When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
I’ll start with the caveat that I am NOT ”a BIRTHER.”
That said, who has really looked at what Obama HIMSELF has said about his birth and early life and compared it with records we have?
Remember in September 2009, when Obama addressed the nation’s schoolchildren?
(It got some flack.)
He said this: “I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother.”
This was a mirror of what was written in Dreams From My Father in 1995: “He [Obama’s father] had left Hawaii back in 1963 when I was only two years old.”
Also in Dreams, Obama tells of coming across an article from the Honolulu Advertiser celebrating Barack Obama, Sr.’s planned grand tour of mainland universities on his triumphant way to Harvard.
He writes “No mention is made of my mother or me, and I’m left to wonder whether the omission was intentional on my father’s part, in anticipation of his long departure.”
What Obama does not mention is that the article was dated June 22, 1962.
Obama was reportedly born on August 4, 1961.
Obama was LESS than 1 year old when his father left.
And, according to school records, Obama’s mamma was living in and taking classes in Seattle, Washington going to classes at the University of Washington there since August 19th, 1961 only WEEKS after Obama’s birth!
Obama may have only shared what he’d been told by grandparents – both times.
Obama was raised by his mother….. after his father had left Hawaaii…..then for less than 1 year.
Obama knew this by the 2009 address to the nation’s schoolchildren.
It is weird/troubling to realize that by the 2009 story to the children of the nation Obama knew he was telling a fable but he continued to spread it.
When Obama’s father died there was a potential payoff for any children who could PROVE they were Obama Sr’s children.
Ruth Nidesand, a white American, had two children by Obama Sr. produced all the birth papers she needed.
Ann Dunham apparently could not do the same for her son Barack, at least not ones that could tie him to Obama Sr.
Just weird.
Hard Right
13 years ago
So much for the left being civil.
MSNBC’s Donny Deutch connects Tucson shooting to AZ not celebrating MLK day. Anyone other than an AZ like myself see the problem?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
We have celebrated the MLK holliday since 1992. In fact, if anyone wants to know the back story on how we got it I’d be happy to share.
A) 4 million 5 MW wind turbines…..the first one was just built in China in 2010.
(That alone would require a quadrupling of rare earth extractions.)
B) 90,000 NEW solar farms that each produce 300 MWs.
(Earth only has 300 of these now, and most of them are smaller.)
C) One rooftop 3-kilowatt solar PV system for EVERY 4 people on the planet!
(I don’t know if there are that many roofs.)
D) The extra steel, concrete and water to drive all of this.
E) The extra oil to lubricate the wind turbines.
F) A 100% compliant world population of recyclers.
(No more using an old plastic bag to take out dirty cat litter.)
(In our area it would also require locking garbage bins so the homeless could not ”steal” recyclables from the official picker-uppers.)
Oh, and in this perfect world, no need for any back-up gas or coal burning electric plants.
When the wind is not blowing it will always be clear and sunny.
And when it is dark and stormy the wind will also always be blowing!
G) The ”grid” would have to be exponentially expanded, too.
And, all of the world would be limited to using only the power they used in ~1950.
Other than that, hunky dory, when do we start?
(BTW, my condo was originally built in 1956. The number of electrical outlets for the entire place was only 2/kitchen, 2 living room, 2/bedroom, 1 bathroom. And that was considered ”modern, ahead of its time! We now have 3 kitchen, 1/dining room, 5/living room, 3/bedroom, 2 bathroom. Some of these have 5-way extensions on them! So, back to 1950? REALLY?)
Randy
13 years ago
Some Simple Questions We Should All Ask About Global Warming Data
There have been quite a few posts concerning global warming over the years here at FA. Some of the discussions are quite in-depth and scientifically oriented. Yet, there are those who fail to understand the issues. They fail to understand why there are skeptics. I want to start the ball rolling here in a simple manner that 9th grade science students use to be able to understand.
Fact: There are scientists who tell us that the Earth is warming and heading for disaster due to human causes. A sensible person would then ask a series of questions.
1. What is the normal temperature of the Earth?
2. How is the temperature of the Earth measured?
3. How long has temperature records been kept?
4. How accurate are the measurements?
5. How many temperature stations are used to determine the temperature of the Earth?
6. Are the temperatures taken at the temperature stations averaged together to determine the temperature of the Earth?
7. Do the temperatures taken at each station accurately represent the region? For example, in an area that is 50% water and 50% land; does the land temperature station also represent the temperature over the water accurately? Are there major differences in elevations in the area measured by the station?
The answers to these questions will surprise most people. An area is assigned to each weather station. The weather stations do not accurately represent the assigned area. Some continents have closely positioned temperature stationed while others have very few yet all of these temperatures are averaged together. Look at the distribution of temperature stations in the US. http://www.surfacestations.org/ A quick look at the map shows most are in urban areas and do not accurately measure surface temperatures. Understand that by going here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/test/
The UK has used 1500 weather stations across the World to develop a system to show how the climate has changed during the past 300 years. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/12/view-300-years-of-global-climate-data-on-one-map.php The Earth has a surface area of 196,940,400 square miles. That equates to one weather station representing 1,312, 936 square miles. I would expect there would be quite a difference in the terrain as well as the activity within those 1.3 square million miles. This would mean that there would be two weather stations that would represent all of the 2.9 million sq miles of Australia. Anyone who has been to or studied Australia knows two stations can never represent the climate of Australia.
Now we know that we have data of little credibility dating back 300 years. We still have not determined the normal temperature of the Earth. Did the little ice age represent normal temperatures (1560-1850) http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html or did the Middle Ages warming period experienced between the 9th and 14th Century where temperature s exceeded today’s temperature represent the normal temperature of the Earth? http://www.michaelkeller.com/news/news575.htm
Well, we cannot determine the normal temperature of the Earth because we do not have records going back far enough. We can use tree rings and ice cores and computer programs to estimate past temperatures, but with what level of reliability?
Any high school graduate should be able to ask these simple questions and understand that the “books have been cooked” to enhance the wealth of a few. In the next few days, I will pose additional simple questions that have remained unanswered by the climate scientists.
Nan G
13 years ago
The NYTimes found a way to ”blame Bush,” for Jared L’s actions.
Look for this buried in the 43rd paragraph of a New York Times story yesterday……..
He became intrigued by antigovernment conspiracy theories, including that the Sept. 11 attacks were perpetrated by the government and that the country’s central banking system was enslaving its citizens. His anger would well up at the sight of President George W. Bush, or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government.
Well before that paragraph the Times implies a right-wing extremist attitude led to Jared’s actions:
FTA – … a few days later, during a meeting with a school administrator, Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups.
Read from the Wall Street Journal that the New York Slimes is backtracking on the Tucson shootings. They were given a bum steer. I call it “steer of the bums”. Gray Lady Down or Gray Lady Dead- your choice. In most of their opeds- they are full of sh t.
Nan G
13 years ago
Polls Show Growing Support for ObamaCare…….NOT!
More like SKEWED polls do.
LOL!
Now in January,
40 percent of adults support Obamacare 41 percent oppose it.
In November,
38 percent supported Obamacare 47 percent opposed it.
But the sample in November was: 39 percent Democrat
38 percent Republican
The sample in January was: 42 percent Democrat
36 percent Republican
And the other questions are weird, too.
weird in that they are NOT covered in the news…..
When asked if they would favor a law “that would require every American to have health insurance, or pay money to the government as a penalty if they do not, unless the person is very poor,” 59 percent are opposed!
