Sen. Chuck Schumer loves the sound of his own voice, but it carried a bit farther than he might have liked on the US Airways shuttle from New York to Washington on Sunday.
According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a bitch after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff....
Posted by: Mike ||
12/16/2009 08:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a bitch after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.
Who you calling a bitch? What an arrogant, self-important snit. Probably thinks of the rest of us in the same way--bothersome voters who don't get it; in other words bitches to tolerate when it's convenient.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/16/2009 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Charles Richard Cranium Schumer thinks, as a member of the self-proclaimed ruling elite, that he doesn't have to use good manners. BTW-I hate cell phones.
Rumors have been circulating for several days through Charlotte's Eastover neighborhood that former U.S. Sen. John Edwards bought a home here for his admitted former mistress, Rielle Hunter. And now the National Enquirer is reporting in its Dec. 21 issue that Edwards has, in fact, bought a house here that the Charlotte Business Journal has identified as a residence on Providence Road.
Edwards, the vice presidential nominee on the 2004 Democratic ticket and a presidential candidate last year, saw his political career derail after details of the affair emerged. In late 2007, the Enquirer first reported claims from an anonymous source that Edwards had an affair with a campaign worker, later revealed to be Hunter, a filmmaker hired to produce YouTube videos for Edwards' 2008 presidential campaign.
Hunter gave birth to a daughter in February 2008. At the time, Edwards campaign aide Andrew Young said he was the father. Young later retracted that claim.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It seems to me the least Breck Boy ought to do is to let her live in his basement.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has privately told her politically vulnerable Democratic members that they will not vote on controversial bills in 2010 unless the Senate acts first.
After a year of bruising legislative victories that some political analysts believe have done more to jeopardize her majority than to entrench it, Pelosi is shifting gears for the 2010 election.
The Speaker recently assured her freshman lawmakers and other vulnerable members of her caucus that a vote on immigration reform is not looming despite a renewed push from the White House and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The House will not move on the issue until the upper chamber passes a bill, Pelosi told the members.
But according to Democrats who have spoken to Pelosi, the Speaker has expanded that promise beyond immigration, informing Democratic lawmakers that the Senate will have to move first on a host of controversial issues before she brings them to the House floor.
The Speaker has told members in meetings that weve done our jobs, a Democratic leadership aide said. And that next year the Senates going to have to prove what it can accomplish before we go sticking our necks out any further.
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the president of the freshman class, said that Pelosi came to last Wednesdays freshman breakfast to deliver that message, and that it was met with wide spread approval.
I think freshmen, particularly, are not enamored of the idea of being asked to walk the plank on a controversial item if the Senate is not going to take any action, Connolly said.
Pelosis promise could dim the prospects for other White House priorities as well, including the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) known as card check and the repeal of the dont ask, dont tell prohibition on gays serving openly in the military.
Theres not going to be a ton of stuff legislatively next year either way, a House leadership aide said. But on EFCA even though the House has demonstrated its ability to pass it and on Dont Ask, Dont Tell, the Senate is definitely going to have to act first.
The House passed EFCA during the last Congress, but members who voted on that bill were well-aware it had no chance to be signed into law by President George W. Bush.
After passing a series of expensive bills, including the $787 billion stimulus, Democrats are vowing to reduce the federal deficit next year.
There certainly will be difficult votes for Democrats next year, ranging from raising the debt limit to funding the troop surge in Afghanistan. Those types of must-pass bills are expected to clear both chambers of Congress.
Some liberals are concerned that there will be fewer Democrats after the 2010 elections and that the White House should ramp up, not slow down, its agenda. They have also made the case that President Barack Obama and congressional leaders must move left to ensure that the Democrats base will show up next November, and argument immigration reform proponents have been making with increased intensity in recent weeks.
Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and administration officials recently agreed that, on the heels of the House taking the lead on a climate change bill that was declared dead on arrival in the Senate and a healthcare bill thats taking on a more centrist form with each passing day, the Senate would have to pass an immigration reform bill before the House would vote on its own.
