Lets remember what he said about the "stimulas," if it wasn't passed unemployment would reach 9%. So his 2-degree fiction is funny on some level, but scary on another. Government setting global change of weather to 2-degrees? Talk about eco-fascism!
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
Spliter Cell Conviction (My Favorite Game Series) I Cannot Wait!!
Extended Gameplay with Commentary (not HD)
Different Extended Game Play with Commentary (HD)
Some Extended Game Play -- No Commentary, With HD
Trying Different Ways Into the Same Place (HD)
Splinter Cell Conviction Multi-Player Co-op Game Play(HD)
BREAKING: IRANIAN FORCES TAKE OVER IRAQ OIL WELL
NASIRIYAH, Iraq (AFP) – Iranian forces took control of a southern Iraqi oil well on a disputed section of the border on Friday, US and Iraqi officials told AFP.
"There has been no violence related to this incident and we trust this will be resolved through peaceful diplomacy between the governments of Iraq and Iran," a US military spokesman told AFP at Contingency Operating Base Adder, just outside the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah.
"The oil field is in disputed territory in between Iranian and Iraqi border forts," he said, adding that such incidents occur quite frequently.
An official of the state-owned South Oil Co in the southeastern city of Amara, and west of the field, said: "An Iranian force arrived at the field early this morning (Friday).
"It took control of Well 4 and raised the Iranian flag even though the well lies in Iraqi territory," the official added.
"An oil ministry delegation is to travel to the area on Saturday to assess the situation."
The national security council was due to hold an emergency meeting on Friday chaired by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, Iraqi state television said quoting the minister of state for national security, Shirwan al-Waili.
The council also groups the ministers of interior, defence, foreign affairs, justice and finance.
Well 4 lies in the Fauqa Field, part of a cluster of fields Iraq unsuccessfully put up for auction to oil majors in June. The field has estimated reserves of 1.55 million barrels.
The field is about 500 metres (yards) from an Iranian border fort and about 1 kilometre from an Iraqi border fort, US Colonel Peter Newell said, adding that it falls on the Iraqi side of a border agreed between the two countries....
....[more]....
We Are Change Chicago Making Their Usual False Connections -- Rod Blagojevich and Conspiracies
I am posting two videos here, one is from We Are Change Chicago, the other is a satirical video that makes my point. Do celebrity concerts kill people? The same type of connective value are on display. Blago knew he was in trouble and going to be arrested, so the Bank of America fiasco was merely a smoke screen to get support from the "people." Another aspect We Are Change cannot seem to grasp is that Blago did want the money, but for the "people," there would still be politically correct/big government strings attached, just directly to "the people." When Blago uses these terms, he is speaking from a more socialist aspect and wants universal health-care, more government control, on-and-on. We Are Change is against the Global Warming debacle... but a broken clock is also right twice a day. (By-the-way, "thermite" is brought up in the video, here is a great, in-depth, response to this supposed "proof." There are also multiple posts at Screw Loose Change's blog, as well as 9/11 Myths... Reading Between the Lies site.)
We Are Change argue against themselves when they put up people like Blago very similarly to when Alex Jones puts people like Cynthia McKinney in his "documentaries." Both Cynthia (who is a black nationalist, racist, Marxist politician) and Blago are for big government, period! Implicitly and explicitly We Are Change and people like Alex Jones want more government by propping up anarchists and Marxists, thus, allowing their boogieman (the New World Order) more headway and control of the people.
(Side note: I post links to these horribly inaccurate sites because I welcome bad thinking here. It offers examples some may hear at work and gives some well meaning, thoughtful replies for the person to respond to these 9/11 "truthers." It also shows the depth of bad thinking in our nation. I also have noted that this thinking will end our Republic if it metastasizes into a more popular view. What then? Here are some links on my site I recommend:)
Mexico’s Drug War -- Part of the Gunfight in Which Arturo Beltran Leyva (a Drug “Don”) Was Killed
In that the Mexican authorities are calling one of their great victories against the drugs cartels they killed Arturo Beltran Leyva in a two hour gun battle yesterday.
One of Mexico’s top drug lords was killed in a two-hour gun battle yesterday in one of the biggest victories yet in President Felipe Calderón’s war on drugs.
Arturo Beltran Leyva, the “boss of bosses”, and three members of his cartel were slain in a shoot out with 200 sailors during a Mexican Navy raid on an upmarket apartment complex in Cuernavaca, just south of Mexico City. A fifth cartel member committed suicide during the fight.
One of Mexico’s top drug lords was killed in a two-hour gun battle yesterday in one of the biggest victories yet in President Felipe Calderón’s war on drugs.
Arturo Beltran Leyva, the “boss of bosses”, and three members of his cartel were slain in a shoot out with 200 sailors during a Mexican Navy raid on an upmarket apartment complex in Cuernavaca, just south of Mexico City. A fifth cartel member committed suicide during the fight.
