title>Lady Liberty Defended: December 2009
Lady Liberty Defended
Thursday, December 31, 2009
  What the helll is going on with flight 253?
FBI "visits" flight 253 passenger...

Something stinks like week old fish.


Wednesday, December 30, 2009
  Our effective President...
The POTUS came out yesterday, for the second time, discussing the Christmas day terrorist attack. This time he was "angry". I have to say that this is a put on. When "stuff" happens to me, to my folks, I get angry at FIRST and then get a cold, rational fix on the problem and solution. Not the other way around. I don't deflect criticism. I point out EXACTLY what was wrong...

Now we've also found out that a Somali national was found with the same set-up in November, prevented from boarding an aircraft and arrested. We also just discovered that not only did the Nigerian's dad turn in his name to the CIA but that once the info got to HQ it was IGNORED.

Friends, this is a function of the command structure, the POTUS, that this happens. What the command emphasizes is what happens. Since this POTUS has been sworn in we've had several such incidents.

In other words we are less safe now than we were under George W. Bush. YET, this POTUS is going ahead with plans to repatriate MORE Yemenis to Yemen to rejoin the attacks against the U.S. I suppose all the liberals consider this as pure genius. Well, not all. Sheila Jackson Lee has called for profiling. At least one liberal sees that we have a problem and isn't just saying so to deflect criticism.


  Cap and Tax will Raise Food Prices...
Plan to turn farms into forest worries Obama official, that's the Secretary of Agriculture.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has ordered his staff to revise a computerized forecasting model that showed that climate legislation supported by President Obama would make planting trees more lucrative than producing food.

The latest Agriculture Department economic-impact study of the climate bill, which passed the House this summer, found that the legislation would profit farmers in the long term. But those profits would come mostly from higher crop prices as a result of the legislation's incentives to plant more forests and thus reduce the amount of land devoted to food-producing agriculture.

According to the economic model used by the department and the Environmental Protection Agency, the legislation would give landowners incentives to convert up to 59 million acres of farmland into forests over the next 40 years. The reason: Trees clean the air of heat-trapping gases better than farming does.

So, with food producing land taken out of production, permanently, food prices are bound to rise. You don't think that the economics will drive this?
Allison Specht, an economist at the American Farm Bureau Federation, said other studies have largely confirmed the results of the EPA and Agriculture Department analysis.

"That's one of the realities of cap-and-trade legislation. The biggest bang for your buck for carbon credits is planting trees," she said.
We don't EAT trees. Neither does anyone else in the world. First there was the ethanol fraud that has driven up corn prices while doing nothing to reduce gasoline consumption (my vehicle uses enough more fuel with 10% ethanol that it obliterates gas or dollar savings) which has driven up food prices for those dependent on corn. Now we'll take wheat and soybeans out of the market as well.


Tuesday, December 29, 2009
  The Christmas Terrorist
He was a Nigerian Muslim traveling (apparently) without a passport.  His father had reported him to the US Embassy as a terrorist.  He had paid cash for a one-way ticket.  He'd had a "helper" help get him on the flight without the passport.  He had no luggage.  He tried to light his "underwear".  Because of our sensitivity to Dutch concerns we had no Air Marshalls on board.  Our system still left him on the plane with only a Dutch film maker and some flight attendants to stop him.  Our "expert" Homeland Security Secretary says the system was a success before she says it was a failure.  She also says there's no indication of a larger plot even as Al Queda Arabian Peninsula (they apparently have regional commands) says that they trained him and he says more are on the way.  The government returns many to Yemen and they are his leaders but they are going to return 90 more just to get that nasty GITMO center closed.  100% of the Yemenis have returned to the "fight" with the US.  The response is to make the children keep their seats on the flights. 

I listened to the former El Al security chief once again decry our lack of real security and childish (and weak) behaviors while pointing out 30 years of El Al success.  Then I discover that a DEMOCRAT Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee supports the profiling

Meanwhile, the additional screening time makes flying to destinations within 6-10 hours of driving distance less and less attractive.  Let's face it, when you have to commit 5 hours to make a 1-hour flight the convenience of air travel disappears. 

So, who won?  I'd say the terrorists won, even if you are too stupid to call them terrorists, they won. 


Friday, December 25, 2009
  Merry Christmas to you and many thanks to God for Christ's gift

What a miracle that we should be blessed with the Savior, Jesus Christ. 


Thursday, December 24, 2009
  Senators Warner and Webb from the Commonwealth of Virginia, again...
It doesn't seem to matter what they said, supported, etc, they voted for the Senate "health care reform" bill. Different from the House bill, it does the same destruction to our country, our economy and our freedoms as the House bill. Further, they supported a bill that makes Virginians, the people they ostensibly represent, liable for at least $500-million in payoffs to Senators of other states. They can't even claim to have gotten anything for the people of Virginia.

Our current governor, Tim Kaine, who's also the DNC chair supports the bill as well. Isn't that special? He is a current sitting governor and doesn't give a rip that the Virginia taxpayer has been ripped off to give a boost to the careers of senators in other states. A traitor.

They think that we'll forget. I suppose many think that we've forgotten 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. We haven't. We won't forget this either. After we've paid taxes out the ass for 4 years and gotten nothing, we won't forget. After we get to the time all this goes into effect and see that in fact we will have death panels, rationed care and watch our parents and grandparents die because of this, we won't forget.

Senator Schumer says that EVERY state got special treatment in the health bill. In my view, NO STATE should have gotten anything special. The changes needed for true health care reform would apply to all states.

Labels: ,

Saturday, December 19, 2009
  Senators Warner and Webb from the Commonwealth of Virginia
I've e-mailed and called and prayed for these two men to listen to their constituents and vote down the so-called health care reform legislation. Their various e-mail responses are a nothing more than repetitive obfuscation and posturing.

There are a pair of TV ads which contrast the two Senators' votes on the amendment to NOT cut Medicare funding. Warner voted to cut (no) and Webb voted to preserve Medicare (yes). Webb is lauded for his vote, Warner lambasted. Yet both are going to vote for the ultimate bill in that they are reported as being willing to vote for cloture (to end debate). Since there are more than 50 socialists/idiots in the Senate who will vote for the bill once the debate ends a vote to end the debate is a vote for the bill. They know it. They think we, you and I and all their other constituents, are too stupid to understand this.

Interestingly, both men ran as people who would represent the Commonwealth and NOT their political parties. Clearly, both have lied. They have defrauded us of our votes with their lies. They have betrayed us.

The POTUS reportedly told one Congressman of his own party, "don't think we aren't keeping score." That works from the "bottom" up as well. Senators Warner and Webb, don't think we aren't keeping score.


Friday, December 18, 2009
  NEA opposes current "health care" legislation...
From the NEA e-mail newsletter:
Stop the Tax on Your Health Benefits!
Health care reform is critical, but the burden of its costs should not be shouldered by middle-class families, including millions of NEA members.
Contact Your Senators Today! Tell them to reject the tax on health benefits.
No Excise Tax on Health Insurance Plans
The United States Senate is currently debating the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) - a health insurance reform bill that would pay for needed reforms by imposing a 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance plans.

