax revenue for gasoline usage, so they then want to tax you for your miles driven (in addition) to make up for the difference that their desire to force you into will cause!

The government will cause the revenue problem then tax you even more to make up for it!! 🙂

Not only that, but they get to put a tracker in your car that will track you everywhere you go!

TA DA!! 🙂

Now, Isn’t that special! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Black Gold, Texas Tea…

This was a bit of ObamaCare fun: http://www.askheritage.org/operation-obamacare/?utm_source=HeritageSpotlight&utm_medium=TextLink&utm_content=OperationObamacare&utm_campaign=2011AskHeritage

President Barack Obama says that Americans are “tired of talk” when it comes to rising gas prices. Unfortunately his administration continues to say one thing and do another on this critical economic front – ignoring opportunities to increase our oil supply while at the same time taking credit for production gains that he is actively seeking to dismantle.

Such doublespeak is obviously nothing new from Mr. Obama – although there is clearly a sense of urgency underlying his latest deception.

According to AAA, the average price of a gallon of gas in America reached $3.55 last week. That’s up 43 cents from a month ago – the second-fastest spike on record.

All told, gas prices have increased by 67 percent since Mr. Obama took office – and as the global economy grapples with a nuclear crisis in Japan, a sovereign debt crisis in Europe and war in the Middle East there is growing concern that further price hikes could put the brakes on a sluggish economic “recovery.”

In an effort to mollify these concerns, on March 8 the Obama administration released data showing that domestic oil production – at least in the Gulf of Mexico – had risen to its highest level in seven years.

“From 2008 to 2010, oil production from the Outer Continental Shelf increased more than a third – from 446 million barrels in 2008 to an more than 600 million barrels of estimated production in 2010,” White House climate change czar Heather Zichal said.

These figures – obtained from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) – were trumpeted by Mr. Obama at a press conference four days later.

“Any notion that my administration has shut down oil production might make for a good political sound bite, but it doesn’t match up with reality,” Mr. Obama said. “We are encouraging offshore exploration and production.”

What the Obama administration neglects to point out, however, is that this expanded production is the result of policies implemented during the administration of former president George W. Bush. And while Mr. Obama announced a modest expansion of offshore drilling a year ago – he reversed course and imposed a six-month moratorium on new leases in the wake of the BP oil spill last summer. Also, earlier this month U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar told reporters that the “Obama moratorium” would be extended to cover the duration of the president’s first term in office.

So much for supporting expanded “exploration and production.”

He also failed to point out that domestic oil production remains 20 percent below its mid-1990 levels.

It’s down but it’s up. That’s normal Orwellian speak for him.

Not only that, leaked documents from the U.S. Department of Interior show that the Obama administration is considering closing off huge swaths of the Western United States to energy exploration – without Congressional approval or the consent of local authorities. (Townhall)

I guess this would be his near undeclared war that he’ll leave Congress out of the loop. After all, it’s for “good”, right?

The only thing expanding are job losses and the environmentalist LEFT’s need to be living in the 19th Century.

President Obama’s hometown of Chicago is nearly 1,000 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. But like many other communities across the country, it is suffering the consequences of his Administration’s anti-drilling agenda.

Illinois accounted for $376.2 million in shallow-water drilling expenditures over the past three years, according to an analysis by 14 oil and gas companies that spend money on vendors and subcontractors. The bulk of that money—$242.2 million—was spent in the Chicago district represented by Representative Danny Davis (D–IL).

It’s fresh evidence that Obama’s anti-drilling agenda is having a ripple effect across America since last year’s oil spill, claiming jobs not just in Louisiana and Texas but also in communities far removed from the shipyards in the Gulf of Mexico.

The study from the Shallow Water Energy Security Coalition paints a picture of the nationwide economic ramifications. Obama can’t even be blamed for playing politics. Five of the states that benefit most from shallow-water drilling backed him as a candidate in 2008. And Democrats represent many of the congressional districts that stand to lose millions.

The cost in jobs is startling. A new analysis by Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason projects national job losses at 19,000 from the drilling moratorium, with wage losses at $1.1 billion. About one-third of those jobs are located outside the Gulf region.

Nearly a year after imposing his anti-drilling agenda, it’s quite clear that Obama is carrying out misguided policies causing widespread harm.

And job losses aren’t the only consequence. The Obama Administration’s deliberate delay in issuing permits for both deepwater and shallow-water drilling has led to a sharp decline in oil production for the Gulf of Mexico this year. The U.S. Energy Information Administration puts the figure at 240,000 fewer barrels every day.

With gas prices hovering around $3.56 per gallon nationwide, now is not the time to lower production. The only way to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil is to produce more of it here at home.

The recent approval of new drilling permits for the Gulf of Mexico is a welcome and long overdue move by the Administration, but it’s nothing to celebrate. The pace of permitting is far below the historical average, and there’s no indication that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) has any desire to return production to a pre-spill level.