Progressive Language and Labels Destroys the Liberal Mind (Generalization Included)
By: Dennis Prager
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, May 23, 2006
The highest-ranking Democrat in America, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, described the Senate bill making English the national language of the American people as "racist." And the New York Times editorial page labeled the bill "xenophobic."
Welcome to the thoughtless world of contemporary liberalism. Beginning in the 1960s, liberalism, once the home of many deep thinkers, began to substitute feeling for thought and descended into superficiality.
One-word put-downs of opponents' ideas and motives were substituted for thoughtful rebuttal. Though liberals regard themselves as intellectual -- their views, after all, are those of nearly all university professors -- liberal thought has almost died. Instead of feeling the need to thoughtfully consider an idea, most liberal minds today work on automatic. One-word reactions to most issues are the liberal norm.
This is easy to demonstrate.
Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:
- Racist
- Sexist
- Homophobic
- Islamophobic
- Imperialist
- Bigoted
- Intolerant
And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:
- Peace
- Fairness
- Tolerance
- The poor
- The disenfranchised
- The environment
These two lists serve contemporary liberals in at least three ways.
First, they attack the motives of non-liberals and thereby morally dismiss the non-liberal person.
Second, these words make it easy to be a liberal -- essentially all one needs to do is to memorize this brief list and apply the right term to any idea or policy. That is one reason young people are more likely to be liberal -- they have not had the time or inclination to think issues through, but they know they oppose racism, imperialism and bigotry, and that they are for peace, tolerance and the environment.
Third, they make the liberal feel good about himself -- by opposing conservative ideas and policies, he is automatically opposing racism, bigotry, imperialism, etc.
Examples could fill a book.
Harry Reid, as noted above, supplied a classic one. Instead of grappling with the enormously significant question of how to maintain American identity and values with tens of millions of non-Americans coming into America, the Democratic leader and others on the Left simply label attempts to keep English as a unifying language as "racist."
Another classic example of liberal non-thought was the reaction to former Harvard University President Lawrence Summers' mere question about whether the female and male brains were wired differently. Again, instead of grappling with the issue, Harvard and other liberals merely dismissed Summers as "sexist."
A third example is the use of the term "racist" to end debate about race-based affirmative action or even to describe a Capitol police officer who stops a black congresswoman who has no ID badge.
"Phobic" is the current one-word favorite among liberal dismissals of ideological opponents. It combines instant moral dismissal with instant psychological analysis. If you do not support society redefining marriage to include members of the same sex you are "homophobic" -- and further thought is unnecessary. If you articulate a concern about the moral state of Islam today, you are "Islamophobic" -- and again further thought is unnecessary. And if you seek to retain English as America's unifying language, you are not only racist, you are, as the New York Times editorial describes you, "xenophobic" and "Latinophobic," the latest phobia uncovered by the Left.
There is a steep price paid for the liberal one-wording of complex ideas -- the decline of liberal thought. But with more and more Americans graduating college and therefore taught the liberal list of one-word reactions instead of critical thinking, many liberals do not see any pressing need to think through issues. They therefore do not believe they have paid any price at all.
But American society is paying a steep price. Every car that has a bumper sticker declaring "War is not the answer" powerfully testifies to the intellectual decline of the well educated and to the devolution of "liberal thought" into an oxymoron.Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show based in Los Angeles. He is the author of four books, most recently "Happiness is a Serious Problem" (HarperCollins). His website is www.dennisprager.com. To find out more about Dennis Prager, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
Democrats and Labels - Where is the Debate? Now if You Are Skeptical of Man-Caused Global Warming, There Is a Psychological Reason Why You Are
"Time for talk is OVER," "America WILL continue on this path" ~ Obama
Obama to act with or without agreement - e.g., progressive fascism
This is an interesting article because it attempts to sweep under the rug any debate on anthropogenic global warming (e.g., climate change) by saying "skepticism of global warming is a psychological disorder and here is why." Ridiculous! It is just another attempt by progressives to not talk, discuss, debate an issue by attaching labels to it. Xenophobic, racist, bigot, religious-nut, and now, climatorophobia. The following is from Dennis Prager:This is easy to demonstrate. Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:
- Racist
- Sexist
- Homophobic
- Islamophobic
- Imperialist
- Bigoted
- Intolerant
And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:
- Peace
- Fairness
- Tolerance
- The poor
- The disenfranchised
- The environment
These two lists serve contemporary liberals in at least three ways. First, they attack the motives of non-liberals and thereby morally dismiss the non-liberal person.
Second, these words make it easy to be a liberal -- essentially all one needs to do is to memorize this brief list and apply the right term to any idea or policy. That is one reason young people are more likely to be liberal -- they have not had the time or inclination to think issues through, but they know they oppose racism, imperialism and bigotry, and that they are for peace, tolerance and the environment.
Third, they make the liberal feel good about himself -- by opposing conservative ideas and policies, he is automatically opposing racism, bigotry, imperialism, etc.
(NewsBusters import)
Global warming? Case closed. Consensus achieved. There can be no debate about it.ClimateGate? Never happened. I refuse to even acknowledge its existence. Must hang on to the global warming belief at all costs even against evidence to to the contrary.