Although the tax would be paid by insurance companies and plan administrators (employers), not by employees, the ultimate result would be a dramatic reduction in benefits as the excise taxes payable would be so high that insurance companies and employers would do everything in their power to avoid paying it.

Tell the Senate to reject any excise tax on high-cost plans in health insurance reform legislation.


Thursday, December 17, 2009
  Race based parallel government for Hawaiians?
While the "race" to "health care reform" occupies all the airwaves, other bills like cap-and-tax and this, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act hide in the shadows. This one is trying to sneak through.
President Obama speaks proudly of his childhood in Hawaii, so we wonder what the state's voters think of his support for a bill that would redistribute its wealth based on race. That's what would happen under the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, which Congress is trying to sneak through in its final days this year.

Sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka, the bill would transfer a percentage of public-owned lands to a native Hawaiian government within the state of Hawaii. The legislation would collect some 400,000 ethnic Hawaiians scattered across the country into a newly affiliated tribe, eventually endowed with the powers of a sovereign state, including freedom from state taxes and regulations and separate police power.

Proponents say the plan would duplicate the legal scenario set up for Native Americans, but the Akaka bill carves out new territory. Unlike Indian tribes made up of tightly knit populations that have lived together continuously, participation in the new group would be available to nearly anyone able to trace their roots back to a Native Hawaiian ancestor, no matter where they now reside. U.S. Civil Rights Commission member Gail Heriot told Congress in June that, "If ethnic Hawaiians can be accorded tribal status, why not Chicanos in the Southwest? Or Cajuns in Louisiana?"

Under the Akaka bill, someone will have to divine exactly who qualifies as a Native Hawaiian. In the bill's current version, the determination would be handled by a nine member commission staffed by experts in native Hawaiian genealogy. That, says the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, amounts to racial discrimination and would "subdivide the American People into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege."

The Supreme Court has already ruled that elections based on a blood quota violate the Fifteenth Amendment's ban on restricting voting along racial lines. In its 2000 decision in Rice v. Cayetano, the Court held that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs could not hold elections limited to ethnic Hawaiians. "Ancestry can be a proxy for race," the court wrote, "and is that proxy here."
Why? Because it benefits the socialist/facist self-labeled "progressives" to divide us to conquer us. That's their only reason. While they have us thus preoccupied they will steal our wealth, our labor and our progeny for their own uses. Ask the "Reverends" Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson how this is done, they've been doing for years (along with bald-faced blackmail).


  Senate Health Care Reform Vote Approaching?
Maybe we'll see the Senate vote on their latest "health care reform" bill before Christmas. What we've seen so far boggles the mind. Closed door meetings with only the majority party in attendance, arm twisting by the POTUS to include bald-faced threats to close MILITARY bases in opposition state(s), lying votes by certain Senators attempting to cover-up their ultimate support and so forth and so on ad naseum.

Nausea is a key part of this bill. It makes one ill to watch the lying, posturing and hypocrisy of our elected "representatives", our employees, as they seek to destroy health care in this country at the same time as they move to tax EVERY citizen to unprecedented levels and to fine us for not buying a particular product. Further, they are coldly going to do what they would never do before, steal from their commitment to senior citizens by cutting funding to Medicare by $500-BILLION.

And then the POTUS, that's Barack Hussein "Barry Sotero" Obama, threatens that the country will go bankrupt if we don't pass this bill. Of course the rest of us will ALSO go bankrupt right along with the government if we do pass this bill but that goes unsaid.

What also goes unsaid is that 54% of the PEOPLE oppose this bill. That's a majority. When that percentage votes for a candidate it is termed a landslide. However, that information hasn't given the reps pause at all. Clearly, our interests aren't their concern.


Wednesday, December 16, 2009
  Global Climate Change Natural (Who'd a thunk it?)
1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that “fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class—predominantly—are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.

14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions

15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been between 1 and 2 degrees C per century - within natural rates

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland says the earth’s temperature has more to do with cloud cover and water vapor than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth’s current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

24) It is a falsehood that the earth’s poles are warming because that is natural variation and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder

25) The IPCC claims climate driven “impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance” but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

27) Research goes strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets.

28) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels are our best hope of raising crop yields to feed an ever-growing population

29) The biggest climate change ever experienced on earth took place around 700 million years ago

30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles

31) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels of some so-called “greenhouse gases” may be contributing to higher oxygen levels and global cooling, not warming

32) Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history – we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

34) It is a myth that CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas because greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume, and CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere

35) It is a myth that computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming because computer models can be made to “verify” anything

36) There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes

37) One statement deleted from a UN report in 1996 stated that “none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases”

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

39) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says “it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense” but there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally

40) Rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be shown not only to have a negligible effect on the Earth’s many ecosystems, but in some cases to be a positive help to many organisms

41) Researchers who compare and contrast climate change impact on civilizations found warm periods are beneficial to mankind and cold periods harmful

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

43) Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests

44) The historical increase in the air’s CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years

45) The increase of the air’s CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution

46) The IPCC alleges that “climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths” but the evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels has helped global populations

47) In May of 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that the Kyoto Protocol has no scientific grounding at all.

48) The “Climate-gate” scandal pointed to a expensive public campaign of disinformation and the denigration of scientists who opposed the belief that CO2 emissions were causing climate change

49) The head of Britain’s climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the Government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions.

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are “no direct subsidies” but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve Wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report.

51) Wind farms are not an efficient way to produce energy. The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) accepts a figure of 75 per cent back-up power is required.

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

53) Climate alarmists have raised the concern over acidification of the oceans but Tom Segalstad from Oslo University in Norway , and others, have noted that the composition of ocean water – including CO2, calcium, and water – can act as a buffering agent in the acidification of the oceans.

54) The UN’s IPCC computer models of human-caused global warming predict the emergence of a “hotspot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics. Former researcher in the Australian Department of Climate Change, David Evans, said there is no evidence of such a hotspot

55) The argument that climate change is a of result of global warming caused by human activity is the argument of flat Earthers.

56) The manner in which US President Barack Obama sidestepped Congress to order emission cuts shows how undemocratic and irrational the entire international decision-making process has become with regards to emission-target setting.

57) William Kininmonth, a former head of the National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organisation, wrote “the likely extent of global temperature rise from a doubling of CO2 is less than 1C. Such warming is well within the envelope of variation experienced during the past 10,000 years and insignificant in the context of glacial cycles during the past million years, when Earth has been predominantly very cold and covered by extensive ice sheets.”

58) Canada has shown the world targets derived from the existing Kyoto commitments were always unrealistic and did not work for the country.

59) In the lead up to the Copenhagen summit, David Davis MP said of previous climate summits, at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997 that many had promised greater cuts, but “neither happened”, but we are continuing along the same lines.

60) The UK ’s environmental policy has a long-term price tag of about £55 billion, before taking into account the impact on its economic growth.