Until that happens, expect more grim news like the unfortunate circumstances facing Seahawk Drilling, which was forced to declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a direct result of the bureaucratic delays at BOEMRE. Seahawk’s president and chief executive Randy Stilley, writing in The Washington Post, painted a dire picture:

The government’s drastic slowdown in the issuance of permits for shallow-water drilling operations—in which companies work in familiar geological formations, typically in less than 500 feet of water, mostly seeking to produce natural gas—has all but crippled the industry. The survivors (for now) like Hercules are staying afloat largely thanks to revenue from operations outside U.S. waters. Put another way, a once-proud industry born in the gulf during the Truman administration can no longer survive on operations in its own back yard.

Unless things change soon, Seahawk Drilling won’t be alone. Businesses located in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, California, and New York—top recipients of shallow-water drilling spending—will all face economic consequences as well.

It’s time for lawmakers to take notice. Representative John Sullivan (R–OK), who represents a district with $87.2 million in shallow-water expenditures over the past three years, recognizes the impact. He told us: “Continuing to keep American sources of energy under lock and key by failing to issue drilling permits only serves to place American jobs at risk, drives up costs at the pump and deepens our dependence on foreign oil.”

Things don’t have to be this way. The House of Representatives must continue to conduct rigorous oversight of the Obama Administration, challenging the Administration’s excuses and applying pressure when necessary. America’s energy future depends on it. (Heritage Foundation)

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Feeling The Heat

The only global warming going on is Liberals feeling the heat and squirming over it. And we need to turn it up!

The Ontario case of Baby Joseph (see “Future of ObamaCare” last Friday) has gotten very PR Political with the hospital trying to repair it’s image while NOT doing what the parents want. They propose a “compromise” and appear to be backing down but aren’t actually.

Much like ObamaCare, more on that in a moment.

The Ontario hospital at the centre of controversy surrounding baby Joseph Maraachli said Monday it has offered to let his parents take the terminally ill infant home to die.

But wait for it….

A day after London Health Sciences Centre announced it was launching a campaign to correct “false and misleading information” about the headline-grabbing case, the hospital issued a news release saying it has always been willing to transfer 13-month-old Joseph home and take him off life support there, while in the arms of his parents.

PR Blitz!!!

The hospital said it would pay for the medical transfer to the Maraachli home in Windsor, Ont., and Joseph would be accompanied by “LHSC physicians and staff.”

But Joseph’s dad, Moe Maraachli, said he and his wife have refused that offer and the family’s lawyer, Mark Handelman, said he was “surprised” to see the hospital’s public statement “given my understanding that the content of our discussions was to have been confidential.”

A spokeswoman for LHSC said the hospital just wanted to “clarify” its position.

AKA PR Spin. look like we “care” but not really…

Joseph’s parents are locked in a protracted battle with LHSC and the doctors who’ve cared for the baby there since last fall. The specialists believe it is in Joseph’s best interest to remove his breathing tube, since he suffers from a severe and fatal neurological disorder and cannot breathe on his own.

Joseph’s parents, however, want the doctors to perform a tracheotomy — cut open a direct airway in the baby’s throat — so they can have more time with him at home before he dies.

“I always said I want my son to die peacefully,” Maraachli said Monday. “I do not want him to die choking when the (breathing tube) is removed.”

The hospital stood firmly Monday by its decision not to perform a tracheotomy, saying it’s an invasive procedure and not part of palliative care.

LHSC said it contacted police and is considering legal action over “innuendo,” “untruths” and threats directed at the hospital, many of them from the United States. (canada.com)

So they are feeling the heat and are trying to weasel around get what they want but not look as heartless as they appear.

So we have ObamaCare.

Speaking to the National Governors Association at the White House today, President Barack Obama endorsed legislation by Mary Landreiu (D-LA) and Scott Brown (R-MA) that would allow states to request waivers from some Obamacare mandates in 2014 instead of the existing 2017 date. President Obama claimed: “It will give you flexibility more quickly while still guaranteeing the American people reform.”

The snake in The Garden of Liberal Eden hisses…. Trust in me! Trust in Me! 🙂

Has President Obama even read the legislation? Because that is just plan false. Heritage Foundation Center for Policy Innovation Director Stuart Butler explained in the New England Journal of Medicine:

One [problem] is that it still locks the states into guaranteeing a generous and costly level of benefits. True, a state could propose alternative benefit requirements if they had the same actuarial value as those in the ACA. But the requirements go well beyond basic coverage, and the HHS secretary is the one who defines “at least as comprehensive” benefits.

Another major problem with the bill is that since ultimate waiver authority rests with the HHS secretary, the waivers granted would probably reflect the administration’s preferences. Senator Wyden claims that his legislation would allow conservative states to opt out of much of the ACA and implement consumer-driven coverage. But he admits that the secretary, not the state, has the final word over what is permitted.

As long as the HHS Secretary, whether it is Kathleen Sebelius or the next occupant of the office, has the final say on granting Obamacare waivers, then there is no real flexibility for states under Obamacare. All 50 of them would still be at the mercy of the whim of the HHS. The only real way to give states true flexibility on health care reform begins with the full repeal of Obamacare.

