The Good News

What’s new today

Our # 1 questions not if Barack Obama is a citizen, but who his real father was.  #2 shows that the Occupy movement is becoming less and less popular.  #3 talks about how a movement like Occupy becomes more and more radical.  #4 talks of the drugs in Occupy Boston and #5 declares Occupy New York as ceased to be a protest movement and is rapidly becoming a crime wave.  #6 is the story of a politician who decided to post a nude photo of himself online.  Not very smart.  #7 is a question for President Obama regarding Libya.  #8 talks about a housing bubble in China. 

1.   Who Was Barack Obama’s father? 

It is widely held that Barack Obama, Sr., goat herder from Kenya, is the father of President Obama. WE NOW KNOW THAT THIS CONTENTION IS PROBABLY FALSE.

In Obama's autobiography, Dreams from My Father, he identifies Barack Obama, Sr. as his father. This book has been the primary source of information for all who have written about him. Yet two strong supporters of the president -- David Remnick, author of The Bridge, a biography of Obama, and Janny Scott, author of A Singular Woman, a biography of Ann Dunham -- have expressed doubts about the factual basis of Dreams:

Remnick: "OBAMA'S MEMOIR IS A MIXTURE OF VERIFIABLE FACT, RECOLLECTION, RECREATION, INVENTION AND ARTFUL SHAPING."

Scott: "He gives his account of his parents' fleeting coming together and breaking apart in language and cadences reminiscent of those of folk tales or myths."…

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_case_against_barack_obama_sr.html#ixzz1d0wz7RC6

I’ve read other articles about this.  In this one the author thinks Obama’s mother was pregnant by an unnamed person and Barack Sr. married her to extend his student visa and for money.

2.   Thumbs down for Occupy in new nationwide poll

THE OCCUPY WALL STREET MOVEMENT MAY BE STARTING TO LOSE ITS LUSTER with the American public, with four in ten now saying they have an unfavorable view of the protests, a new nationwide UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows.

The online poll of 1,005 American adults reveals that 35 PERCENT STILL HAVE A POSITIVE IMPRESSION OF THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT, BUT 40 PERCENT NOW SAY THEY HAVE AN UNFAVORABLE OPINION. About one quarter of the poll respondents had no opinion or were unsure.

The UMass Lowell/Herald poll, conducted Oct. 28 through Nov. 1, is the first to show negative sentiment tilting against the Occupy movement, which has now spread to hundreds of cities, including Boston. Several other comparable national polls conducted earlier in October showed slightly more positive than negative views of the protests.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1378932

The longer this goes on, the more negative the views are going to be. 

3.   Inside the Orwellian machinations in Occupy Wall Street

Last month,  I WROTE THAT THE OCCUPY WALL STREET ORGANIZATION LOOKED LIKE A CHILD FROM A MARRIAGE BETWEEN ANIMAL FARM AND ANIMAL HOUSE. In an insider account  written by an Occupier alarmed at the hijacking of the movement — and its funding — from the OWS “General Assembly,” it’s clear that the analogy didn’t go quite far enough. It’s Animal Farm meets Animal House, all right, but with Niedermeyer running the Deltas….

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/06/inside-the-orwellian-machinations-in-occupy-wall-street/

This is a very interesting posting.  If it is true, it is a great example of how a movement gets taken over and develops its own 1%.  Ever wonder how the Nazis and the Communists became ruthless?  Read this and find out. 

4.  Occupy Boston:  Things are going Downhill

Three people arrested Thursday night inside the Occupy Boston camp have been CHARGED WITH DEALING CRACK COCAINE.

WBZ NewsRadio 1030’s Carl Stevens, who spent the night at the camp a few weeks ago, talked to a man who spends most nights at Occupy Boston. He said things have gone downhill.

“THINGS HAVE CHANGED DRASTICALLY. IT SEEMS TO BE DETERIORATING,” THE MAN TOLD CARL. “A LOT OF DRUG USE, ALCOHOL USE, PEOPLE GETTING INTO FIGHTS… IT’S DETERIORATING PRETTY QUICK.”

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/11/04/3-charged-with-dealing-crack-occupy-boston-deteriorating/#.Trdc8XMiY-E.facebook

Nothing surprising here other than the MSM failure to report this.

5.   Meanwhile in NYC: It’s no longer a protest movement

…“Every single night it’s the same thing. I mean, some guy was a victim of rape!” an officer snarls. “There comes a time when it’s over. THIS IS A DISASTER. IT’S ALL WE’RE DOING, EVERY TWO SECONDS, IS LOCKING SOMEBODY UP EVERY TIME. It’s done.

“It’s done,” he repeats. “OCCUPY WALL STREET IS NO LONGER A PROTEST.”

Scenes like this -- and far worse -- have been playing out since the Zuccotti Park “occupation” began on Sept. 17.

The parcel is now a sliver of madness, rife with sex attacks, robberies and vigilante justice.

It’s a leaderless bazaar that’s been divided into state-like camps -- with tents packed together so densely that the only way to add more would be to stack them.

And despite an NYPD watchtower overhead and the entire north side of Zuccotti lined with police vehicles, IT IS QUICKLY BECOMING ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACES IN NEW YORK CITY….

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/my_in_tents_night_amid_anarchy_of_ush5s5NscUZincUN0tF0yO#ixzz1d2ev5khR

The Lord of the Flies in real life. 

6.   Another Democrat without a clue

Monroe County Legislator STEPHEN ECKEL ABRUPTLY REMOVED TWO NUDE PHOTOS OF HIMSELF FROM A PERSONAL WEBSITE ON FRIDAY after being questioned about them by a television reporter.

ECKEL, 46, A DEMOCRAT FROM ROCHESTER IN THE MIDST OF A RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN, said in a phone interview that he took the photos of himself in 2000 as a student at the Visual Studies Workshop while working on a master of fine arts degree at The College at Brockport. He received the degree a year later.

The sepia-toned photos, taken with a wide lens at an elevated angle, WERE FULL FRONTAL NUDE SHOTS OF ECKEL, BUT WERE NOT SEXUAL IN NATURE. HE DESCRIBED THEM AS ART

http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-york-democrat-yanks-nude-photos-off.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FCnSK+%28JammieWearingFool%29

Some people don’t have a lick of sense. 

