Obama and the left: Two different responses to the shootings

NY Times doesn’t read its own findings

It seems that Jared Loughner did not even like or watch TV or the news, according to his friends:

He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.

The friends went on to describe deep seated rage: "Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, "'HE WAS SHOOTING AT THE WORLD.'"


This would MAKE HIM TYPICAL OF OTHER MASS SHOOTERS according to a study 0f 102 rampage killers done by the New York Times:


The Times found, however, that the debate may have largely overlooked a critical issue: AT LEAST HALF OF THE KILLERS SHOWED SIGNS OF SERIOUS MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS. ...


It seems that A NUMBER OF THE TIMES'S COLUMNISTS OVERLOOKED THE PAPER'S OWN FINDINGS on rampage killings when first discussing the Arizona shooting. Do they even bother doing any research? For example, KRUGMAN BLAMED TALK RADIO, THE CULTURE OF RIGHT LEANING HATE AND RUSH LIMBAUGH. A NYT'S EDITORIAL MADE THE SAME POINTS. Maybe if someone there had taken the time to reflect on their own study, they would have reached a different and more even-handed conclusion.

http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2011/01/osler-says-his-friend-wasnt-shooting-at.html


The lack of facts and a propensity not to actually check to see if there are any facts seems to be a hallmark of the left.



What if Jared Loughner had be Muslim?

Shamefully and sadly, the media would have covered his horrific assassination attempt of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz) and slaying and maiming of innocent Arizonans in a more responsible manner. THEY WOULD HAVE CALLED FOR RESTRAINT AND NOT VIOLATED THE JOURNALISTIC TENET OF NOT ASSUMING ANYTHING, a tenet they purportedly (and often facetiously sanctimoniously) claim to hold dear.

But because Loughner was not a member of one of the mainstream media’s protected classes, they used Loughner’s heinous act to go on liberal crusades against conservatives and Tea Partiers, to promote gun control, amnesty, and rail against those who may oppose ethnic study programs that erroneously teach students that the Southwestern part of the United States is a part of Mexico.

Immediately after this senseless tragedy, The New York Times opined that “it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge…..

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41136


This is an interesting piece speculating on how the left wouldn’t be speculating about the right. What we’ve seen is not journalism but political opportunism played out on a national scale by the left.



What the left did wrong

By Jennifer Rubin

Why were the last four days a mini-disaster for the swampland of the left? It boils down to: facts, response and time.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/01/what_the_left_did_wrong.html


This is a very worthwhile read. I found this to be very insightful, “The final lesson for the left is this: for the sake of a second term, the president is willing to throw liberals under the bus.”




Why the Left Lost It

There has been a great effort this week to come to grips with the American left's reaction to the Tucson shooting. Paul Krugman of the New York Times and its editorial page, George Packer of the New Yorker, E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post, Jonathan Alter of Newsweek and others, in varying degrees, HAVE LINKED THE MURDERS TO THE INTENSITY OF OPPOSITION TO THE POLICIES AND PRESIDENCY OF BARACK OBAMA. As Mr. Krugman asked in his Monday commentary: "Were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen?"

The "you" would be his audience, and the answer is yes, they thought that in these times "something like this" could happen in the United States. Other media commentators, without a microbe of conservatism in their bloodstreams, have rejected this suggestion.

So what was the point? Why attempt the gymnastic logic of asserting that the act of a deranged personality was linked to the tea parties and the American right? Two reasons: POLITICAL CALCULATION AND PERSONAL BELIEF.

The calculation flows from the shock of the midterm elections of November 2010. That was no ordinary election. WHAT VOTERS DID HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CHANGE THE CONTENT AND DIRECTION OF THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM, POSSIBLY FOR A GENERATION.

Only 24 months after Barack Obama's own historic election and a rising Democratic tide, the country flipped. Not just control of the U.S. House, but deep in the body politic. REPUBLICANS NOW CONTROL MORE STATE LEGISLATIVE SEATS THAN ANY TIME SINCE 1928.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076373704758778.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

If you know history, you know before 1928 (read that the Great Depression), the Republicans had been the dominate party since 1860. The massive movement to the Republicans does and should concern the Democrats.

World Freest Economy

HONG KONG WAS RATED THE WORLD'S FREEST ECONOMY FOR A 17TH STRAIGHT YEAR in a ranking by the U.S.-based Heritage Foundation, above rivals Singapore and Australia for the title.