[A] White House conference call with liberal allies this morning says the Administration is presenting it to Democrats as an opportunity to offer more expansive health care plans than the one Congress passed.

Health care advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter stressed on the off-record call that the rule change would allow states to implement single-payer health care plans — as Vermont seeks to — and true government-run plans, like Connecticut’s Sustinet.

The source on the call summarizes the officials’ point — which is not one the Administration has sought to make publically — as casting the new “flexibility” language as an opportunity to try more progressive, not less expansive, approaches on the state level.

“They are trying to split the baby here: on one hand tell supporters this is good for their pet issues, versus a message for the general public that the POTUS is responding to what he is hearing and that he is being sensible,” the source emails. (Foundry)

Splitting the baby to appear to give in, but not really. Fascinating.

As Gas price go past $4 what is Obama and Energy Secretary Chu doing about it?

Nothing.

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

A virtual regulatory ban continues today. At least 103 drilling permits await approval by a federal government that has not approved a single new permit since the moratorium was allegedly lifted last October.

The administration has announced that the eastern Gulf and the Atlantic and Pacific coasts will be off-limits for the next seven years. The Interior Department has canceled four pending lease sales in Alaska.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said the oil industry hasn’t yet persuaded him to re-start deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and that he won’t “respond to political pressure” on the issue.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said that “any disruption in the Middle East means a partial disruption in the oil we import. It’s a world market, and (a disruption can) have real harm on the price.” And so, we would think, would the orchestrated and carefully planned disruption of domestic supply by this administration.

It’s not just Mideast turmoil that has brought us to this point. It’s also a deliberate program of restricting domestic energy to make so-called green energy more attractive and necessary, keeping an Obama campaign promise that energy prices would “necessarily skyrocket” on his energy agenda.

In September 2008, he told the Wall Street Journal: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” Gas prices in Europe then averaged about $8 a gallon.

The administration’s hostility to fossil fuels is documented. Immediately on taking office, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar canceled 77 leases for oil and gas drilling in Utah. Recently, in a stunning land grab, Salazar issued an order allowing Bureau of Land Management officials to place land with “wilderness characteristics” off-limits to energy development. Some 6 million acres in energy-rich Utah would be affected.

But Salazar now, not Chu, has issued 1 permit.

On Feb 2, The Obama Administration lost in court AGAIN, over there de facto moratorium on drilling.

Salazar was losing his battle in the court system at every turn. On Feb. 2, Judge Martin Feldman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, rebuked the administration for “determined disregard” of his previous June 2010 order to lift the moratorium.

In a separate ruling two weeks later, Feldman gave President Obama and Secretary Salazar 30 days to act on five pending permit applications. “[T]he government is under a duty to act by either granting or denying a permit application within a reasonable time,” said Feldman. “Not acting at all is not a lawful option.”

So they appeared to give in just a little. They do it kicking and screaming and whining like the children they are. But they are being forced to eat their vegetables.

Very Slowly.

Democrats once accused Big Oil of deliberately restricting supply to enrich itself. Now the Obama administration may be doing the same on purpose — a policy sure to impoverish us all. (IBD and DC)

But here’s the secret:

The U. S. Geological Service issued a report in April 2008 that only scientists and oil men knew was coming, but man was it big. It was a revised report (hadn’t been updated since 1995) on how much oil was in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota, western South Dakota, and extreme eastern Montana ….. check THIS out:

“The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska ‘s Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable… at $107 a barrel, we’re looking at a resource base worth more than $5..3 trillion.

“This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years,” reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It’s aformation known as the Williston Basin , but is more commonly referred to as the ‘Bakken.’ It stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada .. For years, U. S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the ‘Big Oil’ companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken’s massive reserves…. and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!

But the “green” only Liberals in Washington don’t want you to know and don’t wanna do anything about it. It’s not on their agenda.

It’s all Wind farms, solar power and electric cars. Kumbuya!

simple hit counter
Bakken Shale Map
bakkenshalemap.jpg

“Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies thelargest untapped oil reserve in the world. It is more than 2 TRILLION barrels.(las cruces connection)

Also see: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest “continuous” oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A “continuous” oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest “continuous” oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil. (USGS)

“HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this? Because the environmentalists and others have blocked all efforts to help America become independent of foreign oil! Again, we are letting a small group of people dictate our lives and our economy…..WHY?

Enviromentalists, leftists, and the current “green” administration!!

Because Oil and Oil companies are Evil!!  They are the work of the Devil Incarnate. The only way to cut our dependence on foreign oil is by “green” energy that is vastly more expensive, inefficient and not technologically ready for the mass market.

But it makes the Liberals feel good! All warm and fuzzy. So that’s all they can see.

So let’s let Ideology blind us because the Agenda is the Agenda.

But they are feeling some heat.

So we just have to turn it up! Way up!

The Fires of Perdition itself must be lit under the feet of Liberals or else they will consume the rest of us with them.

Period.