Key House Democrats have said that Pelosi needed to solicit that promise from Reid in order to quell an emerging two-front rebellion in her caucus from Hispanic Democrats who had grown tired of hearing false promises, and from vulnerable Democrats tired of being forced to support contentious bills facing certain death in the Senate.
On Tuesday, a working group of more than a dozen Democrats introduced an immigration reform bill that sponsor Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) said would set the liberal marker for reform.
Minutes before that press conference started, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) said that the Speakers been very clear that the Senate would go first on an immigration bill.
More than most leaders, Van Hollen has had to deal with the ugly side of the victories that Pelosi has won. In the absence of Senate action on a number of House initiatives, GOP reelection committee operatives have been hammering vulnerable Democrats for supporting Pelosis ultra-liberal agenda.
Van Hollen, in his second term heading the DCCC, played offense last cycle. This time around, hes playing defense.
There have been some members who have been concerned that the House is passing things ahead of the Senate, Van Hollen said when discussing immigration. And what were simply saying is that, in this case, the Senate will go first.
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has taken the immigration reform lead for Senate Democrats, but has repeatedly delayed the release of his bill. And while reform proponents believe that passage of a Senate bill would all but guarantee an immigration reform law, many see the upper chamber as being unable to forge a consensus on an issue more divisive than healthcare.
Obama and Reid have vowed to pursue immigration reform in 2010.
While freshman Democrats said they were relieved to hear Pelosis promise, they have also sent some clear signals to House leaders.
Talking about the financial regulatory reform bill that moved through the House last week without any GOP support, Connolly referenced the flipping of 40 Democrats on a controversial amendment to give judges new power to rewrite home mortgages known as cramdown to showcase the approach vulnerable members have been taking on issues that the Senate has shown little appetite for.
Most of us voted against the [Rep. John] Conyers [Jr. (D-Mich.)] amendment to reinstitute cramdown. We may have supported I did cramdown earlier this year, but the Senate said, No, we're not going to do it, Connolly said. "The freshmen pretty much said, Why have a Pyrrhic victory on this issue only to have the Senate shoot us down yet again?
Posted in Seedy Politicians -- but a great move by Sen Coburn --
Senate Democrats' drive to pass health care overhaul by Christmas sputtered Wednesday as a lone moderate holdout remained undecided and Republican delaying tactics stretched an already protracted debate even further.
Despite a one-on-one meeting Tuesday with President Barack Obama that lasted 30 minutes, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said he still has concerns about abortion and other issues. Nelson, the only known holdout among 60 senators whose votes are needed to move the bill, said it had been his third meeting in eight days with the president. Threated to take AirForce base out of NE
Obama "made a strong case for passing health care reform now," said Nelson. "But I think it still remains to be seen if it was compelling." The legislation needs to be improved, he added, and liberals resisting his proposals -- even saying the bill should be scrapped -- are running out of alternatives.
"I do say if nothing is done, I'm not sure what Plan B is," he said. "If Plan B is start over...it's quite possible that it just won't happen. It seems to me that we have a chance right now to fix a flawed bill."
To make matters more complicated, the Senate stumbled into health care gridlock after a Republican senator forced the clerk to read aloud a 767-page amendment.
GOP Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma had sought approval to require that any amendment considered by the Senate must be offered 72 hours in advance and with a full cost report.
When he was rebuffed by Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, Coburn invoked his right to require that an amendment by another Democrat be read aloud. That sent the Senate into limbo, since the amendment by Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders is 767 pages long. It calls for guaranteeing coverage to all through a public program similar to Medicare.
Obama cajoled restive Democrats on Tuesday, urging them not to lose perspective amid intense intraparty battles over government's role and reach in health care. The public plan liberals hoped for appeared dead in the Senate, as did a Medicare buy-in scheme offered as a fallback.
"The president and vice president pointed out that you take your victories when you can and nothing prevents you from fighting on for the things you believe should have been achieved," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. "But why spurn a victory in hand?"
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., a moderate who had been on the fence, said Tuesday night it's time to pass the bill.
But Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was still scrambling to secure the 60 votes he needs to overcome a Republican filibuster. One holdout -- Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman -- was coming around fast. Another -- Nebraska's Nelson -- continued to criticize the bill.
"History will be made either way," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said Wednesday. "A handful of Democrat leaders press ahead in a blind rush of frantic dealmaking to find 60 votes by Christmas; a handful of other Democrats are wondering which side they really want to be standing on when the dust settles."
Just as unhappy with the legislation was former Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean, an outspoken liberal. Interviewed on ABC's "Good Morning America," the physician and former presidential candidate said the Senate bill has some good provisions, "but there has to be a line beyond which you think the bill is bad for the country."
"This is an insurance company's dream," Dean said. "This is the Washington scramble, and it's a shame."
Obama said Democrats were "on the precipice" of victory, not breakdown. The president said differences still remain over details but described the bill as an accomplishment for the history books.
The legislation includes "all the criteria that I laid out" in a speech to a joint session of Congress earlier in the year, he said. "It is deficit-neutral. It bends the cost curve. It covers 30 million Americans who don't have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there to make sure that we're preventing abuse."
Democrats were still awaiting a final cost analysis from the Congressional Budget Office on the latest version of the bill. At its core, the legislation is designed to spread coverage to 30 million Americans who now lack it, impose new consumer-friendly regulations on the insurance industry and try to slow the rate of growth in health care spending.
Most Americans would be required to purchase insurance, and the government would establish new insurance supermarkets called "exchanges" through which consumers could shop for policies.
Large companies would not face a requirement to cover their employees. But the government would impose charges if any of them did not do so and any of their workers qualified for federal subsidies to help them afford private coverage.
It would be financed with tax increases and Medicare cuts.
Democratic leaders mapped out a timetable that envisioned passage before Christmas -- but just barely. The House approved its version of the bill earlier this fall, and final negotiations between the two chambers would follow a vote in the Senate. Here it is live on cspan
#1
I hope Sen Nelson stands his ground. THe mandatory funding of abortion in this bill is an abomination, as er the lack of conscience protection for healthcare workers. And that's in addition to all the other crap that is loaded into it.
I wonder if a case for conscience objections can be made to withhold paying taxes? If forced to contribute to this, I will need to consider going to jail versus committing a cardinal sin and putting my soul at risk.
Look for talk of a primary challenge for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) to perk up again, with a new Quinnipiac poll showing her losing to New York City Comptroller Bill Thompson (D) 41-28.
Thompson pulled off a closer-than-expected loss to Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) last month and is reportedly considering a Senate bid.
Numerous other potential primary challengers to Gillibrand have fizzled out, though, so it's tough to see Thompson making the leap against the wishes of the White House -- unless, of course, he's sore about the lack of support he received during his mayoral campaign.
On the other hand, a 13-point lead is significant and is likely to make any candidate take a second look at the race. And Gillibrand's hard name recognition is actually higher than Thompson's, 41 percent to 35.
Talk of a Rudy Giuliani bid for Senate has died down, but the poll shows him holding his lead over Gillibrand, 50-40, and leading Thompson 52-36.
If Giuliani doesn't run, it looks like former Attorney General Michael Mukasey's son, Marc, will.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The price of supporting a socialist president appears to be quite high and rising almost daily.
According to a Senate aide, the White House is now threatening to put Nebraskas Offutt Air Force Base on the BRAC list if Nelson doesnt fall into line.
Offutt Air Force Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelsons vote. They are threatening to close a base vital to national security for what? asked the Senate staffer.
Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command, and not by accident.
STRATCOM was located in the middle of the country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another example of this administration playing politics with our national security. And Groton Naval Base unless Lieberman plays along as well. Trouble is, some senators get stubborn when threatened.
#5
Let's not forget BO and Rahm Emanuel's Alinsky's community organizer politics in 2010 at the polls. These kind of politics do not serve America well.
A new fundraising letter from Sen. John Kerry (D) of Massachusetts gives a strong hint about how Democrats may try to stir their base to action during the 2010 election season: scare them with the prospect of a Sarah Palin nation.