7.   Questions for the President

The U.N. envoy to Libya reports that WEAPONS DEPOTS IN THAT COUNTRY REMAIN UNGUARDED AND LARGE AMOUNTS OF WEAPONRY HAVE GONE MISSING, including thousands of shoulder-fired missiles. At least two sites contain chemical weapons and nuclear material, including approximately 7,000 drums of uranium. Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro says TERRORIST GROUPS HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN OBTAINING THE MISSILES, WHICH “COULD POSE A THREAT TO CIVIL AVIATION.”

The Daily Telegraph reports that LIBYAN REBEL LEADER ABDEL-HAKIM AL-HASIDI HAS ADMITTED THAT A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THE LIBYAN REBELS CONSISTED OF AL-QAEDA FIGHTERS, many of whom fought U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Numerous news outlets report that in the last two weeks, scores of al-Qaeda flags have been raised over Benghazi and throughout Libya, including over the headquarters of the Libyan rebels.

Given the evident allegiances and sympathies of many of the Libyan rebels, what is the probability that al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups will acquire, or already have acquired, at least some of the missing Libyan weapons?

Do we have any basis for determining how many of the chemical weapons and drums of uranium are missing?

IS LIBYA A LESSER THREAT TO U.S. SECURITY NOW THAN IT WAS A YEAR AGO, OR IS IT A GREATER ONE?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282430/todays-questions-president-peter-kirsanow

We don’t have an answer today, but perhaps we should hold off on that “Mission Accomplished” banner. 

8.Property Prices Collapse in China. Is This a Crash?

4 comments, 0 called-out

+ Comment now

RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY PRICES ARE IN FREEFALL IN CHINA as developers race to meet revenue targets for the year in a quickly deteriorating market. The country’s largest builders began discounting homes in Shanghai, Beijing, and Shenzhen in recent weeks, and the trend has now spread to second- and third-tier cities such as Hangzhou, Hefei, and Chongqing. In Chongqing, for instance, Hong Kong-based Hutchison Whampoa cut asking prices 32% at its Cape Coral project. “The price war has begun,” said Alan Chiang Sheung-lai of property consultant DTZ to the South China Morning Post.

WHAT STARTED SLOWLY IN SEPTEMBER TURNED INTO A ROUT BY THE MIDDLE OF LAST MONTH—NORMALLY A GOOD PERIOD FOR SALES—WHEN SHANGHAI DEVELOPERS STARTED TO SLASH ASKING PRICES. Analysts then expected falling property values to move Premier Wen Jiabao to relax tightening measures, such as increases in mortgage rates and prohibitions on second-home purchases, intended to cool the market.

They were wrong. After a State Council meeting on October 29, Mr. Wen affirmed his policy, stating that local authorities should continue to “strictly implement the central government’s real estate policies in the coming months to let citizens see the results of the curbs.” Then, the selling began in earnest as “desperate” developers competed among themselves to unload inventory. One builder—Excellence Group—even said it would sell flats in Huizhou at its development cost.

CITI’S OSCAR CHOI BELIEVES PRICES WILL DECLINE ANOTHER 10% NEXT YEAR, but that’s a conservative estimate. Even state-funded experts are more pessimistic. For example, CAO JIANHAI OF THE PRESTIGIOUS CHINESE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES SEES PRICE CUTS OF 50% ON HOMES IF THE GOVERNMENT CONTINUES ITS COOLING MEASURES.

When Beijing’s pet analysts are saying prices could halve in a few months, we can be sure they are thinking the eventual sell-off will be worse. In any event, the markets are bracing for trouble. INVESTORS ARE DUMPING BOTH THE BONDS AND THE SHARES OF CHINESE DEVELOPERS, and legendary bear Jim Chanos, citing the property market, late last month said he is still not covering his short positions on China.

One does not have to agree that China will be “Dubai times 1,000—or worse”—Chanos’s memorable phrase—TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE UNWINDING OF “THE BIGGEST HOUSING BUBBLE EVER CREATED” WILL BE ESPECIALLY PAINFUL. Analysts have great confidence in Beijing’s technocrats because they managed to continue to manufacture growth through the global downturn, but most of us seem to forget that the Chinese, through massive stimulus, created even bigger challenges for themselves. At the moment, Beijing has yet to resolve two intractable problems: persistent inflation and artificially high property prices.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonchang/2011/11/06/property-prices-collapse-in-china-is-this-a-crash/

China has a lot of problems which we aren’t familiar with.  This is just one of them.

Wednesday: 2012 election

Politics

Opiniongate: Another Obama Problem

As you've probably read or heard, PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA JUST GOT CAUGHT OPINION-SHOPPING FOR A GOVERNMENT LAWYER WHO WOULD SIGN OFF ON LETTING HIM KEEP AMERICA'S MILITARY INVOLVEMENT IN THE NATO WAR IN LIBYA GOING FORWARD WITHOUT HAVING TO GET CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION.
Tsk-tsk.

Is this just a lawyers' lash-up -- the proverbial tempest in a teapot, yet another "inside-the Beltway scandal" -- or should Americans actually care about this? Another politician being two-faced? Give me a break.

In fact, the issue is an important one, one which involves the lives of thousands of American sailors and Marines who are, literally, within shooting distance of the danger zone.

OPINION-GATE CONSISTS OF THE PRESIDENT'S REJECTION OF LEGAL OPINIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE WHICH SAID MR. OBAMA COULDN'T DO WHAT HE WANTED, IN FAVOR OF ONE FROM THE LEGAL COUNSEL OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT WHICH SAID HE COULD. Opinion-gate raises immediate questions of war and peace, the President's power as commander-in-chief and Congress' war-making power. In particularly, it spotlights the highly- controversial War Powers Resolution, which was passed over President Richard Nixon's veto by a Democratic Congress at the height of the Watergate Scandal.

The State Department opinion which Mr. Obama accepted says that he is not required to seek Congressional authorization for continuing to do what the United States military and covert services have been doing in Libya. The two opinions which he rejected -- from the legal officers which modern American presidents typically look to for such guidance -- say that he is required to do so….

….With Weinergate, the uptick in unemployment, the stock market drop, and now this, all in the same month, Christmas came early this year for conservatives. Republicans need to remember the advice of that great Democratic strategist, James Carville (aka "the Ragin' Cajun"): WHEN YOUR ENEMY IS DROWNING, THROW HIM A SAFE."

