McCain Defends the Plumber

MCCAIN DEFENDS THE PLUMBER
REMARKS IN MIAMI, FL
Fri Oct 17 2008 13:45:02 ET

It's great to be here in Miami. Florida is a must-win state on November 4th, and with your help, we're going to win Florida, and bring change to Washington, DC. We had a good debate this week. You may have noticed-- there was a lot of talk about Senator Obama's tax increases and Joe the Plumber. Last weekend, Senator Obama showed up in Joe's driveway to ask for his vote, and Joe asked Senator Obama a tough question. I'm glad he did; I think Senator Obama could use a few more tough questions.

The response from Senator Obama and his campaign yesterday was to attack Joe. People are digging through his personal life and he has TV crews camped out in front of his house. He didn't ask for Senator Obama to come to his house. He wasn't recruited or prompted by our campaign. He just asked a question. And Americans ought to be able to ask Senator Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks.

The question Joe asked about our economy is important, because Senator Obama's plan would raise taxes on small businesses that employ 16 million Americans. Senator Obama's plan will kill those jobs at just the time when we need to be creating more jobs. My plan will create jobs, and that's what America needs.

Senator Obama says that he wanted to spread your wealth around. When politicians talk about taking your money and spreading it around, you'd better hold onto your wallet. Senator Obama claims that wants to give a tax break to the middle class, but not only did he vote for higher taxes on the middle class in the Senate, his plan gives away your tax dollars to those who don't pay taxes.

That's not a tax cut, that's welfare. America didn't become the greatest nation on earth by redistributing wealth; we became the greatest nation by creating new wealth.

This is the choice that we face. These are hard times. Our economy is in crisis. Americans are fighting in two wars. We face many enemies in this dangerous world, and many challenges here at home.

The next President won't have time to get used to the office. He won't have the luxury of studying up on the issues before he acts. He will have to act immediately. And to do that, he will need experience, courage, judgment and a bold plan of action to take this country in a new direction. We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: waiting for our luck to change. We have to act immediately. I said it at the last debate: I'm not George Bush; if Senator Obama wants to run against George Bush, he should have run for President 4 years ago. We need a new direction now. We have to fight for it. I've been fighting for this country since I was seventeen years old, and I have the scars to prove it. If I'm elected President, I will fight to take America in a new direction from my first day in office until my last. I'm not afraid of the fight, I'm ready for it.

I'm not going to spend $700 billion dollars of your money just bailing out the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess. I'm going to make sure we take care of the people who were devastated by the excesses of Wall Street and Washington. I'm going to spend a lot of that money to bring relief to you, and I'm not going to wait sixty days to start doing it.

I have a plan to protect the value of your home and get it rising again by buying up bad mortgages and refinancing them so if your neighbor defaults he doesn't bring down the value of your house with him.

I have a plan to let retirees and people nearing retirement keep their money in their retirement accounts longer so they can rebuild their savings. I will protect Social Security so that retirees get the benefits they have earned, and I will bring both parties together to fix Social Security so that it is there for future generations.

I have a plan to hold the line on taxes and cut them to make America more competitive and create jobs here at home.

Raising taxes makes a bad economy much worse. Keeping taxes low creates jobs, keeps money in your hands and strengthens our economy.

The explosion of government spending over the last eight years has put us deeper in debt to foreign countries that don't have our best interests at heart. It weakened the dollar and made everything you buy more expensive.

If I'm elected President, I won't spend nearly a trillion dollars more of your money, on top of the $700 billion we just gave the Treasury Secretary, as Senator Obama proposes. Because he can't do that without raising your taxes or digging us further into debt. I'm going to make government live on a budget just like you do.

I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs like defense, veterans care, Social Security and health care until we scrub every single government program and get rid of the ones that aren't working for the American people. And I will veto every single pork barrel bill Congresses passes.

If I'm elected President, I won't fine small businesses and families with children, as Senator Obama proposes, to force them into a new huge government run health care program, while he keeps the cost of the fine a secret until he hits you with it. I will bring down the skyrocketing cost of health care with competition and choice to lower your premiums, and make it more available to more Americans. I'll make sure you can keep the same health plan if you change jobs or leave a job to stay home.

I will provide every single American family with a $5000 refundable tax credit to help them purchase insurance. Workers who already have health care insurance from their employers will keep it and have more money to cover costs. Workers who don't have health insurance can use it to find a policy anywhere in this country to meet their basic needs.

If I'm elected President, I won't raise taxes on small businesses, as Senator Obama proposes, and force them to cut jobs. I will keep small business taxes where they are, help them keep their costs low, and let them spend their earnings to create more jobs.

If I'm elected President, I won't meet unconditionally with the Castro brothers, while they keep political prisoners in jail, stifle free media and block free elections in Cuba. When I am President, we are going to pressure the Cuban government to free their people. The day is coming when Cuba will be free. I will open new markets to goods made in America and make sure our trade is free and fair. And I'll make sure we help workers who've lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.

If I'm elected President, I won't make it harder to sell our goods overseas and kill more jobs as Senator Obama proposes. I will open new markets to goods made in America and make sure our trade is free and fair. And I'll make sure we help workers who've lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.

The last President to raise taxes and restrict trade in a bad economy as Senator Obama proposes was Herbert Hoover. That turned a recession into a depression. They say those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. Well, my friends, I know my history lessons, and I sure won't make the mistakes Senator Obama will.

If I'm elected President, we're going to stop sending $700 billion to countries that don't like us very much. I won't argue to delay drilling for more oil and gas and building new nuclear power plants in America, as Senator Obama does. We will start new drilling now. We will invest in all energy alternativesÊ-- nuclear, wind, solar, and tide. We will encourage the manufacture of hybrid, flex fuel and electric automobiles. We will invest in clean coal technology. We will lower the cost of energy within months, and we will create millions of new jobs.

Let me give you the state of the race today. We have 18 days to go. We're 6 points down. The national media has written us off. Senator Obama is measuring the drapes, and planning with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to vote by secret ballot in labor elections, and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide. My friends, we've got them just where we want them.

What America needs in this hour is a fighter; someone who puts all his cards on the table and trusts the judgment of the American people. I come from a long line of McCains who believed that to love America is to fight for her. I have fought for you most of my life. There are other ways to love this country, but I've never been the kind to do it from the sidelines.

I know you're worried. America is a great country, but we are at a moment of national crisis that will determine our future. Will we continue to lead the world's economies or will we be overtaken? Will the world become safer or more dangerous? Will our military remain the strongest in the world? Will our children and grandchildren's future be brighter than ours?

My answer to you is yes. Yes, we will lead. Yes, we will prosper. Yes, we will be safer. Yes, we will pass on to our children a stronger, better country. But we must be prepared to act swiftly, boldly, with courage and wisdom.

I know what fear feels like. It's a thief in the night who robs your strength. I know what hopelessness feels like. It's an enemy who defeats your will. I felt those things once before. I will never let them in again. I'm an American. And I choose to fight.

Don't give up hope. Be strong. Have courage. And fight.

Fight for a new direction for our country. Fight for what's right for America. Fight to clean up the mess of corruption, infighting and selfishness in Washington.

Fight to get our economy out of the ditch and back in the lead.

Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.

Fight for our children's future.

Fight for justice and opportunity for all.

Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.

Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.

Now, let's go win this election and get this country moving again.

From ThePeoplesCube.com




Campaign poster by Gloucester over at Free Republic...this is very funny! Joe the Plumber is showing up everywhere! Now it is the campaign of Plumbers and Hockey Mom's.

Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, and Barack Obama -- Connecting the Dots

Paul over @ powerline has a great post about Wright,Ayers and Obama. You can comment on it over at powerline just click the link above.

At one level, the connection between Jeremiah Wright (Barack Obama's spiritual mentor) and William Ayers (Obama's political ally) is apparent. After all, Ayers set out to bring "America's chickens home to roost" decades before Wright applied that phrase to 9/11.