That dogmatic stance pretty much sums up the attitude of Associated Press writer Malcolm Ritter in his story about how global warming skepticism can be ascribed to psychological faults:
The Copenhagen talks on climate change were convened with a sense of urgency that many ordinary folks don't share. Why is that? One big reason:
It's hard for people to get excited about a threat that seems far away in space and time, psychologists say.
"It's not in people's faces," said psychologist Robert Gifford of the University of Victoria in British Columbia. "It is in the media, but not in their everyday experience. That's quite a different thing."
Oh, I see. Global warming skepticism has nothing to do with the observable evidence or with the recently discovered falsified evidence revealed in the ClimateGate emails and East Anglia University CRU computer source code. No. It can all be ascribed to psychology as presented by global warming dogmatist Ritter:
Gifford said people tend to attach less importance to future problems than more immediate concerns. That may be a holdover from early days of human evolution, when "things far away didn't matter, things in the future didn't matter. It was whether the tiger or the enemy was just around the corner," he said.
In fact, scientists say global warming's influence is already visible and it could get worse within decades if no action is taken. The average number of heat-wave deaths in Chicago could more than double by 2050, and killer heat waves in Europe could also increase by that time, experts say. Arctic summers may be almost free of sea ice by 2030 or sooner, they say.
Could..could...may. This is called reality? It sounds more like speculation. And Ritter picked a really poor example when he stated that heat-wave deaths in Chicago could more than double in 2050. In the actual, not could, world Chicago has just experienced an unusually cold summer. However, this won't stop Gifford in his junior league psychological analysis starting with the "13 dragons."
Even among people who accept global warming as a serious issue, there are additional psychological barriers to getting them to take significant action against it. Gifford, who studies pro-environmental behavior, calls them the 13 dragons.Among them:
- Environmental numbness: "OK, climate change. I've heard that one before. Been there, done that."
- A feeling of powerlessness: "Anything I do is just a drop in the bucket."
- Conflicting goals: "Yes, I should be changing my behavior, but I've got to look for a job, I've got to go to the gym, I have to take my kids to soccer practice, so I'll do it tomorrow."
- A sense of inequality: "Why should I take the bus when my boss is driving a Cadillac?"
- Loss of freedom: `It's a free country. I can drive a Hummer if I want to."
- Tokenism: "I recycle, so thank you very much, I'm finished."
- Excessive optimism: "It will work out in the end. The scientists will figure it out, so I don't have to do anything."
- And then there's just plain habit. It's "a huge but boring force," Gifford said. "We just tend to do today what we did yesterday."
How about a 14th dragon?
Perhaps Malcolm Ritter should look to himself in the global warming psychological problem department.Dogmatically clinging to a "scientific" belief without considering any evidence to the contrary by writing off dissenting views as merely due to psychology.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Conservative Christians Fight for Gay Rights (4-Posts Imported from Libertarian Republican)
(Imported from LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICAN)
Take note these are "real" rights, not making sexual proclivity a "right."
Take note these are "real" rights, not making sexual proclivity a "right."
Republican Senator John Ensign strongly condemns Uganda's proposed Death Penalty for Gays
Nevada Senator Stands Up for Human Rights: Calls for International Condemnation of African Nation
"Obviously it's a law that's pretty outrageous... even if you disagree with the way people live, what Uganda is doing, I think most people would agree that's pretty outrageous..."
"Obviously it's a law that's pretty outrageous... even if you disagree with the way people live, what Uganda is doing, I think most people would agree that's pretty outrageous..."
Comments from recent days...
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) (ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee):
U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK):
U.S. Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA):
Christian Pastor Rick Warren:
Editor's Note - See our sister site Worldwide Liberty for a full explanation of the proposed Uganda legislation and other related info. Also, LR hopes to have an edition of "Libertarian Politics Live" tonight at 8 pm to discuss the controversy with top guests. Stay tuned...
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) (ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee):
"I am deeply saddened and troubled that such blatantly ignorant and hate-filled legislation would see the light of day anywhere in today's world. It needs to be stopped in its tracks immediately."
U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK):
"Over the past two decades, political, religious, and community leaders in Uganda have united to promote a rare, winning strategy against HIV that addresses the unique and common risks of every segment of society. Sadly, some who oppose Uganda's common sense ABC strategy are using an absurd proposal to execute gays to undermine this coalition and winning strategy...
Officials in Uganda should come to their senses and take whatever steps are necessary to withdraw this proposal that will do nothing but harm a winning strategy that is saving lives."
U.S. Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA):
"Based on what I’ve been able to learn about the legislation and from the stand point that I’m a born again Christian, I can tell you that I don’t agree with this un-Christian and unjust proposal, and I hope the Ugandan officials dismiss it..."
Christian Pastor Rick Warren:The potential law is unjust, extreme and un-Christian toward homosexuals...
ALL life, no matter how humble or broken, whether unborn or dying, is precious to God. My wife, Kay, and I have devoted our lives and our ministry to saving the lives of people, including homosexuals, who are HIV positive. It would be inconsistent to save some lives and wish death on others. We're not just pro-life. We are whole life."