LOOKS LIKE MR. OBAMA ALREADY HAS ONE.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/is_another_shoe_yet_to_drop_in_opinion-gate.html

It just keeps getting murkier and murkier for the Obama reelection.


Is Obama's Libyan Attack Legal or Not?

Obama's being hassled because he's dropping bombs and bullets on Libyan targets without Congressional permission, A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION PER SOME REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. SOME ESTIMATES SAY THAT A YEAR OF IT WILL COST $160 B. Obama says it's within his powers because, though he can't declare war, this isn't war; IT'S A "KINETIC MILITARY ACTION," WHATEVER THAT MEANS.

He goes on to say that ground troops aren't exchanging fire, which adds to the non-warishness. But Libyans bombed or rocketed to death from the sky are still dead. It's not clear that the dead Libyans would appreciate the neat distinction. The Libyans themselves are pretty clearly having a civil war; OBAMA IS KILLING MORE OF THE FOLKS ON ONE SIDE THAN HE IS THOSE ON THE OTHER, THOUGH HE HASN'T DISCRIMINATED ENTIRELY. Apparently, it can be hard to tell which side he's shooting at from the air. That they are having a war seems to be clear to the Libyans even if it isn't clear to Obama.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/is_obamas_libyan_attack_legal_or_not.html

If you are a student of history and you are familiar with the miracle at Dunkirk, you know that the German’s stopped the war for a brief period and went to “Kinetic Military Action” as Herman Goering wanted to destroy the British at Dunkirk with his Luftwaffe.


Our Reactionary President

Barack Obama is the most reactionary president in the recent history of the United States. OBAMA SEEMS INTENT ON TURNING BACK THE CLOCK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF THE 1960S AND 1970S, WHEN RIGID POLITICAL ORTHODOXY, NOT AN OPEN MIND, ONCE GUIDED GOVERNMENT.

Take the economy. The 1980s implosion of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union proved that state control of the means of production guaranteed poverty and worse. The current insolvent and fragmenting European Union, and the stagnant economics of the exploding Middle East, remind us that state socialism does not work.

Why, then, would Obama, in horse-and-buggy fashion, go back to SUCH FOSSILIZED CONCEPTS AS ABSORBING THE NATION'S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, INCREASING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN THE ECONOMY BY TAKING OVER AUTOMOBILE CORPORATIONS, borrowing $5 trillion to spend on new entitlements, or proposing an array of much higher taxes -- all in a vain effort to ensure an equality of result?

Almost every key indicator of the current economy -- unemployment, deficits, housing, energy -- argues THAT OBAMA'S REACTIONARY ALL-POWERFUL STATIST APPROACH HAS ONLY MADE THINGS FAR WORSE….

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/16/our_reactionary_president_110229.html

What in the world will he run on?  "It could have been worse," isn't a real winning slogan.
President Barack Obama's Complete List of Historic Firsts

Yes, he's historic, alright.

• First President to ABROGATE BANKRUPTCY LAW to Turn Over Control


• First President to VIOLATE THE WAR POWERS ACT

• First President to ORCHESTRATE THE SALE OF MURDER WEAPONS TO MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS

• First President to be HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

• First President to DEFY A FEDERAL JUDGE'S COURT ORDER TO CEASE IMPLEMENTING THE 'HEALTH CARE REFORM' LAW

• First President to REQUIRE ALL AMERICANS TO PURCHASE A PRODUCT FROM A THIRD PARTY

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2011/06/president-barack-obamas-complete-list.html

Keep reading and you’ll get another 10 firsts.

10 Reasons Obama will be a one term President

Less than two months ago, buzzing from the president’s gutsy call to eliminate Osama bin Laden, liberal pontificators had practically sworn in Barack Obama for his second term. “For the GOP the sands are rushing through the hourglass,” Roger Simon wrote in a column whose title had wondered whether the president was “invincible.” He claimed that with Geronimo KIA, “the Republican field has been fried like an egg.” In reality, the president’s short-term popularity boost had fried the long-term judgment of his supporters.

THE REASONS TO BELIEVE OBAMA A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT ARE MANY AND WELL-GROUNDED.

10. The Declaration of Independents

CANDIDATE OBAMA ATTRACTED INDEPENDENTS. PRESIDENT OBAMA REPULSES THEM. The president entered office with the approval of 62 percent of independents. The latest Gallup poll shows support of just 42 percent of independents. …

9. A Redder America
Barack Obama faces a redder electoral map than he did in 2008. The 2012 presidential election is more than a year away, but THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE HAS ALREADY SHIFTED TWELVE VOTES AWAY FROM BLUE STATES AND TOWARD RED STATES….

8. The Issues Have Changed

Gallup’s “Monthly Most Important Problem” survey is a problem for the president. What is troubling the American people? Over the first five months of 2011, Americans point to the ECONOMY (29%), UNEMPLOYMENT (26%), THE DEFICIT (13%), AND GOVERNMENT (11%)….

7. The Blank Canvass Isn’t Anymore

….Unpopular ObamaCare, a sedative stimulus, ineptness in the face of the BP oil spill, and defiance of Congress in starting a third Middle Eastern war have all painted a presidential picture that HAS CALCIFIED CONSERVATIVE OPPOSITION, ALIENATED MODERATES, AND DISILLUSIONED LIBERAL SUPPORTERS.

6. Demoralized Liberals

Left-wing activist Ralph Nader encourages a primary challenge. Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich sues the administration over Libya. Netroots conference goers boo White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer….

5. Energized Conservatives

…. It showed in 2010, when Republicans added 63 House seats, seven Senate seats, and six governors. NOTHING INVIGORATES A PARTY’S BASE LIKE AN AGGRESSIVE IDEOLOGUE OF THE OPPOSING PARTY OCCUPYING THE WHITE HOUSE. THE GOP CLEARLY HAS THE MOMENTUM HEADING INTO 2012….

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44311

Keep reading as it will make you feel good.

What the 2012 election will be all about

…WHEN THE ECONOMY IS STRONG, ELECTIONS CAN TURN ON A VARIETY OF ISSUES. But when the economy is poor, elections are seldom about anything else. The 1980 race was illustrative.