So, learning a few facts about what ObamaCare IS really changes the skew.
But guess which portion is touted in the media and which are hidden?
HEADLINES:
CBS says: Poll: Opposition to Health Care Reform Eases
LATimes: Opposition to healthcare law eases, poll finds
AP puts it this way: AP-GfK Poll: Raw feelings ease over health law
The Seattle Times: GOP wants repeal, but fervor slips in poll
RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.
Sigh
Greg
13 years ago
National Geographic Magazine has a nice article about how earth could go 100% green energy.
Could this ever happen?
Truth be told, I think we’re most likely headed for a decline of epic proportions. We’re apparently unable to grasp the fact that dependency on diminishing supplies of non-renewable resources to meet an ever-growing demand simply isn’t a sustainable situation.
I suppose this shouldn’t be surprising. We seem to have trouble taking in what should be obvious. With the national infrastructure literally falling apart, for example, we imagine we’re somehow going to come roaring back to compete effectively in a global marketplace. We can’t afford deficit spending as an investment in the future, but we’ll cheerfully piss away trillions on foreign wars with no clear objectives and no possibility of a payback on borrowed money spent. Now we’re talking about the growing military threat posed by China. I rather doubt they’ll loan us the money to finance a cold war against them. If things get tense, they may cut off our critical supplies of Wal-Mart products, leaving us a nation without televisions, computer components, and a reliable supply of underwear.
It would almost be funny if it weren’t so damn pathetic. Someone, of course, has made a lot of money by allowing all of this to come to pass. I suppose the list of usual suspects depends on one’s political orientation. Ironically, the problems are pretty much the same for all of us. What we all have in common is that we’ve all been equally played for the fool.
When a society gets sold a bag of bolts for billions, by politicians who are in on the kickbacks, taxpayers footing the “subsidy” bill should shout for a recall on their misplaced votes.
. . . Just when you need the energy to keep warm through a cold winter, it’s not there.
Let’s see . . . they don’t work in summer, they don’t work in the spring, they don’t work in the fall, they don’t work in …………..
Nan G
13 years ago
@James Raider:
Thanks, James.
Weird that Minnisota didn’t buy brand new wind turbines.
They took 20-year old CA ones.
Anyway……..
The UK had a similar problem during it’s deadly cold weather earlier this fall/winter.
According to the news their wind turbines didn’t spin in the cold, either.
Less than 2% of their energy during the cold came from wind power.
They CAN, theoretically, produce a top level of 8 and a 1/2% of British needs on a good day.
The UK had been trying to reach the goal of 30% sustainable energy, a target set by Brussels. But even at optimal production numbers that goal will require a doubling of the average family’s energy bill.
The Brits are trying to install a ”smart grid” so they can turn off everybody’s fridges and save energy that way.
(I bet there are some Brits whose fridges are off that list, don’t you?)
1) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years, will continue to do so but this hasn’t be significantly caused by mankind.
2) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years, will continue to do so and this trend has been caused significantly by mankind.
3) You don’t know what’s happening but you know it’s not being caused by mankind.
4) The earth hasn’t globally on average being getting warmer over the last 100 years.
5) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years but will start to cool but none of this has be significantly caused by mankind.
6) Other believe/reason…
Randy
13 years ago
@Greg: Greggie, if you look at the current natural gas and oil reserves, we have more reserves than we had 10 years ago. This is due largely to new discoveries and technologies. Now, if the left allows us to recover them. Spain went bankrupt subsidizing alternative energy. That seems to be the goal of the current administration towards the US. You should read a little more instead of running off your mouth.
Randy
13 years ago
@GaffaUK: Well, If there was an ice age that lasted into 1850 and the ice has receeded, then the Earth is likely warming. That would be a natural cycle that is documented by numerous ice ages and warming. If the temperature was higher in the middle ages, long before the industrial age, then how can we now blame the industrial age for current warming?
If I submitted a science paper to Mr Hartman using the temperature data used by NASA and most of the world, I would at most get a C for trying. The red marks on the paper would read: Measurements failed to statistically represent area. Data does not support conclusions. If the warming and cooling cycle is 10,000 years, how can you determine where we are in the cycle with only 300 years of data?
We should be sceptical of those who cry global warming. Many are the same that cried global cooling back in the 1970s. When that didn’t sell to the grant givers, they found another “cause”. To answer your question, I have no idea if the Earth is cooling or warming because the data is corrupt. Even the climategate emails stated that there is no original temperature data remaining that has not been modified or adjusted.
I will get into the CO2 and tree ring data at a later date.
Thanks Randy, hope your posts on this topic remain close together, also hope I don’t miss any of them. Lost my memory in the 90’s got most of it back but certain topics, most technology(computer, DVD players, clocks, cameras etc.) as well, don’t stay with me and I have to keep relearning. Also will be e-mailing them around to my e-mail buddies, sometimes it’s helpful to put something like this right in front of you, I know they will appreciate this as well.
Nan G
13 years ago
Imagine if Israel had done this….instead of Russia.
November, 2010.
Yet, in all this time, no huge outcry!
Especially watch after the 4 minute mark.
Obviously it is a Somali PIRATE boat, not a fishing boat, as the first few minutes shows guns but no nets.
The pirate are all handcuffed and left on their own boat.
When the Russians get a decent distance away they blow that little boat up.
Think Somali pirates will be stupid enough to continue to attack Russian vessels anymore?
And why weren’t the EU Navy, patrolling the waters, helping?
They held back because they felt there might be casualties.
And they were right.
Look back a few pages in the comments for the poster, Arvelinn.
He/she translates the video….expletives and all.
Randy
13 years ago
The Global Warming Theory
Roy Spencer PHD and former NASA scientist has developed a basic explanation of the global warming theory.
Basically, all scientific theories must have assumptions. (The validity of those assumptions determines the validity of the theory.) The global warming assumptions are that the Earth maintains a constant average temperature. (Looking at my post from 17 Jan, with current temperature data, it is nearly impossible to determine what that constant temperature is.)
The theory proposes there is a balance of the energy absorbed from the sun and the energy emitted as infrared radiation (IR) back out into space that maintains the constant average temperature. For this assumption to be valid, the sun energy from the sun reaching the Earth and the amount of energy absorbed would need to be constant.
The global warming theory says that the green house gases (mostly weather vapor, clouds, CO2 and methane) prevent IR radiation from escaping into space. Global warming alarmists quote increases of the green house gas CO2 as rising considerably. This works because few people know what the concentrations of compounds are in the atmosphere. Here is a table from Physicalgeography.net. http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7a.html
Gas Name Chemical Formula Percent Volume
Nitrogen N2 78.08%
Oxygen O2 20.95%
*Water H2O 0 to 4%
Argon Ar 0.93%
*Carbon Dioxide CO2 0.0360%
Neon Ne 0.0018%
Helium He 0.0005%
*Methane CH4 0.00017%
Hydrogen H2 0.00005%
*Nitrous Oxide N2O 0.00003%
*Ozone O3 0.000004%
As you can see, the primary component of the green house gases is water vapor. CO2 and methane together are 0.9% of the green house gases yet are attributed with major changes in the Earth temperature.
Dr Spencer uses a simple model to explain what really happens. He explains that if you put a pot of water on the stove on a low setting, the water warms to a constant temperature until the heat loss through evaporation, convection and IR loss equals the rate of energy gain from the stove. The water in the pot will remain a constant temperature until all the water is evaporated. If you add heat to the water by turning up the burner, the temperature will again rise until it reaches a new warmer equilibrium.