Political Cartoons by Brian Farrington

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

God Bless All US Tiny Tims

Now don’t call it ObamaCare and don’t cut it: http://www.breitbart.tv/liberal-pundit-acts-offended-by-term-obamacare/

Now That’s worth a Ho-Ho Ho! 🙂

****************************

Merry Christmas D.C.:

‘Washington, D.C.’s workers enjoy the highest salaries of any U.S. city, with a median household income of $85,198,” CNNMoney reported recently. It’s even higher for the federal worker segment of the city, with an average wage last year for federal civilian workers of $81,258 per person.

It’s good to be the King or his minions.

*******************************************

Not even Ebenezer Scrooge had the stomach to fire people during the holidays.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), however, plans to move full speed ahead with new regulations on January 2 that will likely cost many Americans their jobs before the New Year’s Eve party hats have even been put away.

In a nutshell, the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule will treat emissions from renewable biomass energy the same as emissions from the use of fossil fuels, despite the fact that both policymakers and scientists have long considered biomass emissions to be carbon-neutral due to the life cycle of the forests from which biomass is produced.

(Global warming Update: Early Sunday, winter storm warnings stretched from Georgia through New England.

The white Christmas in the South was one for the record books. Columbia, S.C., had its first significant Christmas snow since weather records were first kept in 1887. Atlanta had just over an inch of snow—the first measurable accumulation on Christmas Day since the 1880s.)

This new rule and regulatory uncertainty could spell the end of the biomass energy industry by removing the carbon-neutral status of biomass and, consequently, the biggest incentive to continue investing in it. Recent estimates have shown that biomass generated from forest byproducts could supply as much as 15 percent of the nation’s renewable energy by 2021, yet this will likely never be realized if biomass producers are forced to comply with arbitrary, unfair and unnecessary regulations like those in the Tailoring Rule.

Unfortunately, the Tailoring Rule won’t just disincentivize the use of renewable biomass energy. It will also have widespread effects on our energy options, as well as jobs and the economy.

Forisk Consulting recently released a new study on the economic impact of the Tailoring Rule, which found that the regulations on biomass will result in the loss of over 134 renewable energy projects, up to 26,000 jobs, and $18 billion in capital investment. According to the study’s authors, 23 biomass energy projects have already been placed in limbo due to regulatory uncertainty. In Wisconsin, for example, Xcel Energy Inc. halted plans for a biomass energy plant that would have brought over 100 jobs to Ashland, Wisc., as well as a needed source of domestic power for the entire area. Xcel Energy cited the expected cost increases and regulatory uncertainty as reasons for canceling plans for the plant—and they are likely to be one of many energy companies doing the same.

The negative economic impact will be especially felt in Appalachia and rural parts of the South, the Pacific Northwest, and the Northeast, where biomass energy shows great promise as a source for domestic clean energy and innovative new jobs.

In addition to harming domestic renewable energy development and the economy, the EPA commits a crime that Mr. Scrooge would never commit: wasting money. In President Obama’s “stimulus” program alone, the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy have collectively spent more than $100 million of taxpayer money to promote biomass power production.

The new study by Forisk Consulting only further confirms what bipartisan governors, U.S. Senators, and U.S. Representatives, state and local lawmakers, scientists, and forestry industry insiders have been saying all along—that the Tailoring Rule will hurt energy development, jobs, and the economy at a time when we need all three to be thriving.

Even Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN), the outgoing Chair of the House Agriculture, said before the election, “[The EPA is] screwing things up. They’re raising costs for people, they’re raising the price of food, and I don’t think they’re accomplishing anything.”

The intransigent EPA isn’t yet listening to the bipartisan, nationwide outcry against the Tailoring Rule. Perhaps they will finally begin to pay attention to this latest round of hard facts about the impact of their regulations before it’s too late. (Timothy Lee is the director of legal and public affairs at the Center for Individual Freedom, a free-market and constitutional advocacy organization based in Alexandria, Virginia.)

So another lump of coal for your fire when you’re electricity is too expensive for you to have anymore  and you have no job because the carbon biomass was too much to afford.

Oh, that’s right, coal is politically incorrect! Silly me.

God Bless us Everyone! 🙂

And finally, some TSA “humor”:

From TSA (note the last bullet point):

Photobucket

Does wearing this count as an inappropriate joke? (Katie Pavlich)

Photobucket

Merry After-Christmas Sales you evil capitalist pigs! 🙂

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

The Light

The light at the end of the socialist environmentalist tunnel is a train, by the way.

But it will make you “feel” good as you get run over by it and your freedom denied.

But you’ll be saving the planet! Isn’t that peachy.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

FEAR IS HOPE

Beginning today (Sept 1), it is a crime to manufacture or ship for sale a traditional 75-watt incandescent light bulb in the European Union. Autocrats in Brussels last year declared war on Edison’s greatest invention with a ban on 100-watt lamps. Homes throughout the Old World will continue to dim until incandescent lighting of all types is snuffed out in 2012 – the same year the United States is scheduled to begin a phaseout schedule mirroring the European plan.