But now Stanley Kurtz has demonstrated a more concrete connection, and one that implicates Obama directly, not just through "association." Kurtz's review of documents from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) -- the education foundation Obama and Ayers jointly led for a time during the 1990s -- has established that "Barack Obama knowingly and persistently funded an educational project that shared the extremist and anti-American philosophy of Jeremiah Wright."

There are two elements here: (1) the funding by the CAC of projects that shared Wright's anti-American philosophy and (2) Obama's knowledge that this was the nature of the projects his outfit was funding.

As to the first element, Kurtz found, among other things, that CAC funded teacher training programs based on the curriculum of the South Shore African Village Collaborative (SSAVC). Kurtz explains that the mission of SSAVC is to provide "a social and cultural 'inoculation' process that facilitates healthy, African-centered development among African American youth and protects them against the ravages of a racist, sexist, capitalist, and oppressive society." In this view, American values "have confused African American people and oriented them toward American definitions of achievement and success and away from traditional African values." This process has "proven to be dysfuntional and genocidal to the African American community." The answer, in part, is an adolescent rites of passage movement, designed "to provide African American youth with the cultural information and values they would need to counter the potentially detrimental effects of a Eurocentrically oriented society."

The connection between this philosophy and that of Rev. Wright is apparent. As Kurtz puts it:

We hear echoes of [the educational philosophy underpinning the SVVAC] in Wright's distinction between "right brained" Africans and "left brained" Europeans, in Wright's fears of U.S. government-sponsored genocide against American blacks, and in Wright's embittered attacks on America's indelibly white-supremacist history.

It is not surprising, therefore that prominent members of the "Afrocentric," rites of passage movement spoke at Wright's church during the late 1980s and 1990s. Obama missed church on these occasions, no doubt.

But Obama was right in the middle of the process through which tens of thousands of dollars were funneled by CAC into SVACC teacher training programs. In 1995, the year Obama assumed control of CAC, he publicly rejected "the unrealistic politics of integrationist assimilation," thereby embracing the Afrocentirc educational philosophy of the SVACC, Wright, and Ayers. And according to Kurtz, it is clear from the documents that Obama reviewed and commented on proposals to fund the training programs of SVACC, including the African rites of passage based programs. As one would hope, Obama encountered resistance from his own board to attempting to improve the education of African-Americans by orienting them away from "American definitions of achievement and success." But he managed to keep the money flowing.

We've noted in the past that CAC's own evaluators found that Annenberg-aided schools showed no improvement in achievement scores. The miracle is that scores did not decline.

In what I believe was his only stint running anything (other than the Harvard Law Review), Barack Obama wasted more than $100 million that could have been used to improve the education of disadvantaged students. And he did so in order to advance an extremist, anti-American agenda. The people of Chicago can only wish that Bill Ayers had just been somebody who lived in Obama's neighborhood and that Jeremiah Wright was just an eccentric uncle.

A picture worth a 1000 words

Glenn Beck talks with McCain about ACORN

EXCERPT - Click on link above for full article.

GLENN: We have Senator John McCain on with us now. Welcome, Senator, welcome to the program. How are you, sir?

SENATOR McCAIN: I'm just fine, Glenn. How are you?

GLENN: I'm very good. I noticed today, breaking news, that in Florida ACORN has registered Mickey Mouse. I'm wondering if you are going to go for the mouse vote.

SENATOR McCAIN: Well, frankly some people, having worked in congress for some period of time, I prefer Goofy. But the fact is this ACORN thing is something that's been done before in the 2004 elections and 2006 elections and other elections, and it needs a full and complete investigation, and Senator Obama's ties to ACORN need to be known to everybody as well.

GLENN: In the House and the Senate, the President signed it, a bill over the summer actually gives now 4% of our mortgages. If you sign a new mortgage, 4% goes to fund ACORN. How did this happen?

SENATOR McCAIN: The way these things happen, I don't know if you recall but when this first rescue plan or bailout bill, whichever one you call it, was first developed before I came back from Washington, ACORN was going to get something like 20% of the additional funds that would eventually be raised thanks to Chris Dodd and the Democrats who had protected Fannie and Freddie and have been advocates of this forcing banks to extend home loan mortgage money to people that couldn't afford to pay it back. That's one of the major, the major factors in this housing crisis which then, of course, led to this meltdown. People, the pressures, enormous pressure from congress, the Community Reinvestment Act which basically set corridors for lending money to people that couldn't afford to pay it back and mortgages which were sooner or later going to go under. Meanwhile their executives, as you know, took 10, 20, 30, $50 million in compensation. It's one of the great scandals in American history.

Obama Sued Citibank under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans

Do­ yo­u r­em­em­ber­ h­o­w we to­l­d yo­u th­at th­e Dem­o­c­r­ats­ and gr­o­ups­ as­s­o­c­iated with­ th­em­ l­eaned o­n banks­ and even s­ued to­ get th­em­ to­ m­ake bad l­o­ans­ under­ th­e C­o­m­m­unity R­einves­tm­ent Ac­t wh­ic­h­ was­ a f­ac­to­r­ in c­aus­ing th­e ec­o­no­m­ic­ c­r­is­is­ (s­ee H­E­R­E­ ) … we­l­l­ l­ook a­t­ wha­t­ som­­e­ fe­l­l­ow bl­og­g­e­rs ha­v­e­ dug­ up­ whil­e­ re­se­a­rching­ Oba­m­­a­’s l­e­g­a­l­ ca­re­e­r. L­ooks l­ike­ a­ t­y­p­ica­l­ A­CORN l­a­wsuit­ t­o g­e­t­ ba­nks t­o ha­nd out­ ba­d l­oa­ns.

In­ the­s­e­ l­aws­uits­, ACORN­ m­ake­s­ a b­og­us­ cl­aim­ of Re­dl­in­in­g­ (de­n­yin­g­ poor pe­opl­e­ l­oan­s­ b­e­caus­e­ of the­ir e­thn­ic he­ritag­e­). The­y prote­s­t an­d g­e­t the­ l­ocal­ m­e­dia to rais­e­ a b­ig­ s­tin­k. This­ s­tin­k m­e­an­s­ that the­ b­an­k face­s­ thous­an­ds­ of pe­opl­e­ cl­os­in­g­ the­ir accoun­ts­ an­d g­e­t l­ocal­ pol­itician­s­ to l­ob­b­y to s­top the­ b­an­k from­ doin­g­ s­om­e­ future­ b­us­in­e­s­s­, e­xpan­s­ion­s­ an­d m­e­rg­e­rs­. If the­ b­an­k g­oe­s­ to court, the­y wil­l­ win­, b­ut the­ dam­ag­e­ is­ al­re­ady don­e­ b­e­caus­e­ who is­ g­oin­g­ to l­aun­ch a b­ig­ cam­paig­n­ to g­e­t the­ b­an­k’s­ re­putation­ b­ack?

I­t i­s­ i­m­­por­tant to und­er­s­tand­ the natur­e of thes­e laws­ui­ts­ and­ what thei­r­ pur­pos­e i­s­. ACOR­N fi­led­ tons­ of thes­e laws­ui­ts­ and­ ALL of them­­ allege r­aci­s­m­­.

Thank­s to the­ IUSB Visio­n Webl­o­g f­or provi­di­ng addi­t­i­onal det­ai­ls of­ t­hi­s st­ory­.

We­ pulle­d the­ dock­e­t­ down­­, but­ h­ere’s a­ brief­ f­or y­our summa­ry­:

(CLICK LINK ABOVE TO READ THE WHOLE STORY AND SEE DOCKET)

Barack Obama's ACORN Tree

The MSM's (Poll) Cooking Show

Thanks to Titus over @ FR for putting together this information. It is an interesting read for sure.