Global warming theorists assume that if CO2 doubles in concentration in the atmosphere, then the average temperature of the Earth will rise by about 1 degree F. This assumption also assumes that all other components of the atmosphere remain the same. Their computer models are programmed with this assumption. Anyone can understand that as the temperature increases, the amount of cloud cover changes. The percentage of water vapor in the air changes and precipitation levels change. All of these affect the amount of energy that reaches the Earth and or allows additional or less IR radiation to escape into space.
The other changes are called feedback. When these feedbacks are added together, they determine climate sensitivity. A negative feedback would be cloud levels increasing as temperatures rise due to increased water vapor in the air. This would prevent sun light from reaching the Earth thereby reducing Earth temperature. This is an example of low climate sensitivity. If CO2 increases actually did increase temperatures of earth, if there is low climate sensitivity, the Earth temperature would soon reach equilibrium again at nearly the same or the same temperature.
On the other hand, if there is a high climate sensitivity, then CO2 increases can drastically increase the temperature of the Earth. The climate computer models are not programmed with actual feedback data. This is most likely due to the fact that it is difficult to capture this data. So, the current climate models assume an average feedback that does not respond to rising concentrations of green house gases. This means that the computers tell us that all increases in greenhouse gases increase Earth temperature.
So, in the past days we have determined that no one knows what the normal temperature of the earth is. If we did, then we understand that we have little understanding what happens when the concentrations of the gases in the atmosphere changes. Climate scientists who advocate there is global warming use many assumptions in programming their computers that may not be valid assumptions. If these climate scientists were using a true scientific process, they would develop numerous computer programs using different assumptions.
I will discuss some of the physics involved with the green house gases in my next post. There are some interesting assumptions climate scientists have made that makes their conclusions more suspect.
Countrywide Conrad will announce his retirement quite soon, maybe even today. The “poor” senator needs more time with his family. N. Dakota should have another republican senator in 2012. Ex congressman Pomeroy will probably run for the dems- with a -10 rating. A conservative republican should win this running away.
Nan G
13 years ago
We’ll have to all visit the Obama Library when it opens.
I love big gem stones.
In just one year…..
Saudi Arabia’s King gave
Michelle a ruby and diamond jewelry set worth $132,000,
a $14,200 pearl necklace and more.
The Saudi King gave
Barack a marble-based clock adorned with gold palm trees and camels valued at $34,500.
The Saudi King gave
the two first daughters
diamond earrings and necklaces worth more than $7,000.
I love stuff like that.
I visit gemstone and mineral displays at museums and at both the Nixon and Reagan Libraries.
Randy
13 years ago
To Joe Wilson and Valery Plame and all of those lefties who believe there was no yellow cake in Iraq!
Wikileaks confirm:
Five years after Joe Wilson’s op-ed claimed no yellowcake was sold to Iraq — the ease with which Saddam could have snapped his fingers and reinstituted his nuclear program became apparent. In July 2008, in an operation kept secret at the time, 37 military air cargo flights shipped more than 500 metric tons of yellowcake — found in Iraq — out of the country for further transport and remediation to Canada. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/205888.php
It would be helpful to see the actual Wikileaks documentation. All I’ve seen thusfar are allegations that it exists, which are linked to other articles that simply repeat the allegation. Can anyone provide a link to a detailed source document?
Nan G
13 years ago
See the blared headlines this AM? 129 Million People Could Be Denied Affordable Coverage Without Health Reform
Well, they did use the caveat ”could,” didn’t they?
Yeah, well, way off!
See, paying higher premiums is not the same as being denied coverage!
And the Obama, HHS ”study” lumped together all conditions that either qualify a person for a state high-risk pool, or higher premiums, or could result in a denial of private insurance.
And to add to the dishonesty of their ”study,” Obama, HHS treats all americans as if we are all in the INDIVIDUAL market as opposed to the GROUP market (where MOST Americans actually are!)
In group programs a pre-existing condition might be covered right away by a new insurer, or there might be a waiting period of less than 18 months.
Under that act (HIPAA) an employee CAN switch to the plan of a different employer when he changes jobs.
This ”study” is pathetic PR by Obama.
It will be shredded over the next few days.
Of that I am sure.
Greg
13 years ago
Domestic terrorism? Looks like a near-miss in Spokane, WA yesterday. The story doesn’t seem to have been widely picked up by the national media yet.
Nan G
13 years ago
Obama claims he wants to find every regulation that is wasteful.
It is NOT always the regulations, sir.
The heart of mankind is inclined to do bad.
The GAO has released a study on abuse of government credit cards.
41% of all purchases are abuse of the taxpayers’ money.
For example:
USDA employee embezzled $642,000 over 6 years for gambling, car and mortgage payments, and retail purchases
One U.S. Postal Service employee spent $1,100 on Internet dating services over a 15-month period.
$1 billion credit payments to fictitious individuals.
63% of all purchases could not be verified by inventory checks.
Data mining revealed inappropriate debit card charges:
*Erotica products (“Condoms to Go,” “Pleasure Zone”)
*Girls Gone Wild videos (“GGW Videos”)
*1-week Caribbean vacation (“Vacation Express”)
*Five season football tickets (“New Orleans Saints”)
The title alone would seem pleasant enough for many knowing the piece was written by….Glen Greenwald/snort, lol! But, believe me, it gets better:
First up, old Cheney, Obie’s nemesis, by the end of his one term Barry and Dick might be sharing a picnic table at their next family reunion:
Cheney praised Obama for continuing his and Bush’s core approach to Terrorism:
He obviously has been through the fires of becoming President and having to make decisions and live with the consequences. And it’s different than being a candidate. When he was candidate he was all for closing Gitmo. He was very critical of what we’d done on the counterterrorism area to protect America from further attack and so forth. . .
I think he’s — in terms of a lot of the terrorism policies — the early talk, for example, about prosecuting people in the CIA who’ve been carrying out our policies — all of that’s fallen by the wayside. I think he’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate. So I think he’s learned from experience.
Cheney was then specifically asked whether he stood by his early attacks on Obama’s national security policies — “You said you believe President Obama has made America less safe. That he’s actually raised the risk of attack. Do you still feel that way?” — and Cheney, not exactly known for changing his mind, essentially said that, thanks to Obama’s continuity, he now does not:
Well, when I made that comment, I was concerned that the counterterrorism policies that we’d put in place after 9/11 that had kept the nation safe for over seven years were being sort of rapidly discarded. Or he was going to attempt to discard them. . . . As I say, I think he’s found it necessary to be more sympathetic to the kinds of things we did.
Back to Glen Greenwald, sorry this is so long, but he’s one of those wordy, wordy libs like one that floats about in here, feel free to go read what I cut out.
I was mainly interested in Greenwald’s begrudging admission that Obama, even though he is doing his best to call it something else, is not only continuing the previous administratons war policy, he is using some of those very bad programs more aggressively.
Greenwald still whines about imaginary criminals and torture, but still has to face facts, they were wrong and now they know why:
Aside from the repressiveness of the policies themselves, there are three highly significant and enduring harms from Obama’s behavior. First, it creates the impression that Republicans were right all along in the Bush-era War on Terror debates and Democratic critics were wrong. The same theme is constantly sounded by conservatives who point out Obama’s continuation of these policies: that he criticized those policies as a candidate out of ignorance and partisan advantage, but once he became President, he realized they were right as a result of accessing the relevant classified information and needing to keep the country safe from the Terrorist threat.