61) The UN’s panel on climate change warned that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035. J. Graham Cogley a professor at Ontario Trent University, claims this inaccurate stating the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

62) Under existing Kyoto obligations the EU has attempted to claim success, while actually increasing emissions by 13 per cent, according to Lord Lawson. In addition the EU has pursued this scheme by purchasing “offsets” from countries such as China paying them billions of dollars to destroy atmospheric pollutants, such as CFC-23, which were manufactured purely in order to be destroyed.

63) It is claimed that the average global temperature was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times but sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years according to Penn State University researcher Michael Mann. There is no convincing empirical evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in average global temperature were unusual or unnatural.

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

65) The globe’s current approach to climate change in which major industrialised countries agree to nonsensical targets for their CO2 emissions by a given date, as it has been under the Kyoto system, is very expensive.

66) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures when looking at the history of the Earth’s temperature.

67) Global temperatures have not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years and have actually been falling for nine years. The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed a scientific team had expressed dismay at the fact global warming was contrary to their predictions and admitted their inability to explain it was “a travesty”.

68) The IPCC predicts that a warmer planet will lead to more extreme weather, including drought, flooding, storms, snow, and wildfires. But over the last century, during which the IPCC claims the world experienced more rapid warming than any time in the past two millennia, the world did not experience significantly greater trends in any of these extreme weather events.

69) In explaining the average temperature standstill we are currently experiencing, the Met Office Hadley Centre ran a series of computer climate predictions and found in many of the computer runs there were decade-long standstills but none for 15 years – so it expects global warming to resume swiftly.

70) Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote: “The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”

71) Despite the 1997 Kyoto Protocol’s status as the flagship of the fight against climate change it has been a failure.

72) The first phase of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), which ran from 2005 to 2007 was a failure. Huge over-allocation of permits to pollute led to a collapse in the price of carbon from €33 to just €0.20 per tonne meaning the system did not reduce emissions at all.

73) The EU trading scheme, to manage carbon emissions has completely failed and actually allows European businesses to duck out of making their emissions reductions at home by offsetting, which means paying for cuts to be made overseas instead.

74) To date “cap and trade” carbon markets have done almost nothing to reduce emissions.

75) In the United States , the cap-and-trade is an approach designed to control carbon emissions and will impose huge costs upon American citizens via a carbon tax on all goods and services produced in the United States. The average family of four can expect to pay an additional $1700, or £1,043, more each year. It is predicted that the United States will lose more than 2 million jobs as the result of cap-and-trade schemes.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

77) Why should politicians devote our scarce resources in a globally competitive world to a false and ill-defined problem, while ignoring the real problems the entire planet faces, such as: poverty, hunger, disease or terrorism.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

79) Since the cause of global warming is mostly natural, then there is in actual fact very little we can do about it. (We are still not able to control the sun).

80) A substantial number of the panel of 2,500 climate scientists on the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change, which created a statement on scientific unanimity on climate change and man-made global warming, were found to have serious concerns.

81) The UK’s Met Office has been forced this year to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by revelations about the data.

82) Politicians and activists push for renewable energy sources such as wind turbines under the rhetoric of climate change, but it is essentially about money – under the system of Renewable Obligations. Much of the money is paid for by consumers in electricity bills. It amounts to £1 billion a year.

83) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.

84) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase science for political purposes.

85) Ice-core data clearly show that temperatures change centuries before concentrations of atmospheric CO2 change. Thus, there appears to be little evidence for insisting that changes in concentrations of CO2 are the cause of past temperature and climate change.

86) There are no experimentally verified processes explaining how CO2 concentrations can fall in a few centuries without falling temperatures – in fact it is changing temperatures which cause changes in CO2 concentrations, which is consistent with experiments that show CO2 is the atmospheric gas most readily absorbed by water.

87) The Government’s Renewable Energy Strategy contains a massive increase in electricity generation by wind power costing around £4 billion a year over the next twenty years. The benefits will be only £4 to £5 billion overall (not per annum). So costs will outnumber benefits by a range of between eleven and seventeen times.

88) Whilst CO2 levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout history, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years.

89) It is a myth that CO2 is a pollutant, because nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere and human beings could not live in 100% nitrogen either: CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is and CO2 is essential to life.

90) Politicians and climate activists make claims to rising sea levels but certain members in the IPCC chose an area to measure in Hong Kong that is subsiding. They used the record reading of 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

92) If one factors in non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements show little, if any, global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

93) US President Barack Obama pledged to cut emissions by 2050 to equal those of 1910 when there were 92 million Americans. In 2050, there will be 420 million Americans, so Obama’s promise means that emissions per head will be approximately what they were in 1875. It simply will not happen.

94) The European Union has already agreed to cut emissions by 20 percent to 2020, compared with 1990 levels, and is willing to increase the target to 30 percent. However, these are unachievable and the EU has already massively failed with its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), as EU emissions actually rose by 0.8 percent from 2005 to 2006 and are known to be well above the Kyoto goal.

95) Australia has stated it wants to slash greenhouse emissions by up to 25 percent below 2000 levels by 2020, but the pledges were so unpopular that the country’s Senate has voted against the carbon trading Bill, and the Opposition’s Party leader has now been ousted by a climate change sceptic.

96) Canada plans to reduce emissions by 20 percent compared with 2006 levels by 2020, representing approximately a 3 percent cut from 1990 levels but it simultaneously defends its Alberta tar sands emissions and its record as one of the world’s highest per-capita emissions setters.

97) India plans to reduce the ratio of emissions to production by 20-25 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2020, but all Government officials insist that since India has to grow for its development and poverty alleviation, it has to emit, because the economy is driven by carbon.

98) The Leipzig Declaration in 1996, was signed by 110 scientists who said: “We – along with many of our fellow citizens – are apprehensive about the climate treaty conference scheduled for Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997” and “based on all the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.”

99) A US Oregon Petition Project stated “We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of CO2, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

100) A report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change concluded “We find no support for the IPCC’s claim that climate observations during the twentieth century are either unprecedented or provide evidence of an anthropogenic effect on climate.”
I've long thought that it was interesting how the scientists at the time they are promoting the concepts of "snowball earth" and earth being 60* hotter than it is now also support the idea that ALL global climate change is man-made when nearly every previous change was exclusive of industrial mankind.


Tuesday, December 15, 2009
  What is safe about the "Safe Schools Czar"?
Obama's Safe Schools Czar Tied to Lewd Readings for 7th Graders
President Obama's "Safe Schools Czar," already a target of social conservatives for his past drug abuse and what they say is his promotion of homosexuality in schools, is under fresh attack after it was revealed that the pro-gay group he formerly headed recommends books his critics say are pornographic.

The group under fire is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which Kevin Jennings, now the assistant deputy secretary for safe and drug-free schools in the Department of Education, founded and ran from 1990 to 2008.

GLSEN says it works to create a welcoming atmosphere for homosexual students in schools, and that effort includes recommending books for students of all ages.

But critics say many of the books, particularly some that are targeted for children between Grades 7 to 12, are inappropriately explicit. A full list is available at the blog Gateway Pundit, which has published dozens of controversial passages from the books.