I apologize in advance because this email may be a little longer, but it has some very important information that you need to know if you've been following the election in the MSM (mainstream media) even just a little. Please read this all the way through. If you've followed the news, by now you are aware that John McCain is down in the polls. Way down. Hideously down, so far down that he will never, ever, not in a million years possibly recover from the abyss into which his campaign has slipped. For the past two weeks, poll after national poll has shown Obama leading anywhere from 5-10%. Today's Battleground Poll has Obama up by 13 points. McCain's slipping behind in all the battleground states, and Obama is headed for a massive, Reagan-style landslide victory on Nov. 4. It sure looks hopeless for Senator McCain!

Right?

Wrong. What you are seeing is called "cooking the polls". And here's how it works.

We all know that the MSM - the conglomeration of major TV networks, newspapers, weekly news magazines, etc. - are very, very, very, very, very much in the tank for Obama this year. They're not even making a pretense at objectivity this time around. It's so bad that people from other countries, who basically know nothing about our political system, have commented to me that the media are overtly biased towards Obama and the Democrats. That's how bad it is. Well, the first thing to keep in mind is that pretty much all of the major polling houses - Rasmussen, Gallup, Zogby, Battleground, and so forth - are a part of this MSM conglomeration. Many times, they are headed by Democrats, or by people who at least sympathize with leftist politics, and nearly always they have a financial interest in providing the "right" results and keeping the news entities happy. The polling houses hook up with the media outlets, because the media outlets are the ones most willing to pay for polls to be produced - this generates a steady stream of reportable news every three-four days for the talking heads to analyse at length, which helps to keep interest (and viewership/readership) high. Did you ever notice how many polls include LA Times/CBS/NBC/Fox News/Chicago Tribune/ABC/Time or other news outlets in their titles? That's because of this MSM-polling house dance.

Now, since we know the MSM is in the tank for Obama, and since we know that the polling houses are often led and staffed by people sympathetic to Democrats anywise, and since we know that the polling houses are often hooked up more or less directly with the MSM, it stands to reason that there would be a certain slant to the polls being produced and reported by the MSM, would it not? And indeed there IS a slant - towards Obama and the Democrats.

But guess what? This isn't just my opinion, it's not just a hunch. It's verifiable from the polls themselves.

One lesson we should all learn about the polls we see reported in the MSM is to look at what are called the "internals" of the poll - the reported demographic and partisan breakdowns of the respondents, and the proportional weights being attached to each which are used to calculate the final "result" of the poll. While race and age are important as weighting factors, the one we see being monkeyed with the most in recent polling is the partisan breakdown. Essentially, what a pollster does is "weighs" the data he or she receives from the respondents who answer his or her questions. This weighting depends on what the pollster perceives to be the "right" partisan breakdown for a state or for the national scene. Usually, this just involves getting X number of respondents who are Republicans, Y who are Dems, and Z who are Independents, and using their data.

Seems logical, right? If I'm a pollster, and I want a more accurate poll, if I'm polling a state where the partisan breakdown is 35% D - 33% R - 32% I, then I will try to obtain a data set which mimics that breakdown as closely as possible (and will, at the same time, try to do the same thing with gender, age, and race for the target population). Well, it IS logical, and would work reasonably well - within the margin of error inherent in any statistical sample.

The problem - and this is my point - is that the polls we are seeing coming out with huge Obama leads, do not mirror demographic or partisan reality at all.

Newsbusters.org has an excellent article detailing with this sort of polling trickery, which I'll link to and also excerpt below:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/10/02/cooking-ap-polls-radically-changes-party-mix-fabricate-obama-trend

---------------------------------------------------------

In the kitchens of the Associated Press, it's almost as if the wire service asked its chief cook -- er, pollster -- GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media, to do the following:

* Whip up a tasty, representative poll after the Republican Convention.

* Three weeks later, make the same dish, but this time adjust the mix of ingredients by radically oversampling Democrats and under sampling Republicans, thereby creating a false illusion of momentum in the campaign of Barack Obama, and of decline in John McCain's.

* Hope people don't notice the changes in the recipe.

Of course we don't know if the differences between AP-CfK's Sept. 5-10 and Sept. 27-30 results were created deliberately, but the results sure look suspicious (both polls are available at PDF links found at AP-GfK's home page).

The more recent poll shows Obama with a 7-point lead among likely voters, both with and without leaners; the earlier poll showed McCain with a 5-point lead with leaners, and 4 points without.

Almost all of this 12-point swing (11 points with leaners) is more than likely almost completely due to major differences between the two polls' samples:

---------------------------------------------------------

Blumer then proceeds to point out the huge change in partisan breakdown between the poll taken Sept 5-10, and the one taken Sept. 27-30, and shows the latter poll's internals for party as a picture in his article (click the URL to see). You may access the internals for both polls to see for yourself by clicking the link embedded in the portion I excerpted. Essentially, in the Sept 5-10 poll, the partisan breakdown was 33% D - 31% R, which is pretty accurate - even this year, the Democrats only have a ~2% advantage in voter registration, a trend which follows actual exit polls from 2006 and 2004.

Lo and behold, in the Sept. 27-30 poll, the partisan breakdown suddenly became 40% D - 29% R. What DIDN'T happen is that millions of people suddenly up and switched party affiliations. Rather, what DID happen is that the Associated Press altered the "mix" of voters whose data were included in formulating the poll. Essentially, the Republicans went from a 2% deficit (right) to an 11% deficit (wrong) in partisan affiliation.

The result - predictably - is that (with leaners included), McCain went from winning by 5% to losing by 7%. That's a 12% net change. Now, isn't it interesting how this 12% net change is almost exactly the same amount as the net change in party affiliation difference? Blumer calculates that, if the partisan ratio had been the same in the latter poll, that McCain would have been up 3-4%. Essentially, the AP invented a poll to show Obama way ahead.

Friends, that is the polling equivalent of Mama's home cookin'.

But guess what? This isn't the only poll that's found it's way through a MSM kitchen. I've looked at the internals for a NUMBER of different polls over the past couple of weeks, and they all seem to have the same trend - oversampling of Democrats and under sampling of Republicans. I've seen it so many times in the past week that it's a truism for me now. Let me point out one example from last Friday. Newsweek published a poll on 10 Oct which showed Obama with an 11 point lead (52%-41%). Click on http://www.newsweek.com/id/163337 to see the poll, there will be an Adobe acrobat file with the internals that will pop up automatically. The demographic profile on pg. 19 of the Adobe file is the information of interest. Notice that we see a partisan breakdown of 40% D - 27% R in registered voters who were polled. That's a 13% divide - a lot different from the roughly 2% divide that actually exists nationally.

Folks, this is why we're seeing the slew of terrible polling for McCain for the past two-three weeks. The media are trying to generate momentum for Obama. The MSM is trying to convince voters that the recent economic problems are causing McCain trouble and benefiting Obama, when (if the polls were actually accurate) this is probably not the case.

Just over the past two days, I've seen some pretty ridiculous polling claims by the MSM. They've claimed Obama is up by 15 in Pennsylvania, even though all the evidence on the ground says otherwise. They've claimed Obama is leading in WV, which is patently ridiculous. One poll came out today saying that Obama is leading in North Dakota - a state Bush won by 27% in 2004. A poll yesterday said Obama is leading in Missouri by 8%. Folks, I spend over the first two thirds of my life in Missouri, living in both rural and suburban settings, so I know the state. Obama is NOT ahead by 8% in Missouri.

There is MSM-driven poll cooking going on, folks, and the purpose is to try to demoralize people who would vote for McCain, trying to get us to not come out and vote on Nov. 4. Don't buy into it. The MSM is trying to hoodwink us, trying to make us think that Obama is "inevitable", when he is anything but. Please, get out and vote McCain on Election Day, get your friends and family to come out for McCain, get anyone you can who will vote for McCain to come out, even if you have to drive them yourself. We need to overcome the ACORN vote fraud, the Democrat dead people's vote, and the MSM poll-cooking and win one for the country!