Though the Carter/Reagan race is remembered now as a landslide for Ronald Reagan, the contours of the victory were not apparent during the campaign. AS LATE AS OCTOBER 29, GALLUP HAD THE RACE AS A DEAD HEAT, with Reagan at 44 percent and President Carter at 43 (it was a three-man race). Other polling showed larger margins for Reagan but nothing like the 10-point margin of victory he achieved. At the time, the contest was perceived as close.

It was after the first and only debate, a week before Election Day, that voters definitively moved into Reagan's column. At the time, inflation was running at 13.5 percent, unemployment was 7 percent and interest rates were 21 percent. American hostages remained in Tehran. Carter's approval ratings hovered in the 30s during the final year of his tenure.

Why wasn't Carter perceived as hopelessly weak? Perhaps BECAUSE AS BAD AS THINGS WERE, VOTERS NEEDED TO BE CONFIDENT ABOUT THE CHALLENGER'S FITNESS. CARTER HAD SUCCEEDED TO SOME DEGREE IN FRIGHTENING VOTERS ABOUT REAGAN'S (YOU GUESSED IT) RIGHT-WING EXTREMISM. Reagan's reassuring debate performance allayed those fears. And Reagan's summation drilled to the heart of voters' concerns. Ask yourself, Reagan advised, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

The economy today is in some respects worse than it was in 1980. Barring a catastrophe, little else will matter in 2012. ANY CREDIBLE REPUBLICAN CAN DEFEAT OBAMA -- WHICH IS WHY AXELROD IS ALREADY SMEARING AS "EXTREMIST" A PERSON WHOSE NAME HE DOES NOT KNOW.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/21/here_come_the_extremists_110289.html

I remember the 1980 election and it being called close just a week before it. I found it hard to believe it would be close since Carter was so clearly incompetent. In the coming election I expect much the same.

22% would not vote for a Mormon for President

Though the vast majority of Americans say they would vote for their party's nominee for president in 2012 if that person happens to be a Mormon, 22% say they would not, a figure largely unchanged since 1967.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148100/Hesitant-Support-Mormon-2012.aspx

The delicious part is that it is the left that appear to be the bigger bigots when it comes to religious intolerance. While 80% of Republicans would vote for a Mormon, only 71% of Democrats would do so (45% higher level of religious bigotry). So much for the goodness of the left.

The Clarence Thomas Rules

WHEN IT COMES TO MEDIA COVERAGE OF SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS, THE RULES HAVE ALWAYS BEEN VERY DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF OTHER JUDICIAL FIGURES. Yesterday’s front page feature in the Sunday New York Times about Thomas and his various associations with rich people is the sort of thing that one simply cannot imagine being written or published about anyone else on the high court.

THE PIECE IS A 2,800-WORD INSINUATION ABOUT ETHICAL VIOLATIONS THAT ARE NEVER SPELLED OUT. Reporter Mike McIntire was sent out on a fishing expedition looking for juicy material about this liberal bête noire and clearly came up empty. But instead of spiking the story, the Times (whose new editor Jill Abramson’s career was made via slanders of Thomas) printed it anyway.

The worst allegation in the piece is that Thomas may have helped persuade a wealthy donor to contribute to the building of a museum about the culture of poor Gullah-speaking African-Americans along the Georgia coast where the jurist grew up. Federal judges aren’t supposed to do fundraising even for charity but the code has never applied to the Supreme Court and even if it did, McIntire has no real proof of Thomas conducting an “ask” for the Pin Point museum….

….But you don’t have to be an investigative reporter to understand the motivation behind this article. AS A BLACK CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN, LIBERALS HAVE ALWAYS TREATED THOMAS AS TRAITOR TO HIS RACE. Others may agree to disagree but Thomas is the sort of person about whom anything can be said. It is true that he may not have been the most qualified person in the land at the time of his appointment but the same can be said of a number of his liberal colleagues on the court. But, unlike other judges, his personal destruction has always been the goal of the political left….

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/06/20/the-clarence-thomas-rules/

Conservative women, blacks, etc. are worse than traitors to the left, they are heretics. As such they are subject to extreme forms of racism and sexism by the left.

Science

Science and the Smear Merchants

Professor Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California in San Diego, claims to be a science historian. One can readily demonstrate that she is neither a credible scientist nor a credible historian; the best evidence is right there in her recent book, "MERCHANTS OF DOUBT: HOW A HANDFUL OF SCIENTISTS OBSCURED THE TRUTH ON ISSUES FROM TOBACCO SMOKE TO GLOBAL WARMING," coauthored with Eric Conway. HER SCIENCE IS FAULTY; HER HISTORICAL PROCEDURES ARE THOROUGHLY UNPROFESSIONAL. She is, however, an accomplished polemicist, who has found time for world lecture tours, promoting her book and her ideological views, while being paid by the citizens of California. Her book tries to smear four senior physicists -- of whom I am the only surviving one. I view it as my obligation to defend the reputations of my late colleagues and good friends against her libelous charges.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/science_and_smear_merchants.html

This is a devastating indictment of Oreskes. Oreskes is the person who started the “settled science” claim of AGW proponents when she did a study which examining the abstracts of some 900 published papers found almost none questioning AGW. Unfortunately, she missed more than 11,000 papers (she overlooked more than 92% of the papers available) through an incorrect Internet search. She published a discreet "Correction"; yet she has never retracted her ideologically based claim about consensus. This woman appears to be the Kitty Kelly of Climate Science.

EPA masquerading propaganda as facts

….“The difference in air quality between 1990 and 2020 was then used to project improvements in health and the environment. This result was compared to A SECOND SCENARIO IN WHICH THE SCOPE AND STRINGENCY OF REGULATORY CONTROLS REMAINED FIXED AT THEIR 1990 LEVELS—I.E., PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1990 AMENDMENTS—WHILE ALLOWING FOR INCREASED EMISSIONS FROM ECONOMIC AND POPULATION GROWTH,” she wrote.

“The researchers acknowledge that ‘there is no way to validate’ their forecast of air quality conditions for the non-CAA scenario, effectively rendering the comparison between regulation and non-regulation meaningless,” argued Katz.