HONG KONG, WITH A SCORE OF 89.7, IS WELL ABOVE THE WORLD AVERAGE OF 59.7, the Washington-based Heritage Foundation said in its 2011 Index of Economic Freedom report released on Wednesday.


The study assesses 183 economies, out of which mainland China ranks 135th.


"Hong Kong, one of the world's most competitive financial and business centers, demonstrated a high degree of resilience during the global financial crisis," the report said.

Freedom in trade and finance was the biggest boost to Hong Kong's ranking, while investment freedom and property rights, business and monetary freedom all scored highly.

THE UNITED STATES FELL TO THE 9TH FREEST FROM 8TH LAST YEAR and United Kingdom slipped to 16 place from 11 in 2010 due to more policy responses to the global economic turmoil, it added.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Hong+Kong+reigns+world+freest+economy+17th+straight+year/4097106/story.html#ixzz1Av4p5fJP



Arizona: Let’s start thinking about locking up lunatics

In my Washington Examiner column “Systematic assassinations not part of our politics,” I wrote of the Arizona murders:

IF ANY BLAME ATTACHES TO OTHERS, IT IS TO AUTHORITIES WHO HAD NOTICE OF HIS MADNESS AND DID NOT DO ENOUGH TO CONFINE HIM OR PREVENT HIM FROM BUYING A GUN. The Pima County sheriff, who was quick to suggest the attack was among the "consequences" of Republican rhetoric, also reported that the shooter's bizarre behavior was brought to the attention of authorities.

Arizona reportedly gives authorities more leeway than most states to put such an individual under restraint or at least prevent him from buying a gun. Perhaps there is some good reason this was not done; but at least there are questions that need to be asked.

Or to put it more bluntly, SHOULDN’T THIS GUY HAVE BEEN LOCKED UP? I am pleased to see that William Galston, writing in his New Republic blog, has the same idea, and calls for a reconsideration of the laws that have reduced the possibility of involuntary commitment. Psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey, writing in the Wall Street Journal, makes the same case and adds interesting detail. Jennifer Rubin, on her new Right Turn blog at the Washington Post notices that, as her headline reads, “Left gives up on guns, moves on to mental health,” and applauds the move.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/arizona-let-s-start-thinking-about-locking-lunatics#ixzz1AvFicr7D


While Michael Barone zeros in on the failure here, the anti-gun cabal is acting like a teacher who punishes the entire class for the disruption of one student. To them the answer is to deny everyone the “Legal” right to own a gun. Even Dupnik wouldn’t go along with that idea as he encouraged everyone to buy a gun as his deputies couldn’t keep them from harm.



Autism Fraud

The report that first triggered scares that a vaccine to prevent measles, mumps and rubella might cause autism in children has received another devastating blow to its credibility. The BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL HAS DECLARED THAT THE RESEARCH WAS NOT SIMPLY BAD SCIENCE, AS HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR YEARS, BUT A DELIBERATE FRAUD….

Some parents still consider Dr. Wakefield a hero, and others have moved on to other theories, equally unsupported by scientific evidence, as to how vaccines might cause autism.


THEY NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT FAILURE TO VACCINATE THEIR CHILDREN LEAVES THEM TRULY VULNERABLE TO DISEASES THAT CAN CAUSE ENORMOUS HARM.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/opinion/13thu2.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211



Surely criminal action should be taken against Dr. Wakefield. He was a pied piper who led parents to put their children at terrible risk.



Obama does well—his audience, not so much

Never before in the annals of national moments of mourning have the words spoken been so wildly mismatched by the spirit in which they were received.

THE SENTENCES AND PARAGRAPHS OF PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SPEECH LAST NIGHT WERE BEAUTIFUL AND MOVING AND POWERFUL. But for the most part they didn't quite transcend THE WILDLY INAPPROPRIATE SETTING IN WHICH HE DELIVERED THEM.

There was something about the choice of place, a college arena with the appropriate name of the McKale Memorial Center, that made the event turn literally sophomoric.

If there is one thing we expect from occasions of national mourning, it is, at the very least, A MODICUM OF GRAVITY. That gravity was present in the president's speech from first to last -- especially in the pitch-perfect response to the disgusting national political debate

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/prez_perfect_but_the_crowd_was_appalling_j08cf0Fajllkht0yZ4W7GM#ixzz1AvIQZIQq


Obama did make a good speech. Wild cheers from the crowd reminded me of the Paul Wellstone memorial service. Let’s give credit where it is due (President Obama) and hope that the left learns the proper way to mourn.