~~~~ Second, Obama has single-handedly eliminated virtually all mainstream debate over these War on Terror policies. At least during the Bush years, we had one party which steadfastly supported them but one party which claimed (albeit not very persuasively) to vehemently oppose them. At least there was a pretense of vigorous debate over their legality, morality, efficacy, and compatibility with our national values.
Those debates are no more. Even the hardest-core right-wing polemicists — Gen. Hayden, the Heritage Foundation, Dick Cheney — now praise Obama’s actions in these areas. Opposition from national Democrats has faded away to almost complete nonexistence now that it’s a Democratic President doing these things. What was once viewed as the signature of Bush/Cheney radicalism is now official, bipartisan Washington consensus: the policies equally of both parties and all Serious people. Thanks to Barack Obama, this architecture is firmly embedded in place and invulnerable to meaningful political challenge.
Third, Obama’s embrace of these policies has completely rehabilitated the reputations and standing of the Bush officials responsible for them. Yesterday, J. Gerald Herbert — a long-time DOJ official — told The Raw Story that Obama’s refusal to investigate or prosecute Bush era crimes is both a violation of DOJ’s duties and sets a “dangerous precedent” by vesting lawbreaking elites with immunity. The active protection of torturers and other high-level lawbreakers both signals that they did nothing seriously wrong and, independently, ensures that such conduct will be repeated in the future.
But Obama’s impact in this area extends far beyond that. Dick Cheney is not only free of ignominy, but can run around claiming vindication from Obama’s actions because he’s right. The American Right constantly said during the Bush years that any President who knew what Bush knew and was faced with the duty of keeping the country safe would do the same thing. Obama has provided the best possible evidence imaginable to prove those claims true.
Conservatives would love to bash Obama for being weak on Terrorism so that, in the event of another attack, they can blame him (and Cheney, in last night’s interview, left open that possibility by suggesting Obama may suffer from unknown failures). If it were at all possible, they’d be out accusing him of abandoning critical programs that Keep us Safe; that’s what they do best. But they cannot with a straight face claim that Obama has abandoned their core approach, so they do the only thing they can do: acknowledge that he has continued and strengthened it and point out that it proves they were right — and he was wrong — all along. If Obama has indeed changed his mind over the last two years as a result of all the Secret Scary Things he’s seen as President, then I genuinely believe that he and the Democratic Party owe a heartfelt, public apology to Bush, Cheney and the GOP for all the harsh insults they spewed about them for years based on policies that they are now themselves aggressively continuing.
Obama has won the War on Terror debate — for the American Right. And as Dick Cheney’s interview last night demonstrates, they’re every bit as appreciative as they should be.
“Conservatives would love to bash him….” Oh there’s still plenty to bash him about concerning the war and we will bash when we please. boo-hoo Glen Greenwald, boo-hoo!
Anybody here on FA have an opinion about the direction A. Breitbart is heading?
Greg
13 years ago
Indicators show that the nation’s economic recovery, which began in mid-2010, is continuing to gather momentum. Maybe the GOP can figure out a way to somehow take credit for this as the year progresses.
On this Fox News video, House Rules Committee Chair David Dreier (R-CA) is already attempting to claim the credit:
“We can get our economy growing. And we’ve gotten some positive numbers. I think it’s in large part because we won our majority and we’re pursuing pro-growth policies.”
Yep. Never mind the fact that they haven’t actually done anything yet–and have spent the past 2 years resisting and talking down everything the Obama administration has done.
I suppose this argument is consistent with their assertion that Obama was somehow responsible for an economic train wreck that was already in progress before he was even elected.
The Defense Department’s proposed fiscal 2011 budget funds the shutdown of the C-17 program.
Wm T Sherman
13 years ago
For most of the last half million years or so, the earth has been in ice age conditions, with brief interglacial periods such as the one we are in now.
Questions:
1. Why do ice ages end?
2. Why do they begin?
We heard that last night.
Boeing had employed over 900 just here in Long Beach.
900 really great jobs.
All going away.
Maybe the LB airport will find a use for the land.
So sad.
Yeah, I think both you and David Dreier (R-CA) might be a bit optomistic about the “recovery.” With food costs rising, gas expected to hit $4.oo by the end of this year, $5.00 per gal by 2012. Everything trucked will rise even more and housing…ew. By the time 2012 arrives I think the Republicans might be able to claim credit for stopping the hemorrhaging.
Hard Right
13 years ago
Hey Greg, Obama and the dems were mostly responsible for the train wreck. You also forget he was in Congress before getting elected to the WH. Not only did their actions NOT help, they made things worse and will continue to for some time. Not only has this not discouraged obama, it seems to have emboldened him and his cronies who are moving full steam ahead with their progressive agenda.
GaffaUK
13 years ago
@Randy
Well, If there was an ice age that lasted into 1850 and the ice has receeded, then the Earth is likely warming.
As I understand it – we are in an interglacial period which has lasted around 11,400 years within an Ice Age. The ‘little Ice Age’ you refer to – isn’t technically an ice age but a period of cooling.
That would be a natural cycle that is documented by numerous ice ages and warming. If the temperature was higher in the middle ages, long before the industrial age, then how can we now blame the industrial age for current warming?
The same way we can blame man for the extinction of certain species within relatively modern times (e.g. the dodo) and yet still accept that natural events throughout earth’s billion of years of history has wiped out many species (up to 96% of all marine species in one extinction event alone!) long before man was ever on the face of the earth AND nature will continue to do so. It doesn’t have to be a choice between nature and man – both can and do effect climate.
If I submitted a science paper to Mr Hartman using the temperature data used by NASA and most of the world, I would at most get a C for trying. The red marks on the paper would read: Measurements failed to statistically represent area. Data does not support conclusions. If the warming and cooling cycle is 10,000 years, how can you determine where we are in the cycle with only 300 years of data?
Q: How close would you like weather stations to be?
Q: Do you really believe that we only have 300 years of data regarding global temperatures?
We should be sceptical of those who cry global warming. Many are the same that cried global cooling back in the 1970s.
Would it not be interesting if the so called non renewable resources were in fact renewable? Just imagine the forces of nature working deep within the bowels of the planet churning like a gigantic chemistry set compounding the elements, renewing non renewable energy. Far fetched? If a blight on the planet like humans can concoct synthetics, why cannot mother nature make oil and gas?
@Buffalobob: There is a 100 year old theory that has been resurrected. The idea is that oil and gas are generated as a waste product from the nuclear reactions that heat the Earth’s core. There are very old oil fields that were depleted decades ago that have returned to production. There are also current major oil and gas finds in places that make it difficult to attribute to organic matter being pressurized. Do a search for some reputable people who are exploring this theory.
Nan G
13 years ago
@Buffalobob:
You asked: why cannot mother nature make oil and gas?
Indeed.
Mother Nature made all of it so far.
So, why not?
Who said she had to stop?
She’s not in a union, you know.
inge
13 years ago
@ Nan G and Old Trooper2: Like your comments!
Nan G: Jack Cashill’s book ‘Deconstructing Obama’ will be released on 15 February 2010. He writes frequently at americanthinker, and has established in research that Obamas book ‘Dreams of my father’ was written by Bill Ayres, not Obama among other lies he told.
Old Trooper2: The jobs cut by Boing were shipped to China, with Obamas help.