“GIVEN THESE AND OTHER UNCERTAINTIES THAT PLAGUE THE REPORT, THE FINDINGS AMOUNT TO LITTLE MORE THAN ‘GUESSTIMATES,’ Katz said. “Rather than document that the benefits of regulation roundly trump regulatory costs, the EPA’s report raises serious questions about the agency’s politicization of science.”….

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-masquerading-propaganda-facts-suppor

The EPA should go into infomercials. You’ve seen the ads where someone is selling a spice rack. The person they show has so many spices and when they try to find one, they fall out of the cupboard and on to the floor. Their spice rack eliminates all that. The EPA is spice racking us.


Genetic Basis for Crime: A New Look

IT WAS LESS THAN 20 YEARS AGO THAT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH ABRUPTLY WITHDREW FUNDS FOR A CONFERENCE ON GENETICS AND CRIME AFTER OUTRAGED COMPLAINTS THAT THE IDEA SMACKED OF EUGENICS. The president of the Association of Black Psychologists at the time declared that such research was in itself “A BLATANT FORM OF STEREOTYPING AND RACISM.”

The tainted history of using biology to explain criminal behavior has pushed criminologists to reject or ignore genetics and CONCENTRATE ON SOCIAL CAUSES: MISERABLE POVERTY, CORROSIVE ADDICTIONS, GUNS. Now that the human genome has been sequenced, and scientists are studying the genetics of areas as varied as alcoholism and party affiliation, criminologists are cautiously returning to the subject. A small cadre of experts is exploring how genes might heighten the risk of committing a crime and whether such a trait can be inherited.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/arts/genetics-and-crime-at-institute-of-justice-conference.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=genetic%20crime&st=cse

It appears they need to look at something else. Their theory about guns seems to have proven wrong as places where guns have been readily available, the crime rate has fallen. The article is very interesting though and I recommend you read it.

The War Against Girls

SINCE THE LATE 1970S, 163 MILLION FEMALE BABIES HAVE BEEN ABORTED BY PARENTS SEEKING SONS

….WHAT IS CAUSING THE SKEWED RATIO: ABORTION. IF THE MALE NUMBER IN THE SEX RATIO IS ABOVE 106, IT MEANS THAT COUPLES ARE HAVING ABORTIONS WHEN THEY FIND OUT THE MOTHER IS CARRYING A GIRL. By Ms. Hvistendahl's counting, there have been so many sex-selective abortions in the past three decades that 163 million girls, who by biological averages should have been born, are missing from the world. Moral horror aside, this is likely to be of very large consequence….

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576361691165631366.html

Does a woman’s right to choose also include her right to contribute to genocide against her own sex?

Incoherence: Obama is thy name

Obama’s Missionless War

IF YOU DON’T HAVE A MISSION, IT’S HARD TO KNOW WHEN IT’S ACCOMPLISHED.

If I recall correctly, we went into Libya — or, at any rate, over Libya — to stop the brutal Qaddafi dictatorship killing the Libyan people. And thanks to our efforts a whole new mass movement of freedom-loving democrats now has the opportunity to kill the Libyan people. As the Los Angeles Times reported from Benghazi, these democrats are roaming the city “rousting Libyan blacks and immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa from their homes and holding them for interrogation as suspected mercenaries or government spies.” ACCORDING TO THE NEW YORK TIMES, “MEMBERS OF THE NATO ALLIANCE HAVE STERNLY WARNED THE REBELS IN LIBYA NOT TO ATTACK CIVILIANS as they push against the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.” WE DROPPED BOMBS ON QADDAFI’S CROWD FOR ATTACKING CIVILIANS, AND WE’RE PREPARED TO DO THE SAME TO YOU! “The coalition has told the rebels that the fog of war will not shield them from possible bombardment by NATO planes and missiles, just as the regime’s forces have been punished.”

So, having agreed to be the Libyan Liberation Movement Air Force, we’re also happy to serve as the Qaddafi Last-Stand Air Force. Say what you like about Barack Obama, BUT IT’S RARE TO FIND A LEADER SO IMPECCABLY MULTILATERALIST HE’S WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN BOTH SIDES OF A WAR.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/263675/obama-s-missionless-war-mark-steyn


Read the last line one more time. It shows you the incredible stupidity of this administration.



Incoherence: Obama’s energy policy

Though Barack Obama is a polarizing politician, there’s one thing that his friends and critics seem to agree on: he’s a canny politician. So if the president had the ability to bring down the nation’s staggering gas prices, create new American jobs and decrease the country’s reliance on foreign energy sources without spending a dime of taxpayer money, wouldn’t you expect him to take it?

If you answered yes, chances are that you’re not working in the Obama White House.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/01/running-on-empty-with-a-full-tank-the-incoherence-of-obamas-energy-policies/#ixzz1IMNLDyty


This is a must read. If you want to bring the economy back, we need change from what the Democrats are doing to us.




Commander-In-Hiding

President Obama isn’t quite in hibernation. BUT HE’S SAYING LESS, PROPOSING LESS, APPEARING IN PUBLIC LESS, DOING LESS, INTERACTING WITH CONGRESS LESS, PLUGGING HIS HEALTH CARE PLAN LESS, AND SINGLING OUT A REPUBLICAN DEMON LESS. It took two years and the harsh rejection of a midterm election for Obama to figure out what shouldn’t have been a secret: The magic of the presidency declines with overindulgence.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/commander-hiding_556148.html


It’s been pretty clear for over a year now if you want Obama’s approval to go up, you need for him to go on vacation. The more he does, the less he’s appreciated.



Spill damage trawl accidentally drowns dolphins

THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION SAYS FEDERAL SCIENTISTS CATCHING FISH TO TEST FOR POSSIBLE DAMAGE FROM LAST YEAR'S GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL ACCIDENTALLY DROWNED THREE DOLPHINS.

Spokeswoman Connie Barclay says the Pantropical spotted dolphins were caught Wednesday from a trawl off the research ship Pisces, which works out of Pascagoula, Miss.

She said Friday that NOAA will investigate whether all proper procedures were followed.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/04/01/2145813/spill-damage-trawl-accidentally.html#ixzz1IMIVlagD

A perfect metaphor for how the Government tries to help and what it actually does.



GOP launches mock 'Obama 2012' ad

The ad, which features Obama riding a unicorn over a rainbow, declares: "Four more years: America needs more changing."