"Think GOP obstruction is bad now?" Senator Kerry asks in a fundraising letter sent out Tuesday morning by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. "Just imagine what Washington would look like if a bunch of new senators -- inspired by Sarah Palin and the tea party crowd -- took over."
In recent months, the political right has been energized by Ms. Palin, whose "Going Rogue" book tour has boosted her favorability rating, and by the Tea Party movement, which has channeled the anger of fiscal conservatives outraged by Obama administration spending. Together, they kindle the worst political fears among many liberals, summoning visions of gun-toting, Glenn Beck-watching, right-wing radicals.
With the Democratic caucus holding 60 seats in the Senate -- exactly the number needed to defeat a Republican filibuster -- Kerry suggested in his letter that "the loss of even one or two would flip crucial votes in their favor and doom President Obama's agenda."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Instead, try asking mommy to raise your allowance.
Posted by: ed ||
12/16/2009 0:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Just imagine what Washington would look like if a bunch of new senators -- inspired by Sarah Palin and the tea party crowd -- took over."
Clearly an illustration of how totally phueching DISCONNECTED this fellow is from the American people.
#3
The motto of the San Antonio Tea Party WRT the 2010 election season is "Flip This House ... And Senate" so perhaps JFK-lite is sensing something of a stirring of the political forces.
And the thought of a bunch of new senators, inspired by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party crowd actually gives me a nice, toasty-warm feeling, because about the first thing those new senators would have in mind is that they are supposed to be working for the long-term good of the country ... not the good of their own personal political careers.
#5
When Kerry's boat is full you'd better HIDE FAST!
O'Neill continues: "Kerry's boat moved slightly downstream and was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade. ... A young Viet Cong in a loincloth popped out of a hole, clutching a grenade launcher, which may or may not have been loaded. ... Tom Belodeau, a forward gunner, shot the Viet Cong with an M-60 machine gun in the leg as he fled. ... Kerry and Medeiros (who had many troops in their boat) took off, perhaps with others, and followed the young Viet Cong and shot him in the back, behind a lean to."
#6
Another reason for separation of Lurch and State.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/16/2009 9:32 Comments ||
Top||
#7
perhaps he could send autographed DOD copies of his military records for big contributors? Oh, but then he'd have to actually release them after 5 years of promising.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/16/2009 17:57 Comments ||
Top||
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) is launching an ad campaign targeting White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in his hometown.
The ad, airing in Chicago, slams Emanuel for "undermining" the public option. "A lot of us back home hope that Rahm Emanuel is fighting for people like us as White House chief of staff," says the man appearing in the ad, after describing his own battle with insurance companies. "But if he sides with the insurance companies and undermines the public option, well, he won't have many fans in Chicago."
PCCC has also launched a petition campaign to save the public option.
Many liberal activists have always been wary of Emanuel's eagerness to cut a deal. Just Monday the White House drew outrage from the left by reportedly pressuring Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to appease Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I-Conn.) demand to drop the Medicare buy-in.
Adam Green, co-founder of PCCC, called Emanuel "saboteur-in-chief' on healthcare reform. "The Barack Obama of 2008 would be ashamed of the small-thinking, ready-to-cave Rahm Emanuel of 2009," Green said. "Americans overwhelmingly want the public option, but instead of dispatching the president to Maine and Connecticut to fight for it, Emanuel has played the role of saboteur in chief behind the scenes -- cutting deals with senators who are out-of-step their own constituents."
Green also warned Emanuel that if he ever wants to run for Congress again, "his actions these next couple weeks will absolutely be at the forefront of any campaign."
I've never seen this professional (supposedly non-partisan) newsletter mention a private citizen like this before (AlBore's shenanigans gets reported on, but he's a politician). Beck must have a whole lot of panties in a wad.... :-D
Efforts by Democrats and environmentalists to clarify the scope of the Clean Water Act are facing some new hurdles after controversial conservative talk show host Glenn Beck blasted the legislation, the latest salvo against the bill from right-wing media outlets.