A Tawdry Start to the 2012 Election Campaign

Four years of a Democratically-controlled Congress, coupled with two years of the Obama administration, gave the American progressive movement more power than it had ever achieved before. Not Democrats, progressives. Democrats have had control of the White House and substantial majorities in both houses of Congress prior to 2008, but NEVER WITH A PARTY COMPRISED OF PEOPLE TILTED SO FAR TO THE PROGRESSIVE side of the ledger. Thinking they had achieved what political strategist James Carville referred to as the beginning of a “40 YEAR ASCENDANCY,” THEY BEGAN IMPLEMENTING THEIR AGENDA WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR PUBLIC CONCERN. ON NOVEMBER 2ND, A CONCERNED PUBLIC THOROUGHLY REJECTED THEM.

So what do far-left ideologues do when they have recently endured a clear-cut rejection of their ideology? Apparently A GOOD NUMBER OF THEM TAKE TO THE AIRWAVES AND TELL THE AMERICAN PUBLIC–WITH SMUG CERTAINTY, NO LESS–WHAT MOTIVATES A MADMAN. Facts, as demonstrated by progressives who have sought to tie the tragedy in Arizona to anything and everything conservative absent a shred of evidence, do not matter. Alleged shooter Jared Loughner has become the “vehicle du jour” for a progressive movement in utter denial of reality. IT IS A DENIAL SO PROFOUND that they would rather believe what happened on election day was a spasm of national insanity

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/13/a-tawdry-start-to-the-2012-election-campaign/


Are the Progressives crazy or just kidding themselves? Do they really think that their charges against the right will sway the public?



The Golden No-Vitriol Age Wasn’t So Golden

Denunciations of media vitriol in the wake of the Tucson shootings look back to an age of civil media discourse. That golden age existed in living memory: the 1960s and 1970s, when the mainstream media almost universally hewed to a belief in professional, objective, neutral journalism. The news industry could enforce this line, since it was more oligopolistic than at any time before or since. MOST CITIES HAD ONLY A FEW DOMINANT NEWSPAPERS. Television penetrated about 90 percent of American homes by the late 1950s, and the classic era of network television news began in September 1963, when the Huntley-Brinkley Report on NBC and the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite expanded from 15 minutes to 30 minutes. THESE NEWSCASTS RAPIDLY BECAME THE PRIMARY NEWS SOURCE FOR MOST AMERICANS. NO CABLE NEWS, NO INTERNET.

The result? TWO DECADES OF ASSASSINATIONS AND ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS against major political figures, starting with JFK ….

You could even argue that the golden-age mainstream media made violence more likely by shutting out marginal voices; but IT’S MORE LIKELY THAT THE TONE OF THE MEDIA HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH THE VIOLENT ACTIONS OF RADICALS AND CRAZIES.

http://blog.american.com/?p=24876


Well said and something to think about.




A Rising Star: Chris Christie

I happened to see this NJ Gov. Christie appearance on Morning Joe (MSNBC) yesterday morning and I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT TAKE TEN MINUTES TO SEE HOW A POLITICIAN SHOULD BOTH SEEM AND BE, how he should think aloud, how he should talk. Very impressive, and very disarming. You can tell how his interlocutors--even those who want to disagree with him--are disarmed, even persuaded. HIS CHARACTER AND PERSONALITY FOR A POLITICIAN ARE NEARLY PERFECT, in my opinion. You cannot help liking him. HONEST, CLEAR, AMUSING, LUCID--notice that there is no "uhming and ahing" at any time, no hesitation--clearly deeply thoughtful and knowledgeable, he speaks with an authority that is rare. Very persuasive. Also, he's fat, lards the lean earth as he walks along, he's thrice wider than other men. therefore worthy of our entire trust. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT THIS MAN WILL NOT RUN FOR PRESIDENT.

http://nlt.ashbrook.org/2011/01/chris-christie.php


I’m keeping an eye on him. He is impressive.

The Stupidity of the Left

Massacre, then libel

The charge: The Tucson massacre is a consequence of the "climate of hate" created by Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck, Obamacare opponents and sundry other liberal betes noires.

The verdict: RARELY IN AMERICAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE HAS THERE BEEN A CHARGE SO RECKLESS, SO SCURRILOUS AND SO UNSUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE.