I think I have been POISONED, I just feel so sick when I read the above at the “HUFF” . . . normally I LMAO when I peruse the HUFF . . . but weel go view and read for yourself.
C’mon Hard Right, Sarah is a victim yet again of the lamestream media. Even if the Enquirer was right about John Edwards, there’s no proof that this is nothing more than a smear……may the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob smite the evil lamestream media with his Mighty Hand that this Blood Libel may be avenged!
Nan G
13 years ago
BREAKING NEWS:
MSNBC Says It Has Ended Keith Olbermann’s Contract
(NYTimes)
In a statement, MSNBC said, “the last broadcast of ‘Countdown
with Keith Olbermann’ will be this evening.”
Nan, I think we must have posted at the same time, I will leave mine up because it’s a different article.
Nan G
13 years ago
OMG!
Obama takes over drug researching!
Their own regulations have slowed the pace of new drugs coming out of private pharmaceutical comapnies so much that they’ve just decided to do the development of new medicines themselves!
How much will this cost?
$1 billion to START up.
Who knows. http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ncl=dXUJX_EkuGwNYEMhZUzGjVRG0iYFM&topic=m
I love the picture you posted, it’s absolutely gorgeous.
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day. I wrote about him at my blog if anyone is interested, lots of links there with history that is not widely known:
http://zillablog.marezilla.com/2011/01/martin-luther-king-jr-day-some-thoughts.html
That’s a gorgeous picture, so golden and warm.
I’ll start with the caveat that I am NOT ”a BIRTHER.”
That said, who has really looked at what Obama HIMSELF has said about his birth and early life and compared it with records we have?
Remember in September 2009, when Obama addressed the nation’s schoolchildren?
(It got some flack.)
He said this: “I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother.”
This was a mirror of what was written in Dreams From My Father in 1995: “He [Obama’s father] had left Hawaii back in 1963 when I was only two years old.”
Also in Dreams, Obama tells of coming across an article from the Honolulu Advertiser celebrating Barack Obama, Sr.’s planned grand tour of mainland universities on his triumphant way to Harvard.
He writes “No mention is made of my mother or me, and I’m left to wonder whether the omission was intentional on my father’s part, in anticipation of his long departure.”
What Obama does not mention is that the article was dated June 22, 1962.
Obama was reportedly born on August 4, 1961.
Obama was LESS than 1 year old when his father left.
And, according to school records, Obama’s mamma was living in and taking classes in Seattle, Washington going to classes at the University of Washington there since August 19th, 1961 only WEEKS after Obama’s birth!
Obama may have only shared what he’d been told by grandparents – both times.
Obama was raised by his mother….. after his father had left Hawaaii…..then for less than 1 year.
Obama knew this by the 2009 address to the nation’s schoolchildren.
It is weird/troubling to realize that by the 2009 story to the children of the nation Obama knew he was telling a fable but he continued to spread it.
One other thing from here:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/what_obama_has_said_about_his.html
When Obama’s father died there was a potential payoff for any children who could PROVE they were Obama Sr’s children.
Ruth Nidesand, a white American, had two children by Obama Sr. produced all the birth papers she needed.
Ann Dunham apparently could not do the same for her son Barack, at least not ones that could tie him to Obama Sr.
Just weird.
So much for the left being civil.
MSNBC’s Donny Deutch connects Tucson shooting to AZ not celebrating MLK day. Anyone other than an AZ like myself see the problem?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
We have celebrated the MLK holliday since 1992. In fact, if anyone wants to know the back story on how we got it I’d be happy to share.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/17/deutsch-sharpton-claim-arizona-has-seceded-for-not-recognizing-mlk-day/
National Geographic Magazine has a nice article about how earth could go 100% green energy.
Could this ever happen?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/01/110117-100-percent-renewable-energy/
I’d say, NO!
Look what, they, themselves acknowledge as necessary:
A) 4 million 5 MW wind turbines…..the first one was just built in China in 2010.
(That alone would require a quadrupling of rare earth extractions.)
B) 90,000 NEW solar farms that each produce 300 MWs.
(Earth only has 300 of these now, and most of them are smaller.)
C) One rooftop 3-kilowatt solar PV system for EVERY 4 people on the planet!
(I don’t know if there are that many roofs.)
D) The extra steel, concrete and water to drive all of this.
E) The extra oil to lubricate the wind turbines.
F) A 100% compliant world population of recyclers.
(No more using an old plastic bag to take out dirty cat litter.)
(In our area it would also require locking garbage bins so the homeless could not ”steal” recyclables from the official picker-uppers.)
Oh, and in this perfect world, no need for any back-up gas or coal burning electric plants.
When the wind is not blowing it will always be clear and sunny.
And when it is dark and stormy the wind will also always be blowing!
G) The ”grid” would have to be exponentially expanded, too.
And, all of the world would be limited to using only the power they used in ~1950.
Other than that, hunky dory, when do we start?
(BTW, my condo was originally built in 1956. The number of electrical outlets for the entire place was only 2/kitchen, 2 living room, 2/bedroom, 1 bathroom. And that was considered ”modern, ahead of its time! We now have 3 kitchen, 1/dining room, 5/living room, 3/bedroom, 2 bathroom. Some of these have 5-way extensions on them! So, back to 1950? REALLY?)
Some Simple Questions We Should All Ask About Global Warming Data
There have been quite a few posts concerning global warming over the years here at FA. Some of the discussions are quite in-depth and scientifically oriented. Yet, there are those who fail to understand the issues. They fail to understand why there are skeptics. I want to start the ball rolling here in a simple manner that 9th grade science students use to be able to understand.
Fact: There are scientists who tell us that the Earth is warming and heading for disaster due to human causes. A sensible person would then ask a series of questions.
1. What is the normal temperature of the Earth?
2. How is the temperature of the Earth measured?
3. How long has temperature records been kept?
4. How accurate are the measurements?
5. How many temperature stations are used to determine the temperature of the Earth?
6. Are the temperatures taken at the temperature stations averaged together to determine the temperature of the Earth?
7. Do the temperatures taken at each station accurately represent the region? For example, in an area that is 50% water and 50% land; does the land temperature station also represent the temperature over the water accurately? Are there major differences in elevations in the area measured by the station?
The answers to these questions will surprise most people. An area is assigned to each weather station. The weather stations do not accurately represent the assigned area. Some continents have closely positioned temperature stationed while others have very few yet all of these temperatures are averaged together. Look at the distribution of temperature stations in the US. http://www.surfacestations.org/ A quick look at the map shows most are in urban areas and do not accurately measure surface temperatures. Understand that by going here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/test/
The UK has used 1500 weather stations across the World to develop a system to show how the climate has changed during the past 300 years. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/12/view-300-years-of-global-climate-data-on-one-map.php The Earth has a surface area of 196,940,400 square miles. That equates to one weather station representing 1,312, 936 square miles. I would expect there would be quite a difference in the terrain as well as the activity within those 1.3 square million miles. This would mean that there would be two weather stations that would represent all of the 2.9 million sq miles of Australia. Anyone who has been to or studied Australia knows two stations can never represent the climate of Australia.
Now we know that we have data of little credibility dating back 300 years. We still have not determined the normal temperature of the Earth. Did the little ice age represent normal temperatures (1560-1850) http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html or did the Middle Ages warming period experienced between the 9th and 14th Century where temperature s exceeded today’s temperature represent the normal temperature of the Earth? http://www.michaelkeller.com/news/news575.htm
Well, we cannot determine the normal temperature of the Earth because we do not have records going back far enough. We can use tree rings and ice cores and computer programs to estimate past temperatures, but with what level of reliability?