REPUBLICANS ARE TAKING AIM AT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S IMPENDING REELECTION EFFORT WITH A MOCK CAMPAIGN AD OUTLINING HIS FIRST TWO YEARS IN OFFICE.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) posted a fake "Obama 2012" ad, ribbing the president for divisiveness, his energy policy, budget deficits and engaging in the occasional extracurricular activity, such as golfing or filling out NCAA brackets on television.

"Four more years: America needs more changing," the spot says at the end, featuring a cartoon of Obama riding a unicorn over the rainbow.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/153231-republicans-launch-mock-obama-2012-ad


I especially like the line about Obama celebrating the end of our dependence on American energy


Everything old is new again

IN 2008, SUPPORTERS OF BARACK OBAMA SUB SCRIBED TO THE VIEW THAT HIS ELECTION WOULD, not to put too fine a point on it, "CHANGE EVERYTHING." Maybe they were right.

For the last two years, the old ways of Washington have been crashing down like pillars of Mordor at the end of "The Lord of the Rings."

Then-candidate Obama was himself fond of noting that the conventional wisdom -- or "CW" -- was that a black guy with a funny name could never be elected president. He not only won, he captured such "impossible" states as Indiana and Virginia.

Obama took office during a wrenching financial crisis; THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM WAS THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD RALLY AROUND NEW DEAL POLICIES. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT LIBERAL HISTORIANS AND POLITICAL SCIENTISTS SAID THEY SHOULD DO.

THE EXPERTS WERE WRONG. While Obama had widespread support to fight the financial crisis, once it became clear he was using it to enact a New Deal style agenda, everyone outside his core base started to flee....

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/nothing_in_politics_is_working_like_HJfWUHTSmZECSTAv0Tf6GM#ixzz1IMOkouTM

So Obama is using 1930 solutions for 2011 problems. Now that’s progress for you!


Why Unemployment is worse than the Fed says

My regular correspondent Number Cruncher takes a look at the latest jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and notices:

The percentage of the OVERALL POPULATION THAT IS EMPLOYED IN MARCH 2010 WAS 58.6 PERCENT. ONE YEAR LATER, THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF OVERALL POPULATION EMPLOYED IS… 58.5 PERCENT. Conclusion: In a growing population we have produced fewer jobs than the number that the population grew. (For the record, the number of Civilian non-institutionalized population was 237.2 million in March 2010, and is 239.00 million in March 2011.)

The number of people who were “not in the labor force” In March 2010 was 83,264,000 (seasonally adjusted). In March 2011, it was 85,594,000 (seasonally adjusted). If you want to know how unemployment dropped a point, look no further than this statistic.

IF YOU REMOVE 2.33 MILLION PEOPLE FROM THE LABOR FORCE WITHIN ONE YEAR, THAT WILL INDEED HELP LOWER THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. It is, however, not the same as helping the unemployed find jobs.

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/263656/our-workforce-lost-233-million-people-one-year

This is both good and bad news for BHO and the Democrats. While they can say the unemployment rate is falling, it certainly doesn’t feel that way. And as the economy does come back we may actually start producing a significant number jobs, only to find the unemployment rate increase as more people come back into the labor market. This will be very important next year prior to the election.



Research to Date on Forecasting for the Manmade Global Warming Alarm

In testimony to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Committee on Science, Space and Technology, PROFESSOR J. SCOTT ARMSTRONG OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, described research he conducted with Kesten C. Green, University of South Australia, and Willie Soon, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, TO DETERMINE THE VALIDITY OF SCIENTIFIC FORECASTS WITH RESPECT TO GLOBAL WARMING. They describe their work as follows (from the abstract):

The VALIDITY OF THE MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING ALARM requires the support of scientific forecasts of (1) a substantive long-term rise in global mean temperatures in the absence of regulations, (2) serious net harmful effects due to global warming, and (3) cost-effective regulations that would produce net beneficial effects versus alternatives such as doing nothing.

WITHOUT SCIENTIFIC FORECASTS FOR ALL THREE ASPECTS OF THE ALARM, THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS TO ENACT REGULATIONS. In effect, it is a three-legged stool. Despite repeated appeals to global warming alarmists, we have been unable to find scientific forecasts for any of the three legs.

We drew upon scientific (evidence-based) forecasting principles to AUDIT THE FORECASTING PROCEDURES USED TO FORECAST GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURES by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -leg "1" of the stool. THIS AUDIT FOUND THAT THE PROCEDURES VIOLATED 81% OF THE 89 RELEVANT FORECASTING PRINCIPLES

We also did an audit of the forecasting procedures used for two papers that were designed to SUPPORT PROPOSED REGULATION RELATED TO PROTECTING POLAR BEARS - leg "3" of the stool. On average, THESE PROCEDURES VIOLATED 85% OF THE 90 RELEVANT PRINCIPLES.

The warming alarmists have not demonstrated the predictive validity of their procedures. Instead, THEIR ARGUMENT FOR PREDICTIVE VALIDITY IS BASED ON THEIR CLAIM THAT NEARLY ALL SCIENTISTS AGREE WITH THE FORECASTS. Such an appeal to "voting" is contrary to the scientific method. It is also incorrect.

We conducted A VALIDATION TEST OF THE IPCC FORECASTS based on the assumption that there would be no interventions. This test found that THE ERRORS FOR IPCC MODEL LONG-TERM FORECASTS (91 TO 100 YEARS IN THE FUTURE) WERE 12.6 TIMES LARGER THAN THOSE FROM AN EVIDENCE-BASED "NO CHANGE" MODEL.

http://www.heartland.org/environmentandclimate-news.org/article/29687


AGW is a sham hypothesis. It violates the very principles it says it is based upon.

Libya Speech: Obama explains it all to you



Where is the word Victory?

 Obama’s fundamentally dishonest speech

President Obama gave an impassioned, sometimes eloquent, defense of his policies in Libya tonight. But when it came to justifying the limited goals of the military mission, HIS SPEECH WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST.  OBAMA PRESENTED HIMSELF AS STANDING BETWEEN TWO EXTREMES — those on the one hand, who want to do nothing in the face of a humanitarian catastrophe, and those on the other who want to invade Libya the way George W. Bush invaded Iraq…..

