Big stick in the eye of Global Warming nazis

British Researcher: No Global Warming in 18 Years

Tuesday, 09 Sep 2014 | Newsmax

By Drew MacKenzie

A British aristocrat has taken a swipe at activists and politicians who fan the fears of climate change as he claimed that recent research shows there’s been no global warming for almost 18 years.

Lord Christopher Monckton announced on ClimateDepot.com that his scientific satellite data show the temperatures have remained fairly stable between October 1966 and August 2014, despite a rise in greenhouse gas emissions.

Calling it the “Great Pause,” Monckton wrote, “It is becoming harder and harder to maintain that we face a ‘climate crisis’ caused by our past and present sins of emission,” said Monckton.

“Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on Remote Sensing Systems’ satellite-based monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature dataset, there has been no global warming — none at all — for at least 215 months.”

“This is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for half the satellite temperature record. Yet the Great Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.”

Monckton, the third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley and a policy adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, says the rate of warming is half of what climate scientists initially predicted a quarter-century ago, according to The Daily Caller.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had projected in 1990 that global temperatures would rise at a rate of 2.8 degrees Celsius per century. But the temperature increase since the IPCC’s prediction has only been at a rate of 1.4 degrees Celsius per century, the Caller reports. […/]

Read More from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Global-warming-climate-change-Christopher-Monckton/2014/09/09/id/593471/#ixzz3D4BfnVEj

That will really disturb the climatologists. But even with the facts, we know what they do. If they can’t get it their way they make it up. The facts speak for themselves. An attack campaign is probably on the way as soon as they can get one.

So it seems the cause and effect argument is out the window. But even more interesting some will just deny the pause exists. Do we call them deniers? From the Daily Caller:

While some climate scientists deny the “pause” in global warming even exists, others have looked to places ocean and wind patterns for answers as to why there has been no warming for nearly two decades.

There are now literally dozens of potential explanations for the global warming “pause,” ranging from increasing volcanic activity to Chinese coal-fired power plant emissions.

Can you believe that? Now they want to blame the coal-fired plants and volcanoes for the pause. I see where their arguments went.

“The Great Pause is a growing embarrassment to those who had told us with ‘substantial confidence’ that the science was settled and the debate over,” Monckton wrote in his climate analysis. “Nature had other ideas.”

“Though more than two dozen more or less implausible excuses for the Pause are appearing in nervous reviewed journals, the possibility that the Pause is occurring because the computer models are simply wrong about the sensitivity of temperature to manmade greenhouse gases can no longer be dismissed,” Monckton added.

H/T to DavetheRave

Obama’s War of Women

This means Warren: Obama backs challenger to Hillary

By Edward Klein July 6, 2014 | NY Post

President Obama has quietly promised Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren complete support if she runs for president — a stinging rebuke to his nemesis Hillary Clinton, sources tell me.

Publicly, Obama has remained noncommittal on the 2016 race, but privately he worries that Clinton would undo and undermine many of his policies. There’s also a personal animosity, especially with Bill Clinton, that dates from their tough race six years ago.

A former Harvard law professor and administration aide, Warren would energize the left wing of the Democrat Party just as Obama did against Clinton in 2008.

Thanks to her outspoken stand against big banks and the top 1 percent, Warren is the darling of progressives. She won her Senate seat thanks to millions of dollars in donations from outside Massachusetts, including from rich environmentalists and Hollywood celebrities. …/

More http://nypost.com/2014/07/06/this-means-warren-obama-backs-challenger-to-hillary/

The war is on it seems. What else can be said? If it means it takes another slap at Bill Clinton while dissing Hillary, that’s just another reason to support her. Is Valerie Jarrett now in charge of the Democrat Party? She seems to be the self-appointed Czar.

I heard MSNBC applaud Warren campaigning for Tennant in West Virginia. They took issue that W Va, who once supported Dukakis, now favors Republicans. Yes, they believe she is the one to rectify that situation. The people that declared war on energy want to win back W. Virginia. Can even Democrats follow these “bob and weave” politics?

Their reasons, according to Wa Po:

1. Tennant needs every Democratic base voter to turn out
2. Tennant needs the money. (only had 1.5 mil on hand)
3. Warren’s economic populist message is a nice fit for the state. Yes, Warren is more liberal than the average West Virginian. And, her views on coal are not in line with most residents in the state. But, on economic inequality — the issue with which she is most closely associated — Warren is likely standing right with most West Virginians. (West Virginia was the third poorest state in 2013.) “Our job is to fight for the families of America,” Warren said at the Tennant event. “Stitch up the tax loopholes so that millionaires and billionaires pay at the same tax rate as the people in this room.” That’s a message that can work in West Virginia.
4. The event was in the Panhandle. West Virginia has moved heavily toward Republicans over the past decade or so. But, the entire state is not solidly Republican. The eastern Panhandle, which includes the town of Shepherdstown where the event was held, probably has more in common with Washington, D.C. than Charleston, West Virginia.

“None of the above means Tennant is going to win. She’s a long shot. And long shots need to take risks. This one makes political sense,” says Chris Cillizza.

 

There you have it, the rosy optimism for why Warren was a great fit for Virginia voters. Just the one to speak to them. Well, that percentage on the extreme Eastern border that leans Liberal anyway. What’s not to like? And she’s their presidential poster-child?

Don’t laugh, they are serious on both. Forget that Dems want to nuke the coal and energy industries and their extreme anti-gun, anti-second amendment, abortion ideology that comes with them. Insulting. One can only hope it’s not “change they believe in”.

RightRing | Bullright

It’s back….the Vortex returns

Polar vortex expected to make a summer return

Jul 11th 2014

Those who endured the winter’s Polar Vortex may be in for a repeat performance of sorts.

Meteorologists say that those in the North and Northeast should brace themselves for the unseasonably cold summer temps predicted to return starting around July 14th.

Those living in the Great Lakes region will feel it first and then the chill will begin move east.

Weather experts aren’t suggesting that down parkas and snow boots be dug out of storage, but locating some long pants and sweatshirts is highly advised.

Midwesterners will see highs of 50 to 60 degree. Morning lows could drop as far as 40.

By late in the week those on the East Coast can expect a 10-degree drop from what they’re used to this time of year.

Temperatures under 50 aren’t predicted except in the mountains, but it’s still too early to say what they’ll be for sure.

More video

So another issue for global warming enthusiasts to explain.

Let me take a stab at it: “Warm temperature melting all the polar ice sheets transfers to cold jet stream temperatures as far south as Bermuda.” Sounds like an Al Gore diagnosis.

Wow, and they just got done explaining last winter!

Goreacle prophesying abroad

Al Gore: climate change is the ‘biggest crisis our civilization faces’

7 July 2014 | BBC

Climate change is “the biggest crisis our civilisation faces”, says former US Vice President Al Gore.

Mr Gore sat down with the BBC’s Jon Donnison in Australia, where his organisation, The Climate Reality Project, was holding training sessions to educate future leaders in the fight against climate change.

Australia’s conservative Prime Minister Tony Abbott is viewed by many as a climate change skeptic and once described the science behind human-induced global warming as “absolute crap”.

“We’re way past time where it’s responsible for any national leader to reject the science behind the climate crisis,” Mr Gore said.

Eight years after he released the film An Inconvenient Truth, Mr Gore said we have come a long way in awareness of global warming, but there is still much more to be done to find solutions.

 

Unfortunately, Al Gored never heard of the Caliphate. Though Climate Change Caliphate does have a certain ring to it. Call it the “CCC” for short.

Gore is over the edge but how has he not hit bottom yet? That makes two things that can be described as “absolute crap”.

CBS goes off script… what’s in a legacy?

(Photo credit: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images)

Who is the worst president since WWII?

BySteve Chaggaris | CBS News –July 2, 2014

As if President Obama doesn’t have enough to worry about running the country day-to-day, now his legacy can be added to his laundry list of concerns.