"Finally, the freedom to make moral choices and our right to free expression are gifts endowed by God. Uganda is a democratic country with remarkable and wise people, and in a democracy everyone has a right to speak up. For these reasons, I urge you, the pastors of Uganda, to speak out against the proposed law."
Editor's Note - See our sister site Worldwide Liberty for a full explanation of the proposed Uganda legislation and other related info. Also, LR hopes to have an edition of "Libertarian Politics Live" tonight at 8 pm to discuss the controversy with top guests. Stay tuned...
GOProud Urges President Obama to Publicly Take a Stand against Proposed Uganda Law
Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director - "If the President wants to start earning the Nobel Peace Prize he is accepting, he can start by speaking out against this outrageous Ugandan law."Press Release, Dec. 10
(Washington, D.C.) - While the President is in Norway accepting a Nobel Peace Prize, Ugandan political leaders are considering a bill that criminalizes gays and lesbians. "If the President wants to start earning the Nobel Peace Prize he is accepting, he can start by speaking out against this outrageous Ugandan law," said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud - the only national organization for gay conservatives and their allies. "President Obama's lack of leadership on international human rights issues is appalling," continued LaSalvia. "From his refusal to confront the radically anti-gay regime in Iran to his refusal to speak out against this proposed Ugandan law - this President's silence speaks volumes about his priorities."
Ugandan political leaders have been debating legislation that would impose criminal penalties on gays and lesbians living in Uganda. Certain proposed versions of the bill have even called for the death penalty or life imprisonment for being gay. While President Obama has been silent, leading Republicans have spoken out forcefully against the proposed Ugandan legislation.
"It is time for this administration to stand up for human rights across the globe. Not another day should pass without President Obama making it clear that he unconditionally opposes this Ugandan law," concluded LaSalvia.
Note - GOPProud.org is less than 2 years old. They split off from Log Cabin Clubs viewing them as too moderate. They will be official Co-Sponsors in Feb. 2010 of C-PAC in DC.
Uganda, Rwanda starting to feel Heavy Hand of Muslim FundamentalismFrom Eric Dondero:
Islam is on the rise across Sub-Saharan Africa, including Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya and Nigeria. And estimated 9.5 million Muslims now live in Uganda, for example. That is approximately 12.1% of the population (2004 figures). The Muslim dominated Luo Tribe headed by Raila Odinga now has a power sharing arrangement for the first time with the formerly Christian-dominated government of Kenya. Nigeria is suffering from a bloody civil war in its northern region with Muslim Separatists supported by Jihadist groups in Sudan, and Niger.
With the increase in fundamentalist Islam in the region comes an increasing push to institute laws consistent with Sharia. Among these include radical Anti-Homosexuality laws.
Homosexuality is already outlawed in 38 out of 53 African nations, all in Muslim or Muslim-dominated countries. Now Muslim groups are pushing for the sexual identity to be outlawed in countries previously immuned to Islamic domination.
From the Population Institute website:
Nigeria has a similar bill waiting to reach its statute books and already allows the death penalty for homosexuality in northern states, as does Sudan. Burundi criminalised homosexuality in April this year, joining 37 other African nations where gay sex is already illegal. Egypt and Mali are creeping towards criminalization, using morality laws against same-sex couples.
Rwanda, which suffered from one of the worst genocides in human history in the early 1990s, is the first of these countries to consider completely outlawing Homosexuality. From Queerty:
On December 16, 2009, the lower house of the Rwandan Parliament will hold its final debate on a draft revision of the penal code that will, for the first time, make homosexuality a crime in Rwanda.Neighboring Uganda has followed suit.
CNN reported on December 9 that the Ugandan Parliament is debating severe restrictions on Homosexuals. The "Anti-Homosexuality Bill" includes these provisions:
• Gays and lesbians convicted of having gay sex would be sentenced, at minimum, to life in prisonAccording to CNN:
• People who test positive for HIV may be executed
• Homosexuals who have sex with a minor, or engage in homosexual sex more than once, may also receive the death penalty
A leading Muslim cleric, Sheikh Ramathan Shaban Mubajje, has called for gays to be rounded up and banished to an island until they die.
Also, Sheikh Nsereko Mutumba, the public relations officer of the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council has been quoted as saying:We believe that Allah created us to multiply and worship him. How will a gay do that? Muslims are aware that homosexuality is a sin and I am sure that the churches also teach that this vice is a sin and unacceptable in any society.The International Community has been slow to react. Political sensitivities with its native Muslim population have kept the United Kingdom from denouncing the Ugandan legislation. In the US the Obama administration, through Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now just beginning to issue mild and carefully worded criticisms.
Ironically, it has been Christians who have been the strongest and quickest in their reactions against the anti-homosexual proposals. A coalition of Christian leaders in the US strongly condemned the actions of the Ugandan Government and issued the following statement:
"Regardless of the diverse theological views of our religious traditions regarding the morality of homosexuality, in our churches, communities and families, we seek to embrace our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters as God's children, worthy of respect and love," the statement read.