As killers go, Jared Loughner is not reticent. Yet among all his writings, postings, videos and other ravings - and in all the testimony from all the people who knew him - THERE IS NOT A SINGLE REFERENCE TO ANY OF THESE SUPPOSED ACCESSORIES TO MURDER.

Not only is there no evidence that Loughner was impelled to violence by any of those upon whom Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, the New York Times, the Tucson sheriff and other rabid partisans are fixated. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS RESPONDING TO ANYTHING, POLITICAL OR OTHERWISE, OUTSIDE OF HIS OWN HEAD.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011106993.html

Dr. Krauthammer again tells us what we already knew if we were anything but rabid partisans.


Dupnik for Dummies

As you may know, Dupnik has been busy warning of how speech has consequences while in the same breath blaming conservatives for the actions of Loughner. Now, I don’t blame the sheriff for asking why. It is fine to look for reasons. IT IS NOT FINE TO BE RECKLESS AND WRONG. AND IT’S A SIN WHEN IT’S BORN OF INDIFFERENCE TO TRUTH.

To be precise, Dupnik implicates right-wing talk radio—HE MENTIONED RUSH LIMBAUGH—and cable news in the Giffords shooting. Yet a number of obvious things seem to have eluded this man, this supposed professional investigator. For starters, if we’re actually going to analyze the politics of Loughner, we should note that ONE OF HIS FORMER CLASSMATES DESCRIBES HIM AS A “LEFT WING” “POLITICAL RADICAL” AND “POT HEAD” and that Loughner had listed THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO AMONG HIS FAVORITE WORKS on his YouTube page. Then, many know about Loughner’s bizarre YouTube video. What few know, however, is that HE APPARENTLY POSTED IT TO DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND.COM BEFORE ITS APPEARANCE ON YOUTUBE. Yes, sheriff, that’s “democratic” as in Democratic Party—not as in Republican, Tea, or Animal House.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/32041


This one is well worth the read. The Democraticunderground.com is a website bathed in hate however it is left wing hate.



What is a climate of hate?

THE RODEO CLOWN POSSE was led out of Tucson in a cloud of dust with a hay-burning frenzy by Arizona's Pima County Sheriff CLARENCE DUPNIK. Close in tow were hyper-boiling politicians and the usual lefty print and TV media cowboys such as REP. JAMES CLYBURN, columnist PAUL KRUGMAN, TV antagonista CHRIS MATTHEWS, and even our own Secretary of State HILLARY CLINTON. These tin-star constables couldn't get on their donkeys fast enough to round up the usual outlaws. THE LEADING PERENNIAL VILLAIN, OF COURSE, IS OVERHEATED POLITICAL RHETORIC, THE EUPHEMISM FOR ANY STRONGLY HELD OPINION THAT DIFFERS FROM THE LIBERAL NARRATIVE.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/we_need_more_political_rhetori.html


A good explanation of how what is going on by the Democrats is an assault on free speech and why free speech is so vital to a democracy.



Extreme Rhetoric about Extreme Rhetoric

When it was revealed by Middlebury College sociologist David Stoll that Nobel Prize-winning writer (and doyenne of university syllabi) RIGOBERTA MENCHU HAD INVENTED KEY PARTS OF HER HARROWING MEMOIR OF THE GUATEMALAN CIVIL WAR, many who taught the book INSISTED THAT IT WOULD REMAIN A PART OF THEIR CURRICULUM. Menchu might have been a first-class fabulist, it was argued, but HER STORY REPRESENTED A TRUTH FAMILIAR TO THOSE AFFECTED BY THE GUATEMALAN CIVIL WAR. So there I was, sitting in a television studio yesterday, debating a university professor who intoned gravely that WHILE THIS PARTICULAR SHOOTER MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN MOTIVATED BY THE TEA PARTY, THAT TYPE OF RHETORIC COULD POTENTIALLY PROVOKE OTHERS TO SHOOT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

Crawling out from under an avalanche of doltish tragedy blogging and tweeting, there isn’t much more one can say about the shootings in Tucson that hasn’t already been said by the few sensible pundits left in the United States. But it is perhaps worth pointing out that many of those denouncing rhetorical extremism are themselves in danger of drifting into similar territory (I won’t say "extremist" because dumb political rhetoric isn’t always "extreme").