Mr. Obama edges out former President George W. Bush as the worst president since World War II, American voters say, according to a new Quinnipiac Poll released Wednesday.

Thirty-three percent chose Mr. Obama as the worst among the 12 presidents since Harry Truman, with 28 percent choosing George W. Bush and Richard Nixon tallying 13 percent. In 2006, Mr. Bush led the pack with 34 percent over Richard Nixon at 17 percent and Bill Clinton at 16 percent, much higher than the scant 3 percent who currently think Clinton is the worst.

But his legacy was always a top concern. I don’t see how he can add what was his driving force, even if tarnished by all visible recognition.

When asked who the best president is since World War II, 35 percent of American voters chose Ronald Reagan, 18 percent picked Clinton and 15 percent selected John F. Kennedy. Only 8 percent said Mr. Obama was the best since World War II and George W. Bush barely registered on the “best” list with 1 percent.

To add insult to injury for Mr. Obama, more voters say the country would be better off if 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney won the election. Forty-five percent feel America would be better off with a President Romney; 38 percent said the country would be worse off. – CBS

What’s amazing is how he helps make Clinton look good. The ridiculed Nixon is way down on the list. But he did resign. There’s a hot tip for Obama’s legacy concerns. If he doesn’t care about the resurrecting Russian Union, Iran’s nuclear breakout, or the new caliphate formed in the Middle East, then how significant is his legacy, relatively speaking? However, I’m sure his golf game has improved, since he didn’t have one before.

It seems to me that some of the stragglers who still think Obama is a good president also think we’d be worse off with Mitt Romney, with nothing to base that on. Yet they cannot seem to find their hand in front of their face.

Political divide…. us and them

And the survey says that the political divide has increased over the years, to some record highs. According to a Pew research poll: “Political polarization in America has broken out of the voting booth“.

Political Polarization in the American Public

Republicans and Democrats are more divided along ideological lines – and partisan acrimony is deeper and more extensive – than at any point in recent history. And these trends manifest themselves in myriad ways, both in politics and in everyday life.

“How Increasing Ideological Uniformity and Partisan Antipathy Affect Politics, Compromise and Everyday Life

Republicans and Democrats are more divided along ideological lines – and partisan antipathy is deeper and more extensive – than at any point in the last two decades. These trends manifest themselves in myriad ways, both in politics and in everyday life. And a new survey of 10,000 adults nationwide finds that these divisions are greatest among those who are the most engaged and active in the political process.”

Democrats and Republicans more ideologically divided than in the past

Well, the AP article points out some amusing extensions of this divide, like relationships, where people live based on political leanings, and who they associate with.

However, what grabs me outside the parameters of the article is what has happened in government. Obama and Democrats have politicized the environment, the war on energy, the EPA regulations, the IRS, the border, immigration, the Keystone Pipeline, national resources, water, military, the National Park Service, government employees, schools and home schooling, White House tours, the Dep of Justice, federal lands, the budget, terrorism, healthcare, the economy, incomes, the climate and weather, national disasters, the war, national security, people’s data and personal information, etc.

Now then, considering all that, is there any wonder why it seems people are politically divided? Is it any wonder they are more ideologically “consistent”, and more politically aware in general, than in the distant past? But leave it to them, and government I presume, to worry about us being too partisan or political divided.

Well, all that politicization makes makes our political choices pale by comparison. And it was done under a man who said he would be a uniter not a divider. Isn’t it working well? Under a president who practices the most divisive politics possible. Yet the alarmists point out a political divide? Pardon my Casablanca face, I’m shocked!

A man who practices divide and conquer tactics and class war as his trademark, and they are concerned about our divided politics? But it’s not like we need a poll to know that.

RightRing | Bullright

Activists Are US: Liberals in rabid political mode

(at a new high even for them)

There are a plethora of areas which tie into the rabid nature of today’s “progressives”.

The latest on Obama’s ‘phoney scandal’ list is the VA and poor treatment of vets, which is an example. There were calls for Shinseki to step down, rejected out of hand.

There is a deeper issue here and its personal with Libs. Do you think the Libs really care about the VA or veterans? They are proving which is more important by defending Shinseki over the widespread mismanagement in the VA.

But first Shinseki’s history. All you hear is he is a four star general served in the military. If you remember Iraq he was a steady voice in the Liberals’ criticism of the war. He was wildly cited by Liberals in their anti-war campaign. Because he disagreed with Rumsfeld on the number of troops in an surge, he was hailed for his disagreement.

Now at the VA, Democrats’ knee-jerk reaction is to defend him, and since he was their VA pick. No doubt past-disagreement politics factor into the administration’s defense of Shinseki. Had he not been useful to them, he probably wouldn’t be there now, nor entitled to Dems defense. That’s my guess. That aside, he became a default ally of the Left. His post military career includes positions at corporations, also contractors to the military.

But the people frustrated with the VA don’t care about that. It matters to Liberals since politics trumps reality. Were it not for Obama being in the White House, and his man Shinseki at VA, Dems would have no problem politicizing the VA situation for political gain. (as if they are out there by their lonesome defending the military – the way they frame every other group they pander to.) It’s what they do.

The White House says they have full confidence in him, and he says he serves at the pleasure of the president. He said he has no plans of resigning. Veteran organizations have called for his resignation for over a year. He might have been wrong there, he serves the Vets in that capacity. Wouldn’t you think he would have said as much instead of just at the pleasure of the president? What is going on in the VA is symptomatic of what happens in Government, and the Left’s mindset. They instinctively protect government bureaucracy. Backlog? Alter the books, fixing the books not patients.

Another issue, in no particular order, is Liberal activism in media on business. The CEO is forced from his office at Mozilla for his past support of “prop 8” in CA. Not that he was against anyone, just supported traditional marriage. He wasn’t out there with a megaphone. But the left went at him like a pack of wolves for it. So he’s out. It’s all part of the culture that tolerates what is politically convenient — even if it is the mismanagement or abuse in government.

Along the same lines is liberal activists supporting same-sex marriage. And you have the LGBT movement/agenda lashing out at anyone who stands up for traditional marriage. Chick-fil-A anyone? Phil Robertson, Duck Dynasty? Oppose their agenda and look out. Standing for tradition is taboo.

On the stimulus, same thing, opposition was hatred of Obama. They distorted and extorted Mitch McConnell’s quote that “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” into ‘hatred of Obama’. Then came the mythical “War on women”.

Then you have their defense of ObamaCare despite roll out problems. The defense of ObamaCare stretched from accusations of extreme right-wing politics and branded opponents unreasonable. They did anything to ram it through. Anyone who disagreed was driven by hatred, bigotry or racism toward Obama. The strategy was to demonize any opposition and question their motives.

You have the environmental Nazis in a tizzy defending global warming and Michael Mann, their super hero. (remember the hockey stick) Enter Mark Steyn who said as much in his columns and suffered their attacks, along with National Review, for it. Mann sued both for defamation of character for criticizing his work. Rule number I , tho shalt not criticize or insult Leftisit academia. Buck that and the collective come at you. (by design) But now even defending yourself against their intimidation and attacks can cause defense attorneys to cringe. Possibly even dropping their client.

Along those lines the Keystone Pipeline. The Left channeled all its environmental strength and money to oppose the pipeline for five years. Obama being a creature of the radical Left himself has handed off and stalled the process multiple times. The Left is willing to do anything to “save the earth”. (while destroying civilization as we know it) The lizards’ welfare trumps human interests. Stuck on Steyer; all who oppose them feels their global-warming wrath.

Then we have campuses, universities, and collective academia. This is on various levels on the left’s hot button issues. But gone are the sit-ins, today its about controlling and wielding the strings of government in the most radical ways they can. A pox on anyone or thing that disagrees. It’s called progressive, and so loud and paramount is it that it repels anything in its wake. And the proofs, or fruits, of it are demonstrated across campuses. That’s an entire subject but consider just some of their main bullet points. (Issues coincide with the radical Left, MoveOn and the LGBT movement et al) Not to leave out class warfare — always a popular favorite.