… This is a straw man, and the president knows it. No serious person is arguing that we should “repeat in Libya” what we did in Iraq….

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/a-fundamentally-dishonest-speech/2011/03/28/AFC0NfrB_blog.html


This appears to be the technique Obama loves using. He is always setting up a straw man argument so he can knock it down.

Obama Still Murky on Libya

PRESIDENT OBAMA JUST GAVE A WEIRD SPEECH. Part George W. Bush, part trademark Obama — filled with his characteristic split-the-difference, straw-man (“some say, others say”), false-choice tropes.

His support for those “yearning for freedom all around the world” was the sort of interventionist foreign policy that a Senator Obama — if his past reaction to the removal of Saddam Hussein is any indication — WOULD HAVE OBJECTED TO, ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF SENDING BOMBERS OVER AN ARAB MUSLIM OIL-EXPORTING COUNTRY. Since SADDAM WAS A FAR GREATER MONSTER (gassing thousands is far worse than turning off the water to neighborhoods) than the monsters that Obama now wishes to slay, I think he has confused rather than enlightened his audience.

THERE WAS NO MENTION OF THE CONGRESS. Is he going to ever ask its approval? And if not, why the repeated emphasis on asking others such as the Arab League or the UN for their approval — given that their representatives, unlike ours, are largely not elected?

IN A SPEECH DEDICATED TO CLARIFYING OUR POLICY, IT LEFT IT EVEN MORE MURKY. WHAT WAS OUR OBJECTIVE, AND WHAT IS IT NOW? Obama asserted that “We have stopped his deadly advance.” But is that the aim — the status quo, and a sort of permanent safe zone for rebels in accordance with UN directives? Or are we going beyond that to eliminate Qaddafi, who is the source of the problem? THE PRESIDENT NOW SAYS HE WON’T OVERTHROW QADDAFI BY FORCE, BUT THAT IS WHAT HE HOPES, IN FACT, WILL HAPPEN as a result of our military presence:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263273/obama-still-murky-libya-victor-davis-hanson

Honesty doesn’t seem to be Obama’s strong suit.



Obama’s Libya speech

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S SPEECH OFFERED MORE FOR NEO-CONSERVATIVES TO CHEER THAN IT DID FOR LIBERALS. But at the heart of his speech and of his Libya policy is a fundamental and UNRESOLVED CONTRADICTION….

…. THAT LAST SENTENCE IS THE PERFECT ENCAPSULATION OF BUSH’S FREEDOM AGENDA. But Obama then runs into trouble. Obama can’t bring himself to embrace the view of those conservatives, you know the ones who pushed to liberate Iraq. (“Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq’s future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya.”) Moreover, he won’t, he told us in no uncertain terms — despite all the interests he outlined — use our military to remove Moammar Gaddafi. And THIS IS WHERE HE BECAME, FRANKLY, INCOHERENT. Why aren’t we using our military? Ah, the price of multilateralism…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obamas-libya-speech/2011/03/04/AFOOTDrB_blog.html

Actually for all his anti-Bush rhetoric and his Nobel Peace Prize, Obama seems to be more of a warrior than Bush was. No wonder his message was incoherent.


In fact, if you dissect Obama’s argument, we find that removing Saddam was too costly and removing Milosevic took too long, but I, Barack Hussein Obama, will get rid of this dictator wholesale!!!



White House says Libya decision based on 'best interests'

NO SENSE OF PRECEDENT GUIDED PRESIDENT OBAMA’S DECISION TO INTERVENE IN LIBYA, administration officials said Monday.

"We don’t make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent," said Denis McDonough, the administration's deputy national security adviser, amid an off-camera gaggle of reporters. "WE MAKE THEM BASED ON HOW WE CAN BEST ADVANCE OUR INTERESTS IN THE REGION."

McDonough was speaking hours before President Obama’s speech Monday night on Libya. He explained that there were compelling reasons to get involved in Libya as opposed to Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen and Syria, four other countries in the Middle East where pro-democracy crowds have battled authoritarian governments.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/152181-white-house-says-libya-decision-based-on-best-interests-in-region

Makes you wonder if we are trading blood for oil. Nah, that couldn’t be the case since Obama is in office.



His lips were moving, but nothing was really said

….IF YOU'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION, THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME. In his last remarks before hostilities commenced, Obama announced that he was sending Secretary Clinton to Geneva for consultations with our allies. Tonight Obama announced: "Tomorrow, Secretary Clinton will go to London, where she will meet with the Libyan opposition and consult with more than 30 nations."

OBAMA IDENTIFIED NO AMERICAN INTEREST AT ISSUE IN OUR LIBYAN VENTURE. Obama did say that it was not in the American national interest to permit Qaddafi's intended massacre of Libyans in Benghazi ("It was not in our national interest to let that happen"), but one could just as well say that it was not in the American national interest to prevent it either. HIS ASSERTION IS A VACUOUS VERBAL FORMULATION. He's moving his lips, but he's not saying anything. There may be an American national interest involved, even if not a vital one, as Secretary Gates asserts, BUT IT PLAYS NO ROLE IN OBAMA'S STATED RATIONALE…

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/03/028704.php

While attacking Libya may be the “right and humanitarian” thing to do, it certainly isn’t the “smart” thing to do or even the “logical” thing to do.

Obama vs Bush

“We believe that people across the Middle East and across the world are weary of poverty, weary of oppression, and YEARN TO BE FREE. And all who know that hope, all who will work and sacrifice for freedom, HAVE A FRIEND IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.” – George W. Bush in 2006

“We welcome the fact that history is on the move in the Middle East and North Africa, and that young people are leading the way. Because WHEREVER PEOPLE LONG TO BE FREE, THEY WILL FIND A FRIEND IN THE UNITED STATES.” – Obama 3/28/2011.

Perhaps we should change Barack Obama’s name to Barack W. Obama.



Reid vows to stop any tinkering with Social Security

ANY LAWMAKER WHO SO MUCH AS THINKS ABOUT TINKERING WITH SOCIAL SECURITY ANYTIME IN THE NEXT DECADE WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH HARRY REID (AND A FEW OF HIS FRIENDS) FIRST.