In a Dec. 11 segment on his show, Beck said pending legislation to clarify the law's scope is misguided. "Congress is moving toward changing government jurisdiction over water," he says. "They just want to make a couple of, just a couple of words, just gonna nudge . . . a couple of words out of there. Navigable waters? Yeah they're going to change that with 'waters of the United States' because who uses the word 'navigable' any more?" Beck says.
Beck is targeting pending legislation that aims to codify the scope of the water law EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers had been using before two key Supreme Court decisions ruled the agencies had stretched the law too far. EPA officials, environmentalists and others have said the legal uncertainty created by the rulings has stymied enforcement of the law, undermining water quality. To address this, the Obama administration and environmentalists are calling on Congress to pass legislation clarifying the law's scope. Many favor removing the word "navigable" from the law's definition of jurisdictional waters.
But Beck and other conservative media outlets are increasingly concerned such an approach would significantly expand federal oversight. The Washington Times noted in a recent editorial editorial that removing the word "navigable" from the CWA's definition of "waters" means "any backyard fish pond or birdbath, any swimming pool or even a piece of low ground that is prone to forming puddles after rains, could be subject to the dictates of bureaucrats at the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers."
Proponents of the bill say such criticisms are are inaccurate. But the high profile controversy shows the legislation is becoming even more polarized, which could make it more difficult to pass in 2010, an election year. Nevertheless, House transportation committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-MN) vowed recently that he will seek to move the legislation next year after he abandoned plans to move the bill in 2009.
But Beck has scored some successes against the administration's environmental protection efforts when earlier this year his criticisms forced the ouster of White House green jobs czar Van Jones. Mods: No link - from proprietary newsletter; couldn't find an open source. The story gave a link to his 12/11 show, but I couldn't figure out how to reproduce it here. Sorry.
Then give us the name of the newsletter and the issue date/number. That way people can find it in the public library, should they be so inclined.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/16/2009 11:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Got news for ya, Glenn: Army Corps already uses the "waters of the US" language in all of their dealings. I work for my state's DOT, and anytime we work in a stream channel with intermittent water flow, the Corps claims it is in their jurisdiction. This is even sometimes true for concrete-lined drainage ditches. No one considers those navigable, but they are still waters of the US, says the Corps, thus requiring permits and mitigation. A real pain, I can tell youse. Removing the word navigable won't change the way the Corps does business, it'll just reduce nagging questions from those pesky inquisitive citizens.
Posted by: abu Chuck al Ameriki ||
12/16/2009 18:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
abu Chuck - that's true for tributaries to navigable, but the new laws are for isolated bodies of water which NEVER connect to navigable waters, cross no state boundaries and are not part of interstate commerce, IIUC, which is a naked power grab. Most states already have clean water boards or fish & game depts which already have jurisdictions. I oppose a Federal agency intervening without rationale in state's rights to have jursdiction
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/16/2009 18:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"Then give us the name of the newsletter and the issue date/number. That way people can find it in the public library, should they be so inclined."
Thanks, tw - I'll try to remember to do that in the future. (I don't have access to it tonight.)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/16/2009 20:12 Comments ||
Top||
Money grafs from longer article:
Former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore urged countries to wrap up a full legal climate treaty by July 2010.
Describing "runaway melt" of the Earth's ice, rising tree mortality and prospects of severe water scarcities, Gore told a UN audience: "In the face of effects like these, clear evidence that only reckless fools would ignore, I feel a sense of frustration" at the lack of agreement so far. Well, Al, you're certainly in a position to know what a reckless fool looks like....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/16/2009 10:59 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, so he's finally slipped over the edge into total delusion, eh?
#2
He (and others like him that are 'heavily invested') see this slipping away quickly. The next twelve months will most likely see more 'problems' for the AGW cause and they will try anything to get something out of it while there is still some 'traction' (and $$) to be had.
Kind of like the current 'Pass Anything before it goes away' mentality of the president and congressional Democrat leaders (>spit<).
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
12/16/2009 11:43 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/16/2009 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The United Planet of Calamitists, also known as UPC is a group of planetary alarmists, who wish to establish an international federal republic based upon interpretation of fictional, manipulated, environmental data.