The anti-war left, the anti-Israel left, the pro-appeasement, pro-abortion left, multicultural left, and the big government left, with their ever-present pro amnesty, pro-illegal alien, social justice, pro-LGBT agenda in tow. However, they demand not just in kind support but their full agenda. No a la carte.

What’s new is not just their grievance list or their lobbying power, for their cause, the new tactic is singling out anyone disagreeing with any part of their long laundry list. That is one big difference. It attacks anyone or anything that disagrees. It demands synergy from everyone, despite your own views. And the means is their way, exclusively. No lone cowboys. It plays out in social media, which apparently was bequeathed to them alone.

Start with a few honorable mentions on their menu: Israel boycott, pushing boycotts of Jews on campuses, summer camps on anti-Semitism, and their anti-military lockstep. (they love everything about big government except robust defense?) But factor in the cadre of other issues above and you have a volatile cocktail.

Along comes  Condoleezza Rice and their wrath pours out. Not like she’s Ann Coulter but the same treatment applies. That was only on the heels of Ayaan Hirsi Ali being dis-invited to speak at Brandeis because she did not represent their values. Cair protests and the University of Michigan shuts out the film “Honor Diaries” – calling it hate Anyone speaking to them has to meet their ideological criteria or they get the banner of protest. (that alone rallies their support) Now they won’t tolerate anyone out of lockstep. It sends a powerful, albeit chilling, message to others. If you marginally disagree, you might as well be in full disagreement. Well, not quite your Aunt Nelly’s bra-burning liberals.

Then we have the old standard of the Left, racism. Used to maintain control and intimidation on their enemies, it is their accusation of choice, freely applied. The way it plays out though is the best case against the left. It’s not only militant, it is radical to the core. So the rabid way it treats others is particularly aggressive on campuses where it strives to set the culture precedent for the rest of us. Going after anything perceived racist, or related to Israel, and believing UN and the human rights campaign are its personal tools inspires their activism and emboldens their radical posturing.

I’ve concluded it is now more a culture of intolerance. We’ve had political correctness for decades. Now it is full ‘offense’. More like pc swat teams, pc paratroopers, pc snipers, and a whole armament assembling to deal with their perceived grievances. I’d say they managed to bring all the issues to bear, unified, to make their case. Breaching one pet grievance is to breach their entire code of conduct. If only one side, theirs, sees it as an all out war, then we have a problem. One should no sooner dismiss this open assault than dismiss the Islamic extremists’ and terrorists’ agenda.

In fact, progressives, Democrats, ‘Liberals’, Marxists, and multiculturalists can see bigotry just about everywhere: from the Internet, to reality TV, to board rooms, to talk radio and sports. Everywhere it seems except where blatantly obvious to anyone not blinded by progressive orthodoxy; institutionalized in Universities, on campuses, in the administration, bureaucracy, in the Left, the grievance industry, the LGBT movement, the environmental movement, in Party politics and their conventions, or Islamic radicals. Those are just some highlights of what passes for the progressive left’s politics today — which usurps almost every facet of culture.

RightRing | Bullright

Unsettled Liberal Hysteria

Charles Krauthammer attacked the “Myth of Settled-Science” and labeled Obama the “propagandist in chief”. Talk about hitting the nail on the head. No wonder Libs try to shut him up, so bad.

But even having their own radical crew in the White House and controlling the Senate, you would think that would pacify liberals. No, it only exacerbates them if they don’t get everything they want. They repeat the term the science is settled and that (any)debate is over. Challenge any of their conclusions and that is what you’ll hear.

In his article, The myth of ‘settled science’, Krauthammer says:

None of this is dispositive. It doesn’t settle the issue. But that’s the point. It mocks the very notion of settled science, which is nothing but a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate. As does the term “denier” — an echo of Holocaust denial, contemptibly suggesting the malevolent rejection of an established historical truth.

But welcome to the alternative reality of the progressive left. As my friend likes to say, they think they can repeal reality. (that’s their stand and their sticking to it.) The funny part is to call their self-labeled political enemies “deniers”. As science teaches it always wants certifiable proof. That should make scientists “deniers” by their nature. And it could make science an institution of denial.

But better than that, think of all the things the Left denies. For a crowd that accepts the “hockey stick” of global warming as a threat, they have an awful lot of denial. Denying Islamists’ agenda, denying effects of Obamacare. They deny the threat of fiscal crisis. They argue against the severity of the fiscal problem, as something that more spending will solve. It is akin to believing carbon is the biggest problem in the world, then calling to double the amount of carbon in ten years. That’s the equivalent. Their answer is always spend more money, it should be no surprise.

Their hysteria is far from settled; it’s fluid and flows in ebbs, but can always escalate at the swat of a fly. It has to outdo the last hysterical outrage. It’s on a collision course with reality. When faced with reality, it snorts and reverts to name-calling and the Alinsky tactics it is known for. It reflexively calls for the power of federal government to oppose their foes and opponents and silence them. It has an incessant dependency on big-government.

What is not settled is Liberal hysteria, its always looking for the next opportunity to be offended. Progressives reactions match or exceed the hysteria.

According to Progressives: “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”

As Krauthammer says, we want a cleaner environment, and improve efficiency and resources. But the left would gladly prevent our use of resources and anything related, including the XL Pipeline.

Climate-change proponents have made their cause a matter of fealty and faith. For folks who pretend to be brave carriers of the scientific ethic, there’s more than a tinge of religion in their jeremiads. If you whore after other gods, the Bible tells us, “the Lord’s wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit” (Deuteronomy 11).

Obama came out to rail against Republicans in a press conference, and lectured us on strengthening the infrastructure. The next day, the administration announces Kerry and the State Dep. needs more time to study comments on the Keystone XL Pipeline, putting off the decision until after the elections.(5 1/2 years is not enough) All convenient to raising money from outrage, and whooping up Liberal hysteria.

RightRing | Bullright

Democrats’ band of Boogeymen

Gas Attack

Column: How Democratic donors benefit financially from climate policy
BY: Matthew Continetti | Free Beacon
March 21, 2014

Some lies just won’t go away. In February the Washington Post published an article with the following headline: “Why There’s No Democratic Version of the Koch Brothers’ Organization.” It was the umpteenth attempt to explain, in a particularly simplistic manner, how the millionaires and billionaires who donate money to the Democratic Party are nothing, absolutely nothing, like those meanie cancer research philanthropists Charles and David Koch.

The author, Reid Wilson, interviewed “Democratic strategists who deal frequently with high-dollar donors,” and these Democratic strategists told him, strategically, that their high-dollar donors are better than Republican ones. “For the Koch brothers, electing the right candidate can mean a financial windfall,” Wilson wrote. “Democratic donors revolve more around social issues.” On the one hand you have petty, greedy rich men, and on the other you have committed liberals willing to sacrifice for causes they believe in. The morality play writes itself.

Now, these liberals are not totally selfless, Wilson cautions. They are human beings; they have egos; they seek affirmation. “Donors like being recognized for their philanthropic gestures.” Hedge-fund billionaire and radical environmentalist Tom Steyer, for example, “cooperated with the New Yorker when it wrote a profile of him last year.” Charles and David Koch, though, “didn’t cooperate when the magazine took a look at their political activities,” presumably because “no one needs to send the message that the better-known Koch brothers are there for Republican candidates.” So that’s why the Kochs didn’t talk to Jane Mayer.

Does Reid Wilson believe in Santa Claus? His willingness to suspend disbelief when confronted with the image of a mythic creature—the un-self-interested liberal—suggests as much. The words “labor” and “union” appear nowhere in his article, despite the fact that unions are 6 of the 10 top all-time donors recently compiled by OpenSecrets.org, despite the fact that unions spent some $4.4 billion on politics between 2005 and 2011. (Incidentally, every member of the OpenSecrets.org top ten either leaned Democratic or split money evenly between the two parties. The Democrats are not hurting for money.) [A lot to ignore there]

Unions, their leadership, and their staff see political giving as “an investment,” any non-cross-eyed observer of the political scene would agree, with donations laundered back to the SEIU, AFSCME, NEA, UAW, and others in the form of generous and unsustainable pensions, wage laws benefiting closed shops over free labor, government-mandated dues and contracts, and job protections that make it difficult even for child predators to be fired from schools. That’s an ROI the hosts of the Shark Tank would envy.