The EU’s final solution to the incandescent problem was sparked by bureaucratic irritation at a public that refused to accept the pale, flickering, cold light emanating from government-approved, expensive compact fluorescent bulbs. “Although energy-saving bulbs have been clearly labeled since 1998 as the most cost-effective bulbs, their relatively high purchase price has inhibited take-up,” the European Commission website explains. “To remedy this, EUEuropean Parliament asked the Commission to adopt minimum requirements phasing out the least-efficient bulbs.” governments and the

Consumers realize the warm glow of a cheap incandescent is superior in every way to the deadly, mercury-filled substitute being foisted upon them. In Finland, Helsingin Sanomat reported that the new ban has not resulted in a surge of sales for the new bulbs that the bureaucrats expected. Instead, 75-watt packages have been flying off the shelves as customers filled their closets, garages and attics with lighting supplies for the long term. Such hoarding has been the rule for more than a year. London’s Daily Mail gave away 25,000 of the 100-watt bulbs as a prize in a January 2009 contest. Der Spiegel reported that German customers left hardware stores with carts jammed with enough incandescent bulbs to last 20 years.

We can look forward to a similar reaction on these shores as our own Jan. 1, 2012, deadline approaches. President George W. Bush’s signature on the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 condemned the traditional bulb in favor of the fluorescent lights rejected by the free market. Only eight senators and 100 House members opposed the bill.

Yes, George W Bush, the Left’s Anti-Christ!

There is still hope that sanity could return before the U.S. ban on normal light bulbs takes effect. Two years ago, New Zealanders faced an imminent ban. The National Party, at the time in the minority, made overturning the light-bulb scheme a priority in its campaign against the ruling Labor government. The public responded favorably to the party that proclaimed that it “stands for freedom, choice, independence and ambition.” In December 2008, the National Party government overturned the light-bulb ban. Republican challengers seeking an edge over Democrats in November could learn a few things from the Kiwis. (Washington Times)

A light bulb factory closes in Virginia as mandated fluorescents are made in China. It’s now a crime to make or ship for sale 75-watt incandescent bulbs in the European Union. Welcome to green hell.

(I bet if they’d had a Union…)

Thomas Alva Edison was a genius credited with the invention of many things — the phonograph, the motion picture, the incandescent light bulb, global warming. That last credit was given by those who rank light bulbs right up there with the internal combustion engine as ravagers of the planet.

The General Electric light bulb factory in Winchester, Va., closed this month, a victim, along with its 200 employees, of a 2007 energy conservation measure passed by Congress that set standards essentially banning ordinary incandescents by 2014.

Just as they are by fuel-economy standards, consumers are denied choice and the freedom to evaluate any possible benefits on their own by the nanny state. Washington’s force and coercion are necessary because it seems the great unwashed can’t seem to see the benefits or ignore the risks of compact fluorescents, or CFLs.

In Europe, light bulbs are already a controlled substance. The 100-watt bulb was banned last year and the 75-watt became illegal as of Sept. 1.

Not surprisingly, incandescent light bulbs there quickly became a hot item, flying off the shelves while they were still available. Der Spiegel reported that German customers leave hardware stores with carts piled high with enough incandescent bulbs to last 20 years. Garages and attics throughout the Old World are full of them.

It’s said that CFL bulbs are more economical in the long run because they supposedly use up to 80% less energy than old-style bulbs and don’t burn out as quickly. Though we’re not fully convinced of these claims, we do know that CFL bulbs are more expensive, costing up to six times as much as equivalent incandescent bulbs. Because they are made of glass tubes twisted into a spiral, they also require more hand labor and therefore cost more.

Due to the expense, CFLs are made largely in China, where labor is cheaper and environmental regulations not so strict. As with wind turbine blades, we are creating plenty of green jobs — in the People’s Republic.

Despite governments’ effort to market them, CFLs are not necessarily better. Tests conducted by the London Telegraph found that using a single lamp to illuminate a room, an 11-watt CFL produced only 58% of the illumination of an equivalent 60-watt incandescent — even after a 10-minute warm-up that consumers have found necessary for CFLs to reach their full brightness.

Lack of light isn’t the only drawback. CFLs apparently are so dangerous, the European Commission has to warn consumers of the environmental hazards they pose. If one breaks, consumers are advised to air out rooms and avoid using vacuum cleaners to prevent exposure to the mercury in the bulbs.

You can’t just throw an old bulb out, either. It must be properly disposed of lest your bedroom or family room become a Superfund toxic waste site.

Mercury is considered by environmentalists to be among the most toxic of toxic substances and, yes, it is dangerous if ingested or handled over time. We’ve been warned that high concentrations in fish are dangerous to pregnant women. We’ve been told mercury in vaccines causes autism. So it’s safe in light bulbs?

As we’ve found out here with energy regulation and taxes, and the push for cap-and-trade, governments don’t care what people want. Nor do they weigh the costs, the benefits and the risks of this or that. Government must mandate what’s good for us under penalty of law. (IBD)

And if this is the humble Light Bulb, imagine what Health Care will be like. 🙂

And then there’s the Chevy Volt, built, subsidized and marketed by the US Government (GM-Government Motors).

Texas Instruments, for example, has a page on its web site devoted entirely to the wonders of using RFID chips to monitor municipal trash collection in order to determine whether people are properly recycling.