HOW ACORN & ITS DEM ALLIES BUILT THE MORTGAGE DISASTER

Hopefully the sheeple in this country will wake up and understand how we entered into this current financial disaster. If we don't understand how this happened and what we need to change to prevent it - it will just come back and bite us.

At the center of all the CRA driven bad loans is ACORN. This extreme activist organization supported strongly by the far left and specifically Obama has been a major factor in the destruction of our housing market. Their story goes back to 1995 with their extreme protests which put a lot of them in jail however the liberal left ran to their rescue:

The following is an excerpt from the article:

With the hearing interrupted and the demonstrators refusing to leave, Roukema called the Capital Police, who arrested Hurd and four others for "disorderly conduct in a Capital building" - a charge carrying a penalty of a $500 fine, six months in prison or both. As the police arrived, two of the protesters menacingly approached Roukema's desk, still demanding the hearing microphone.

Requests to the Capital Police to release the activists from Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass,) failed. Then Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) showed up at the jail and refused to leave until the protesters were released; the Capital Police relented.

Meanwhile, instead of repudiating ACORN's intimidation tactics, Rep. Kennedy berated Roukema for arresting one of his constituents and accused the Republicans of preparing for "an all-out attack on CRA." He also promised to introduce legislation to expand the CRA's coverage to mortgage bankers and large credit unions.

THIS little slice of political life from 1995 had a variety of ripple effects. Above all, ACORN's intimidation tactics, and its alliance with Democrats in Congress, triumphed. Despite their 1994 takeover of Congress, Republicans' attempts to pare back the CRA were stymied.

Instead, Democrats like Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Reps. Kennedy and Waters allied with the Clinton administration to broaden the acceptability of risky subprime loans throughout the financial system, thus precipitating our current crisis.

ACORN had come to Congress not only to protect the CRA from GOP reforms but also to expand the reach of quota-based lending to Fannie, Freddie and beyond. By steamrolling the GOP that March, it had crushed the last potential barrier to "change."

It is a good read and we need to understand how this happened so we an ensure it won't happen again.

'I've lost faith in The Messiah': How EDWARD HEATHCOAT AMORY lost his Obama-mania

This is a story of how Edward was completely sucked into Obama-mania and then he got a chance to read David Freddoso's book "The Cast Against Brack Obama". Its a short read and it didn't take long for Edward to snap out his fascination with Obama.

I also hear Edward isn't putting on camo pants anymore and doing that crazy line dance chanting Obamaminations.

Nice to see someone waking up and returning from the land of the sheeple.

Timeline of Barack Obama's Radical Relationships

UPDATE: Complete Obama Timeline

Special thanks to savvyguy over at FreeRepublic for putting the pieces together not withstanding some of his harsh adjectives. All in all it presents a pretty clear picture of what Obama has been doing and who truly influences his life.

1970, Obama’s grandfather introduced him to Frank Marshall Davis when Obama was ten, Obama had an admitted relationship with a father mentor figure, someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA. Obama never disputed this relationship.

1975-1979- Frank Davis was Obama’s mentor during the critical years. (AIM) 1980- Both terrorists William Ayers & wife Bernadine Dohrn were in hiding until December, 1980.

1979-1981- He attended Occidental college and tried drugs. It was at Occidental where he stopped being called “Barry” and became Barack . Professor Roger Boesche became Barack’s '1983's intellectual political mentor at Occidental.
Obama’s first public speech was at Occidental, sponsored by the Students for Economic Democracy, a branch of the Campaign for Economic Democracy, chaired by Radical Tom Hayden.

1981-1983.- Professor Steve Diamond believes the origin of Obama’s ties to Weatherman Underground terrorists William Ayers and his wife. could be traced back at least to Occidental College.

Is it just a coincidence that Obama and Ayers were at Columbia together? A plethora of anti-American rallies took place there. Both admit to attending these rallies. Ayers studying for his M.Ed in Early Childhood Education and Obama his B.A. in political science..They are LIKELY to have met.

There is strong evidence now that Obama’s DREAM was written by a ghost writer- Ayers! Similarity between their writings and phrases used! (Freerepublic) Early 1980s -Carter national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski became the candidate's "guru and controller" while at Columbia. Brzezinski is Obama’s foreign policy advisor.

In his “Dreams From My Father”, he reveals that at Columbia he “went to socialist conferences …in Brooklyn.”

1983, worked as Full time organizer in Harlem, New York 19851988- he began working as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project. a subsidiary of Gamaliel, with McKnight as a board director. Alinsky was the “father of community organizing” and a notorious far-leftist. Later Obama himself taught workshops on the Alinsky method. Professor John L. Mckight, a Marxist follower of Alinsky, and former ACLU director, mentored Obama on the agitation tactics of Alinsky, who wrote the organizing manual, “Rules for Radicals,” which he dedicated to mankind’s “very first radical, Lucifer.” Under McKnight , Obama says he got the “best education I ever had, better than anything I got at Harvard Law School.” (remark in 2007 while campaigning in Iowa). “My views are not so much more refined than they were when I labored in obscurity as a community organizer,” Obama wrote in his 2006 autobiography.

Mid 1980s, Obama worked with ACORN and Project Vote. 1987 William Ayers links up with Obama in Chicago 1988 Ayers solicits Khalid Al-Mansour to raise money for Obama’s Harvard law School education

Fall, 1988- went to Harvard and took advanced training at the Industrial Areas Foundation, a group founded by Alinsky

1988- he joined racist, America hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church of Christ in Chicago and one Sunday was brought to tears by Rev. Wright’s “Audacity of Hope” sermon. Wright admittedly became his mentor and spiritual advisor for the next 20 years.

1988- The ABCs Coalition was coordinated by Bill Ayers, whose father was a key member of ABC. Another member of the ABCs was Obama’s Developing Communities Project.. The two must have crossed paths again.

1988- In his "Why Organize?" essay, Obama planned to politically organize "liberationist" black churches. He saw the black church as a slumbering giant in cities like Chicago.

1989 Tom Ayers (father) and William Ayers got Obama a summer job at Sidley & Austin (where he meets Michelle Obama); Ayers’ wife Dohrn also worked there the same time.
April, 1992- Obama, Ayers & Dohrn had their documented public gathering sponsored by the U. of Illinois, Chicago 1992 - Obama graduates from Harvard and returns to Chicago

1992, Obama became director of Project Vote, Illinois.

1992-New Party was founded- a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist officials — mostly Democrats. They want to move the Democratic Party leftward.

1993-2004 worked as associate in Chicago Law firm. In time, the job would bring him support from slum landlords. Remember Rezco?

1993 Ayers places Obama on Woods Foundation, which gave sizable grants to ACORN, Rev. Wright’s church , etc. 1995 -publishes “Dreams From my father”

1995 Ayers made Obama Chairman of Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC)

1995-1999- Obama served as President of CAC

1999-2001- Obama served as Board of Director, CAC After CAC closed down, Obama served on a successor group called the Leadership Council of the Chicago Public Schools Education Fund. Ayers’ brother John and their father Thomas served with Obama. By now, news all over about Ayer’s boasts of his terrorist acts.

1995 Ayers hosts a coffee fundraiser for Obama’s political debut (Obama falsely claims this is when he first met Ayers when he has met him AT LEAST 8 years earlier!) -Chicago Times interview: 10-7-08 Lynn Sweet Obama’s advisor, Axelrod , claim that Obama did not know Ayers’ history when he went to his home (Fox interviews, Oct. 08)

1996-Ayers began to contribute money to Obama’s campaign. How is it possible that Obama in writing two autobiographies could ignore his 13 year-long association with Ayers if he were not purposely trying to hide it?

1996, Ayers played a significant role within the Democratic party in Chicago. Democrats were proud to be allied with him. ( Chicago Tribune, Aug 27, 1996) David Lytel, who set up President Clinton's Web site said,” There is a lot of room for different ideas in progressive politics, and we're proud to be associated with Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers," Ayers & , Henry DeZutter consider themselves "The Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party hasn't gone underground. . . . We're on the Internet!"