Nor did Wilson see fit to mention trial lawyers and other attorneys, whose giving disproportionately favors the Democratic Party, and who are repaid for their donations with opposition to tort reform, and with increased regulations that amount to permanent employment programs for attorneys practicing regulatory, tax, M&A, antitrust, and campaign finance law. But perhaps lawyers don’t figure in Wilson’s calculus. We all know how altruistic and big-hearted they are.

“The coordination between big donors that the Koch network so ably facilitates just doesn’t exist on the Democratic side,” Wilson writes. His Democratic sources must not have been invited to the recent meetings of the Democracy Alliance, the secret organization of liberal donors that coordinates giving and builds campaign infrastructure. His sources must not be members of the Democracy Initiative, a vast coalition of liberal interest groups that meets to plan strategy, or of the Campaign for America’s Future. His sources must never have contributed to the online donation clearinghouse Act Blue. Of all of the thousands of Democratic strategists circling the D.C. waters for prey, Wilson seems to have spoken to the poorest and least connected ones available.

I thought of Wilson’s puerile article this week, as I read remarks by White House adviser John Podesta. The day before Podesta’s interview with a roundtable of journalists, several environmental groups had written to the president, urging him not to lift export bans on American liquid natural gas (LNG). Podesta dismissed the environmentalists’ request.

“If you oppose all fossil fuels and you want to turn that switch off tomorrow, that is a completely impractical way of moving toward a clean-energy future,” he said, defending the use of natural gas. The greens are “impractical.” LNG is the best available alternative to coal-fired power plants, which the White House and EPA want to shut down. “I think we remain committed to developing the resource and using it, and we think there’s an advantage, particularly in the electricity generation sector, to move it forward.”

For the Politico reporter who transcribed Podesta’s remarks, the former lobbyist, Clinton chief of staff, and president of the Center for American Progress was not “afraid to part ways with his former compatriots to make the case for the president’s climate agenda, a topic he said he spends about half his time working on.” (How does he spend the other half?) In fact the comments were nothing new. Podesta has long supported natural gas.

He’s not alone. His 2012 Wall Street Journal op-ed making the case for natural gas was coauthored with Tom Steyer, the hedge-fund billionaire who is quickly becoming one of the most powerful men in the Democratic Party. Steyer is known mainly for his opposition to the Keystone Pipeline, and for his recent pledge to raise and spend $100 million on behalf of Democrats in this year’s elections. According to Reid Wilson, liberal donors such as Steyer “aren’t going to realize a profit if their chosen candidates win.” This is not true.

Steyer pledged to remove himself from the operations of his hedge fund, Farallon Capital Management, in the waning days of 2012, when he was being considered as a possible secretary of Energy in the second Obama administration. But he remains an “outside limited partner” with the firm, and the “bulk” of his billion-dollar fortune is parked there. As of 2012, when Steyer was supporting Democrats, donating millions to Podesta’s Center for American Progress, and otherwise championing natural gas over other forms of energy, Farallon held more than $7 million in shares of gas technology company Fuel Systems Solutions. He was making plenty of money from the Obama administration’s championing of natural gas.

As of the end of 2013, Farallon also held close to $40 million in Kinder Morgan, which is building a competitor to the Keystone Pipeline. When Farallon’s position in Kinder Morgan was exposed last summer—after the Keystone debate had been raging for years—Steyer pledged to sell his share of the stock and donate the profits to charity. Last September, it was revealed that Steyer had backed a UT study on hydraulic fracturing, which showed that the process does not result in dangerous methane emissions. As far as I can determine, Steyer remains an adviser to and backer of EFW Partners, a “global investor in the basic resources critical for economic growth: energy, food, and water.” I wonder whether EFW is short or long on LNG.

Just as Politico was publishing its write-up of Podesta’s defense of natural gas, George Soros, another ultraliberal billionaire hedge-fund manager, was increasing his stake in oil and gas company Penn Virginia Corporation. Shares of Penn Virginia spiked on the news that Soros’s fund would take a more active role in restructuring the company, which extracts both shale oil and natural gas. Soros of course is one of the most famous Democratic donors in the world, an architect of the Democracy Alliance, a founder of the Center for American Progress, and a backer of Priorities USA, the Obama Super PAC that, under the leadership of Democratic empire-builder Jim Messina, is shifting its allegiance to Hillary Clinton. George Soros’s net worth is some $23 billion. And we are supposed to pretend that he is not benefiting financially from the energy policies of the Democrats he puts into office.

Pretense and make-believe are thick in the air in Barack Obama’s Washington, where one’s alignment with the regnant values and priorities—one’s allegiance to, or at the very least one’s acquiescence in, the programs of the environmental lobby, the union lobby, the abortion lobby—acts as a sort of baptism, cleansing the ethical and intellectual impurities associated with conservatism, and elevating one to a higher stage of moral development, of righteousness, to a place of clean living and pure intentions where one’s motivations must not be questioned. If only we could capture and export Washington’s emissions of self-deception and gullibility, of media naïveté and partisanship, of the hot air we produce as we convince ourselves that all parties are equal but some parties are more equal than others. That would be a true energy revolution, a genuine “financial windfall.” *

Its hard for me to believe that Democrats or their media water carriers can even expect to be taken seriously on this, especially on organization and networking which they pride themselves on. If you want the hypocrisy angle, there it is in 3D. Just mentioning the list of exhaustive connections takes an awful lot of ink. But then who would deny it? (they call the right deniers)

Look at all the things Sorros has been connected to including Air America, that leftist radio mouthpiece. Or look at media matters and all the interconnected progressive operatives, just as that whole ‘shadow government’ network installed after Clinton left office. Then to say there is no equivalent to the Koch brothers? Surely you jest. But when the Democrats read such postured tripe, they take it as fact. Then it is merely repeated — the debate is over — through their vast echo chamber of mouthpieces. (Aka. daily mentions)

Why there’s no Democratic version of the Koch brothers organization –WaPo

But for the Democratic professionals who actually run campaigns, the thing that frustrates them most about the Koch brothers network is that there’s no real equivalent on their side.

There are, to be sure, groups of Democratic donors who raise big bucks just like Republicans — the Majority PAC, the House Majority PAC, EMILY’s List, the Democracy Alliance. There are just as many individual Democratic donors who cut seven-figure checks, and who become boogeymen for Republicans, from Tim Gill to Tom Steyer to George Soros. But the coordination between big donors that the Koch network so ably facilitates just doesn’t exist on the Democratic side.

Its the old tactic: accuse others of what you yourself are doing. They are very practiced at it. They thought that just mentioning a few of the well-known operators on the left, and dismissing interconnections, would mitigate what is really their central strategy.

Congratulations to Matthew Continetti for connecting the dots.

RightRing | Bullright

War on CO2

The world according to the Liberal orthodoxy (aka. progressives)

    Plant life needs Co2…
    Leftists declare war on Co2…
    Claim to be saving the planet.
    And they call us “flat-earthers”.

 

I think that traces all the way back to the Garden and eating the forbidden fruit.

The serpent said to the woman: “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”[Gen 3:3]

Today the Left says (paraphrasing) ‘Was there really an Adam and Eve? Didn’t we evolve from a microbe or something…. don’t you know? That mutation called human beings have been multiplying and destroying the earth ever since.’

Notice any similarities?

Romans 1:25

“Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.”

Gen 1:26 — Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

The Left: Man is created from the image of animals. We shall put plant life and animals over human beings. Plants survive on Co2, and you shall not create Co2. Let us regulate Co2. And you shall worship Creation.