Any high school graduate should be able to ask these simple questions and understand that the “books have been cooked” to enhance the wealth of a few. In the next few days, I will pose additional simple questions that have remained unanswered by the climate scientists.
The NYTimes found a way to ”blame Bush,” for Jared L’s actions.
Look for this buried in the 43rd paragraph of a New York Times story yesterday……..
Well before that paragraph the Times implies a right-wing extremist attitude led to Jared’s actions:
FTA – … a few days later, during a meeting with a school administrator, Mr. Loughner said that he had paid for his courses illegally because, “I did not pay with gold and silver” — a standard position among right-wing extremist groups.
Read it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/us/16loughner.html?_r=3&adxnnlx=1295272816-mzPTbiXmgfYK5d56DmiDjg&pagewanted=all
Also at the Washington Examiner:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/loughner-was-bush-hater-says-43rd-paragraph-nyt-story#ixzz1BKxBTS9S
Read from the Wall Street Journal that the New York Slimes is backtracking on the Tucson shootings. They were given a bum steer. I call it “steer of the bums”. Gray Lady Down or Gray Lady Dead- your choice. In most of their opeds- they are full of sh t.
Polls Show Growing Support for ObamaCare…….NOT!
More like SKEWED polls do.
LOL!
Yes, be forewarned: it is a PDF….
http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK%20Poll%20011411.pdf
Now in January,
40 percent of adults support Obamacare
41 percent oppose it.
In November,
38 percent supported Obamacare
47 percent opposed it.
But the sample in November was:
39 percent Democrat
38 percent Republican
The sample in January was:
42 percent Democrat
36 percent Republican
And the other questions are weird, too.
weird in that they are NOT covered in the news…..
When asked if they would favor a law “that would require every American to have health insurance, or pay money to the government as a penalty if they do not, unless the person is very poor,” 59 percent are opposed!
So, learning a few facts about what ObamaCare IS really changes the skew.
But guess which portion is touted in the media and which are hidden?
HEADLINES:
CBS says: Poll: Opposition to Health Care Reform Eases
LATimes: Opposition to healthcare law eases, poll finds
AP puts it this way: AP-GfK Poll: Raw feelings ease over health law
The Seattle Times: GOP wants repeal, but fervor slips in poll
RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.
Sigh
Truth be told, I think we’re most likely headed for a decline of epic proportions. We’re apparently unable to grasp the fact that dependency on diminishing supplies of non-renewable resources to meet an ever-growing demand simply isn’t a sustainable situation.
I suppose this shouldn’t be surprising. We seem to have trouble taking in what should be obvious. With the national infrastructure literally falling apart, for example, we imagine we’re somehow going to come roaring back to compete effectively in a global marketplace. We can’t afford deficit spending as an investment in the future, but we’ll cheerfully piss away trillions on foreign wars with no clear objectives and no possibility of a payback on borrowed money spent. Now we’re talking about the growing military threat posed by China. I rather doubt they’ll loan us the money to finance a cold war against them. If things get tense, they may cut off our critical supplies of Wal-Mart products, leaving us a nation without televisions, computer components, and a reliable supply of underwear.
It would almost be funny if it weren’t so damn pathetic. Someone, of course, has made a lot of money by allowing all of this to come to pass. I suppose the list of usual suspects depends on one’s political orientation. Ironically, the problems are pretty much the same for all of us. What we all have in common is that we’ve all been equally played for the fool.
@Nan G:
When a society gets sold a bag of bolts for billions, by politicians who are in on the kickbacks, taxpayers footing the “subsidy” bill should shout for a recall on their misplaced votes.
There are endless problems with the windmills in the sky, and I’ve whined enough over the past few years on their problems, but this winter Minnesota just got a wake-up call: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/science/earth/05cold.html?_r=1
. . . Just when you need the energy to keep warm through a cold winter, it’s not there.
Let’s see . . . they don’t work in summer, they don’t work in the spring, they don’t work in the fall, they don’t work in …………..
@James Raider:
Thanks, James.
Weird that Minnisota didn’t buy brand new wind turbines.
They took 20-year old CA ones.
Anyway……..
The UK had a similar problem during it’s deadly cold weather earlier this fall/winter.
According to the news their wind turbines didn’t spin in the cold, either.
Less than 2% of their energy during the cold came from wind power.
They CAN, theoretically, produce a top level of 8 and a 1/2% of British needs on a good day.
The UK had been trying to reach the goal of 30% sustainable energy, a target set by Brussels. But even at optimal production numbers that goal will require a doubling of the average family’s energy bill.
The Brits are trying to install a ”smart grid” so they can turn off everybody’s fridges and save energy that way.
(I bet there are some Brits whose fridges are off that list, don’t you?)
@Nan
I believe the sustainable target set by the EU for the UK is 15% by 2020. It was the UK itself which was aiming for 30% by 2020. However currently it only produces around 3%.
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/548927/uk_likely_to_miss_legal_2020_renewable_energy_target.html
@Randy
Interesting. Out of interest what do you believe?
1) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years, will continue to do so but this hasn’t be significantly caused by mankind.
2) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years, will continue to do so and this trend has been caused significantly by mankind.
3) You don’t know what’s happening but you know it’s not being caused by mankind.
4) The earth hasn’t globally on average being getting warmer over the last 100 years.
5) The earth is on average getting warmer over the last 100 years but will start to cool but none of this has be significantly caused by mankind.
6) Other believe/reason…
@Greg: Greggie, if you look at the current natural gas and oil reserves, we have more reserves than we had 10 years ago. This is due largely to new discoveries and technologies. Now, if the left allows us to recover them. Spain went bankrupt subsidizing alternative energy. That seems to be the goal of the current administration towards the US. You should read a little more instead of running off your mouth.
@GaffaUK: Well, If there was an ice age that lasted into 1850 and the ice has receeded, then the Earth is likely warming. That would be a natural cycle that is documented by numerous ice ages and warming. If the temperature was higher in the middle ages, long before the industrial age, then how can we now blame the industrial age for current warming?
If I submitted a science paper to Mr Hartman using the temperature data used by NASA and most of the world, I would at most get a C for trying. The red marks on the paper would read: Measurements failed to statistically represent area. Data does not support conclusions. If the warming and cooling cycle is 10,000 years, how can you determine where we are in the cycle with only 300 years of data?
We should be sceptical of those who cry global warming. Many are the same that cried global cooling back in the 1970s. When that didn’t sell to the grant givers, they found another “cause”. To answer your question, I have no idea if the Earth is cooling or warming because the data is corrupt. Even the climategate emails stated that there is no original temperature data remaining that has not been modified or adjusted.
I will get into the CO2 and tree ring data at a later date.
@Randy:
Thanks Randy, hope your posts on this topic remain close together, also hope I don’t miss any of them. Lost my memory in the 90’s got most of it back but certain topics, most technology(computer, DVD players, clocks, cameras etc.) as well, don’t stay with me and I have to keep relearning. Also will be e-mailing them around to my e-mail buddies, sometimes it’s helpful to put something like this right in front of you, I know they will appreciate this as well.
Imagine if Israel had done this….instead of Russia.
November, 2010.
Yet, in all this time, no huge outcry!
Especially watch after the 4 minute mark.