But this debate about the “tone” of American politics is IDEOLOGICALLY UNIDIRECTIONAL, DESIGNED NOT TO ELEVATE DEBATE BUT TO VILIFY A POLITICAL ENEMY. The call for calm—with its frequent invocations of Tea Party “fascism”—is STUPID PARTISAN POLITICS DRESSED UP AS INCOHERENT MORAL POLITICS

http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/11/the-extreme-rhetoric-about-ext


The talk by the left is dangerous. Freedom of Speech needs to be upheld, not attacked because there may be individuals who might go off the deep end. It appears the left is looking to try to castigate the right and specifically the TEA Party. But these charges like the ones of the TEA Party being extremist and racist will fail.



My Name is Betsy. I’m a killer

My name is Betsy. I'm a wife and proud soccer mom, a writer, and small business owner. I'M ALSO A KILLER.


On the morning of January 8th, 2011, I intentionally entered a gathering held by Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and shot her at near point blank range. I injured 14 others, killing six: among them a beautiful, curious, doe-eyed, nine-year-old girl. I DIDN'T ACTUALLY PULL THE TRIGGER, BUT I'M AS GUILTY AS THE PSYCHOPATH WHO DID.


Here are just a few of the charges against me:

I am a CONSERVATIVE.

On occasion, I LISTEN TO BECK, LIMBAUGH, AND FOX NEWS.

I've been known to pick up a book or two by conservative authors; Thomas Sowell, Andrew McCarthy, or the Founding Fathers, for example!

I BELIEVE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS TOO LARGE, far too intrusive, and dangerously powerful……

The only person who actually pulled the trigger on that terrible, fateful day was Jared Loughner, by every account, a deeply troubled young man. But THE REAL GUILTY WALK AMONG US: SENIOR CITIZENS IN RED, WHITE, AND BLUE, ARMED WITH SIGNS, "Taxed Enough Already," flag-wavers clinging to guns and religion, doctors, the wealthy, business owners, talk radio, and ANY CITIZEN THAT DARE EXERCISE HIS OR HER RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, particularly a conservative.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/my_name_is_betsy_im_a_killer.html


Satire, but very effective satire.



Bush vs Obama

….IF OBAMA IS SO MUCH SMARTER THAN BUSH IS, HOW COME HE CAN'T come up with new ways to do things but ends up instead with the Bush tax cuts, with the Bush protocols for the war on terror, with the Bush wars, the Bush generals, the Bush surge strategies, and the Bush policies on Guantanamo Bay?

HOW COME BUSH'S APPROVAL RATINGS NOW MATCH OBAMA'S? How come Bush beat out President Clinton for second place in the annual ranking of men most admired? And how come his memoir sold 2.2 million copies in the two months since it's been published, a little more than Clinton's memoir sold in six years?

"Who's actually buying the poorly reviewed book of a failed former president?" asked the Washington Monthly. "I THINK IT'S THE FACT THAT HE WAS HATED BY SO MANY PEOPLE," Salon's Alex Pareene answered.

People wanted to read Bush's excuses for the terrible things that he did.

Other excuses Pareene offered were these: PEOPLE BOUGHT THEM AS GAGS FOR PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T WANT TO RECEIVE THEM.

They were bought in bulk orders by conservative think tanks and book clubs. IT WAS SHORTER THAN CLINTON'S BOOK, AND PEOPLE HATE READING……

Almost as much as trying to live in the state of denial, it seems.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/01/noemie-emery-liberals-denial-about-obamas-achievements#ixzz1Apr1dQB1


I’m becoming more convinced that the left really doesn’t have a reasoning ability. They simply emote.



Lopsided Spill Commission Doesn’t Single Out BP

The While House oil-spill commission made it official today: THE ENTIRE OIL INDUSTRY, NOT BP, IS EVIL AND POTENTIALLY THE SOURCE OF ANOTHER DEEPWATER-SIZED SPILL. Thus the entire oil industry, which has already been punished by the administration with its drilling moratorium and slowdown in permitting, should be punished further with massive new regulations and fees.


Those conclusions were virtually predetermined when the administration appointed a panel heavily stacked with academics and environmentalists. And those findings are wrong.


Why? A simple reality check: Other companies drilling in deep water in the Gulf have not had well blow-outs. But in BP’s case, the commission’s own studies show not just one mistake but a series of failed judgment calls by BP officials. Responsibility is specific, not collective. WE DON’T SHUT DOWN THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY WHEN A PLANE CRASHES, AND WE SHOULDN’T SHUT DOWN THE OIL BUSINESS.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256923/lopsided-spill-commission-doesnt-single-out-bp-lou-dolinar

BP was the Democrats favorite oil company prior to the failure in the Gulf. They were heavy donors to the Democrats and Barack Obama in particular (BHO got $71,000 in donations in 2008 alone). This appears to be Democrat politics as usual.