"Tea Party" Fares More Positively Than Republican Party
.... Republican voters are paying a lot more attention to the Tea Party movement than anyone else. Forty-three percent (43%) of GOP voters are following news about the movement Very Closely. Another 30% are following it Somewhat Closely. Just 12% of Democrats are following stories about the Tea Party movement Very Closely.
Seventy percent (70%) of Republican voters have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party movement while only seven percent (7%) offer an unfavorable view. Interestingly, 49% of Democrats have no opinion one way or the other.
Among unaffiliated voters, 43% have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party efforts while 20% say the opposite.
Forty-one percent (41%) of all voters nationwide say Republicans and Democrats are so much alike that a new party is needed to represent the American people. Republicans are evenly divided on this question, while Democrats overwhelmingly disagree. However, among those not affiliated with either major party, 60% agree that a new party is needed, and only 25% disagree. Men are far more likely than women to believe a new party is needed....
Amazing Tilt-Shift Photography Video
Tilt-shift miniature faking is a process in which a photograph of a life-size location or object is manipulated so that it looks like a photograph of a miniature scale model. By distorting the focus of the photo, the artist simulates the shallow depth of field normally encountered with macro lenses making the scene seem much smaller than it actually is. Many miniature faked photographs are taken from a high angle to further simulate the effect of looking down on a miniature. Objects oriented horizontally, such as the train in the first example, make better subjects for tilt-shift miniature faking than vertically oriented objects.
Scare Tactics via Obama (Big Government)
by Dana Loesch
You mean if we don’t add a trillion dollars to the deficit then the country will … go … bankrupt?
(more…)President Obama told ABC News’ Charles Gibson in an interview that if Congress does not pass health care legislation that will bring down costs, the federal government “will go bankrupt.”
The president laid out a dire scenario of what will happen if his health care reform effort fails.
“If we don’t pass it, here’s the guarantee….your premiums will go up, your employers are going to load up more costs on you,” he said. “Potentially they’re going to drop your coverage, because they just can’t afford an increase of 25 percent, 30 percent in terms of the costs of providing health care to employees each and every year."
The president said that the costs of Medicare and Medicaid are on an “unsustainable” trajectory and if there is no action taken to bring them down, “the federal government will go bankrupt.”
Harry's 60? NOPE! Abortion One of the Sticking Issues (HotAir)
(HotAir Import)
The path to 60 just got a lot more difficult:
In an interview Thursday with a Nebraska radio station, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said new compromise language on abortion funding is unacceptable.
“As it is right now, without further modifications, it isn’t sufficient,” Nelson told KLIN radio in Lincoln, NE.
This could be a significant blow to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s effort to line up 60 votes in the coming days for the health care bill. Nelson has said he would filibuster the bill unless the abortion language mirrored what was included in the House bill.
Even if abortion is addressed to his satisfaction, “that is not enough” for Nelson commit to voting for the bill, he said.
How bad will this get? Barack Obama hasn’t even addressed the issue of abortion with Nelson directly. That’s a pretty interesting picture of disinterest coming from the Oval Office on what is supposed to be Obama’s highest priority on his domestic agenda.
Harry Reid will have to go back to the drawing board on abortion funding, but that may not be possible. His progressive wing is already in near revolt over having to vote for a bill with no government-run plan in it. They wanted a precursor to a single-payer system; in fact, that was the entire point of the health-care reform push. Now they’re going to be asked to kill funding for abortion as well, having worked for months to build a path around the Hyde Amendment. There is no way that will get through to cloture, and no way it will pass in the House even if it did.
Dennis (Short Movie)
These short films tend to be not very exciting, done by people trying to make some sort of statement, typically have no point, on and on. However, when I can watch one all the way through, I usually post it.
Antarctic Sea Ice for November 2009 Higher Than 1979 -- Refuting Democratic Propaganda
Contrary to media reports Antarctic sea ice continues to expand. Ice totals for November 2009 are significantly higher than 1979 when measurements began. The main stream media concentrates on a couple of small areas of the Antarctic in order to scare you in to believing that Antarctica is melting, when in fact its gaining ice.
From the National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado
Since measurements began in 1979 antarctic sea ice has continued to expand, contrary to what the news media would have you believe. We bring this information to you month after month and still there is no sign of the main stream media picking up on the story. They continue to discuss the relatively small areas of the Western Antarctic Peninsula that are melting due to changes in ocean currents.
You may have heard that some of the “computer models” predicted increases in antarctic ice, but they predicted increased “interior ice” due to increased snow fall. None of the models predicted increased sea ice around the antarctic. Yet that is what we have, more sea ice in November of 2009 than what we had in November of 1979 when measurements began. This is highly significant yet hardly anyone in the main stream media (MSM) is talking about it.