One recommended book is titled "Queer 13: Lesbian and Gay Writers Recall Seventh Grade." On pages 43 through 45, writer Justin Chin tells of how as a 13-year-old, he went along with "near-rapes" by older men, but "really did enjoy those sexual encounters." Chin also recounts each sexual action he performed with an "ugly f*** of a man" he met on a bus.

In another book, "Passages of Pride," the author writes about a 15-year-old boy's relationship with a much older man.

"Near the end of summer, just before starting his sophomore year in high school, Dan picked up a weekly Twin Cities newspaper. Scanning the classifieds, he came upon an ad for a "Man-2-Man" massage. Home alone one day, he called the telephone number listed in the ad and set up an appointment to meet a man named Tom.... Even though Tom was older, almost twice Dan's age, Dan felt unthreatened by him. Dan admits Tom was a 'troll' in every sense of the word -- an older closeted gay man seeking sex with a man much younger. But Dan says he was not intimidated by the discrepancy in their ages. 'He kind of had me in a corner in that he knew I didn't have access to anything I wanted.' says Dan. 'But everything was consensual.'"

On Page 13 of a third book, "Reflections of a Rock Lobster," the author recounts his sexual encounters in first grade.

"By first grade I was sexually active with many friends. In fact, a small group of us regularly met in the grammar school lavatory to perform fellatio on one another. A typical week's schedule would be Aaron and Michael on Monday during lunch; Michael and Johnny on Tuesday after school; Fred and Timmy at noon Wednesday; Aaron and Timmy after school on Thursday. None of us ever got caught, but we never worried about it anyway."

"Reflections of a Rock Lobster" was recommended in 1995, the year Jennings became GLSEN's first executive director; "Passages of Pride" made the list in 1997 and "Queer 13" in 1999. Those are just three out of over 100 books that GLSEN has recommended for students in grades 7-12 since 1990, and all three remain on GLSEN's recommended reading list.

Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, says the content of the books is shocking, and it raises concerns about Jennings' judgment.

"The graphic sexual content of these books is so extreme that I think any average parent or citizen, regardless of how they feel about homosexuality, would be shocked at these books being recommended to young people," Sprigg said.

GLSEN Executive Director Eliza Byard defended her group's recommendations, telling FoxNews.com in a written statement:

"Some of the books that might be used with young adult audiences contain mature content, as is true of many memoirs and works of literature. Because of the presence of mature content in some of the works, GLSEN provides very clear guidelines throughout, recommending that adults review each book to make sure the book is suitable."

Those guidelines, listed on each book recommendation page, read: "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for quality and appropriateness of content. However, some titles for adolescent readers contain mature themes. We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability."

But critics say the guidelines themselves are damning, because they confirm that GLSEN staff have checked the books for appropriateness. And Jennings, they point out, was in charge at the time.

"It's like Jennings just doesn't realize he's working with kids here.... You need a totally different set of rules when you're working with kids," said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality.

LaBarbera said the books should be seen in light of other recent controversies surrounding Jennings.

In September it came out that, when he was a teacher in Massachusetts, Jennings did not report an incident in which a 16-year-old boy told him that he was having sexual relations with an older man he met in a bus station bathroom. After that, 53 Republican members of the House publicly called for Jennings to be dismissed.

But Alvin McEwen, who runs a blog called "Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters" and has commented extensively on the Jennings case, said GLSEN's book recommendations should be seen in a different light.

"GLSEN is saying that parents should decide. They are saying these books may be a good idea to read, but ultimately it is up to parents," he told FoxNews.com.

McEwen said that even though Jennings was the director of GLSEN when the books were recommended, there was no evidence that he personally selected the books.

"This is ridiculous guilt-by-association ... just another moral panic thought up by people who don't have any legitimate reason to oppose Jennings, so they've made a mountain out of molehill," he said.

Department of Education spokesman Justin Hamilton declined to comment about Jennings' role in recommending the books.

But critics say Jennings, as GLSEN's first full-time employee and first executive director, must be held responsible.

"He was at GLSEN from the beginning and was in charge during the time when these books were approved," said Warren Throckmorton, a professor at Grove City College.

The blogger at Gateway Pundit, Jim Hoft, wrote elsewhere concerning a "black book" that contains a gay bar guide and explicit sexual references that was handed out at a GLSEN event.

But McEwen said it's not clear that Jennings -- or GLSEN -- knew about the guide, which was distributed by Fenway Community Health officials at a GLSEN event, which they later said had been a mistake.

Hoft has also alleged that Jennings and GLSEN were involved in Planned Parenthood's purported distribution of "fisting kits" [fisting involves forcing one's hand into another person's rectum or vagina] at at least one GLSEN event. The kit was actually for making a "dental dam" -- designed to prevent STD transmission during oral sex.

McEwen said that the attacks on Jennings and GLSEN were motivated largely by homophobia.

"There are a lot of heterosexual books that are just as explicit. In the first page of 'The Color Purple' [a 1982 novel that has caused controversy when assigned in schools], the character talks about being raped in graphic terms... what's in [GLSEN's] books is no different from what's in The Color Purple."

But Sprigg disagrees that books like "The Color Purple" are comparable to those recommended by GLSEN.

"We are not talking about 'The Great Gatsby' or 'The Grapes of Wrath' here," he said. "A lot of people who have only read the news and opinion pieces on this story, without reading the actual excerpts, may think that we are talking about the kind of sexual content that might, in a film, earn a PG-13 or R rating. We are not.

"This is material that, if portrayed visually, would be a triple-X hard-core porn film, and quite possibly meet the legal definition of obscenity. In fact, I think the homosexual content is the only thing preventing the outcry from being even greater, because some people fear being labeled as 'anti-gay.' If the content were heterosexual in nature, there would be no one defending it at all."
My mother was a school librarian. My wife is a teacher. I was briefly a substitute teacher. I'm absolutely appalled that this man with these views is a "safe schools czar". What he is really doing is trying to cast a wide net for future conquests for himself and his queer community. He is aggressively seeking through this disingenuous use of pro-homosexual and pro-pedophilia "literature" propaganda to make perversion the norm. This is not what I want for this country, for society. Is this what you want?

Why is it that the POTUS has selected this man for this position? I can think of no good reason.

Labels: ,

  Fed Employees and Retirees Owe Billions in Taxes
Feds owe Uncle Sam $3B in unpaid taxes but I'm glad to say that our family has a 100% compliance rate. I noted the following:
Based on percentages, the Department of The Treasury, which includes the IRS, has the best compliance rate. Fewer than 1 percent of Treasury employees didn't pay their taxes in 2008.

The IRS is the only federal agency where employees can be fired for not paying their taxes. The non-compliance rate for IRS employees in 2008 was 0.76 percent -- down from 0.89 percent in 2007.
I don't suppose that the Secretary of the Treasury is included in this computation now that he's paid up.