The city council in Cleveland, Ohio, on the other hand, is far less concerned with even the appearance of benevolence in its RFID-based trash monitoring program, than is Texas Instruments.  The council recently voted to expand its RFID trash program by mandating the installation of the devices in order to determine and hand out fines for failure to participate.  In yet another example of the unholy alliance between business and government in expanding the reach of Big Brother, Cleveland has retained a  private company to handle its high-tech recycling program.  It’s a win-win — the company makes money by collecting the recycled trash, and the city reaps at least a short-term windfall by receiving payments from the company for a task it formerly had to carry out.  The loser, of course, is the consumer who is paying the taxes and fees for such activities; and surrendering to the company and the city council any privacy in their accumulation or disposal of garbage.

In California, schools are finding that students – like municipal citizens — constitute another captive audience on which to experiment with RFID chips.  One school district in Contra Costa County, for example, now requires all its students to wear jerseys embedded with RFID tags, so their whereabouts can be monitored all the while they are at the schools, and then data-based.   The tags also reportedly will alert school officials if a student has not eaten; though what punishment will befall dieting students is unclear.

Where is the Contra Costa County school system getting the money to implement such a school-based Big Brother program?  They get the money from same place most of these and other privacy-invasive programs come from — you, the American taxpayer; genereously given away as federal “grants.” (AJC)

The government wants to know everything about you. Because, you want to misbehave and act outside society’s interest (aka their control) you individual freedom-ist. You selfish bastard.

We, The Government, just want you to be safe, save energy, and save the planet all at the same time.

Is that so wrong? 🙂

BY Executive Order, Put Down that Twinkie!

During the Health Care “debate” last year I joked about the government coming for your twinkies and wanting to regulate what you eat, since it would impact their Health Care costs when the government takes over your Health Care under the guise of  “qualified plans”. (i.e. if your plan changes and the government doesn’t like the change it’s no longer “qualified” and thus subject to ObamaCare regulations)

So quick but important diversion on an ObamaCare update:

Internal administration documents reveal that up to 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage because of ObamaCare.

Small firms will be even likelier to lose existing plans.

The “midrange estimate is that 66% of small employer plans and 45% of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfathered status by the end of 2013,” according to the document.

In the worst-case scenario, 69% of employers — 80% of smaller firms — would lose that status, exposing them to far more provisions under the new health law.

“It is difficult to predict how plans and employers will behave in the coming years, but if plans make changes that negatively impact consumers, then they will lose their grandfather status.”

So change it, and lose it.

I railed against “qualified plans” for months last year.

Under the new health law, current employer-based health plans will be grandfathered — that is, they will not have to follow many Obama-Care provisions that take effect on Jan. 1, 2014. These include benefit mandates, caps on out-of-pocket expenses and limits on age-based premiums.

But they forfeit that grandfathered status if they make changes to the plans by 2014. If so, firms may have to adopt new plans or drop coverage and pay the penalty.

Under the regulations in the document, a plan is no longer considered to be grandfathered if:

It eliminates benefits related to diagnosis or treatment of a particular condition.

It increases the percentage of a cost-sharing requirement (such as co-insurance) above its level as of March 23, 2010.

It increases the fixed amount of cost-sharing such as deductibles or out-of-pocket limits by a total percentage measured from March 23, 2010, that is more than the sum of medical inflation plus 15 percentage points.

It increases co-payments from March 23, 2010, by an amount that is the greater of: medical inflation plus 15 percentage points or medical inflation plus $5.

The employer’s share of the premium decreases more than 5 percentage points below what the share was on March 23, 2010.

“These rules will ensure that up to 69% of employees — and 80% of workers in small business — will lose their current plan within three years,” said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., a physician. “The reality is this: 58% of Americans want ObamaCare repealed because they fear they will lose their health care — and even their jobs — once this law is fully implemented.”(IBD)

Well, it’s not a joke anymore. They are after you.

President Obama has signed an executive order specifying the treatment for all Americans, to be prescribed by government bureaucrats.

Obama’s order appoints members to a new government committee set up by the Democrats’ new health law that will evaluate, make recommendations about and establish rules for everything from how people exercise to whether they smoke to the food they eat and the medicines they use.  And it specifically requires the committee list the priorities for “lifestyle behavior modification” that the government will pursue.

The council is designed to basically implement future policy that ultimately everything will be governed by federal authorities, from food to dietary supplements to vitamins.

The June 10th executive order establishes the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council.

The Food Police. 😦

The council’s membership, including the chiefs of Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, Transportation, Education, and Homeland Security departments as well as the heads of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Federal Trade Commission.


The executive order requires the council to “provide coordination . . . with respect to prevention, wellness, and health promotion practices, the public health system, and integrative health care in the United States.”

It further must develop a “health-care strategy that incorporates the most effective and achievable means of improving the health status of Americans” and also must “carry out such other activities as are determined appropriate by the president.”

It will “set specific goals and objectives for improving the health of the United States” and “establish specific and measurable actions and timelines to carry out the strategy.”