A handful of liberal Democratic senators pushed back against calls from Republicans and even fellow Democrats to reform the national pension system during a rally on Capitol Hill Monday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada joined Sens. Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat, Bernie Sanders, Vermont independent, Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Democrat, and Al Franken, Minnesota Democrat, at a “Hands Off Social Security” rally where all of them insisted that Social Security — THE NATION’S LARGEST PROGRAM THAT COSTS ABOUT $700 BILLION A YEAR — adds nothing to the deficit or debt.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/29/reid-vows-to-stand-in-the-way-of-any-efforts-to-reform-social-security/#ixzz1HzEbtJeN

Reid has shown that he and the democrats aren’t serious about deficit reform and that they plan to use this issue politically. It might work, but it might not as well. The democrats are playing a dangerous game of “chicken” with our country.



Obama votes “Present” on deficit

There’s a well-worn aphorism in politics that getting U.S. senators to agree on anything is as easy as herding cats. In today’s bitterly partisan atmosphere, that maxim is especially apt. So when 64 SENATORS SIGNED A LETTER RECENTLY THAT URGED PRESIDENT OBAMA TO GET INVOLVED ON DEVELOPING A “COMPREHENSIVE” DEFICIT REDUCTION PACKAGE, IT APPEARED TO BE A BIG DEAL.

But even though Obama has expressed grave concern about the country’s ocean of red ink, HE HAS REFUSED TO ENDORSE THE SENATORS’ LETTER, HIS FISCAL COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR $4 TRILLION OF DEFICIT REDUCTION IN THE COMING DECADE, OR EMBRACE ANY OTHER APPROACH.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/03/29/Senators-Toss-Budget-Ball-to-Obama-Who-Fumbles.aspx

If anyone has any sense of Presidential leadership, this should help dispel them. We must address the deficit and it appears Obama, Reid, and Pelosi (the democratic leadership) refuse to.



NPR Ekes Out A Surplus and Hosts Make Out Like Bandits

NPR, which has been under attack after video footage from James O’Keefe showed a now former network executive saying that NPR would be just fine without federal funding, is going to run a surplus or “modest margin,” this year.

Daily Finance reports on the network’s financial turnaround:

AS A WHOLE, NPR — AS IS COMMON FOR A NONPROFIT — USUALLY RUNS A DEFICIT. According to audited financial statements, NPR’s revenue ran a $8.3 million deficit in the 2010 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30. Revenues rose to $184.3 million from $148.7 million a year earlier, while expenses jumped to $192.5 last year from $166.6 million in 2009. But after cutting staff and scaling back benefits in 2008, NPR EXPECTS TO MAKE A “MODEST MARGIN” THIS YEAR, ACCORDING TO SPOKESWOMAN DANA DAVIS REHM.

This would normally be good news, except that NPR IS LOCKED IN A BATTLE OVER FUTURE GOVERNMENT FUNDING, RUNNING A SURPLUS SHOWS GOOD FISCAL MANAGEMENT BUT MAY ALSO LEND CREDENCE TO THE IDEA THAT THEY DON’T NEED MORE TAXPAYER MONEY.

http://www.aim.org/don-irvine-blog/npr-ekes-out-a-surplus-and-hosts-make-out-like-bandits/


Makes sense to me. In an age of Obama sized deficits, NPR must be allowed to fend for itself.



Voting With Their Feet

The latest published data from the 2010 census show how people are moving from place to place within the United States. In general, PEOPLE ARE VOTING WITH THEIR FEET AGAINST PLACES WHERE THE LIBERAL, WELFARE-STATE POLICIES FAVORED BY THE INTELLIGENTSIA ARE MOST DEEPLY ENTRENCHED.

When you break it down by race and ethnicity, it is all too painfully clear what is happening. BOTH WHITES AND BLACKS ARE LEAVING CALIFORNIA, THE POSTER STATE FOR THE LIBERAL, WELFARE-STATE AND NANNY-STATE PHILOSOPHY….

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/03/29/voting_with_their_feet_109369.html

This phenomenon has mixed messages. The red states they are fleeing to are picking up congressional seats, but will they bring the liberal policies they are fleeing with them? Will they “Californicate” Texas, etc?

AT&T merger could swell ranks of union that backs Democrats

The merger of AT&T and T-Mobile COULD SWELL THE RANKS OF A UNION WITH CLOSE TIES TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Analysts predict that Republicans are less likely than Democrats to try to block AT&T's merger with T-Mobile. But in certain districts, the merger could carry political costs for GOP candidates.

That's because thousands of T-Mobile USA's employees — who are not unionized — will become part of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) if AT&T is permitted to buy up the company. CWA almost uniformly endorses Democrats.

"CWA IS VERY INFLUENTIAL IN CERTAIN STATES, AND THIS MIGHT INCREASE THEIR POLITICAL MUSCLE IN CERTAIN PLACES WHERE THEY ARE POWERFUL, LIKE NEW JERSEY," said Daniel DiSalvo, a political science professor at the City College of New York.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/152221-atat-merger-could-hurt-republican-candidates

It easy to see this merger should get quick approval by a Democrat administration. I guess all corporations are equal in Obama’s eyes, but some are more equal than others.

Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout

Rex Weyler announces to Patrick Moore that he is about to come out publicly with a critique of Patrick’s new book, Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist.

RW: You portray yourself as “sensible” and disparage all non-corporate environmentalists, but you don’t act scientific. You employ rhetorical devices such as: “There is no alarm about climate change,” since “the climate is always changing….”

PM: I hardly think Stewart Brand, founder of the Whole Earth Catalogue, is a corporate environmentalist, more of a loveable hippie with a big brain. Do you think Bjorn Lomborg is “corporate”. I DON’T AGREE WITH EITHER BRAND OR LOMBORG ON EVERYTHING BUT AT LEAST THEY CAUSE ME TO THINK RATHER THAN PEOPLE WHO REPEAT A MEMORIZED PARTY-LINE. I also admire James Lovelock even though I find him enigmatic. All three of these environmentalists that I admire are non-corporate. Which “corporate environmentalists” am I allegedly admiring?

I believe I am sensible and have been all my life, as in common sense. But I suppose that is a matter of opinion….

http://www.beattystreetpublishing.com/moore-weyler-exchange/

An interesting conversation (debate?) that highlights the differences between the environalarmists and those who take a more sensible approach.