Today news reports say we are on the verge of hitting 400 pp/mm of Co2 in the atmosphere — an all time record, they say:

CO2 Levels Already Topped 400 PPM This Year, On Track To Cross Threshold For A Month

From Climate Central’s Brian Kahn:

Last year, atmospheric carbon dioxide briefly crossed 400 parts per million for the first time in human history. However, it didn’t cross that threshold until mid-May. This year’s first 400 ppm reading came a full two months earlier this past week and the seeming inexorable upward march is likely to race past another milestone next month.

“We’re already seeing values over 400. Probably we’ll see values dwelling over 400 in April and May. It’s just a matter of time before it stays over 400 forever,” said Ralph Keeling in a blog post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/18/400-ppm-co2-levels-_n_4985580.html?icid=maing-grid7

It says that temperatures will rise 8.6 degrees over the next hundred years. Melting polar ice will drive cold jet streams farther south producing snow, but winters will be unusually warm and earlier springs with longer, later falls. And they have problems with our faith-based beliefs.

All that seems almost a certainty, given their vast knowledge, but balancing a budget? Now there’s a non-computable problem.

Immeasurable amounts of Co2 were emitted in creating this post.

RightRing | Bullright

Saving the “back nine” from climate change

On the web, Friday is synonymous with funnies but Obama is teasing a laugh line almost everyday these days.(It would be hilarious if not so serious) Take last Friday, for instance. He took the carbon footprint of AF-1 to the Central Valley in California so he could highlight his globul warming, climate change agenda.

Not content with actually doing anything really useful for the drought-stricken valley, he at least fit in a few rounds of golf at a lush golf course that uses water like he burns jet fuel.

With that effective backdrop, he made a speech about dramatic changing climate. Now is the perfect time to highlight it in his portfolio of politics. In that folder, politics (ideology) is first, raising money a very close second.

He did make a gesture of relief aid in his billion-dollar demand for the green agenda. So Obama is”speeding delivery of $100 million of aid to livestock farmers, $15 million for areas hit hardest, and $60 million for California food banks to help the poor“. But what the people really need is the 3 million acre-feet of water diverted away from them. The 60 million in food banks? That matters not to Obama and his ideologue allies. They “help” people by making them suffer and then use their suffering for political fodder. None of Obama’s pipe dream schemes really helps their condition.

Sure enough to that end, a billionaire leftist hedge-fund manager has set his sights on climate change (or whatever new name they give it this month) The greasy grimy politics of the left on climate is truly something you have to witness. Hypocrisy does not matter. Which side someone is on — and there is only one side to the Left — is all that is important.

As Kerry told us, they “don’t have time for a meeting with the Flat Earth Society”. In fact they don’t even have time to meet with ranchers and farmers in the Central Valley. The do, however, have plenty of time for speeches and preening their pious feathers about globul warming. Of course, with the enormity of their own carbon footprints, don’t expect them to see the forest for the trees.

What really matters is politics, raising money, and elections…. and a big shout out to gov.control. Fitting that into the lifestyle of the elite ruling class is just part of the gig. After all, what is an issue for but to benefit the ruling class and promote their political interests — i.e control?

In pre-visit Central Valley newspaper coverage, people wondered exactly what Obama’s itinerary would be? Wonder no more. They wondered if he’d speak to or meet with affected residents. That would probably be too time consuming for the Chief Elitist, he has no time to wallow in dust bowls. He has serious things to do, golf for one. Thank God Palm Springs uses millions of gallons of preciously scarce water to keep the greens and fairways up to snuff. Can’t let things like droughts or resources effect the golf industry. I expected him to make a few jokes, makng fun of people’s suffering. He might as well have.

Switching the conversation from dismal ObamaCare to climate change is really trying to change the climate. But big money from the likes of Leftist Steyer is just the prescription to get the wheels turning and his allies on board, especially his divided base. Crank up the campaign machine again to get them to midterms. Forget the scandals, Benghazi, IRS, bombing Obamacare, Fast and Furous… or the Mid-East turmoil, pay no attention to their let’s make a deal road show. All that ever mattered to progressives is politics anyway. (spending is politics)

Enter their great billionaire activist, “Daddy Greenbucks”, Tom Steyer.

 

Image from a anti-Keystone ad produced by Steyer and his NextGen.

NYT reports

“Our feeling on 2014 is, we want to do things that are both substantively important and will have legs after that,” Mr. Steyer said in an interview. “We don’t want to go someplace, win and move on.”

Free Beacon reported: “The Steyer Party

Steyer, who has amassed a $1.4 billion fortune through his dealings in the secretive world of high finance—including managing a number of funds based in the Cayman Islands—wants to deliver a “smashing victory” in the war on climate change by bullying skeptics and other pro-eagle politicians into submission. “The goal here is not to win,” Steyer told the Hill in 2013. “The goal here is to destroy these people.
Steyer, meanwhile, has “embraced the political toolbox that was opened to wealthy donors and other interests in the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision,” and is “rallying other deep-pocketed donors” and “seeking to build a war chest” for his NextGen Climate Action operation, which could soon be one of the largest shadowy outside groups in the country.
The group is already running ads seeking to stop construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline. On Wednesday, Steyer is hosting a fundraiser for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.).

Truth alert: their goal is not to win debate or the issue but to destroy their enemies and those in their way. Anyone who thinks it’s a matter of legitimate scientific debate is wrong.

And from the NYT:

Those [California ballot initiative] efforts cemented his partnership with Chris Lehane, a California-based Democratic strategist, and heralded the emergence of NextGen Climate, now a 20-person operation encompassing a super PAC, a research organization and a political advocacy nonprofit. The group employs polling, research and social media to find climate-sensitive voters and spends millions of dollars in television advertising to try to persuade them.

Safe to say that it’s one non-profit IRS won’t be probing into.

Meanwhhile back at the farm, or what was a farm in Central Valley years ago, the real drought problem was driven by liberal policies designed to protect anything but human beings’ welfare creating what we see today. But in 2012, a bill was brought up to deal with the regulatory problems and restore the water. Obama swiftly declared he would veto it. Now he goes back to that area for a visit only to highlight his climate change agenda, to use it for fodder. Then he demands a billion in new spending for his agenda.

In 2012, Hotair reported the details:

I’ve called the judicially-imposed drought in California’s Central Valley “the Dust Bowl Congress created” through its creation of the Endangered Species Act, invoked in this case by the Delta smelt, a fish that’s not suitable for eating. Once a breadbasket for the nation, the cutoff of irrigation water to the Central Valley has destroyed agriculture and tens of thousands of jobs as a tradeoff for the endangered fish. Now, however, voices of sanity in Congress have begun to speak on the man-made economic and agricultural disaster, as Rep. Devin Nunes builds support for his Sacramento-San Joaquin Water Reliability Act:
Nunes’ Sacramento-San Joaquin Water Reliability Act goes to a vote in the House Wednesday and if it passes, it will guarantee that water the farmers paid for finally gets to the parched Central Valley. It will put an end to the sorry stream of shriveled vineyards, blackened almond groves and unemployed farm workers standing in alms lines for bagged carrots from China.
“The bill restores the flow of water and establishes a framework for meaningful environmental improvements. It is a repudiation of the left’s assault on rural communities, which began with the decimation of the West’s timber industry and now is focused on Central Valley agriculture,” Nunes told IBD.
If Barack Obama has his way, though, that situation will continue indefinitely. Late yesterday, the White House announced that Obama would veto Nunes’ bill because — I am not making this up — it would “unravel decades of work” on California water regulations … decades of work that brought California’s Central Valley to its current destruction:

So let’s put an end to this notion that both sides just need to talk and work things out for the people they represent. That’s not how the Left plays. If they don’t care about a dust bowl they created in California, do you really think they care about people or the climate? So the agenda that largely caused the effects in the Central Valley needs a stimulus of new spending, while those devastated in its path get lip service. Ironically, bait fish win and communities lose. Unfortunately for Central Valley, they only illustrate his agenda.