Obviously it is a Somali PIRATE boat, not a fishing boat, as the first few minutes shows guns but no nets.
The pirate are all handcuffed and left on their own boat.
When the Russians get a decent distance away they blow that little boat up.
Think Somali pirates will be stupid enough to continue to attack Russian vessels anymore?
And why weren’t the EU Navy, patrolling the waters, helping?
They held back because they felt there might be casualties.
And they were right.
Look back a few pages in the comments for the poster, Arvelinn.
He/she translates the video….expletives and all.
The Global Warming Theory
Roy Spencer PHD and former NASA scientist has developed a basic explanation of the global warming theory.
Basically, all scientific theories must have assumptions. (The validity of those assumptions determines the validity of the theory.) The global warming assumptions are that the Earth maintains a constant average temperature. (Looking at my post from 17 Jan, with current temperature data, it is nearly impossible to determine what that constant temperature is.)
The theory proposes there is a balance of the energy absorbed from the sun and the energy emitted as infrared radiation (IR) back out into space that maintains the constant average temperature. For this assumption to be valid, the sun energy from the sun reaching the Earth and the amount of energy absorbed would need to be constant.
The global warming theory says that the green house gases (mostly weather vapor, clouds, CO2 and methane) prevent IR radiation from escaping into space. Global warming alarmists quote increases of the green house gas CO2 as rising considerably. This works because few people know what the concentrations of compounds are in the atmosphere. Here is a table from Physicalgeography.net. http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7a.html
Gas Name Chemical Formula Percent Volume
Nitrogen N2 78.08%
Oxygen O2 20.95%
*Water H2O 0 to 4%
Argon Ar 0.93%
*Carbon Dioxide CO2 0.0360%
Neon Ne 0.0018%
Helium He 0.0005%
*Methane CH4 0.00017%
Hydrogen H2 0.00005%
*Nitrous Oxide N2O 0.00003%
*Ozone O3 0.000004%
As you can see, the primary component of the green house gases is water vapor. CO2 and methane together are 0.9% of the green house gases yet are attributed with major changes in the Earth temperature.
Dr Spencer uses a simple model to explain what really happens. He explains that if you put a pot of water on the stove on a low setting, the water warms to a constant temperature until the heat loss through evaporation, convection and IR loss equals the rate of energy gain from the stove. The water in the pot will remain a constant temperature until all the water is evaporated. If you add heat to the water by turning up the burner, the temperature will again rise until it reaches a new warmer equilibrium.
Global warming theorists assume that if CO2 doubles in concentration in the atmosphere, then the average temperature of the Earth will rise by about 1 degree F. This assumption also assumes that all other components of the atmosphere remain the same. Their computer models are programmed with this assumption. Anyone can understand that as the temperature increases, the amount of cloud cover changes. The percentage of water vapor in the air changes and precipitation levels change. All of these affect the amount of energy that reaches the Earth and or allows additional or less IR radiation to escape into space.
The other changes are called feedback. When these feedbacks are added together, they determine climate sensitivity. A negative feedback would be cloud levels increasing as temperatures rise due to increased water vapor in the air. This would prevent sun light from reaching the Earth thereby reducing Earth temperature. This is an example of low climate sensitivity. If CO2 increases actually did increase temperatures of earth, if there is low climate sensitivity, the Earth temperature would soon reach equilibrium again at nearly the same or the same temperature.
On the other hand, if there is a high climate sensitivity, then CO2 increases can drastically increase the temperature of the Earth. The climate computer models are not programmed with actual feedback data. This is most likely due to the fact that it is difficult to capture this data. So, the current climate models assume an average feedback that does not respond to rising concentrations of green house gases. This means that the computers tell us that all increases in greenhouse gases increase Earth temperature.
So, in the past days we have determined that no one knows what the normal temperature of the earth is. If we did, then we understand that we have little understanding what happens when the concentrations of the gases in the atmosphere changes. Climate scientists who advocate there is global warming use many assumptions in programming their computers that may not be valid assumptions. If these climate scientists were using a true scientific process, they would develop numerous computer programs using different assumptions.
I will discuss some of the physics involved with the green house gases in my next post. There are some interesting assumptions climate scientists have made that makes their conclusions more suspect.
Another Allen West Post. Here is a man who doesn’t understand what PC language is. We need more of this straight talk!
http://secure.afa.net/afa/activism/takeaction.asp?id=384
Countrywide Conrad will announce his retirement quite soon, maybe even today. The “poor” senator needs more time with his family. N. Dakota should have another republican senator in 2012. Ex congressman Pomeroy will probably run for the dems- with a -10 rating. A conservative republican should win this running away.
We’ll have to all visit the Obama Library when it opens.
I love big gem stones.
In just one year…..
Saudi Arabia’s King gave
Michelle a ruby and diamond jewelry set worth $132,000,
a $14,200 pearl necklace and more.
The Saudi King gave
Barack a marble-based clock adorned with gold palm trees and camels valued at $34,500.
The Saudi King gave
the two first daughters
diamond earrings and necklaces worth more than $7,000.
I love stuff like that.
I visit gemstone and mineral displays at museums and at both the Nixon and Reagan Libraries.
To Joe Wilson and Valery Plame and all of those lefties who believe there was no yellow cake in Iraq!
Wikileaks confirm:
Five years after Joe Wilson’s op-ed claimed no yellowcake was sold to Iraq — the ease with which Saddam could have snapped his fingers and reinstituted his nuclear program became apparent. In July 2008, in an operation kept secret at the time, 37 military air cargo flights shipped more than 500 metric tons of yellowcake — found in Iraq — out of the country for further transport and remediation to Canada.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/205888.php
@Randy, #21:
It would be helpful to see the actual Wikileaks documentation. All I’ve seen thusfar are allegations that it exists, which are linked to other articles that simply repeat the allegation. Can anyone provide a link to a detailed source document?
See the blared headlines this AM?
129 Million People Could Be Denied Affordable Coverage Without Health Reform
Right.
Not quite true, Obama, HHS and your toadies in the media.
http://www.healthcare.gov/center/reports/preexisting.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/17/AR2011011702842.html
Well, they did use the caveat ”could,” didn’t they?
Yeah, well, way off!
See, paying higher premiums is not the same as being denied coverage!
And the Obama, HHS ”study” lumped together all conditions that either qualify a person for a state high-risk pool, or higher premiums, or could result in a denial of private insurance.
Obama, HHS lists Crohn’s Disease, which some insurers simply cover, others place in a high risk pool.
http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/300_399/0341.html
And to add to the dishonesty of their ”study,” Obama, HHS treats all americans as if we are all in the INDIVIDUAL market as opposed to the GROUP market (where MOST Americans actually are!)
In group programs a pre-existing condition might be covered right away by a new insurer, or there might be a waiting period of less than 18 months.
Did Obama/HHS think we Americans forgot all about the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act#Title_I:_Health_Care_Access.2C_Portability.2C_and_Renewability
Under that act (HIPAA) an employee CAN switch to the plan of a different employer when he changes jobs.
This ”study” is pathetic PR by Obama.
It will be shredded over the next few days.
Of that I am sure.
Domestic terrorism? Looks like a near-miss in Spokane, WA yesterday. The story doesn’t seem to have been widely picked up by the national media yet.
Obama claims he wants to find every regulation that is wasteful.
It is NOT always the regulations, sir.
The heart of mankind is inclined to do bad.
The GAO has released a study on abuse of government credit cards.
41% of all purchases are abuse of the taxpayers’ money.