Sea ice is much different than interior ice. Some of the computer models predicted increased ice over the interior of antarctic. If you've ever lived in the extreme cold temperature regions you already understand the reason why. When it gets very cold the air become drier and it snows less, as the temperature warms towards freezing it actually snows more. Since the antarctic rarely even gets close to freezing its understandable that warming would cause more snow fall. Over time compacted snow would lead to more ice. But that is not what is happening here. We're seeing increases in “sea ice”, this ice is over the ocean. Sea ice is caused by colder temperatures, not by increased snow fall. But we hear nothing from either the MSM or the scientific community. Especially compared to the out 6%-7% decrease at the arctic (this isn't year over year, this is a 6% decline since 1980!).
Antarctic Sea Ice for November
Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted. According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1°F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004. All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the main stream media has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions. They regularly show Antarctic sea ice shelves breaking apart, which is an entirely normal process (though they never tell you that part). The main stream media and certain segments of the scientific community truly must have no shame.
You may have heard that some of the “computer models” predicted increases in antarctic ice, but they predicted increased “interior ice” due to increased snow fall. None of the models predicted increased sea ice around the antarctic. Yet that is what we have, more sea ice in November of 2009 than what we had in November of 1979 when measurements began. This is highly significant yet hardly anyone in the main stream media (MSM) is talking about it.
Sea ice is much different than interior ice. Some of the computer models predicted increased ice over the interior of antarctic. If you've ever lived in the extreme cold temperature regions you already understand the reason why. When it gets very cold the air become drier and it snows less, as the temperature warms towards freezing it actually snows more. Since the antarctic rarely even gets close to freezing its understandable that warming would cause more snow fall. Over time compacted snow would lead to more ice. But that is not what is happening here. We're seeing increases in “sea ice”, this ice is over the ocean. Sea ice is caused by colder temperatures, not by increased snow fall. But we hear nothing from either the MSM or the scientific community. Especially compared to the out 6%-7% decrease at the arctic (this isn't year over year, this is a 6% decline since 1980!).
Antarctic Sea Ice for November
Extent Concentration 2009 16.3 million sq km 11.6 million sq km 1995 16.0 million sq km 11.4 million sq km 1979 15.9 million sq km 11.2 million sq kmThis continues a long trend of increasing sea ice that has been noted here for several months.
Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted. According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1°F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004. All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the main stream media has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions. They regularly show Antarctic sea ice shelves breaking apart, which is an entirely normal process (though they never tell you that part). The main stream media and certain segments of the scientific community truly must have no shame.
Going Green Kills -- Yet Another Example of How Enviromentalists Are Trying to Kill People for Gaia
(Are These Obama's Green Jobs?)
HotAir has an interesting "Green" update that has to do with the Enviro-Fascists up north and back east. They are the LED street lights that apparently do not get warm enough to melt the snow on the street lights, thus, causing accidents -- one death resulting so far. I hope the family sues:
....[read more]....The effort to change the bulbs traffic lights from high-energy incandescents to low-power LEDs does make sense — in those areas of the country where snow is not a factor. Unfortunately, just as with the decision of Seattle to stop using salt for clearing roads of snow, the decision to go green has created fatal traffic conditions for no good reason whatsoever. At least one person has died from the use of LED traffic lights in snowstorms, as the LEDs are not hot enough to melt the snow when it covers them (via Instapundit):
Cities around the country that have installed energy-efficient traffic lights are discovering a hazardous downside: The bulbs don’t burn hot enough to melt snow and can become crusted over in a storm — a problem blamed for dozens of accidents and at least one death.
“I’ve never had to put up with this in the past,” said Duane Kassens, a driver from West Bend who got into a fender-bender recently because he couldn’t see the lights. “The police officer told me the new lights weren’t melting the snow. How is that safe?”
Many communities have switched to LED bulbs in their traffic lights because they use 90 percent less energy than the old incandescent variety, last far longer and save money. Their great advantage is also their drawback: They do not waste energy by producing heat. …
Illinois authorities said that during a storm in April, 34-year-old Lisa Richter could see she had a green light and began making a left turn. A driver coming from the opposite direction did not realize the stoplight was obscured by snow and plowed into Richter’s vehicle, killing her.
“Would the accident have occurred if the lights had been clear? I would be willing to bet not,” Oswego police Detective Rob Sherwood said.
The picture on the front page shows the traffic light in Oswego that caused the death of Lisa Richter earlier this year. The snow made the traffic light useless. No driver could possibly have spotted a red light, and even the green would have been difficult to discern at speed, especially during the daytime. Oswego may just have well turned off its traffic lights and set up four-way stops at every intersection for all the good these systems do in snowstorms — when traffic lights are more necessary than ever.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
NRO's The Corner -- Obama's Latest Appointment
The White House has announced that Mari Del Carmen Aponte will be nominated by the President to become the U.S. ambassador to El Salvador. Aponte is a former director of the radical Mexican organization La Raza and of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education fund. (More from Judicial Watch, here.)