1995- Obama, along with Rev.Wright, helped organize the Farrakhan’s famous Million Man March in DC. Farrakhan is a longtime friend of Wright and comrade of Michael Pfleger. Yeah, birds of the feathers flock together! It's evident that the liberationist preachers were also Obama’s valued political allies.
1995- he sued, on behalf of ACORN, for the implementation of the Motor Voter law in Illinois. ACORN later invited Obama to help train its staff on how to shake down banks.

1995- Obama sought the New Party’s (socialistic) endorsement for his 1996 state senate run. Democratic Socialists of America founded the "New Party" He got it and he used New Party volunteers as campaign workers. The New Party rigorously evaluated its candidate endorsements & Obama HAD to sign a contract that he agrees with its goals! The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP

1997-Ayers published his radical book, A Kind and Just Parent, in which he brags of his terrorist acts

Dec 97, Obama wrote a positive review of Ayers's book in the Chicago Tribune the following month. He did not know Ayer’s past?

1997- another joint appearance with Ayer

1988- In his "Why Organize?" essay, Obama planned to politically organize "liberationist" black churches. He saw the black church as a slumbering giant in cities like Chicago.

1990’s-Obama was a card carrying documented active member, participant and a direct political beneficiary of the Chicago New Party and, importantly, the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Newsletter said Obama “walked the walk & talked the talk” ( Newsletter , New Ground 45, March-April , 96.)
Democratic Socialists of America - as “the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International,” DSA is the largest socialist organization in US. Weatherman Underground splintered from SDA in 1969
1996-when Obama ran with the blessings of the Marxist New Party and Chicago Democratic Socialist Party April 11, 1996- Obama attended membership meeting where he expressed his gratitude for their support.

1996-Obama was speaker at meeting of the Democratic Socialists of America (Sponsored by: University of Chicago Democratic Socialists of America )

1998- Connie Chung ABC interviewed Ayers & wife & they said,” We were young, idealistic, and We would do it (bomb) again. I wish we have done more!” This was HUGE news! Obama must have watched news!

2000- Obama was supported by leftist catholic priest, Rev. Michael Pfleger of Saint Sabina Catholic Church, in his House of Rep. race. He was another Obama’s spiritual adviser . 1995- 2001, Pfleger contributed $1,500 to his campaigns. Obama later sponsored a $100,000 earmark to help finance Pfleger’s youth center
2001- Ayers was photographed stepping on American flag and I guess Obama missed the news again? In his “Fugitive Days”, Ayers boasts that he “participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970…” All told, responsible for some 30 bombings. Ayvers bragged, “I don’t regret setting bombs”, “I feel we didn’t do enough.” Was Obama blind, deaf, incredibly naive?

2001-2002, Woods Fund with directors Ayers and Obama, made grants of $40,000 and $35,000 to the Arab American Action Network, founded by radical Kashid Khalidi . Rashid is a professor at Columbia. he was strongly identified with the PLO. Khalidi hosted a fundraiser for Obama in 2000.

April-2002, Obama & Ayers spoke at another panel. 2002 through 2005, the two regularly exchanged emails and phone calls.

2004- the Communist Party USA campaigned to elect Obama to the US Senate (People's Weekly World 4-24-.04).

2004 interview-(Chicago Sun-Times) Obama described racist minister , Rev. James Meeks of Chicago’s Salem Baptist Church as an adviser to whom he looked for “spiritual counsel.” In 2007 Meeks served on Obama’s exploratory committee for the presidency

April 5, 2004- He came out and declared, “I am a Christian,”, “I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power”, “I am a big believer in the separation of church and state.”

2007 Top Marxist praise Obama in article “Obama’s Audacious Foreign Policy, 6-18-07, Politicalaffairs.net, By Joel Wendland, managing editor Wendland is one the world's top Marxist-Leninists. He heaps praise on Obama. Is he sending a clear signal to thousands of Communist Party members that Obama is the party's favored candidate? It looks that way. Dec. 2007, Obama sought Rev. Wright’s counsel before formally declaring his candidacy in 2007. Wright was named as member of the campaign’s African American Religious Leadership Committee.

2007-2008 The structure of Obama’s presidential campaign increasingly resemble an Ayers-designed national “community organizer matrix” straight out of Maoist theory.

2008 Obama tells a national TV audience he was “six years old” when Ayers bombed federal buildings, and they are only casual neighborhood acquaintances. He was 40 when supported by Ayers for his Senate seat!. 2004 -Frank Chapman called Obama a communist mole? Chapman, a CPUSA supporter, has written a letter to the communist party newspaper hailing obama’s victory in the Iowa caucuses.

“Obama’s victory was more than a progressive move; it was a dialectical leap ushering in a qualitatively new era of struggle,” Chapman wrote,” Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.”

2004 –present - ACORN and its sister group Project Vote ran nationwide voter drives, which were marred by voter frauds.

2005 - Obama purchases land from neighbor and now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko June, 06- Jim Wallis - A socialist “Christian” preacher and founder of Sojourners, Jim has long championed the cause of communism. On June 28, 06, Obama spoke at a Sojourners-sponsored Conference, calling Wallis, “my friend.”
2006 Obama flied to Kenya to campaign openly for his radical, leftist, pro-violence cousin Raila Ordinga. Obama never condemned the violence and bloodshed instigated by Ordinga after his narrow election loss. December, 2006, George Soros met with Obama in his New York office. Soros had hosted fund-raiser for him back in 2004. In 2007, within hours of Obama’s announcement of his presidential exploratory committee, Soros sent $2,100, the maximum amount allowable. Soros believe America is an oppressive nation.

April 2007- The Nation reported, “Today Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons…” In Oct. 08, Obama denied his involvement in ACORN.

2008- Obama named Professor West of Princeton to his presidential campaign’s Black Advisory Council. A member of the Democratic Socialists of America, and a Marxist and admirer of Rev. Wright.

June-08-Mohamed Salim Al-Churbaji - a Syrian University student who served as a fundraiser and organizer for Obama’s campaign. His father, Mohammed Al-Churbaji, is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood with close ties to such terrorists as Abu Amatallah; leading mujahideen fighters Abu Rawdha; and Bassam Ahmad, the latter fought for Osama Bin Laden !

2008- Valerie Jarrett, Michele Obama's boss, became Obama's chief advisor and he doesn’t make any major decisions without first talking to her. She was born in Shiraz, Iran.

2008- Obama was forced to cut ties with Robert Malley, his foreign policy advisor after the latter told the Times of London that he had been in regular contact with Hamas.

January , 2008 on - Joyce & Tim Wheeler, known commusis campaigning for Obama! – Joyce is Baltimore’s longtime C Py activist. Both became prominent figures in his campaign, helping to organize local canvassing and visibility events for the candidate. Tim is a National Board member of the Communist Party (CPUSA). He chronicled his experiences on the campaign trail in a blog that appeared on the Obama campaign website.

4/25/2008 (Judicial Watch)-The chairman of an Islamic “charity” shut down by the U.S. government for funding Middle Eastern terrorists has dedicated himself to raising money for … Obama.”

September 23, 2008 – After pouring through thousands of pages of newly released documents from archives of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge , they reveal that Obama and Ayers were “partners” in a radical education program.

2008- Four Weatherman Underground leftists have signed and endorsed Obama online for Progressives for Obama, including Mark Rudd, a founders of the WU.

2008- The racist leader Louis Farrakhan who earlier lavishly praise on Obama, “this young man is the hope of the entire world”, “America will change and be made better.” Latest remarks at Nation of Islam rally (on U-tube), says “When Obama talks the Messiah is absolutely speaking.” and "I love my BROTHER and I want to see that brother successful. I don't want to say anything that would hurt that brother, and I don't want them to use me or the Nation of Islam."

Did Obama break the Logan Act?

There is another major issue about Obama that is not being reported. According to the Iraqi Foreign Minister in a July meeting with additional people Obama pressure the Foreign Minister to not finalize a troop withdrawal agreement with the US until after the election.