I also noted this:

U.S. Senate: 231 employees owe $2,469,026;
U.S. House of Representatives: 447 employees owe $5,809,631;
Active Duty Military: 27,111 employees $102,474,672.
and to conclude
the total tax gap to be about $345 billion. The tax gap is the difference between what is owed each year and what is paid, and includes income, corporate, employment, estate and excise taxes.

If we went to a consumption/national sales tax (and ONLY the sales tax), this would likely solve itself without huge increases in federal employees.


Saturday, December 12, 2009
  UN is not for Free Speech
The UN doesn't even allow the usually fawning mainstream media to ask question regarding climategate.
McAleer, a veteran journalist and film maker, has recently made a documentary “Not Evil Just Wrong’ which takes a sceptical look at the science and politics behind Global Warming concerns.

He asked Professor Schneider about his opinions on Climategate – where leaked emails have revealed that a senior British professor deleted data and encouraged colleagues to do likewise if it contradicted their belief in Global Warming.

Professor Phil Jones, the head of Britain’s Climate Research Unit, has temporarily stood down pending an investigation into the scandal.

Professor Schneider, who is a senior member of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said he would not comment on emails that may have been incomplete or edited.

During some testy exchanges with McAleer, UN officials and Professor Schneider’s assistants twice tried to cut short McAleer’s question.

However as the press conference drew to a close Professor Schneider’s assistant called armed UN security guards to the room. They held McAleer and aggressively ordered cameraman Ian Foster to stop filming. The guard threatened to take away the camera and expel the film crew from the conference if they did not obey his instructions to stop filming Professor Schneider.

The guard demanded to look at the film crews press credentials and refused to allow them to film until Professor Schneider left the room.

Many years ago my godmother was a proponent of one world government. She really believed it would be some sort of idealistic arrangement with freedom and justice for all. What she never considered, nor could I convince her of this, was that the people in the United States (particularly at that time) had all come here or their ancestors had come here to get away from all the tyrannical SOBs that controlled the rest of the world. That is mostly still true, although our Congress is trying to make us just as bad as all the rest of the world. Now the UN is showing itself for what it is (well again, right Kofi?) and that is another expression of all those tyrannical SOBs and their view of government. Do as I say, do it now and quit asking questions.


Friday, December 11, 2009
  "Global Climate Change" Fraud Might be Catalyst for Revolution/Civil War
We know that the man-made global climate change is a fraud. Al Gore says so when he continues lying about the circumstances of the e-mail record. If he was confident that the real data supported his position he could throw these particular scientists under the bus but he can't. Like the crime boss whose molls have tape evidence of his crimes he has to provide for their defense.

Then the Canadians, in a move to guarantee their own destruction, have called for a world-wide one-child policy.
The "inconvenient truth" overhanging the UN's Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world.

A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days.

The world's other species, vegetation, resources, oceans, arable land, water supplies and atmosphere are being destroyed and pushed out of existence as a result of humanity's soaring reproduction rate.

Ironically, China, despite its dirty coal plants, is the world's leader in terms of fashioning policy to combat environmental degradation, thanks to its one-child-only edict.

The intelligence behind this is the following:

-If only one child per female was born as of now, the world's population would drop from its current 6.5 billion to 5.5 billion by 2050, according to a study done for scientific academy Vienna Institute of Demography.

-By 2075, there would be 3.43 billion humans on the planet. This would have immediate positive effects on the world's forests, other species, the oceans, atmospheric quality and living standards.

Read more: http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2314438#ixzz0ZJHL72Su
The Financial Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.
Well, they want a reduced population but will they reduce their families? I doubt it. Neither will most other cultural groups. As it is Europeans and those of European ancestral descent are already at or very close to zero population growth. If the current young adult generation knew that their grandchildren would be overcome by the non-complying Chinese (who have reversed their decades long limit to one child due to a lack of female children), Indians and Muslims, they likely wouldn't comply. Non-compliance IS revolution. Using physical force to enforce the prohibition is civil war. How violent these acts of resistance and enforcement become depends on the people involved.

As it is we kill to preserve our country now AND to enforce the law. Is it such a leap to think that we won't kill to defend our families generations from now or to enforce a population/breeding limit?


  Yes, it is right to make you pay for murdering the unborn...


Thursday, December 10, 2009
  Stimulus was really political payoff to supporters...
That Hillary's pollster Mark Penn's two firms got $6 million from stimulus for PR campaign is just one example.

I'm not going to go posting about these issues in the hundreds including the POTUS intent to spend left-over TARP money rather than "returning" it to the treasury. This is just one huge fraud. The government prosecuted Bernie Madoff, why not prosecute these thieves?


  Perverts in Power?
What the heck is a pervert doing as "safe schools czar"? High school kids were given "fisting kits"! don't feel bad if you don't know what "fisting" is. I'll tell you. It is apparently sticking ones fist up another's nether regions, anal or vaginal, as a sex act.
In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During another workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here. Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid $273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.
Now, are you going to try to convince me that activist homosexuals aren't dangerous? I think that at this moment you are losing that argument.


Wednesday, December 09, 2009
  Global Climate Change Fraud is ALL About POWER...
...and nothing about saving the planet. Why else would the Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak?
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.

The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".

A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;

• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";

• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;

• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.


  Health Care might just be a CRIMINAL FRAUD!
It seems that the author of the plan to use "health care reform" as a means to access our earnings was written by a convicted felon while serving time.
It turns out that the organizer in the video is John Gaudette, the Illinois director of HCAN. Gaudette also works for a left-wing group linked to ACORN called Citizen Action/Illinois. Rep. Schakowsky sits on the Policy Council of the group, which suggests that she may have known about or even coordinated the suppression of her own constituents’ views by HCAN.

The plot thickens.

Rep. Schakowsky’s husband, Robert Creamer, used to be the leader of Citizen Action/Illinois. He also founded its predecessor, Illinois Public Action, in which Ms. Schakowsky served as Program Director. He runs a political consulting firm, the Strategic Consulting Group, which lists ACORN and the SEIU among its clients and which made $541,000 working for disgraced former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.

Creamer resigned from Citizen Action/Illinois after the FBI began investigating him for bank fraud and tax evasion at Illinois Public Action. He was convicted in 2006 and sentenced to five months in federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, plus eleven months of house arrest.

While in prison—or “forced sabbatical,” he called it—Creamer wrote a lengthy political manual, Listen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (Seven Locks Press, 2007).

The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern—the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House—and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer’s tome “provides a blueprint for future victories.”

In the book, Creamer draws lessons from decades of experience on the radical left, including the teachings of arch-radical Saul Alinsky, and several episodes from Rep. Schakowsky’s political career. He also lays out a “Progressive Agenda for Structural Change,” which includes a ten-point plan for foisting universal health care on the American people in 2009:

* “We must create a national consensus that health care is a right, not a commodity; and that government must guarantee that right.”
* “We must create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis.”
* “Our messaging program over the next two years should focus heavily on reducing the credibility of the health insurance industry and focusing on the failure of private health insurance.”
* “We need to systematically forge relationships with large sectors of the business/employer community.”
* “We need to convince political leaders that they owe their elections, at least in part, to the groundswell of support of [sic] universal health care, and that they face political peril if they fail to deliver on universal health care in 2009.”
* “We need not agree in advance on the components of a plan, but we must foster a process that can ultimately yield consensus.”
* “Over the next two years, we must design and organize a massive national field program.”
* “We must focus especially on the mobilization of the labor movement and the faith community.”
* “We must systematically leverage the connections and resources of a massive array of institutions and organizations of all types.”
* “To be successful, we must put in place commitments for hundreds of millions of dollars to be used to finance paid communications and mobilization once the battle is joined.”