This is the second time she's been proposed for an ambassadorship. The first didn't go so well. President Clinton nominated her to be ambassador to the Dominican Republic but, as detailed on Andrew Breitbart's Big Government, it turned out that she had "co-habited" with an agent of the Cuban intelligence service. In fact, a confidential U.S. intelligence memo alleged that she had been recruited to become a Cuban spy in her own right. The revelations caused her nomination to be quietly withdrawn ... whereupon she reportedly refused to answer questions from the FBI (saying that since she was no longer seeking an executive branch slot, she no longer needed to cooperate in a background security check). Now, despite that debacle, and heedless of the controversies stoked by Van Jones, Kevin Jennings, et al., Obama wants to press ahead with Aponte.
Maybe you don't buy my theory that the President is an Alinskyite radical, but I still think annointing him a neocon based on his Oslo performance may be a tad premature.
ETTs (Embedded Tactical Trainers) Talk About the Consistant Failure of Training the Afghan Army
(HotAir h/t)
I hate to do it, but I am going to re-post the Ken Jowitt video I edited after this initial video post. A great point was made about a nationalistic pride in this video. Which caused me to think of WWII -- Germany was very "nationalistic, as was Japan, which drove these people to make their country great again. There doesn't seem to be any "nationalism," as the ETT put it, that can drive these Afghan men. There is however a worldwide Islamic state (nationalism) driving the enemy. Likewise, if the majority of Mulsim believers only have nationalistic pride for this worldwide hope for an Islamic state, then no amount of pride for Afghanistan will overcome that. I say put up some bases in Afghanistan and let these buggers come to us to die... for years if need be. We have the nationalism to stop the global ambitions of this cultic Jihad.
Democrats Breaking Rules -- Plus, Some Senate History Comes Up
This is with thanks to HotAir. What it shows is a rule of the Senate being broken by the Democrats. The second video is the minority leader taking the sitting president to task. By the way, the caning mentioned by Sen. Mitch McConnell is that of a Democrat nearly beating to death a Republican because the Republican was trying to stop slavery/segregation.
(WND Import)
The original targets of the Ku Klux Klan were Republicans, both black and white, according to a new television program and book, which describe how the Democrats started the KKK and for decades harassed the GOP with lynchings and threats.
An estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites died at the end of KKK ropes from 1882 to 1964.
The documentation has been assembled by David Barton of Wallbuilders and published in his book "Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White," which reveals that not only did the Democrats work hand-in-glove with the Ku Klux Klan for generations, they started the KKK and endorsed its mayhem.
"Of all forms of violent intimidation, lynchings were by far the most effective," Barton said in his book. "Republicans often led the efforts to pass federal anti-lynching laws and their platforms consistently called for a ban on lynching. Democrats successfully blocked those bills and their platforms never did condemn lynchings."
Further, the first grand wizard of the KKK was honored at the 1868 Democratic National Convention, no Democrats voted for the 14th Amendment to grant citizenship to former slaves and, to this day, the party website ignores those decades of racism, he said.
"Contributing to the evidences was the 1871 appearance before Congress of leading South Carolina Democrat E.W. Seibels who testified that 'they [the Ku Klux Klan] belong to the reform part – [that is, to] our party, the Democratic Party,'" Barton writes.
"The Klan terrorized black Americans through murders and public floggings; relief was granted only if individuals promised not to vote for Republican tickets, and violation of this oath was punishable by death," he said. "Since the Klan targeted Republicans in general, it did not limit its violence simply to black Republicans; white Republicans were also included."
Barton also has covered the subject in one episode of his American Heritage Series of television programs, which is being broadcast now on Trinity Broadcasting Network and Cornerstone Television.
Barton told WND his comments are not a condemnation or endorsement of any party or candidate, but rather a warning that voters even today should be aware of what their parties and candidates stand for.
His book outlines the aggressive pro-slavery agenda held by the Democratic Party for generations leading up to the Civil War, and how that did not die with the Union victory in that war of rebellion.
Even as the South was being rebuilt, the votes in Congress consistently revealed a continuing pro-slavery philosophy on the part of the Democrats, the book reveals.
Three years after Appomattox, the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, granting blacks citizenship in the United States, came before Congress: 94 percent of Republicans endorsed it.
"The records of Congress reveal that not one Democrat – either in the House or the Senate – voted for the 14th Amendment," Barton wrote. "Three years after the Civil War, and the Democrats from the North as well as the South were still refusing to recognize any rights of citizenship for black Americans."
He also noted that South Carolina Gov. Wade Hampton at the 1868 Democratic National Convention inserted a clause in the party platform declaring the Congress' civil rights laws were "unconstitutional, revolutionary, and void."
It was the same convention when Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, the first grand wizard of the KKK, was honored for his leadership.
Barton's book notes that in 1868, Congress heard testimony from election worker Robert Flournoy, who confessed while he was canvassing the state of Mississippi in support of the 13th and 14th Amendments, he could find only one black, in a population of 444,000 in the state, who admitted being a Democrat.
Nor is Barton the only person to raise such questions. In 2005, National Review published an article raising similar points. The publication said in 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, deployed the 82nd Airborne Division to desegregate the Little Rock, Ark., schools over the resistance of Democrat Gov. Orval Faubus.