Now if this is true this is just unbelievable! He says he wants to bring home troops right away but don't let anyone else do it first.

PAC Ad showing the issue

Interesting video about the meeting

The rise and fall of our housing market and how did it happen?

This is a very high level overview of the pertinent facts. Please excuse my typos and grammatical liberties.

Ok we have heard a lot of talk back and forth on what caused the problems that led to the economic meltdown this year. We have heard that it is both party's fault and that the Democrats share the blame equally with others. Additionally people want you to believe that Glass-Steagal is the main cause here.

What I am going to try to do is provide the core facts of this scenario all the way back to 1938 when Fannie was created.

Before we start with the creation of Fannie Mae a couple of points need to be made.

MBS's are at the center of the problems with the sub-prime market. Mortgage backed securities have been created to combine risky loans into tranches which then as a bundle are sold as an investment instrument to various financial institutions.

It should be noted from a historic standpoint that between Civil War and WWII in this country there were six failures of mortgage security schemes within this country. Economists of all shapes and sizes if they just reviewed history and learned from it would have known we would have problems with this. MBS's as a financial instrument alone are not the cause - they need an enabler.

The enabler for this meltdown is Fannie/Freddie and several Democrats hell bent on protecting this scheme for their political gain.

After reviewing the facts you can decide on who is at fault and to what degree.

1938 Roosevelt (D) created the New Deal which Fannie Mae was created to provide an opportunity of credit in a financial market where the "housing" market didn't exist.

NOTE: Many Great Depression Historians based on review of the cause and effects now conclude with some level of certainty that the "New Deal" only prolonged the most serious effects of the Great Depression.

A lot of people have forgotten that the DOW did not return to its pre-Great Depression levels until 1954 - think about that - if that were today it would mean we wouldn't be above 10,000 until 2035.

1968 Johnson (D) along with a Democratic controlled congress created one of the largest expansions of government called the "Great Society" which included spinning off Fannie Mae as a quasi-private organization. Even though it was now to be considered private it was always understood that the government would back it - translation: Fannie could take higher risks than any other private company because of the government backing.

1970 Nixon (R) Freddie Mac was created to compete with Fannie Mae

1977 Carter (D) created the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) which provided for strong oversight. Well that oversight was to force banks to extend credit to low income people regardless of risk.

During the 80's and 90's Fannie and Freddie continued to grow but a very interesting event occurred which was the beginning of the launch of bad people that Fannie and Freddie would hold.

A Thrift in Illinois wanted to merge with another bank. ACORN through legal means challenged the merger on the basis that the Thrift was not providing easy enough access for low income based loans. The Thrift countered in the lawsuit that it wasn't prudent business practice and the loans would jeopardize the bank. ACORN prevailed through the courts to force banks in Illinois to allow these low income loans to be made available regardless of how reckless it was in support of CRA.

You can only guess who was the attorney in Chicago who worked directly with ACORN to make this happen.

DING DING DING you guessed it - Barack Obama (D) himself.

This was actually a landmark victory for CRA because it literally opened up every Thrift in the country to legal trouble if it didn't adopt the reckless provisions of CRA. Sub-prime lending was born and one its parents is Obama.

During the 1990's Clinton (D) really blew the support for CRA wide open and lowered the bar even more for more reckless loan giving. During the last few months of his administration they literally mandated Fannie and Freddie were to increase the mix of high risk and reckless loans to the level of 50%. Yep that's right - 50% of their loans had to be crap.

Two of the biggest defenders for Freddie and Fannie for many years have been Frank (D) and Schumer (D).

4/2001 Bush (R) during the budget request for the following year raised the first alarm about Freddie and Fannie that there was potential trouble there. Dot.com has just busted and then 9/11 all eyes unfortunately were elsewhere.

During 2002 WSJ Editorial page started writing stories warning of the impending disaster of Freddie and Fannie. Each time the editorial staff attempted to interview the key people either in Freddie or Fannie or close organizations like CountryWide they were told to butt out and in some cases were threatened. One of editorials even stated that Freddie and Fannie was going to be our next Enron.

2003 Bush (R) called for significant oversight on Freddie and Fannie. John Snow even made a speech directly on the floor calling for strengthening of the oversight of GSE's particularly Freddie and Fannie. Barney Frank (D) led the charge to kill any oversight on Freddie and Fannie and using his now becoming famous lines - nothing is wrong with Freddie and Fannie.

2004 Freddie and Fannie were caught cooking their books which mean they were making things look a lot rosier than they really were which in turn allowed picaroons like Reins (strong D supporter) the ability to pocket 10's of millions of dollars in bonuses.

2/2004 Greenspan even called for oversight of Freddie and Fannie.

4/2005 Schumer (D) took major steps to block any new oversight on Freddie and Fannie - once again stating everything is great in the housing market - why does anyone want to legislate something that is working so well?

4/2005 Bush (R) pushed for more oversight on Freddie and Fannie - you can see the famous YouTube clips now of all the Democrats (D) blowing off ALL calls for any oversight of Freddie and Fannie.

The Senate Banking committee answered the call of President Bush (R) to adopt much stronger legislation which many view in hindsight that if this legislation had passed on the Senate floor it would have stopped the meltdown of this year.
The Senate Banking committee voted on party lines to adopt the legislations ALL Democrats (D) on the committee voted against the new legislation and all Republicans (R) on the committee voted for it.

When it went to the Senate floor the Democrats (D) successfully blocked a vote on it. - The legislation died.

2006 Another Republican bill co-sponsored by McCain (R) hit the floor with McCain specifically warning all members that Freddie and Fannie posed a significant threat to our financial markets and ultimately the taxpayer. He clearly warned them of the impending disaster.

The Democratic (D) controlled killed the legislation. The bill voted down party lines. Democrats (D) against, Republican (R) for.

By the time 2008 came around Freddie and Fannie held over $4 trillion dollars worth of mortgage paper.

In July 2008 Barney Frank (D) told everyone that Freddie and Fannie were fine and going forward everything was going to be great.

Then we had our meltdown. I think it should be noted that the first bail-out bill had over $20 billion earmarked for far left organizations and that is the primary reason that Republicans couldn't stomach it. The bill failed the house by 12 votes. If the Democrats really wanted to pass it they had the majority to do it. It should be noted that 12 Democrat (D) members of Barney Frank's banking committee voted against the bill. Even at our darkest hours Barney's boys were still in denial.

All you have to do is look at the facts and it is pretty clear who bears the majority of responsibility here. (CLUE: Democrats!!!) It is also clear that Republicans are not getting enough credit for trying to fix this time and time again.

According to economists and business school professors Freddie and Fannie and the lack of oversight on their reckless practices is the primary cause for our financial meltdown.

Anyone who tries to tell you Freddie and Fannie were NOT the major cause are not being honest with you. Any politician that is telling you that Freddie and Fannie were NOT a major cause is not dealing with reality.

All we need to do is review history and we can stop these things from happening. Remember Roosevelt (D) raised taxes during the Great Depression and unemployment was at 25%.

One thing is for sure - we CANNOT under any circumstance raise taxes and we CANNOT increase government spending or we will see the Greatest Depression on our shores - and it took WWII for us to start to crawl out of the last one. We are doomed to repeat history unless we get honest and use straight talk with each other.

If you want to look at the entire picture it seems to be clear to me that our meltdown is really a result of almost 100 years of bad government socialistic tendencies and programs which the Democrats seems to want to continue to shove down our throats.

One thing is for sure WE CANNOT LEGISLATE RECOVERY!

These videos are fun to watch...make sure you keep a bucket close by!
Video showing the Democrats in action protecting Freddie and Fannie

Burning Down The House:What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

Timeline of who defended Freddie and Fannie

Global Warming Debunked by Augie Auer

Augie Auer steps up the plate yet another time and provides the basic calculations regarding carbon dioxide. Augie states that in five years time this man-made global warming controversy will be a joke. Kind of reminds me of the global cooling scare back in the 70's that ended up being quite the scam as well.