Saving the back nine is a metaphor for preserving politics of the ruling class elite, and their power.

RightRing | Bullright

Organizing for [Obama] Action

With all the calls Democrats make to rein in Tea Parties’ activism, they ignore OFA.
Schumer is mum on that.

Rep. Schock Highlights Organizing for Action, a 501(c)4 Openly Working for Obama
June 2013

Having established that no significant campaign cash was flowing through these groups, Rep. Schock then pulled up the description of Organizing for Action, a 501(c)4 whose stated mission is to “support President Obama in achieving enactment of the national agenda Americans voted for on Election Day 2012.” OFA describes this agenda as including legislation on “gun violence prevention, sensible environmental policies to address climate change and immigration reform.” Despite the obvious political overtones, OFA’s work is considered within the proper realm of a 501(c)4 activity, i.e. promoting social welfare. /…

Democrats in the hearing argued that scrutiny is appropriate for any group engaged in political activity and applying for 501(c)4 status. They further suggested the conservative groups filed for 501(c)(4) status in order to hide their donor lists, implying these organizations were hiding large influxes of cash. In ‘response, Rep. Schock asked three Tea Party groups giving testimony to state their annual budgets.

More: www.breitbart.com

 

Have a little politics with your hypocrisy. “Political overtones” is a giant understatement.

The OFA staffers run president Obama’s twitter account, and sign tweets BO for Obama. Yet you can bet their tax-exempt status was never in question – nor will it be.

Here’s the script on the twitter account for Barack Obama

Barack Obama Verified account
@BarackObama
This account is run by Organizing for Action staff. Tweets from the President are signed -bo.
Washington, DC · barackobama.com

What is OFA?

“Organizing for Action is the grassroots movement built by millions of Americans to pass the agenda we voted for in 2012.”

It’s Obama’s personal campaign. No, no politics or political advocacy going on there.

Is IRS checking that Twitter feed and monitoring every tweet? They are probably too busy trying to get all the names, donors, copies of speeches, writing and reading material of Tea Party groups, and thinking up questions to ask them for pending 501 status. That’s what Schumer wants them to redouble their efforts on.

And try to name one part of government he hasn’t politicized as well.
Time to rename IRS, now Obama’s ‘Internal Revenge Service’.

RightRing | Bullright

Greenpirates! Russia charges Greenpeace with piracy

October 2, 2013 by CFACT Ed,

Russian authorities have charged five Greenpeace campaigners with piracy in Murmansk and are continuing to detain and investigate as many as 25 more. If convicted they face 10-15 years in prison.

Greenpeace’s diesel powered ship Arctic Sunrise was seized and 30 campaigners arrested after attempting to board the Prirazlomnaya oil platform in the Pechora Sea.  Details here.

The five are Roman Kieron Bryan, Dolgov, Dmitri Litvinov, Alminhana Maciel,  Ana Paula, Sini Saarela; Russian Roman Dolgov.  Bryan claims to be a “freelance” videographer, rather than a campaigner.

The 30 people aboard Arctic Sunrise hail from a variety of nations including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, the United States, Britain, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Ukraine, Russia, France, Italy, Turkey, Finland, Switzerland, Poland and Sweden.

The piracy charges surprised many after Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his opinion that the Greenpeace campaigners are not pirates, although he held open the likelihood of other charges.

See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/10/02/greenpirates-russia-charges-greenpeace/#sthash.kjANZ3L7.dpuf

Gullible Green sailors trapped in the Arctic

Should they sue Sierra Club Canada for predicting an ice-free Arctiic in 2013?

by ,

·

Churchville, VA—The naïve advice of ardent activists can kill. Last spring, Paul Beckwith of Sierra Club Canada predicted that the Arctic seas would be ice-free ice this summer. (So did Britain’s BBC network.)  This exciting adventure opportunity attracted a variety of yachts, sailboats, rowboats, and kayaks owners to try sailing the fabled Northwest Passage.

As a former sailboat owner I can understand their excitement, but my heart aches for the agonies they now face. The Arctic sea ice suddenly expanded 60% this fall, after the coldest summer in the modern Alaska temperature record. The passage is now impassable. More than a dozen of the boats are trapped, apparently even including a group of tiny American jet-ski “personal watercraft” that were attempting to cross from the east coast of Russia to the North Atlantic.  Arctic observers are now warning that even Canadian icebreakers might not be able to rescue them.

The Northwest Passage blog reminds us that fall super storms are a potentially deadly fact in Alaska. “It is only a matter of time. . . . Give Mother Nature her due time and she will move billions of tons of sea ice and push it up against the Alaska Arctic coast—effectively closing the door to exit the Arctic ice from western Canada. . . . No icebreakers are going to be able to offer any assistance. Mother Nature is mightier than all the icebreakers put together.”  Note that the Atlantic exit is already problematic. […/]

– See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/09/19/gullible-green-sailors-trapped-in-the-arctic/#sthash.LQI1gVR6.dpuf

I can’t not believe they did that. (sorry for the double negative, but it works)
Well, never mind what they weren’t thinking.

Green gates to Penna. Ave

…And high tides of politics

White House solar panels being installed this week

Wa-Post — By Juliet Eilperin, Published: August 15

After nearly three years, the White House began installing solar panels on the First Family’s residence this week, a White House official confirmed Thursday.

The Obama administration had pledged in October 2010 to put solar panels on the White House as a sign of the president’s commitment to renewable energy.

The White House official, who asked not to be identified because the installation is in process, wrote in an e-mail the project is “a part of an energy retrofit that will improve the overall energy efficiency of the building.”

At the time of the 2010 announcement, then-Energy Secretary Steven Chu and White House Council on Environmental Quality chair Nancy Sutley said the administration would conduct a competitive bidding process to buy between 20 and 50 solar panels.

The officials did not identify the supplier or cost of the project, but wrote the White House “has begun installing American-made solar panels” and the initiative, “which will help demonstrate that historic buildings can incorporate solar energy and energy efficiency upgrades, is estimated to pay for itself in energy savings over the next eight years.”

The retrofit also includes installing updated building controls and variable speed fans, the official added. […/]

On Thursday, climate activist Bill McKibben, whose group 350.org had organized one of the campaigns to install solar power at the White House, welcomed the news that the installation had begun.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/15/white-house-solar-panels-finally-being-installed/

But wouldn’t it be great if Barry would cut his offensive, personal carbon footprint, including AF-1 and consolidate those extra and double trips? He could probably save enough in one month to pay for all those solar panels and upgrades.

Get this, he cannot afford to have school kids or visitors for White House tours but he must expidite this… achem, it will eventually pay for itself. But White House tours are way too expensive and there is no return for the “investment”. That’s the Hypobama mentality.

Well kids, unless yo can prove you can produce electricity or some service to the White House, then forget it, you are not green enough. (maybe you could take turns pedaling a generator while the next group comes through….or maybe you could wash dishes?)

Meanwhile, Barry and his family will freely abuse the privileges of carbon-producing technology as much as they can, as far as they can, as long as they can; while they deny student field trips and tours. The efficiency gauge is busted on AF-1.

In his second term, Obama becomes bolder on the environment– Wa-Post

The shift has alarmed some industry officials, as well as coal allies. Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) described the administration as coal’s “adversary” and brought a state delegation headed by West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D) into the White House on Aug. 1 to meet with McCarthy and Michael Rodriguez, the White House legislative affairs director.

While Manchin called the nearly hour-long session “very respectful and productive,” he also said it exposed the “deep differences” between politicians like himself and Obama.

“You cannot describe this any differently than as a war on coal, and not just in West Virginia or the U.S. but on a global scale,” he said. “They’re using every tool they have to destroy the most abundant, reliable and affordable resource that we have.”

Kids and tourists, just think, you can tell everyone your sacrifices helped pay for those solar and efficiency upgrades. Won’t that be special? And you can also remember that when you or your parents pay that added Executive Order tax on the phone you carry.