Where’s the “missing” heat?

I’m bowing to pressure to prepare a post on a current science topic that people seem to want to talk about. This topic refers to Kevin Trenberth’s infamous statement in the CRU emails:

THE FACT IS THAT WE CAN’T ACCOUNT FOR THE LACK OF WARMING AT THE MOMENT AND IT IS A TRAVESTY THAT WE CAN’T.

This statement was written in reference to the following paper: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth’s global energy (Trenberth 2009). The paper discusses the planet’s energy budget in terms of how much net energy is flowing into our climate and where it’s going, and how we observe and track this energy flow. For additional background on this, see also Trenberth, Fasullo and Kiehl.

Trenberth and Fasullo wrote a follow on perspective published in Science entitled “Tracking earth’s energy: from El Nino to Global warming.” THE PUNCHLINE OF THE PAPER IS THERE IS OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE FOR MISSING ENERGY ACCUMULATING IN THE CLIMATE SYSTEM FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS.

Roy Spencer responded to Trenberth and Fasullo here and here, There is a back and forth exchange between Trenberth and Pielke Sr here. The gist of their arguments relate to problems in the measurements and the possible impact of clouds.

This week, there is discussion ABOUT A NEW PAPER BY KNOX AND DOUGLASS ENTITLED “RECENT ENERGY BALANCE OF EARTH” is in press at the International Journal of Geosciences and some text is posted at WUWT, with the following overall punchline: THEY FIND THAT ESTIMATES OF THE RECENT (2003–2008) OCEAN HEAT CONTENT RATES OF CHANGE (OBSERVED FROM ARGO FLOATS) ARE PREPONDERANTLY NEGATIVE, which does not support the existence of either a large positive radiative imbalance or a “missing energy.”

http://judithcurry.com/2011/01/07/wheres-the-missing-heat/#comment-29221


I don’t run a lot on AGW anymore because quite frankly it isn’t a very big issue anymore. The alarmists have either moved on to a new crisis or find themselves being ignored by the public. But with all the stories on the Tucson tragedy, it actually nice to look at some other news.

Warmists say cold weather proves AGW happening

Temperatures for December and January were consistently 1.8 F ( 1 C) lower than the average of 41 F (5 C)and 37 F (3C) respectively and more snow fell in London this week than since the 1960s.

But despite this extreme weather, scientists say that the current cold snap does not mean that climate change is going into reverse. In fact, the surprise with which we have greeted the extreme conditions only reinforces how our climate has changed over the years.

A study by the Met Office which went back 350 years shows that such extreme weather now only occurs every 20 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/4436934/Snow-is-consistent-with-global-warming-say-scientists.html?sms_ss=email&at_xt=4d2e42b3bf2fcb62%2C0

It appears everything supports the speculation about AGW.  You can watch a video on it below.
And here’s an explanation why no matter what happens it doesn’t change their minds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdxaxJNs15s

More on the Climate of Hate and other fairytales of the left

All hate speech is wrong, but some is more wrong than others

As Jeffrey Lord at the American Spectator reports, this quote from NOW FORMER DEM CONGRESSMAN PAUL KANJORSKI "seemed to vanish in the pre-election haze." It was reported in the Scranton Times on October 23 with hardly a raised eyebrow - just more of the Congressman's famous "loose lips."

I leave it for you to judge whether these "eliminationist" comments by Kanjorski about Florida's then candidate for Governor Rick Scott should have received a little wider play:

"That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "INSTEAD OF RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA, THEY OUGHT TO HAVE HIM AND SHOOT HIM. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/dem_congressman_suggests_shoot.html

Of course this wasn’t a big deal, because the speaker was a Democrat.

  

Sarah Palin: Inciting violence? I don’t think so

(Palin) “And ya know, hearing the news reports lately, kinda this ginned up controversy about us, common sense conservatives, inciting violence because we happen to oppose some of the things in the Obama administration.”

Interrupted from audience: “We do it with our vote!”