The council then will have to report to the president on what it has done, what progress has been made and provide a “list of national priorities on health pfomotion and disease prevention to adderss lifestyle behavior modification (including smoking cessation, proper nutrition, appropriate exercise, mental health behavioral health, substance-use disorder, and domestic violence screenings) and the prevention measures.”

Herb Titus, a veteran constitutional expert and lawyer, told WND, “The council is designed to basically implement future policy that ultimately everything will be governed by federal authorities, from food to dietary supplements to vitamins.”

Deborah Stockton, executive director of the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, which deals regularly with natural foods such as raw milk, agreed with the Titus analysis.

“They say, ‘We’re going to centralize power and control. We’re going to be in control,'” she told WND. “It’s [going to be] another epic confrontation between those who will and those who won’t.”

Could it be that noncompliance will bring down the wrath of those agencies?

“It’ll be criminalized … if you don’t follow federal guidelines on nutrition, exercise,” he said. “That’s what this is designed to do. Ultimately bring everything under the federal umbrella. The only way they can accomplish that is through force.

“Ultimately that’s where it’s headed,” Titus said. “This is what people have been warning about. Here you have it.”

The executive order requires the council to “provide coordination … with respect to prevention, wellness and health-promotion practices, the public-health system and integrative health care in the United States.”

“Citizen, stop and show your papers and certify under oath you have properly exercised and ingested the proper amount of nutrition today!” scoffed one blogger.

The order also targets most of the products that are promoted as natural supplements or remedies, demanding that all “prevention programs” be based on the “science” guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control, virtually eliminating anything that is not put through the multimillion-dollar tests required of the federal agency.

Think I’m kidding:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-establishing-national-prevention-health-promotion-and-public-health

Then add: H.R. 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act (pending in Congress)
This bill would give the FDA greater regulatory powers over the national food supply and food providers with the goal of preventing food-borne illnesses and ensuring food safety. More specifically, it would increase the frequency of FDA inspections of food processing plants, expand the FDA’s traceback capabilities for when outbreaks do occur, give the FDA mandatory recall authority, and require food facilities to have safety plans in place in order to mitigate hazards. Concurrently, the bill would impose annual registration fees of $500 on all facilities holding, processing, or manufacturing food and require that such facilities also engaged in the transport or packing of food maintain pedigrees of the origin and previous distribution history of the food. Farms would not have to register.

Does a “Facility” include your garden or greenhouse?

The fun part I’ve seen so far: Recalls:  H.R. 2749 provides the FDA with recall procedures for food that is deemed to be dangerous.  The basis for this determination would be if the Secretary has “reason to believe” the food poses a health risk.

She “deems” it so. And we all know about Democrats and “deeming” 🙂

“I’m sorry citizen that food has been deemed to be a health hazard and you are not allowed to eat it!”

Black Market Salt anyone? 😦

The bill would also require the creation of a national public education program on food safety.  This section additionally mandates that the Department of Health and Human Services conduct food safety research.

After all, you are too dumb to eat healthy to begin with so we have to ‘re-educate’ you. 🙂

Quarantine Authority:  The bill would give FDA the authority to restrict the movement of food within a State (quarantine) if there is credible evidence that the food presents an imminent threat of serious adverse health consequences or death.

Can that be “deemed”??

FDA Regulation of Agriculture:  The bill would authorize and direct the FDA to regulate agricultural production practices, effectively telling farmers how to farm.  Fruit and vegetable producers specifically would be subject to regulatory burdens.  Agricultural groups such as the California Farm Bureau have expressed concern over these issues.
General Summary of H.R. 2749 and Farm Bureau’s Chief Concerns

H.R. 2749 would add significant new regulatory burdens for farmers, especially for produce and nut crops.  The bill would establish farming standards and create a traceability system with strict record-keeping requirements.  FDA would have the authority to conduct on-farm inspections as well as quarantine large geographic areas.  Stiff criminal and civil penalties could be imposed for any violation of the act, including record-keeping mistakes.
http://www.montereycountyfarmbureau.org/Issues/HR_2749.htm

Quarantine Authority and Mandatory Recall: The bill’s quarantine authority allows FDA to quarantine a geographic area if there is credible evidence that food poses a health risk.  The provision does not account for economic losses suffered by food producers, processors or distributors in the quarantine area.  Some Members may be concerned that if the FDA ultimately lifts the quarantine for lack of confirmatory evidence, the agency has no obligation, authority or means to indemnify producers for their losses.   Similarly, the bill allows FDA to act on suspicion to require a producer to cease distribution of food.  No consideration is given in the legislation to indemnification for economic damages if the FDA was wrong.After all, the Government will control your Health care. So why no the nutrition that goes along with it.

So that will be your Food, your Health, and your Energy.