The UPC,(not to be confused with Universal Product Code) "elects" its delegates via acclaim, adulation, and blind hysteria.
After loosing the Presidential election in 2000, Former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore was "elected" by general acclaim by members of the UPC.
The intent of the UPC is to form a Federation scientific, diplomatic and defensive/military units roughly based upon the model of Starfleet, probably to be called EarthFleet, which was depicted in the Star Trek television series and motion pictures.
It has been rumored that they are seeking a "warm moderate place" for their headquarters, likely San Francisco.
"There's a sucker born every minute." is the motto of the UPC.
Posted by: Jack Unising7046 ||
12/16/2009 19:07 Comments ||
Top||
The Danish president of the U.N. climate conference, Connie Hedegaard, has resigned and will be replaced by the Danish prime minister as head of the historic talks.
The change was announced Wednesday as the 193-nation conference enters into a higher phase of negotiations, with world leaders arriving.
U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer says Hedegaard will continue to lead informal talks but Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen will now be the formal head of the conference.
Hedegaard says it's appropriate for Loekke Rasmussen to preside with so many heads of state and government taking part.
When an overblown environmental conference culminates with Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad lecturing the West on virtue, color it another shakedown.
The United Nations' Copenhagen Climate Conference is going fast into meltdown. It may be because it's not about climate anymore, but fitting a noose on the world's productive economies and extracting wealth transfers.
Poor countries have gone from defending their right to economic development as a reason for exemptions to emissions cuts to claiming a "legitimate" right to vast wealth transfers from the West to prevent emissions. They call it "climate justice."
Monday, the Group of 77, led by African states, shut down the conference for the second time, saying they would pick up their marbles and go home if the West didn't agree to their formula for emissions cutbacks and send them more than the $10 billion promised by the West.
Sudanese diplomat Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping said the African states would "not participate in any negotiations until the issues of Kyoto Protocol are discussed."
Having manipulated the foreign aid racket for decades, the African officials knew just what buttons to push with Western Europeans. Not surprisingly, they won concessions. No doubt they'll do it again to get more, and the Danes and other one-worlders will give them what they want.
It's no surprise it's come to this. It follows calls from environmental extremists like billionaire George Soros to have the International Monetary Fund front billions in cash to third world countries for climate control, creating a vast pool of money for Third World kleptocrats that won't be subject to accountability by pesky taxpayers.
Worse still, some at the World Bank have vowed to divert actual development and disease prevention aid help to global warming causes -- something that didn't sit well with countries that actually care about real jobs and infrastructure.
Meanwhile, a draft climate accord by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, calling for a 50% cut in global emissions by 2050, has been kicked down the road till 2015 or 2016. Gee, maybe it's not the most urgent threat facing humankind after all.
This shows that all the pretty words about going green and controlling climate have turned into nothing but a money-grab.
Maybe the reality is sinking in that the entire science of climate change is a sham.
The hacked CRU e-mails of the University of East Anglia show science has been corrupted by supposedly respected scientists in charge of the climate data at the university from the beginning. They falsified data and repressed inconvenient facts and then tried to silence real scientists who tried to determine the truth.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sometimes failure is the best option.
Will Obama get this right, for once?
He could vote "Present!"
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/16/2009 0:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Worse still, some at the World Bank have vowed to divert actual development and disease prevention aid help to global warming causes -- something that didn't sit well with countries that actually care about real jobs and infrastructure.
But, but, but will will not divert all investment. We could still Guarantee Choice, Make Health Care Coverage Affordable, Protect Families Financial Health, Invest in Wellness, Provide Portability of Coverage, etc.
#4
Who are the biggest contributors to the World Bank? I would think the U.S. A back door approach to getting money from the American people for "global warming scams?" Is there no end to this craziness.
Al Gore, the former US Vice-President, has become embroiled in a climate change spin row after claiming that the Arctic could be completely ice-free within five years.
Speaking at the Copenhagen climate change summit, Mr Gore said new computer modelling suggests there is a 75 per cent chance of the entire polar ice cap melting during the summertime by 2014.