Obama’s White House put it this way:

Due to staffing reductions resulting from sequestration, we regret to inform you that WhiteHouse Tours will be canceled effective Saturday, March 9, 2013 until further notice. Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected tours.

 We very much regret having to take this action, particularly during the popular Spring touring season. Please check this webpage for updates regarding this situation, or contact the White House Visitors Office 24 Hour Hotline at (202) 456-7041.
Sincerely,
The White House Visitors Office

Fortunately, no such sequestration on solar panels to the White House.
(Whew, that’s a relief…. or, you know, people might talk and complain!)

Globul Climax bucks narrative

What Global Warming? 2012 Data Confirms Earth In Cooling Trend

By Barbara Hollingsworth — CNS News — August 13, 2013

[excerpt]-“To no one’s surprise, the report gives the reader the impression that warming is galloping ahead out of control,” writes Gosselin. “But their data shows just the opposite.”

Although the NOAA report noted that in 2012, “the Arctic continues to warm” with “sea ice reaching record lows,” it also stated that the Antarctica sea ice “reached a record high of 7.51 million square miles” on Sept. 26, 2012.

And the latest figures for this year show that there’s been a slowdown of melting in the Arctic this summer as well, with temperatures at the North Pole well below normal for this time of year. Meteorologist Joe Bastardi calls it “the coldest ever recorded.” ….

[photo]

Continue reading >

Climategate meets Brandenburg Gate – changing of the guards

Obama promises an end to cheap energy

The Left has shifted from being champions of the poor to being developed-world Progressives, comfortably ensconced in their own modernity

June 24, 2013 -by Marita Noon
A few months ago, in his State of the Union address, President Obama proudly pledged to tackle climate change—despite opposition from Republicans. To date, precious little action to combat climate change has been seen from the White House—which pleases most Republicans and angers the Left.
Environmental activists are some of Obama’s most ardent supporters, but they are frustrated and losing patience with the president. He hasn’t been definitive on killing the Keystone pipeline; as the Washington Post reports, he’s “fallen back from the broad clean energy agenda he envisioned when he first took office”—even to the point of supporting natural gas exploration and recently approving Liquefied Natural Gas export terminals that will increase demand by shipping U.S. natural gas to foreign markets; and he seems to have acquiesced to a fossil fuel future by proposing adaptations to make “coastal communities more resistant to increasingly severe storms and floods.” The environmental community wants to see bold steps toward a fossil-fuel free future ….
[excerpt]
Frank Ackerman, an economist at Tufts University who published a book about the economics of global warming, calls the social cost of carbon “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek, he said: “This is a very strange way to make policy about something this important.” And added, “The Obama Administration ‘hasn’t always leveled with us about what is happening behind closed doors.’”
Why bury “something this important” in an afternoon announcement about something that is virtually insignificant? The answer, I believe, is found in a small piece of the Washington Post story cited previously. Apparently, the White House’s own research found that when Obama, in his State of the Union speech, “vowed to act on climate change if Congress refused to do so,” a focus group’s “favorability” rating “plummeted.” White House transcripts reveal that Obama knows that “the politics of this are tough.”
At an April fundraising event at the San Francisco home of billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer, Obama defended his lack of action on climate change: “If you haven’t seen a raise in a decade, if your house is still $25,000, $30,000 underwater … you may be concerned about the temperature of the planet, but it’s probably not rising to your number one concern.”
As a result, his Organizing for America team—“formed to advance the president’s second term agenda”—has been laying the “groundwork with the American public before unveiling a formal climate strategy.” Teasing out the increase in the social cost of carbon was likely part of the strategy, intended to test the waters ahead of the planned climate announcements from the White House.
Likewise, his comments in Berlin, where he reintroduced the subject, calling climate change “the global threat of our time.” The next day, headlines read: “Obama to renew emissions push.” It is believed that the new “measures to tackle climate change” will “effectively ban new coal-fired power plants”—to which I add, will effectively ban “cheap electricity.”
– See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/06/24/obama-promises-an-end-to-cheap-energy/#sthash.OHGMnFWP.dpuf

Good article on the politics of Obama’s weathered climate policy. And what do microwave ovens have to do with climategate? Who knew? This is the kind of politics and policies — no difference between them to Obama — we’ve grown to expect and detest. Ah yes, reintroducing the subject in Berlin, with the sun in his eyes and teleprompter issues.

In a related article, Paul Driessen fleshes out the big questions:

23) Shouldn’t Congress pass a cap-and-trade bill or carbon tax to help heal the climate? 
The climate bill that died in the Democrat Senate was a scientifically meaningless bill that Obama’s own EPA admitted would not impact global CO2 levels – let alone global temperatures.
The climate bill would only have raised the cost of energy for American families and businesses, and killed jobs, while doing nothing for the climate. A major Bloomberg News report revealed that U.S. oil companies would likely cope with the climate legislation by “closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.” Bloomberg also reported that “one in six U.S. refineries probably would close by 2020,” and this could “add 77 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline.”
EPA’s unilateral “carbon dioxide endangerment” regulations would have much the same effect.
20) Don’t graphs show that current temperatures are the highest in 1,000 years?
Penn State professor and UN IPCC modeler Michael Mann did publish a hockey stick-shaped graph that purportedly showed an unprecedented sudden increase in average global temperatures, following ten centuries of supposedly stable climate. However, Dr. Mann was at the center of the Climategate scandal. His graph and the data and methodology behind it have been scrutinized and debunked in peer-reviewed studies by numerous climate scientists, statisticians and other experts.
The latest research clearly reveals that the Medieval Warm Period (also called the Medieval Climate Optimum) has been verified and was in fact global, not just confined to the Northern Hemisphere. The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change reported in 2009 that “the Medieval Warm Period was: (1) global in extent, (2) at least as warm as, but likely even warmer than, the Current Warm Period, and (3) of a duration significantly longer than that of the Current Warm Period to date.”
The Science and Public Policy Institute reported in May 2009: “More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was real, global, and warmer than the present. And the numbers grow larger daily.”

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent to (green), or cooler than (blue), peak Current Warm Period temperatures.

Read more: http://papundits.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/climate-change-issues-for-2012/
And Read more excellent articles at CFACT http://www.cfact.org/
H/T PA Pundits-International

Government of the absurd

In his last inaugural speech, Obama lectured:

“We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate.”

Let’s hear it for politics of destruction and fear.

Now he comes out on global warming to claim we don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society. I have never seen a bigger hypocrite than Obama.

Months after delivering his inaugural address lecturing others about name calling and partisanship, Hypocrite-in-Chief says he doesn’t have any “patience” and “we don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society”

It is amazing what he does have patience for. Eight months after Benghazi he has no lack of “patience” to get to the bottom of that scandal. The White House said that was old, it happened a long time ago. He had no shortage of patience on “fast and furious” – that must be ancient history.Heck he has no impatience to get to the bottom of any of his scandals, including solyndragate or greengate.

Obama gets the award for substituting spectacle for politics. He creates a spectacle out of everything under the guise of politics. And when he is not getting his way, he lashes out lecturing everyone else, including those who are not in politics. Then it must be our fault for not understanding. He went on a gun-control binge and when it was not going his way, he lashed out in a tirade and used children as a backdrop to create a spectacle to attack his opponents. We got a lecture again. He tells the people they are wrong. We are wrong about Obamacare, because we don’t like it and don’t want it. We are wrong about NSA collecting and spying on all Americans. We are wrong about everything we oppose him on.

 

Reasoned debate?
Then he calls us “flat earthers”. He substitutes personal attack and ad hominem for dialogue. How’s that for “reasoned debate”? Mr reasonable  even seems to argue with an agency in his administration:  when the IRS came out and admitted that it targeted conservatives, Obama said it would be “outrageous, if true”. And he seems to think the presidency gives him license to lie.