Augie presents a basic framework for understanding greenhouse effect on planet Earth. Basically without greenhouse effect our planet would be at minus 18 deg C instead of the plus 15 deg C that we enjoy now.

When you run his numbers it is pretty clear that even if we totally eliminated man-made carbon dioxide it probably would make any difference at all in regard to climate change.

Carbon dioxide makes up 3.6% of the greenhouse gases and the man-made carbon dioxide portion is only 3.2% of the 3.6% or 0.12% of the total of greenhouse gases. It seems to reason that 1/12 of 1% of anything is pretty much nothing.

So goes another chapter in the great Al Gore swindle of the century. How many of you think his rock concert for global warming is a good idea? I can imagine just how much carbon dioxide that concert will create...wish somebody would calculate that - but with Al Gore's new math he would conclude that it is only 1/12 of 1% of the daily carbon dioxide so it isn't a big deal, besides he can buy them away with carbon credits! Aye yi yi!

photo: nzhearld.co.nz (Herald)

Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reversing Belief in Man-mad Global Warming

The link goes to an interesting post about scientists that are now changing their previously stated positions on global warming and how they are now becoming skeptics of man-made global warming.

Of course the media is playing the climate alarmists tune the loudest and science seems to gaining a more realistic view of the impact of climate change on our planet. You can see more of the negative slinging toward the opponents of man-made global warming with statements from the U.N. stating it is "completely immoral" to doubt global warming fears!

A statement like that is irresponsible and just plain absurd. The whole purpose of the scientific process is to challenge any and all positions on a topic. To demonize someone for having an opposing view is just further evidence of how desperate and extreme the proponents are.

Of course the U.N. is constantly struggling to validate itself as a useful organization even though they are thoroughly corrupt and have ultimately failed on most of their endeavors - to them man-made global warming agenda is a financial windfall.

We need more open and public debate on the subject especially with trillions of taxpayers dollars at stake.

More Climate Alarmists Refusing to Change Their Ways

Back in April in the spirit of Earth Day - Senator James Inhofe from Oklahoma challenged the outspoken climate alarmists celebrities to take the challenge and live up to their own environmental rhetoric by reducing their own personal energy usage - just like they want everyone else to do.

Of course they "elite" will hide behind carbon credit schemes not unlike the old Catholic indulgence which you could "purchase" to forgive you for an upcoming sin!

Can anyone out there say "Hypocrites!"?

As I continue to research more and more of the climate change issue it is becoming very clear that we really don't know what is happening or what is going to happen. One thing is for sure - our climate change is not being caused by mankind! Not to say we can't affect it, however, it is a very big stretch to implicate mankind as the cause of our climate change. There are other planets in our solar system that are experiencing similar trends in their climate change - common sense would indicate the most likely suspect is the Sun.

I just read another report where some more environmental extremists are claiming we only 5 years to save the planet - now if that isn't somebody with an agenda for their own personal gain - I don't know what is. To think for a second that anything we do in a five year span can impact our climate cycles on a planet that has existed for BILLIONS of year is completely and utterly absurd.

Mankind should accept some humility and understand there is very little we can do to change a climate change trend, however we are super at adapting and that is what we need to focus on. We need to create opportunities for every human on this planet the chance to adapt to the changes. After all in the grand scheme of things we are just guests on this blue marble and the planet earth will probably continue for billions of years after we are gone just like it existed for billions of years before we got here.

Personally I think we each have less than 100 years on this planet, we really ought to spend our time doing something more productive than any of the extreme measures and propositions in front of us. There is so much that is wrong with the world I think we can spend our time and energy on far more productive things.

Scientist who helped invent meteorology thinks the climate alarmists have it wrong!

Reid Bryson the 30th person to receive a PhD in Meteorology has come out stating the current politically charged climate alarmists have it wrong!

Reid states there is no doubt that the climate is changing as it always is however, it is absurd to think climate warming is caused by man. Reid claims that our warming trend is a continued change of our climate as it came out of the Little Ice Age in the early 1800's.

Now Reid is 86 years old and has been working on the science and climate for most of his life. A lot of alarmists should really listen to his perspective - as it is unique from the standpoint he probably has more experience on the topic than 99% of the human race.

The article is a good read and it is nice to read a level headed response from such an authority.

Photo: Wisconsin Energy Cooperative

17 year old girl stoned to death in Iraq

This is one of those stories that should absolutely outrage anyone that even thinks about something like this happening.

What is wrong with a world where people would willingly participate and seemingly enjoy stoning a helpless 17 year old girl? For what - wanting to have a boyfriend of a different religion?
I cannot image family members where part of this middle ages lynching!

This was sanctioned by the extremist religious leaders? There is so much wrong in the world today and a lot of this has to change if we want any possible chance to survive long-term.

These radical religious leaders need to be stopped at all costs. They are root of terrorism and have only one goal: complete disruption of any progress of the human race.

It is time for people in the world to take a stand. These religious fanatics have as much right to exist freely as does a serial killer - NONE!

There will be those that will argue that their perspective is just different and who are we to try to determine what is right or wrong and we shouldn't judge them. Any reasonable level of intelligence of an evolved species can tell you that there is no justification to publicly stone a 17 year old girl because has a boyfriend of a different religion. Religions of hatred and violence is pure evil and needs to be stopped.

People will want to blame this on the war in Iraq, etc. This abhorrent treatment and vile process of condemnation is rampant with the religious fanatics in the middle east. The world should show no quarter to any of this.

Can you imagine what it will be like when Iran has nuclear weapons? Their fanatic religious leaders - who are in power - will condemn Western civilization and will not hesitate to use nuclear weapons to carry out the sentence.

Make no mistake if we let the radicals continue to garner power and position - the end result is clear. Personally I am deeply sadened by this event and wonder if people really do care at all for what is right or wrong - or even if they know how to tell the difference?

Any and all who participated in that stoning should be brought to justice especially the members of the security force that just stood by and watched. It is time for some minimal reasonable level of sanity to prevail against this ungodly behavior by cowards who hide behind the shroud of something that should be so good - religion.

Unfortunately these groups only understand violence and it will be the only way to put a stop to this. How can any intelligent species allows this behavior and doctrine to exist?

Parting thought as horrible as it sounds...wouldn't the world be a better place without these extreme and evil religious leaders?

Climate change occurring on Mars similar to Earth's

The Sunday Times on the other side of the Pond ran an interesting story about the climate change occurring on Mars. Mars has warmed about 0.5c since the 70's - about the same amount that Earth has warmed during the same period.

It is this kind of evidence that strongly suggests that Earth is experiencing global warming as a natural phenomena and not specifically caused by man. The Sun plays a much larger role in climate change than I think many of the alarmists are willing to give it credit for.

After all man-made global warming is a great way to guilt the human race into spilling trillions of their hard earned dollars into government programs that create wealth and power for the liberal elite!

Dr. William Gray: Oceans Cause Global Warming, Not CO2

Renown hurricane forecaster Dr. William Gray came out swinging again yesterday. His voice of reason is really starting to resonate. He has been correctly predicting hurricane forecasts for over 40 years.

It is his belief that the current global warming trend is caused by the ocean currents and soon we will start to see a cooling trend.

He went after the Gore alarmists approach to global warming - the camp that states that humans are responsible for the current global warming trend. Gray summed it up nicely:

"They're blaming it all on humans, which is crazy," he said. "We're not the cause of it."

Gray also pointed out that politics and research into global warming have created an industry that unfairly scares the population and attacks dissenting voices.

He went on to say that the computer models used by the alarmist camp are unreliable and are just "mush". Gray noted that there are hundreds of factors that influence the weather.

Most of the scientific information I have digested indicates to me that the CO2 increases are actually a result of the global warming trend and not the cause of it.

Photo: Houston Chronicle

Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’ - might be a scam - SHOCKER!