Creamer adds: “To win we must not just generate understanding, but emotion—fear, revulsion, anger, disgust.”
Does this look familiar to you? Thought so.


Tuesday, December 08, 2009
  Thoughts on Government
It seems to me that government should be as inobstrusive as possible while providing the necessary services as set forth in the Constitution of the United States.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
I don't see any mention of any number of things we've since permitted the government to do in contravention of the Constitution. However, I am really thinking of the concept of limited government. That is does it impede free will? Well, of course it will. Just as The Ten Commandments tell us that we won't murder, steal, or lie so to will we as a society levy sanctions on those who do those things despite that it is against their free will. These are things that are wrong. Not purchasing health insurance doesn't rise to that level though.

What, you don't believe we should have free will? Why not? Are you not a Christian? Ummmm, because the idea of free will is intrinsic to Christian belief. Lacking free will we couldn't have original sin and wouldn't need the Ten Commandments. God would just do the equivalent of snapping his fingers and we'd hop right on over to do whatever he wants done.


Monday, December 07, 2009
  Now this is rich...
Harry Reid Compares Opponents of Health Care Reform to Supporters of Slavery
"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over.' If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right," Reid said Monday. "When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough.'"

He continued: "When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn't quite right.

"When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today."
This pitiful attack from a man who apparently is actively seeking to enslave all Americans by controlling the most basic of life's decisions for them and to steal their money in order to do so is pathetically hypocritical.

See for yourself...


  What is wrong with today's military?
I ask the question because there must be something wrong when a commander sends people out to catch somebody who has a proven record of violence and when he is slightly injured decides to prosecute those people. After all, a violent person will often resist with violence and you sent people to raid, using violence, to capture him.

Three Navy SEALS are on trial for giving a terrorist, one Ahmed Hashim Abed who ambushed some Blackwater employees escorting supplies for a catering company a punch in the gut which resulted in a fat lip. Yeah, I don't buy that either but lets just go with it for a second. Imagine the scenario:
Terrorist ambushes Americans operating legally and not only murders them but burns their bodies and hangs those bodies from a bridge as a form of advertising. The U.S. military rightfully decides this man must be caught and dealt with. They send in some of their best operatives to find and capture this leader. They do so. In the process he is ever so slightly hurt.
I don't care how he was hurt, hell, I've given myself a fat lip by running into something in the dark of night. Are we to expect that soldiers in COMBAT make every effort to avoid harming thier enemies? Would it have worked any differently if the SEALS had simply shot him and drug his body back to base for identification. Do these rules apply to U.S. police officers in U.S. communities who apprehend violent criminals?

So tell me, what the hell is happening to the U.S. military? What's wrong with the leadership that permits such a travesty? Are they being directed by the Muslim in Chief? Please. Explain it to me. I don't get it.


  What is Obamunism and what makes an Obamunist?
An Obamunist believes:

- that $2 trillions added to the deficit in one year to buy nothing is better than adding $1.2 trillions over 8 years while fighting a global war and reacting to major natural disasters.

- that releasing Muslim extremists captured fighting US soldiers into the continental US is better than confining them off-shore until the war is over.

- that charging soldiers for care of their war wounds is better than paying a mere $540 million for their care.

- that hiring a tax cheat as Secretary of Treasury is better than hiring any dumbass off the street.

- that taking money from the rich is better than letting the poor and the rich keep their money to spend and grow all around the country.

- as a corollary to the above, an Obamunist believes that tax cheats who are one of us are fine upstanding people needed in government, while the other side are to be run out on a rail for using a "bad" word.

- that the Secretary of Homeland Defense should never mention terrorism.

- that it isn't unusual for the Secretary of State to not have a Russian linguist on staff.

- that the first lady saying America is a "mean" country is pro-American.

- that global climate change is a new thing and never happened before the industrial revolution AND that man can keep things exactly the same year-to-year.

- that Congress passing laws mandating banks make bad loans had no effect on the current economic crisis.

- that executives aren't deserving of bonuses but Congress is deserving of an automatic pay raise.

- it is wrong for private businesspeople to fly in private planes but A-OK for the Speaker of the House to demand the US Air Force fly her home.


Sunday, December 06, 2009
  Single-handedly Crushing Dreams
I Single-Handedly Crushed the Dreams of the Next Generation by Jeff Clark is a must read. It starts thusly:
Last Wednesday was "Career Day" at the local high school. I was invited to speak, just as I have for the past six years, on the opportunities in the world of finance.

The room was filled with starry-eyed students – their heads swimming with dreams of million-dollar opportunities working for Goldman Sachs, trading crude oil futures, or taking over Ken Lewis' spot heading up Bank of America.

It took me less than 30 seconds to crush those dreams.

"Every year, I'm asked about how best to prepare for a career in finance," I started my speech. "And for the past six years, I've suggested taking courses in statistics, human psychology, behavioral finance, and demographics. Today, however, I'm going to give you the same advice I've given my children, the same advice I've given my friends, the same advice for which people pay me thousands of dollars every year..."

I paused just long enough to notice the students were on the edge of their seats. The faculty, standing in the back of the room, stopped whispering to each other. The parents stopped texting on their Blackberries and sipping their lattes, anticipating the wisdom I was about to provide.

"If you want to be successful in life," I said, "learn to grow a frickin tomato."

I then explained to my audience how the government is devaluing the dollar, how the politicians are catering to the lowest common denominator of the population, how the "let's get everything I can for myself right now" society is leading to the destruction of this once-great country, and how if you want to take care of yourself and your family in the future... you need to learn to grow a tomato.

"Take care of yourself," I said...

Take responsibility for the welfare of your family and of your close friends. Don't count on the government. The Constitution of the United States of America does not guarantee health care. It doesn't guarantee home ownership. And it doesn't guarantee cash for clunkers.

You are not entitled to a prosperous life. You are not guaranteed to live better than your parents. In fact, yours is the first generation ever in the history of this great republic that will not do so. You are, however, entitled to opportunity. But that opportunity diminishes when the government takes from the hardest working and most industrious citizens and gives to the folks who sleep in until 10:00 in the morning.

Your road to riches in life isn't going to be traveling to Wall Street and constructing some new way to raise money for an unprofitable business. It isn't going to be creating a new type of adjustable-rate mortgage. And it isn't going to be negotiating stock option pricing for you and your cronies.

The path to riches for the next generation is going to be providing for your family. Forget about building a better mousetrap. The mice are more prosperous now than ever.

Instead, grow a better tomato. Take responsibility for yourself and your family. Take a step backward to ensure your kids can take two steps forward.