Nothing to oppressive. 🙂

http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr2749

Petition: http://www.ftcldf.org/petitions/pnum993.php
CBO Report: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:KC3T2Rie_ocJ:www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm%3Findex%3D10478+H.R.+2749:+Food+Safety+Enhancement+Act+of+2009&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjlh3G7CEnBI74BaGpy76CIlAQDXW3brSvgdm4RT50ZGv5T_aUetIZd-GwgirP75PnzVvnmKgJsob6R_qlH5ZCzNj8eIAju6cb4rRAdkeqa5KYWotdp6W0JQC6D9QFahWK1ku8n&sig=AHIEtbS9h81IMhl_JMQ5gs4370vtmCgiJg

We are from the Government and we are here to save you from yourself!

Rejoice Citizen!

The Hydrocarbon Deniers

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar quietly told reporters on Friday that the administration’s six-month delay in approving new offshore drilling leases in federal waters will morph into a three-year total ban. We are forbidden from finding more oil and gas even though a December 2009 Rasmussen poll showed as many Americans want offshore drilling — roughly two-thirds — as oppose administration plans for health care.

After President George W. Bush lifted an executive ban on Outer Continental Shelf leasing, drilling was expected to begin by this July. “Secretary Salazar has finally confirmed what has long been feared — that the Obama administration has no intention of opening new areas for offshore drilling during his four years in office,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., ranking member on the House Natural Resources Committee.

A study by Science Applications International Corp. at the request of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, the Gas Technology Institute and others shows that as a result of this administration’s energy policy, the U.S. economy will suffer $2.3 trillion in lost opportunity costs over the next two decades, monies that would go a long way to reining in runaway deficits and creating economic growth.

Call them the Hydro-Carbon Deniers if you will.

The kumbaya liberal set where Fossil Fuels are the Spawn of Satan and we all need solar panels, hybrid cars, and wind turbines  in our backyard.

Problem is, like more Liberal pie-in-the-sky crap, it’s fecal matter rots in the light of truth. Then the liberals cover it up and just ignore it.

The administration asked for public comments on a plan to expand offshore drilling. When they came in 2-to-1 in favor, the Interior Department sat on the news.

Last April, Salazar said President Obama told him regarding the comment period “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government” and to make sure that DOI was “maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is they want us to do” about expanding domestic energy exploration and development.

Well, the public provided no small amount of guidance. The Interior Department announced in September it had received more than 530,000 comments. It did not say, however, how many supported or opposed expanded drilling. It’s now four months after the close of this extended comment period, so where are the results? What happened to the open and transparent process?

Instead, on Jan. 6 Salazar announced plans, as the energy news service Greenwire put it, that “will require more detailed environmental reviews, more public input and less use of a provision to streamline leasing.” In other words, we were being promised more stalling, not more drilling. (IBD)

So we have another case of “transparency” going right up someone’s ass and farting nothing.

They never had any intention of doing anything. They solicited public opinion, when they did get the opinion they wanted they buried it, ignored it, and continued on with what THEY wanted to do.

Sound Familiar??

Sound Like a pattern??

Sound like “consent of the governed” to you?

And do do you think they care?

NO.

And then there’s the problem that all this “green jobs” junk economics has been proven to be just that, JUNK.

Spain exposed the boondoggle of wind power in 2009, discrediting an idea touted by the Obama administration. In response, U.S. officials banded with trade lobbyists to hide the facts.

It was a cold day at the Energy Department when researchers at King Juan Carlos University in Spain released a study showing that every “green job” created by the wind industry killed off 4.27 other jobs elsewhere in the Spanish economy.

Research director Gabriel Calzada Alvarez didn’t object to wind power itself, but found that when a government artificially props up this industry with subsidies, higher electrical costs (31%), tax hikes (5%) and government debt follow. Fact is, these subsidies have the same “Cuisinart” effect on jobs as wind-generating propeller blades have on birds. Every green job costs $800,000 to create and 90% of them are temporary, he found.

Alvarez made no bones about the lessons of Spain for the Obama administration, which has big plans for “green jobs.” His report warned of “considerable employment consequences” from “self-inflicted economic wounds.” It forecast that the U.S. could lose 6.6 million jobs if it followed Spain, and it “should certainly expect its results to follow such a tendency.”

A few months later, Danish researchers at the Center for Politiske Studier came to the same conclusion about subsidized wind power from their own country’s experience.

“It is fair to assess that no wind energy to speak of would exist if it had to compete on market terms,” their report said.

Straightforward experience, facts and the logical conclusions about policy failure in Europe should be de rigueur in science, and the reports coming from nations with long experience in wind power ought to be taken seriously.

But they had no place in the Obama administration, which had declared a “green jobs” agenda with $2.3 billion in tax credits to create 17,000 “high-quality green jobs.”

“Building a robust clean energy sector is how we will create the jobs of the future,” said President Obama.

And Out Energy Secretary says we need more of it.

With an economy struggling to regain sound footing, Chu advocated a starvation diet devoid of additional fossil fuels that are to remain under the ground and seabed. Instead, he supports 53% more funding for wind research and a 22% jump for solar research. (eco-friendly)

So it’s another case of the liberal ignoring the facts and what the people want and need and just rush blindly into their own ideology, the consequences be damned!

You have to wonder why they solicit any opinions from anyone since they are going to do what they are going to do regardless.

Passive Aggressive  Dictatorship anyone?