Obama on IRS scandal

This is pretty straightforward,” Mr. Obama told reporters. “If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous and there’s no place for it.”

“The IRS as an independent agency requires absolute integrity and people have to have confidence that they’re… applying the laws in a non-partisan way,” he said. “If you’ve got the IRS operating in anything less than a neutral and non-partisan way then that is outrageous … People have to be held accountable and it’s got to be fixed.”

Pretty straight forward? If? You are kidding, right? We have finally reached the pinnacle of a government of the absurd.

When they do something wrong there is a dumbed-down report to say it was an innocuous act and that the administration, powers that be, had no culpability in it even when the facts clearly indicate the opposite. Obama’s standard reply to the scandals is: we will investigate that and “get to the bottom of it”. Then they never do get to the bottom of it.

Just like EPA dictates are pretty straight forward, or his war on energy, ObamaCare or gun control were straight forward? (straight off the cliff)

David Axelrod Defends WH On IRS Scandal
When Axelrod was asked about IRS, he said we know it is not political because it would be a politically stupid thing to do. However, lying about Benghazi on the eve of an election is not a stupid thing to do? There were clearly politics involved in that. That lying was straight from the WH and surrogates.

We are to believe IRS actions were not politically motivated. So if the targeting was political — which it couldn’t be anything but — then it was “stupid”, in Axelrod’s judgment.

First, they denied the validity of it, even after the IRS admitted it did it and after an Inspector’s report determined they did it. “If true”, Obama said? That is denial.

“If anybody political was involved this wouldn’t have happened, because anybody with a modicum of political sense would have said, ‘This is ludicrous. What are you guys doing?’” – MSNBC.

Take one more look at just Axelrod’s statement: it wouldn’t Have Happened ‘If Anybody political Was Involved’ The assertion: if someone political was involved, it couldn’t have happened because they would know how wrong that is. So political operatives are smarter than that.(smell that elitism) Political operatives are smarter than bureaucrats and gubmint employees.

Remember Axelrod’s other excuse for Obama is that government is so vast he could not know what is going on in it. But at least political operatives are a lot smarter than those government employees! I believe they’re both pretty dumb but since he did pose the question — Anthony Wiener flashes through my mind. So, those political operatives have more morals than agency employees, even the IRS. See what I mean, it is government of the absurd – or government of the stupid, whichever you want to use.

And I’m sure government is so vast he could not know about Solyndra and all the other failures, or EPA’s plotted reign of terror, or spygate, or anything. Nope. Just be on the lookout for that absolutism and its sister, spectacle disguised as politics. They’re trouble.

Government of the absurd by the absurd.

related: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/david-axelrod-defends-wh-on-irs-scandal-wouldnt-have-happened-if-anybody-political-was-involved/

Obama: EPA is the gate to the climate

From NRO :

If only President Obama simply had cried wolf. Instead, the president announced that, on behalf of “all of humankind,” he is in effect directing the EPA to take over the American economy. New power plants will be subject to emissions controls, and existing plants will have to be retrofitted to comply with new standards. New restrictions on heavy trucks will affect the movement of freight and goods across the country.

New subsidies will be handed down for politically connected energy firms, and federal lands will be set aside for their use. New federal impositions will affect the construction of factories, commercial buildings, and private homes.

The president says that this is all enabled by the “overwhelming judgment of science.” It certainly has not been enabled by something so mundane as the law. We rather suspect that the overwhelming judgment of Congress would be against the president’s program of regimenting the entire American economy under the management of a newly empowered EPA. But the president has made it clear that he intends to act largely through administrative fiat, subverting the democratic process and the people’s elected representatives. Unhappily, the Supreme Court has abetted this ambition by misconstruing the Clean Air Act as a warrant of action on global warming.

Every economic activity involving energy or transportation — which is to say, every economic activity — will be affected by the president’s global-warming program.

More: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/352025/obamas-radical-climate-agenda-editors

Barry-‘Ozone’-Obama lays out his second term “climate” strategy:

(it reads something like this, no matter what he says or promises — a little satire)

“I will continue laying out scandals. The air in DC will become extremely inhospitable, putting air conditioning and filtration at a premium. You all will continue to try to make me look bad. I will continue to lie… I mean you all are so gullible.

The political pollution in DC will reach a historical high. Clouds of chaos and confusion will slow even traffic to a crawl. Never let a storm go to waste. I will continue to demonize my opponents or anyone in my way.

I will use any… and I mean any, extraordinary and unconstitutional means to achieve my ends to extort the climate for every political and geo-political opportunity I possibly can. And there won’t be a damn thing you can do about me using executive power and regulation to accomplish it. Oh, like what are you going to impeach me or something? Like I said, you people are so gullible.”

Yet during Barry’s glorious Georgetown address, another controversy erupted because all the networks cut away – even MSNBC. That prompted a tweet from NYT reporter that you could turn to one network covering the entirety, the Weather Channel. (good thing he wasn’t upstaged by a storm..) Wolfy Blitzer just talked over it. No loss there.

Off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of Obamaland

Barry started his term out on a rocky road. That is if you call playing golf with a couple of big-oil guys in Palm Springs while his minions are screaming for ending the Keystone pipeline outside the White House, “rocky”.

So his sycophant, low information voters weren’t too happy with that news. Oh well, welcome to the land of disenchantment with the rest of us. Do they want to compare outrage? I don’t think so. His magical mystery agenda will not solve our country’s problems, nor will the Kool Aid.

Everyone who uses oil or its byproducts has seen the price tag double since he came to office. But that matters not to the anti-energy tyrant or his little green friends with their war on energy. They scream for more inaction. “Can we have LESS, please?”

It is entirely contrary to the needs of the nation, but that’s okay to the Left. They’ll run their cars on mushrooms and algae or nothing. Meanwhile, everyone on the Left is quite content to pay double for their fuel, triple if they could have their way. And they would praise the results, as people go to the poorhouse for their agenda.

If people cannot afford to heat their homes or neglect their other necessities to pay for their fuel, it bothers the Left about as much as a flea on a grizzly bear. Whoops, sorry to bring those poor bears into a matter of politics. Well, it is politics. Does anyone in Obama’s land of make-believe really think this is about the environment, climate, or being stewards of our resources? Of course it isn’t. It’s politics, pure and simple.

That’s why, in my opinion, it was good to see all the green hypocrites and all their friends out demonstrating for what they believe in. Remember they “believed” in Obama too. It must make any used car salesman drool with envy that there are still that many suckers. Why worry about a sucker being born a minute when there are already that many of them out there, probably multiplying too…even if it’s by accident. It only shows how out of step they really are.

Isn’t it convenient for the left that the mantra “drill baby drill” has been replaced with pay baby pay? They are ecstatic about what that does to consumers forcing cuts in use and choices. That’s what they wanted and they got it. The next time Obama tries to twist the oil issue into an illogical pretzel, remember who is getting what they want.

The who by the way applies to Iran too. While they talk about the tough sanctions, Iran knows the one thing that hurts their economy drastically is low oil prices. They need or want the price of Brent around 117 /barrel. And they are near enough to their optimal price it doesn’t hurt them much. We, however, are hurting. The economy is still sputtering. Do you think the high cost of oil and energy has anything to do with it? Not if you are in their land of make-believe. (it might be a nice place to visit, but you sure wouldn’t want to live there.)

Bloomberg.com

The rally in crude prices earlier this month was driven by renewed optimism in economic growth rather than “hard demand data,” according to a report by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Brent prices reached a 2013 high of $118.90 on Feb. 8.

“The current sell-off in oil is bringing prices more in line with the underlying fundamentals,” said the bank’s New York-based head of commodities research, Jeffrey Currie, in a report e-mailed today.

Price Outlook
WTI may fall next week after weak consumption boosted crude inventories, a separate Bloomberg News survey showed.

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Pollution-Laws-Threaten-to-Drop-Britain-into-an-Energy-Crisis.html

It sort of makes you curious what other solutions may lurk along their yellow brick road in Obamaland?