“AMEN, BROTHER! THAT’S WHAT YOU DO IT WITH, WITH YOUR VOTE! You got it right. WE KNOW VIOLENCE ISN’T THE ANSWER. When we take up our arms, we’re talking about our vote. We’re talking about being involved in a contested primary like this, and picking the right candidate too–John McCain, we thank you for that.”

http://bigjournalism.com/pjsalvatore/2011/01/10/flashback-palin-answers-lamestream-media-charges-of-incitement-in-march-2010-when-we-take-up-arms-were-talking-about-our-vote/

There are lies, damn lies and then liberal pundits.

A climate of hate: The MSM’s role

All of this evidence, which is easily accessible on the Internet, points to the possibility that Loughner may be suffering from a mental illness like schizophrenia. The vast majority of schizophrenics are not violent, and those that receive treatment are not violent. But as Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, a research psychiatrist, writes in his book, “The Insanity Offense,” ABOUT 1 PERCENT OF THE SERIOUSLY MENTALLY ILL (OR ABOUT 40,000 INDIVIDUALS) ARE VIOLENT. THEY ACCOUNT FOR ABOUT HALF THE RAMPAGE MURDERS IN THE UNITED STATES.

….In short, the evidence before us suggests that LOUGHNER WAS LOCKED IN A WORLD FAR REMOVED FROM POLITICS as we normally understand it.

Yet the early coverage and commentary of the Tucson massacre suppressed this evidence. The coverage and commentary shifted to an entirely different explanation: Loughner unleashed his rampage because he was incited by the violent rhetoric of the Tea Party, the anti-immigrant movement and Sarah Palin.

MAINSTREAM NEWS ORGANIZATIONS LINKED THE ATTACK TO AN OFFENSIVE TARGET MAP ISSUED BY SARAH PALIN’S POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE. The Huffington Post erupted, with former Senator GARY HART FLATLY STATING THAT THE KILLINGS WERE THE RESULT OF ANGRY POLITICAL RHETORIC. Keith Olbermann demanded a Palin repudiation and the founder of the Daily Kos wrote on Twitter: “Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin.” Others argued that the killing was fostered by a political climate of hate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/opinion/11brooks.html?_r=1

The worst part here is when will the media realize by blaming SP or talk radio, they are contributing to the “Climate of Hate,” they are condemning.

  

Turn the other cheek?

MARK HALPERIN: I just want to single out one thing. I don't want to over-generalize but I think the media and THE POLITICIANS HAVE BEHAVED PRETTY WELL so far. The thing I'm most concerned about now is the anger on the right-wing commenatariat: on Fox, and George Will, and other conservatives are, in some cases justifiably upset at liberals. But they're turning this right now, in the last 24 hours, back into the STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE OF ALL OF THIS IS WAR AND FODDER FOR CONTENT, RATHER THAN TRYING TO BRING THE COUNTRY TOGETHER.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Wait a second, Mark. I think they would say that you have that backwards. THAT A SHOOTING WAS TURNED INTO FODDER TO ATTACK CONSERVATIVES.

HALPERIN: And I, and I, and I already made that criticism as well. They're right. BUT RATHER THAN SEIZING ON IT AND TURNING THE OTHER CHEEK, THEY ARE BACK AT THEIR WAR STATIONS. And that's not going to help us.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2011/01/11/az-aftermath-halperin-praises-media-condemns-fox-news-and-conserva#ixzz1AjkNBfvy

“I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.“ Barack H. Obama September 2008

Halperin is a fool. He reminds me of the old joke when a kid comes crying to his mother, “Mommy, Billy hit me in my hand with his eye!”

Political Opportunism

  

How do we react to the horrific murders of Christina Green, 9; John Roll, 63; Gabe Zimmerman, 30; Dorothy Morris, 76; Dorwin Stoddard, 76; and Phyllis Schneck, 79; and the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and 13 others?

For one thing, WE CAN REFUSE TO ENGAGE IN POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM. There's been too much of that.

  

Before any relevant facts about the alleged shooter were in, New York Times' columnist Paul Krugman posted a blog in which he admitted that he had no proof that the right was involved, but BLAMED SARAH PALIN ANYWAY FOR TARGETING THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSWOMAN'S DISTRICT IN "CROSSHAIRS." MSNBC host Keith Olbermann did likewise

.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_debra_j_saunders/the_first_casualty_is_not_partisanship

Her last line says it well: “IT SEEMS THAT AS A COUNTRY, WE HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO MOURN.”

