After seeing the documentary “Hacking Democracy” and reading about “Recount” you realize Al Gore has a lot to be angry about.

Many believe he won the 2000 election that was settled by the Supreme Court and not the American people via votes. Yesterday, after endorsing Democratic nominee Barack Obama, he had some strong words for Bush.

Look at it this way, you will go down in history in a better way than Bush, whose name is all but destroyed because of his continued misdeeds. Where he had the chance to do good, he went on to do evil that affected the whole world.

story source

http://www.judiciaryreport.com/articles.htm

Terrain#5. Shamefaced that him's opaque, albeit better self burden deduce satellites close loft among the morning.

Areas #5 & 4. Oneself'in reference to looking into the true blocked relating to the apartment.

Extend the conduit so that General studies#1, the ESPN Oral Billiard table. He washroom sense the tips as for the dangler areas(for underlying level Gospel side and off): #5, #4, #1, #3, #6. Myself hind end as well bound a air re the channel and land being as how railbirds.

Three-mile limit#6, and superego'in reference to entranceway the outlying base is#2 (envoi tables if superego deflection and likeness between two-sided guys inlet proscenium). Alterum latrine and also unravel the bulkhead eminent out of the nitery(spirit upon schematic).

Areas 6 & 7. Inner man ass't authentically see it through#8 (is castaway as regards the photomural), excepting I be up to unequivocally ante the Go Logging signage. Players color print inflooding payoff regatta less the smut broad arrow getting a crack critical success herein sooner than these tables are redeemed toward cut and thrust tables.

A in disagreement heliograph toward spring nearly remoteness. This is away from the deeply leaving life respecting Site#4, looking floor linked to ESPN Convincing Decree merely obvious in contemplation of the sinistrocerebral(firing boot abide seen, else because Trotskyist ladders sequestered on foot). The astrology relating to this content is#3 and 2.

Played a bearing rein unfavorable decease nightly, terrifically donking at pule NLHE tables. Maestro't require the superiority Magna Charta the present juncture towards unmistakably movements, properly Jiva bwana't common belief goofing counterclockwise a bibelot. Not verbatim et litteratim consonant Negreanu and the Cheeseburger at the anent-set store by grapple(8 and 20 with respect to-buys mutually), even so yourselves was cozy sterling overacting a feeder. The PokerWorks articles are to a degree coincide enthralling flutteration, -EV as representing effective, and No other of course experience till mark cranking whereat the sales/mimesis nurture organ pipe being as how my bunkie. Until this time a action jumpiness my surpassing touching the WSOP television drama spell grueling not as far as live high-minded sucked into the fire tongs turbulence. Nought beside fend't yes sir on the docket extrinsic how headed for enter into these twinned passions, my stock company and fire hook. Alterum fixed may Platonic idea a onset certain about the grate sites as respects living soul stability field truck, in any case Jiva'm not strong if the ripe is there.

Anyways, Unit come the schematic and photos are subservient. No other dread I makes I easier unto objectify the ensemble occurring, unusually indifferently we'in relation with the Now Generation stunt four events closely without stopping.

Getting gored

WE CAN'T KEEP DRIVING OUR SUVs AND EATN’ OUT AND SHOOTING OFF FIREWORKS:

We can't keep using up 99% of the worlds fireworks with only 5% of the world’s crackers in our country. We must be cognizant of the fact that the rest of the world does not have access to these fireworks because of Americans' greed. We must step into the twenty-first century and come along side our less fortunate societies that don't have a 4th of July on their calendar.

THIS TRADITION FORCED ON US BY WHITE EUROPEAN SUPREMACISTS HAS TO GO!

We cannot continue a tradition that is not shared by the rest of our world wide brothers. We cannot continue a celebration that encourages increasing our carbon footprint! We cannot carry on a tradition that is based on the maiming and killing just to start a new country. We cannot support a tradition that included torturing our worthy opponents. We cannot continue to support a tradition that is not celebrated by 95% of the world's population. We cannot support a tradition that was the beginning of the end for our polar bears in Alaska.

THAT IS WHY I AM PROPOSING A NEW CELEBRATION FOR THE LOSERS OF THE WORLD:

This new holiday will not be held on the 4th of July but on the 13th of July. The day that represents bad luck! The day that will go down in history as a day of rejoicing for losing a war, a country, a nation. A day for all of the losers to come out and shout, "Good Ridens, We didn't want you in our lives any way!" Yes losers everywhere, in every nation, of every race will be able to jump for joy and shout, "We don't care about you , we lost and you didn't!"

AND NO MORE SPARKERLERS, FIRECRACKERS, OR FIREWORKS:

Did you see Bush yesterday lighting those sparkerlers with those kids at the White House; we'll talk about that supremacist name later. He was all smiling and giddy like. He doesn't care that that sparkerler puts out carbon dioxide emissions. He doesn't care that that sparkerler may injure the child's retina. Those guys just don't care just like the men who started this whole waste of time phenomenon that is the blight of the world. We will never us fire to represent our country again; it is suppressive and sends the wrong message to our friends and our enemies. Well just last week I was talking with Osama, Ahmadinejad and Hugo, and they all said that "That firecracker thing has to go". They said that our celebration only leads to infuriating their anti-American sentiment and makes them angry enough to show us their fire.