The high school students erupted in applause. I received the only standing ovation of the day.


Saturday, December 05, 2009
  Culture of Corruption - Maxine Waters

WASHINGTON -- When Rep. Barney Frank was looking to aid a Boston-based lender last fall, the Massachusetts Democrat urged Maxine Waters, a colleague on the House Financial Services Committee, to "stay out of it," he says.

The reason: Ms. Waters, a longtime congresswoman from California, had close ties to the minority-owned institution, OneUnited Bank.

Ms. Waters and her husband have both held financial stakes in the bank. Until recently, her husband was a director. At the same time, Ms. Waters has publicly boosted OneUnited's executives and criticized its government regulators during congressional hearings. Last fall, she helped secure the bank a meeting with Treasury officials.

Rep. Maxine Waters, center, with Earvin "Magic" Johnson, left, and Ms. Waters's husband, Sidney Williams, at the 2009 BET Honors Reception in Washington, D.C.

Her involvement isn't new. Ms. Waters has detailed her financial ties in a series of federal disclosure forms and has been vocal in public in support of the bank. Those ties, however, have received little public attention. Nor is it well known how the influential lawmaker has over the years acted to support the bank and its executives.

Such potential conflicts of interest are more serious as the banking system's crisis has led the government to take an increasingly active role in overseeing financial institutions, including OneUnited. The financial-services committee on which Ms. Waters sits oversees banking issues, and the lawmaker is a potential future chairman.

Representatives of the bank and Ms. Waters didn't return calls seeking comment. Ms. Waters's congressional staff didn't respond to written questions about her and her husband's relationship with the bank.

Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group, says Ms. Waters should have recused herself from any matters involving the bank. If her support helped OneUnited, "it was a disservice to her constituents," Ms. Krumholz says.

Ms. Waters, who represents inner-city Los Angeles, hasn't made a secret of her family's financial interest in OneUnited. Referring to her family's investment, she said in 2007 during a congressional hearing that for African-Americans, "the test of your commitment to economic expansion and development and support for business is whether or not you put your money where your mouth is."

OneUnited's executives have donated $12,500 to Ms. Waters's election campaigns.

Through a series of acquisitions, OneUnited grew to become what it says is the largest African-American-owned bank in the country. It once counted the late Motown Records boss Jheryl Busby as a vice chairman.

Ms. Waters and her husband, Sidney Williams, were investors in two African-American owned California banks that merged with other lenders in 2002 to form OneUnited. Congressional financial-disclosure forms show Ms. Waters acquired OneUnited stock worth between $250,000 and $500,000 in March 2004, as did Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams joined the board of OneUnited that year.

Each sold shares in September 2004 -- including Ms. Waters's entire stake -- but Mr. Williams continued to hold varying amount of the company's stock. In the lawmaker's most recent financial-disclosure form, dated May 2008 and covering the prior year, Ms. Waters reported that her husband held between $250,000 and $500,000 worth of the bank's stock.

Mr. Williams also received interest payments from a separate holding at the bank, also worth between $250,000 and $500,000. The 2008 form doesn't specify what that is. Mr. Williams stepped down from the bank's board last spring. It couldn't be learned whether he still owns stock in the bank. Mr. Williams didn't return calls seeking comment.

At a hearing on minority lending in 2007, Ms. Waters criticized regulators for not doing enough to help minority banks stave off mergers with non-minority institutions. The lawmaker said she had contacted the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2002 over such concerns and "I was told that there was nothing that could be done."

In her 2007 remarks, Ms. Waters alluded to two banks, Independence Bank of Washington, D.C., and "another bank that was about to be acquired by a major white bank out of Illinois."

Ms. Waters didn't mention that OneUnited had been an unsuccessful suitor of Independence, which had been taken over several years earlier. The second bank, which she didn't name, appears to have been Family Savings Bank of Los Angeles. In 2002, that bank backed out of a merger agreement with FBOP Bank of Oak Brook, Ill., and shortly afterward was acquired by OneUnited.

News reports at the time credited the intervention of Ms. Waters and others for Family Savings's change of heart.

At the hearing, Ms. Waters praised OneUnited's senior counsel, Robert P. Cooper, as "typical of the young, brilliant minds that have been amassed at OneUnited Bank."

OneUnited's minority-lending record is mixed. The bank received "outstanding" Community Reinvestment Act ratings for lending in Los Angeles. It has weak ratings in Massachusetts and failed to meet minimum standards in Florida.

In January, Ms. Waters acknowledged she made a call to the Treasury on OneUnited's behalf. The bank's capital, which was heavily invested in shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was all but wiped out with the federal takeover of the two mortgage giants, and the bank was seeking help from regulators.

OneUnited eventually secured bailout funds under the government's $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, which was set up later that month.

In a brief interview in January, Ms. Waters said she was unaware the bank received $12 million of TARP money, which arrived in December. OneUnited was "just a small" bank, she said.

A provision designed to aid OneUnited was written into the federal bailout legislation by Mr. Frank, who is chairman of the financial-services panel. Mr. Frank has said he inserted the provision to help the only African-American owned bank in his home state. He said in an interview that Ms. Waters's interest "had zero impact on the outcome because I would have done it anyway."

In October, regulators demanded that OneUnited raise fresh capital and name an independent board. The bank was ordered to stop paying for a Porsche used by one of its executives and its chairman's $6.4 million beachfront home in Pacific Palisades, Calif., a luxury enclave between Malibu and Santa Monica.


  Ted Kennedy Health Bill? Just say no...
Senator Ted Kennedy had the best health care money could buy. The best doctors. He had a will to live. These seem to have kept him on this earth for some time after he was expected to depart. But...

Let me explain. I have a living will. My wife has a living will. My mother has a living will and a do not resuscitate (DNR) order. However, in no case was a government bureaucrat involved in our counseling, directing that we have counseling nor was COST a consideration for us.

H.R. 3200 would open the doors to rationing of health care. It would insert the government into your decision regarding treatment, even extraordinary treatment. It taxes you.


  I just don't understand...
Mr. Obama told us to vote for hope and change but now admits (yeah, like the reasonable among us didn't already know) that the economy won't immediately recover after he takes over. That's pretty good. He's compared the current economic recession to the Great Depression, he's apparently going to do a newer New Deal and he's fully supportive of printing trillions (that's $4,000,000,000,000-$7,000,000,000,000) of dollars to give to certain (i.e. the chosen few) of sufficiently obsequious businesses to "bail them out".
Twice during the opening moments of his most extensive interview since winning the presidency on Nov. 4, the president-elect said the economic situation "is going to get worse before it gets better," an unspoken plea with voters to have patience with the incoming administration.

Please, somebody, explain to me how hyper-inflation, devaluation of the dollar by a 200% or more, and choosing which businesses succeed or fail will help the economy?

John Stossell put it this way,
If an athlete injures himself and suffers great pain, we'd recognize the shortsightedness of giving him painkillers to keep him going. The pain might be masked, but at the risk of greater injury later.
So, what am I missing?