For example:
USDA employee embezzled $642,000 over 6 years for gambling, car and mortgage payments, and retail purchases
One U.S. Postal Service employee spent $1,100 on Internet dating services over a 15-month period.
$1 billion credit payments to fictitious individuals.
63% of all purchases could not be verified by inventory checks.
Data mining revealed inappropriate debit card charges:
*Erotica products (“Condoms to Go,” “Pleasure Zone”)
*Girls Gone Wild videos (“GGW Videos”)
*1-week Caribbean vacation (“Vacation Express”)
*Five season football tickets (“New Orleans Saints”)
The PDF report is here:
http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/fas/Purchase_Cards_Audits_Investigations_Atlanta.ppt#499,1,Purchase
My, my, how fun!
The title alone would seem pleasant enough for many knowing the piece was written by….Glen Greenwald/snort, lol! But, believe me, it gets better:
First up, old Cheney, Obie’s nemesis, by the end of his one term Barry and Dick might be sharing a picnic table at their next family reunion:
Back to Glen Greenwald, sorry this is so long, but he’s one of those wordy, wordy libs like one that floats about in here, feel free to go read what I cut out.
I was mainly interested in Greenwald’s begrudging admission that Obama, even though he is doing his best to call it something else, is not only continuing the previous administratons war policy, he is using some of those very bad programs more aggressively.
Greenwald still whines about imaginary criminals and torture, but still has to face facts, they were wrong and now they know why:
“Conservatives would love to bash him….” Oh there’s still plenty to bash him about concerning the war and we will bash when we please. boo-hoo Glen Greenwald, boo-hoo!
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/18/cheney/index.html
Anybody here on FA have an opinion about the direction A. Breitbart is heading?
Indicators show that the nation’s economic recovery, which began in mid-2010, is continuing to gather momentum. Maybe the GOP can figure out a way to somehow take credit for this as the year progresses.
On this Fox News video, House Rules Committee Chair David Dreier (R-CA) is already attempting to claim the credit:
Yep. Never mind the fact that they haven’t actually done anything yet–and have spent the past 2 years resisting and talking down everything the Obama administration has done.
I suppose this argument is consistent with their assertion that Obama was somehow responsible for an economic train wreck that was already in progress before he was even elected.
Great Obama Budget Cuts to create Jobs?????…..
Boeing to cut 1,100 jobs in C-17 program
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110120/bs_afp/usaerospacemilitarycompanycutsboeing_20110120174354
The Defense Department’s proposed fiscal 2011 budget funds the shutdown of the C-17 program.
For most of the last half million years or so, the earth has been in ice age conditions, with brief interglacial periods such as the one we are in now.
Questions:
1. Why do ice ages end?
2. Why do they begin?
@Old Trooper 2:
Happy and relieved to see you with us again.
@Old Trooper 2:
We heard that last night.
Boeing had employed over 900 just here in Long Beach.
900 really great jobs.
All going away.
Maybe the LB airport will find a use for the land.
So sad.
@Greg:
Yeah, I think both you and David Dreier (R-CA) might be a bit optomistic about the “recovery.” With food costs rising, gas expected to hit $4.oo by the end of this year, $5.00 per gal by 2012. Everything trucked will rise even more and housing…ew. By the time 2012 arrives I think the Republicans might be able to claim credit for stopping the hemorrhaging.
Hey Greg, Obama and the dems were mostly responsible for the train wreck. You also forget he was in Congress before getting elected to the WH. Not only did their actions NOT help, they made things worse and will continue to for some time. Not only has this not discouraged obama, it seems to have emboldened him and his cronies who are moving full steam ahead with their progressive agenda.
@Randy
As I understand it – we are in an interglacial period which has lasted around 11,400 years within an Ice Age. The ‘little Ice Age’ you refer to – isn’t technically an ice age but a period of cooling.
The same way we can blame man for the extinction of certain species within relatively modern times (e.g. the dodo) and yet still accept that natural events throughout earth’s billion of years of history has wiped out many species (up to 96% of all marine species in one extinction event alone!) long before man was ever on the face of the earth AND nature will continue to do so. It doesn’t have to be a choice between nature and man – both can and do effect climate.
Q: How close would you like weather stations to be?
Q: Do you really believe that we only have 300 years of data regarding global temperatures?
Many being around 10%? http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
Would it not be interesting if the so called non renewable resources were in fact renewable? Just imagine the forces of nature working deep within the bowels of the planet churning like a gigantic chemistry set compounding the elements, renewing non renewable energy. Far fetched? If a blight on the planet like humans can concoct synthetics, why cannot mother nature make oil and gas?
@Buffalobob:
Far fetched.
@Buffalobob: There is a 100 year old theory that has been resurrected. The idea is that oil and gas are generated as a waste product from the nuclear reactions that heat the Earth’s core. There are very old oil fields that were depleted decades ago that have returned to production. There are also current major oil and gas finds in places that make it difficult to attribute to organic matter being pressurized. Do a search for some reputable people who are exploring this theory.
@Buffalobob:
You asked: why cannot mother nature make oil and gas?
Indeed.
Mother Nature made all of it so far.
So, why not?
Who said she had to stop?
She’s not in a union, you know.
@ Nan G and Old Trooper2: Like your comments!
Nan G: Jack Cashill’s book ‘Deconstructing Obama’ will be released on 15 February 2010. He writes frequently at americanthinker, and has established in research that Obamas book ‘Dreams of my father’ was written by Bill Ayres, not Obama among other lies he told.
Old Trooper2: The jobs cut by Boing were shipped to China, with Obamas help.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/20/hundreds-of-dead-birds-in_n_811709.html
I think I have been POISONED, I just feel so sick when I read the above at the “HUFF” . . . normally I LMAO when I peruse the HUFF . . . but weel go view and read for yourself.
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Blood Libel Alert!!!!!!!!
Blood Libel Alert!!!!!!!!
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/todd_palin_sex_scandal_prostitute_shailey_tripp_exclusive/celebrity/70033
Moosedroppings squats and scoots again.
C’mon Hard Right, Sarah is a victim yet again of the lamestream media. Even if the Enquirer was right about John Edwards, there’s no proof that this is nothing more than a smear……may the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob smite the evil lamestream media with his Mighty Hand that this Blood Libel may be avenged!
BREAKING NEWS:
MSNBC Says It Has Ended Keith Olbermann’s Contract
(NYTimes)
In a statement, MSNBC said, “the last broadcast of ‘Countdown
with Keith Olbermann’ will be this evening.”
Wow!
THURS. JAN. 20, 2011
FOXNEWS O’REILLY 2,918,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,079,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 1,940,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,786,000
FOXNEWS BECK 1,780,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,460,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,106,000
CNN PIERS 1,025,000
MSNBC MADDOW 976,000
MSNBC O’DONNELL 855,000
MSNBC SCHULTZ 760,000
CNN COOPER 740,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 700,000
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110122/ap_on_en_tv/us_tv_olbermann
Comcast is coming to town! One down……more to go.
_______________
Nan, I think we must have posted at the same time, I will leave mine up because it’s a different article.
OMG!
Obama takes over drug researching!
Their own regulations have slowed the pace of new drugs coming out of private pharmaceutical comapnies so much that they’ve just decided to do the development of new medicines themselves!
How much will this cost?
$1 billion to START up.
Who knows.
http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ncl=dXUJX_EkuGwNYEMhZUzGjVRG0iYFM&topic=m