Interesting article yesterday in the Financial Times regarding the ole Carbon Credits debacle. Looks like this whole "carbon credits" nightmare is looking pretty sketchy. This whole scheme reminds me of the Catholic Indulgences payment for sin scam!

The FT investigation found:

• Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.
• Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.
• Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.
• A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.
• Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

Where is Al Gore screaming about this? Why is it that people think they can always "buy" an excuse for their hypocritical behavior?

Interesting read but wholly not surprising.

Earth like planet found - The New Earth

This is really amazing. An earth like planet has been discovered. Albeit 20.5 light years away but it has our same climate, water, gravity, etc. This is really a fantastic discovery.

I wonder how long before Al Gore tries to convince that planet that it is suffering from our man-made global warming!

Image: Daily Mail

Mapping out the Blogosphere

Wow this is cool! Mathew Hurst recently collected data and links for six weeks and produced a plot of the most active and interconnected parts of the blogging world.

Definitely worth taking some time to review and read about his efforts. These type of mapping exercises certainly put some perspective on the depth of blogging and its' potential impact on the world.

Thanks Mathew - interesting stuff!

Image: Discover Magazine

Scientist: Warming not caused by humans

Wendy Reeves over at The Huntsville Times has a story about Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and former NASA scientist.

Roy Spencer is another scientist stepping up to proclaim Global Warming is not caused by humans. Roy has recently testified to congress about Global Warming and Climate Change.

Roy also has a website: http://www.ecoenquirer.com/. Be prepared as the site is definitely a satirists view on Global Warming. Roy is not only an accomplished and respected scientist but he is pretty funny as well!

Photo: NASA

Top MIT Meteroligists Slams Alarmist Approach to Global Warming and States Their Perspective Has No Basis in Science

Newsweek has an article in the upcoming April 16th issue that will certainly raise some eyebrows. Here is another example of a top scientist coming out against the alarmists approach to Global Warming.

Richard Lindzen MIT's top meteorologist has come out swinging against the media driven consensus regarding Global Warming. Specifically the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action - this statement has nothing to do with science. He goes on to further explain that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest anything close to a catastrophe.

He also makes a great point about predicting the weather. That somehow our warming forecasts for 30 years in the future is somehow more reliable than the forecast for next week.

Here is an interesting twist for you: Richard also suggest that a warmer climate could prove to be more beneficial than the climate we currently have. He blames the alarmist approach on their ignorance of what is normal for weather and climate.

This article is very worthwhile reading and really should cause people pause and take a moment to rethink and question what is being presented behind an extremists environmental or political agenda.

BTW: Richard receives no funding from any energy company.

Photo: mit.edu faculty photo

Top Hurricane Forecaster says Gore has it all wrong!

Another voice of recent with impeccable credentials steps forward and calls Al Gore "a gross alarmist". Dr. William Gray the world's top hurricane forecaster thinks Gore is doing a great disservice and he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Is anyone really surprised? Al Gore is a politician, he is in it because it garners him political power and many opportunities to increase his personal wealth.

This article is a good read for anyone looking to debunk the alarmists approach to forcing normal folk into spending trillions of dollars.

GORE REFUSES TO TAKE PERSONAL ENERGY ETHICS PLEDGE

Gore refusing to take a personal energy ethics pledge is a perfect example of what a poor leader he really is.

His personal home consumes 20 times more energy per year than the average US home. He hides behind carbon credits as his way of balancing his energy usage. Let's face it folks, carbon credits are as big a scam as donating a lot of money to the Catholic church to buy your way into heaven.

Gore asks us if we are ready to change the way we live? Who is making the sacrifice here? Gore wants to buy a pass with carbon credits which he pays for by money he makes off the Global Warming swindle! Doesn't anyone see through this veil of deception?

A good and strong leader sets an example by doing what he wants others to do. Gore wants to dictate change and then be exempt from it. Sounds like the creation of an elite class here and Gore is part of it and wants the lesser classes to have to bear the burden of the changes he wants to impose while he profits from these changes.

Sorry I am not buying it. I have to give credit to Sen. Inhofe for coming up with this pledge. This should have been a no-brainer for Gore to agree to if he really believed change was necessary.

Here is a link to the skeptics guide to debunking Global Warming: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Facts&ContentRecord_id=8f5c9829-c459-4d17-89bb-3e3b04d8d444&Region_id=&Issue_id=

Did anyone else catch the fact that Al Gore was allowed to submit his written testimoney to the GOP only 2 hours before he testified? Typically anyone who is going to testify needs to submit their written testimoney 48 hours before they testify. Dingle waived the requirement - if this Global Warming argument is so strong and foolproof why would they need to try to slide this through like this?

Also did you see one of the Democrats called Gore a prophet? Barbara Boxer said Gore has provided them hope?

image (AP)

Using solar energy to keep homes cool

CNET has a great article today about a new solar powered A/C unit from SolCool. As they say in the CNET article this is an absolute no-brainer and I can't believe it has taken this long to reach the market.

These units need to be scaled to replace home A/C units as soon as possible. This unit could eliminate the electricity drain from air conditioning homes. It is the largest drain on our grid and this type of solution could really make a difference.

The unit even has battery backup and can run without sun from period of 12 to 24 hours depending on the battery size.

You can learn more about this at the CNET link above and the link to SolCool is: http://www.solcool.net/. They have several interesting products and ideas. Here is the link that goes directly to the two-ton Hybrid SolCool platform: http://www.solcool.net/solcool.htm

image: SolCool

Climate scientist sees cover-up

This being reported by The Washington Times today...

Wow! James Hansen a director at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies is claiming he was muzzled by the Bush administration about speaking out on Global Warming.

He is one of the scientists behind Al Gore and his alarmist approach to the problem. Mr. Hansen claims the Bush adminstration block his interview on NPR because it is a liberal slanted outlet. Mr. Hansen claims it was an oral threat made to a public affairs person and then relayed to him.

Let's take a look at some interesting facts about Mr. Hansen.

Ironically he had a tough time reconciling the fact that during this time period he had participated in over 1400 other interviews with the press although he claims he was controlled by the Bush administration.

He was paid $250,000 in form of a grant from the Heinz foundation (controlled by Teresa Heinz AKA John Kerry's wife).

He is also a senior advisor to Al Gore and was a consultant (paid I am sure) to Al Gore's outrageous Global Warming docudrama "An Inconvenient Truth".

The fact behind his interview being blocked has nothing to do with politics but because of Mr. Hansen's repeated violations of NASA's policies regarding interviews. Mr. Hansen did not deny violating the policy. So he is paid by NASA and when hired and by accepting a paycheck agrees to NASA's policies. He violates the policy and get himself blocked from the interview but he somehow wants to blame the Bush administration.

It seems the only inconvenient truth here is the fact that James Hansen looks to be bought and paid for by liberal wing of the democrats which are jumping on the Al Gore view of science and Global Warming. It looks more like a democratic cover-up not a Bush cover-up.

But then again this kind of logic is consistent with the logic applied to the science surrounding human made Global Warming.

Oh and by the way Mr. Hansen also stated that the White House is making strides in the environmental agenda and claims "It is a success story" and Bush should be given credit for it.

Go figure?

Researchers Question Validity Of A 'Global Temperature'

The Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen is analyzing the approach used to calculate a "single" average temperature and has come to the conclusion that basically it is impossible to assign a "single" average temperature to Earth.

That same "single" average temperature is what is being used to fuel the alarmists approach to the Global Warming argument. Bjarne Anderson explains that it is impossible because of the number of variables and complications that are connected to all the different areas of the globe.

He likens the scientific value of the "single" average temperature to that of taking the average of all the phone numbers from the phone book - it is an average, it is a single number but it is meaningless.

We need a lot more analysis and scientific study done to come to a reasonable conclusion on this issue. I find it very strange that scientists don't want their studies to come under peer review - isn't that what real science is all about? Scientists put forth their findings and other scientists work to replicate their efforts to validate it.