  What to write about...
Where to begin? Two Virginians who managed to saunter into a State Dinner? The Secret Service failure to protect the POTUS and a visiting dignitary? Desiree Rogers' inability to manage a State Dinner? Max Baucus' inability to see that nominating his girl friend for a government position (which position is unimportant) is wrong? The POTUS telling our enemies when we'll be leaving Afghanistan? The POTUS reps, Gates and Clinton saying the deadline wasn't one? Gibbs saying the deadline was chiseled in stone? Votes on amendments to the "health care" (personal freedom denial) bill? The climate summit in Copenhagen continuing when man-caused global climate change is now a proven fraud? Al Gore being asked about everything EXCEPT the global climate change fraud (aka climategate)? Gold hitting $1200+?

A lot there, none of it good because all of it really comes back to the same thing. People who do what they want, and lie about it, without regard to the consequences for others.


Thursday, December 03, 2009
  Tiger Woods
Must be somebody who cares. Not me. Let's see, which is more important, Tiger Woods or Afghanistan? Tiger Woods or "health care"? Tiger Woods or the global climate change fraud?

Tiger Woods is an athlete who's job performance is really entertainment. He's a modern circus performer who makes his money from our desire to be distracted from life. His accomplishments in his field are many but really fleeting. I doubt that golf has done anything for the survival of the species or to defend liberty around the world. But, maybe just maybe there is a "but".

Maybe somebody will look at this bonehead who betrayed the woman he supposedly loved and to whom he promised his all and learn a lesson that will prevent them from doing the same thing. Maybe somebody will see Tiger Woods and know that you can have it all, money, a good wife, beautiful children, and still throw it all away or at least risk it all for the 1 second pleasure of an orgasm and know just how absolutely stupid that is. Maybe.

And maybe we can get the "journalists" to get back to reporting congressional corruption, the fraud of global climate change, the fraud of the so-called health care reform bills, the inanity of the President's war planning and so forth. Yeah, right...


Wednesday, December 02, 2009
The POTUS has taken over 90 days (thats 3 months) to decide on a "strategy" (its really a tactic) to deal with Afghanistan (it isn't to win or to get out or to satisfy his political friends or enemies as it does nothing to satisfy any of those goals). He made a speech on the subject last night. In the same breath he said we'll send 30K more military people (Marines and soldiers) into the country but we'll pull out in 18 months. He plans to accelerate training of the Afghans so that they can take over before we leave.

Oh, there is just so much wrong with this. First and most important is that 18 months, maybe 18 years, is too short a time to get success in retraining either Afghani police, military, or government officials to do their jobs in a way that Americans find tolerable. In fact with actual deployments not being effective until sometime next summer, 12 months is the actual amount of time on the ground for these additional personnel. That the whole "surge" is predicated on a pre-determined withdrawal date is the real killer for this plan. In the end such a program will be viewed as failure.

He is apparently doing nothing to turn the Afghans against the Arabs who seem to dominate the Taliban. Perhaps this is part of his diversity initiative. It is necessary that the Afghans be united against an enemy other than the U.S. They aren't. Self interest tells them that if they want to survive, if they want their family to survive, if they want their clan to survive, if they want their tribe to survive, they need to separate themselves from the national government because in 18-20 months there will be no national government. You see that's how it is there. That's the rank of priorities there. Combined with pre-determined withdrawal date this tells the individuals who would enlist or who serve in the government to sit back to wait and see what happens. It also tells the Taliban that they only have to build up their forces over the next 18 months to win.

He did set some conditions on the Afghan government, benchmarks, which seem incompatible with the pre-determined withdrawal date.

Much of the speech was given to covering his ass. He spent a lot of time trying to justify his choices. In that he appears weak.

It sure seems to me that the strategy here is all about re-election in 2012 and really has nothing to do with beating the terrorists. The POTUS obviously doesn't think that we're really at war (nor does he care) with radical Muslims who have tentacles everywhere and have co-opted several governments to give them safe havens for training and planning.

I predict that this is what we'll see aside from the political wrangling in this country.
- summer of 2010, military strength upped to 30K or so
- summer of 2011, drawdown begins
- October 2012, withdrawal completed
- November 2012 to January 2013, Afghan government falls

Labels: ,

Tuesday, December 01, 2009
  "Global Climate Change" Fraud Extends Beyond Environmental Concerns
"Global Climate Change" (the title of the week) as caused by humans is a fraud. The scientists have been cooking the books, lying about their data, lying about their conclusions, lying about their "colleagues" who disagree with them, and being generally unprofessional and dishonorable. This may be one of the biggest problems of the GCC fraud.

Science is supposed to be objective, logical, and responsible, or so I was taught. Only when it is those things can it be depended upon to work for the common good. However it is like all things of man, dependent on the egos and personality faults/strengths of those engaged in it. Still, there are those who have built a religion around science.

Like earlier religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, Science (as a religion) seeks to explain the unexplainable AND provide a moral code of conduct. Apparently, that code of conduct is much more dependent on situational circumstance than in earlier "god" based religions. Like many other religions, the Science religionists seek to disparage and demean those other than their co-religionists. You might have noticed the rampant anti-Christian activity. There is no attempt to reconcile science (with the little "s") and Christian thought. As demonstrated by the behavior at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit these Scientists (big "S") are more than or as willing as Islamic jihadists to lie or compromise their "moral code" in order to attain their political goals.

Clearly, Scientists are unable or unwilling to admit the fraud. Even the White House (aka the President of the United States and his minions) are continuing to parrot the Scientists. However, like the priests of old religions who often/sometimes feel they are entitled to special privileges, the elitists involved in the green movement do the same.

But what is really at risk here is our freedom. The Scientists including the Global Climate Change cult are trying to force the cap-and-trade (cap-and-tax) legislation despite the fact that it will not only tax every American but raise the cost of living to unprecedented levels. Much is made of the POTUS' need to find balance at Copenhagen but what he really needs is to avoid being twice the apostate by pushing a cap-and-tax treaty and spinning it such that the U.S. public will buy it. Further, the Scientists seek to limit your behavior based not on actual intrusion on the lives of others but on perceived threats to your own safety/health. They no longer think you are wise enough to make suitable decisions about your own well-being.

Climategate has finally brought to light the immoral fraud of Scientists and how much "scientific" data it might encompass. That is the why the global climate change fraud extends beyond environmental concerns.

Labels: ,

For us, the American ideal is personified in the concept of self-reliance, work ethic, honesty/forthrightness, decency, personal property rights, family, religion, an ability to defend oneself from criminals and crooked politicians, and personal responsibility.

Whoop-ti-do, the forum for the rest of us...

May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / April 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 / July 2008 / August 2008 / September 2008 / October 2008 / November 2008 / December 2008 / January 2009 / February 2009 / March 2009 / April 2009 / May 2009 / June 2009 / July 2009 / August 2009 / September 2009 / October 2009 / November 2009 / December 2009 / January 2010 / February 2010 / March 2010 /

Email The Editor

Locations of visitors to this page

Site Meter

View My Stats
Powered by Blogger

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]