However, he faced embarrassment last night after Dr Wieslav Maslowski, the climatologist whose work the prediction was based on, refuted his claims.
Dr Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, told The Times: "It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this."
The blunder follows the controversy over hacked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, which sceptics claim suggest scientists manipulated data to strengthen their argument that global warming is man-made.
Mr Gore, who narrated the Oscar-winning climate change documentary An Inconvenient Truth, told the conference that record melting of Polar and Himalayan ice could deprive more than a billion people of access to clean water.
Alluding to Dr Maslowski's work, he said: "These figures are fresh, I just got them yesterday. Some of the models suggest to Dr Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of summer months could be completely ice free within five to seven years. There are more than a billion people on the planet who get more than half of their drinking water -- many of them all of their drinking water -- from the seasonal melting of snow melt and glacier ice."
His projection strongly contradicted forecasts made eight months ago by the US government agency that the ice cap may nearly vanish in the summer by 2030.
Dr Maslowki said that his latest results give a six-year projection for the melting of 80 per cent of the ice, but he said he expects some ice to remain beyond 2020.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Condemned the Gorcle did they? Oh my. Well, if nothing else, it ought to double their credibility.
#5
Usually, you can land a plane on the ice strip at Little Diomede Island in January if the ice freezes up well. There are some currents in the Bering Straits that move the ice around and make pressure ridges.
If the weather is good, you can check on things with the DIOMEDE WEBCAM.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/16/2009 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Flew from Fairbanks to Galena years ago. The cargo and baggage lad came out to help the three of us aboard. Turns out he's the pilot as well. He couldn't have been over 19 or 20. He pops into the left seat and asks me to join him in the right. Never went over 8-10k feet. Splendid pilot, excellent view.
#7
Here's another Inconvenient Truth for the Goracle The inconvenient truth about malaria
Al Gore has made bold claims that climate change is aiding the spread of insect-borne diseases. The science does not support him, says Paul Reiter
#8
Another Al Gore Reality Check: Rising tree mortality? In this Reuters story (15 December 2009) they report: Describing a runaway melt of the Earths ice, rising tree mortality and prospects of severe water scarcities, Gore told a UN audience: In the face of effects like these, clear evidence that only reckless fools would ignore, I feel a sense of frustration at the lack of agreement so far.
#9
What is the Difference Between a Pathological, a Compulsive, a Chronic, and a Habitual Liar?
Pathological Liar
A pathological liar is usually defined as someone who lies incessantly to get their way and does so with little concern for others. Pathological lying is often viewed as coping mechanism developed in early childhood and it is often associated with some other type of mental health disorder. A pathological liar is often goal-oriented (i.e., lying is focused - it is done to get one's way). Pathological liars have little regard or respect for the rights and feelings of others. A pathological liar often comes across as being manipulative, cunning and self-centered.
Compulsive Liar
A compulsive liar is defined as someone who lies out of habit. Lying is their normal and reflexive way of responding to questions. Compulsive liars bend the truth about everything, large and small. For a compulsive liar, telling the truth is very awkward and uncomfortable while lying feels right. Compulsive lying is usually thought to develop in early childhood, due to being placed in an environment where lying was necessary. For the most part, compulsive liars are not overly manipulative and cunning (see, Pathological Liar), rather they simply lie out of habit - an automatic response which is hard to break and one that takes its toll on a relationship (see, how to cope with a compulsive liar).
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Rumors have been circulating for several days through Charlotte's Eastover neighborhood that former U.S. Sen. John Edwards bought a home here for his admitted former mistress, Rielle Hunter. And now the National Enquirer is reporting in its Dec. 21 issue that Edwards has, in fact, bought a house here that the Charlotte Business Journal has identified as a residence on Providence Road.
A new fundraising letter from Sen. John Kerry (D) of Massachusetts gives a strong hint about how Democrats may try to stir their base to action during the 2010 election season: scare them with the prospect of a Sarah Palin nation.
Al Gore, the former US Vice-President, has become embroiled in a climate change spin row after claiming that the Arctic could be completely ice-free within five years. 