Further, three years later, Eisenhower signed the GOP's 1960 Civil Rights Act after it survived a five-day, five-hour filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats, and in 1964, Democrat President Lyndon Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act after former Klansman Robert Byrd's 14-hour filibuster, and the votes of 22 other Senate Democrats, including Tennessee's Al Gore Sr., failed to scuttle the plan.
The current version of the "History" page on the party website lists a number of accomplishments – from 1792, 1798, 1800, 1808, 1812, 1816, 1824 and 1828, including its 1832 nomination of Andrew Jackson for president. It follows up with a name change, and the establishment of the Democratic National Committee, but then leaps over the Civil War and all of its issues to talk about the end of the 19th Century, William Jennings Bryan and women's suffrage.
A spokesman with the Democrats refused to comment for WND on any of the issues. "You're not going to get a comment," said the spokesman who identified himself as Luis.
"Why would Democrats skip over their own history from 1848 to 1900?" Barton asked. "Perhaps because it's not the kind of civil rights history they want to talk about – perhaps because it is not the kind of civil rights history they want to have on their website."
The National Review article by Deroy Murdock cited the 1866 comment from Indiana Republican Gov. Oliver Morton condemning Democrats for their racism.
"Every one who shoots down Negroes in the streets, burns Negro schoolhouses and meeting-houses, and murders women and children by the light of their own flaming dwellings, calls himself a Democrat," Morton said.
It also cited the 1856 criticism by U.S. Sen. Charles Sumner, R-Mass., of pro-slavery Democrats. "Congressman Preston Brooks (D-S.C.) responded by grabbing a stick and beating Sumner unconscious in the Senate chamber. Disabled, Sumner could not resume his duties for three years."
By the admission of the Democrats themselves, on their website, it wasn't until Harry Truman was elected that "Democrats began the fight to bring down the final barriers of race and gender."
"That is an accurate description," wrote Barton. "Starting with Harry Truman, Democrats began – that is, they made their first serious efforts – to fight against the barriers of race; yet … Truman's efforts were largely unsuccessful because of his own Democratic Party."
Even then, the opposition to rights for blacks was far from over. As recently as 1960, Mississippi Democratic Gov. Hugh White had requested Christian evangelist Billy Graham segregate his crusades, something Graham refused to do. "And when South Carolina Democratic Gov. George Timmerman learned Billy Graham had invited African Americans to a Reformation Rally at the state Capitol, he promptly denied use of the facilities to the evangelist," Barton wrote.
The National Review noted that the Democrats' "Klan-coddling" today is embodied in Byrd, who once wrote that, "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia."
The article suggested a contrast with the GOP, which, when former Klansman David Duke ran for Louisiana governor in 1991 as a Republican, was "scorned" by national GOP officials.
Until 1935, every black federal legislator was Republican, and it was Republicans who appointed the first black Air Force and Army four-star generals, established Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday as a national holiday, and named the first black national-security adviser, secretary of state, the research reveals.
Current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said: "The first Republican I knew was my father, and he is still the Republican I most admire. He joined our party because the Democrats in Jim Crow Alabama of 1952 would not register him to vote. The Republicans did. My father has never forgotten that day, and neither have I."
Barton's documentation said the first opponents of slavery "and the chief advocates for racial equal rights were the churches (the Quakers, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.). Furthermore, religious leaders such as Quaker Anthony Benezet were the leading spokesmen against slavery, and evangelical leaders such as Presbyterian signer of the Declaration Benjamin Rush were the founders of the nation's first abolition societies."
During the years surrounding the Civil War, "the most obvious difference between the Republican and Democrat parties was their stands on slavery," Barton said. Republicans called for its abolition, while Democrats declared: "All efforts of the abolitionists, or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient [to initiate] steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and all such efforts have the inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people."
Wallbuilders also cited John Alden's 1885 book, "A Brief History of the Republican Party" in noting that the KKK's early attacks were on Republicans as much as blacks, in that blacks were adopting the Republican identity en masse.
"In some places the Ku Klux Klan assaulted Republican officials in their houses or offices or upon the public roads; in others they attacked the meetings of negroes and displaced them," Alden wrote. "Its ostensible purpose at first was to keep the blacks in order and prevent them from committing small depredations upon the property of whites, but its real motives were essentially political … The negroes were invariable required to promise not to vote the Republican ticket, and threatened with death if they broke their promises."
Barton told WND the most cohesive group of political supporters in America now is African-Americans. He said most consider their affiliation with the Democratic party long term.
But he said he interviewed a black pastor in Mississippi who recalled his grandmother never "would let a Democrat in the house, and he never knew what she was talking about." After a review of history, he knew, Barton said.
Citing President George Washington's farewell address, Barton told WND, "Washington had a great section on the love of party, if you love party more than anything else, what it will do to a great nation."
"We shouldn't love a party [over] a candidate's principles or values," he told WND.
Washington's farewell address noted the "danger" from parties is serious.
"Let me now … warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. … The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism," Washington said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)