Poll: Americans don’t buy political rhetoric as a cause of the Tuscan shootings

Overall, 57 percent of respondents said the harsh political tone had nothing to do with the shooting, compared to 32 percent who felt it did. Republicans were more likely to feel the two were unrelated - 69 percent said rhetoric was not to blame; 19 percent said it played a part. Democrats were more split on the issue - 49 percent saw no connection; 42 percent said there was.

Independents more closely reflected the overall breakdown - 56 percent said rhetoric had nothing to do with the attack; 33 percent felt it did.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028105-503544.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea

The American public once again shows its common sense. I guess a nut is just a nut for most Americans.

Test your knowledge now!

1. Which right-wing, fascist US president said "If they bring a knife, we bring a gun."?

• A. Ronald Reagan
• B. Barack Hussein Obama
• C. Thomas Jefferson
• D. Calvin Coolidge…

Continue the quiz here: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/right_wing_hate_speech_quiz.html

Paul Krugman Buffoon

WITHIN HOURS after Jared Loughner's killing spree, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman went straight for the gutter, proclaiming, WITH NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, THAT LOUGHNER'S ACT WAS IN ALL LIKELIHOOD "POLITICAL," and going on to blame Republicans for the murders. I denounced Krugman's vile blog post here.

WE NOW KNOW THAT LOUGHNER'S MURDERS WERE NOT POLITICAL. He was deranged and had no coherent political philosophy. TO THE EXTENT THAT HE HAD ANY POLITICAL BELIEFS AT ALL, HIS FRIENDS DESCRIBE HIM AS LEFT WING……

In Krugman’s latest column he says:

Where's that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let's not make a false pretense of balance: it's coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE A DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF CONGRESS URGING CONSTITUENTS TO BE "ARMED AND DANGEROUS" without being ostracized; but REPRESENTATIVE MICHELE BACHMANN, WHO DID JUST THAT, is a rising star in the G.O.P.

….My guess is that KRUGMAN HAS NO IDEA WHEN MICHELE REFERRED TO BEING "ARMED AND DANGEROUS," or why, or what the rest of the sentence was. Krugman's biggest problem isn't that he is stupid. HIS BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THAT HE IS LAZY. He is incapable of doing even the most rudimentary research, which is why his columns rarely contain many facts, and when they do, his "facts" are often wrong.

As it happens, I--unlike Krugman--know all about Michele's "armed and dangerous" quote, because she said it in an interview with Brian Ward and me, on our radio show. It was on March 21, 2009. THE SUBJECT WAS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S CAP AND TRADE PROPOSAL. Michele organized a couple of informational meetings in her district with an expert on global warming and cap and trade, and she came on our show to promote those meetings. SHE WANTED HER CONSTITUENTS TO BE ARMED WITH INFORMATION ON CAP AND TRADE so that they would understand how unnecessary, and how damaging to our economy, the Obama administration's proposal was. THAT WOULD MAKE THEM DANGEROUS TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S LEFT-WING PLANS.

 
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/01/028118.php

I think the author’s viewpoint of Krugman being lazy is actually applicable to many on the left. They don’t take the time to actually research. To many on the left, simply believing something is true requires no actual facts to back them up.

Generic Ballot

REPUBLICANS HOLD AN 11-POINT LEAD OVER DEMOCRATS on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending January 9, 2011. That’s up one point from last week and six points from the week before. IT'S THE WIDEST GAP BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES SINCE RIGHT BEFORE ELECTION DAY.

New Rasmussen Reports telephone polling finds that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters nationwide say they would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 36% would choose the Democrat instead.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

This really doesn’t mean anything at this point in time, but is interesting to keep an eye on it to see which party is making inroads.

Ohio becomes 25th state to contest healthcare plan

Ohio is joining a multistate lawsuit over the federal healthcare reform plan passed less than a year ago because the law "tramples on the rights of Ohio's citizens," the state's new attorney general said on Monday.

OHIO WILL JOIN 21 OTHER STATES IN A LEGAL CHALLENGE TO THE HEALTHCARE REFORMS THAT IS LED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA. Virginia has filed a separate lawsuit and Oklahoma's attorney general has announced plans to do the same. That means HALF OF ALL STATES ARE FIGHTING THE PLAN IN FEDERAL COURT.

The lawsuits primarily revolve around the plan's requirement that an individual have health insurance or pay a penalty.

 
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7096D420110110

There are other things happening in the news. Just thought I would bring this one up.