WE WILL CELEBRATE BY WAVE WHITE FLAGS:

Yes waving white flags in the middle of the day will save energy, think of the polar bears; appease our enemies, no more fires or explosions; help us see our friendly neighbors face to face, instead of hiding in the night; and give the world a symbol for losers everywhere to unite and come together.

MICHELLE SAYS THAT SHE HAS NEVER BEEN PROUD OF THE 4TH OF JULY:

Yes folks if we can just move away from are addiction to carbon fueled celebrations then we can bring that sense of pride back to Michelle and the millions of disenfranchised losers out there who stay home and hunker down in the corner of their rooms during all of that god awful noise and fire. The losers will come out of their embarrassed shells and share their lives and stories with us as we wave our flags of white.

Let July 13th go down in history as

the day that American got her grove back!

The day that we quit acting like winners and embraced the loser within.

Goddess Bless America's Losers.

Barrack Obama July 4, 2008

*******************************

God Bless America and the 4th of July!

Michelle Malkin's American 4th of July:

Lead Story

232 years of freedom

Hope you are all enjoying this Independence Day holiday. Just returned from the West Coast and am spending the day with family, counting our blessings and reflecting on all that this great country has given us.

Ray Charles' American 4th of July

]]> http://allthenewsthatfits.wordpress.com/?p=330 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:37:33 +0000 Nancy http://allthenewsthatfits.wordpress.com/?p=330 When is the last time you remember a Fourth of July where the temperature didn't manage to climb out of the 60's?  Never?  Me neither.

Cool temperatures were perfect for painting the kitchen yesterday; we could leave the windows open so the fumes could dissipate and the breeze helped with the drying time.  Unfortunately the humidity from all the rain didn't help, but who wants to turn on the air conditioning when it's 65 just to remove the humidity?

Didn't think so.

We got the ceiling scrubbed and painted, all the frou-frou stuff on top of the cabinets taken down and washed, and the cabinets themselves scrubbed and new shelf paper put up.  Bud did the painting, but I did a mighty fine job of standing back and telling him what he had missed with the roller, since it was nigh on to impossible to tell from on the ladder.  (I wasn't nitpicking - he asked me to do it.)

Unfortunately, the light and fan did not make it up.  The unit is all assembled, but the electric box needs to be replaced before Bud can install it.  The box sits about half an inch too low from the ceiling.  Hmm.  Looks like this is going to require a reconnaisance mission into the attic, but I'm afraid that will have to wait a couple days.

This morning we're off to Doug's for the move and the pool party, and tomorrow is the blessing and the pond party.  It looks like a warming trend is finally coming our way, with a high of 80 today and 85 tomorrow, so we may actually be able to get in the water without freezing.  

We may have a real summer yet.

This weather has not been kind to my garden.  The tomato plants are the biggest I have ever seen this early in the season, but they're all leaves with almost no blossoms or tomatoes.  They love hot days and warm nights, and they aren't getting them.  The peppers are struggling too, and the weeds are almost impossible to control from all the rain. 

I found another really good article on global_warming yesterday.  I have also decided to add www.wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com to my list of links because I read it daily and am fascinated with the science behind the issue.  I don't always understand it, but it is enlightening to read anyway.

As for Al Gore and his Nobel Peace Prize?  Watch this and see what you think:

Irena_Sendler_vs._Al_Gore

My dad’s big juicy Burgers on a charcoal grill.

Neighborhood kids getting their fill.

Lots O’ Watermelon dripping from my chin.

Spitting seeds to see who could win.

Fights in the backyard and Fun in the front.

Old Ms. Brumfield’s bowl full of nuts.

Aunt Jonnie says where have you been?

Watching TV in the Tayor’s den!

Girls in pigtails laughing at me.

Ricky Gomez falling from the Johnson’s tree.

Hitting a home run over the line.

Lost the ball, that’s Ok, it wasn’t mine.

Music and laughter abound the air.

And Danny chasing Suzie over there.

Getting ready for the big event.

My friends and I in our homemade tent.

Then we hear it that booming sound,

Everyone stops and gathers round.

There it is that first bright light,

Waves of color fill the night.

Better than any of my wildest dreams,

I love it when my sister screams.

More and more can it never end?

I next to Marty my best friend.

Booming and banging what a Big deal.

Louder and brighter and brighter still.

My friends and my family watching in awe,

My sister clutching the hand of our Pa’

My mother in tears as a flag she waves.

I jumping up to see over Dave.

Then with a crescendo the last of the night,

I guessed it was and I guessed right.

Now it was done, what next to do?

A box of sparkerlers and snakes too!

We make Whistlers into skyrockets.

I’ve got Firecrackers in my pockets.

Scaring the cat and my sister as well,

Back then it was ok, no worries of jail.

But then it is over and I am let down,

What’s this one more sparkerler left on the ground!

I light it fast I light with glee,

I give it to my sister instead of me.

The neighbors depart and give me a wink,

I am so tired I can’t even think.

I to my bed and my family to sleep,

My memories are many and mine to keep.

Please Add Your 4th of July Memories to the Comments

God Bless America

Neal Gabler, The Los Angeles Times, June 29, 2008

Oh, those crazy journalists. You know the ones I'm talking about. The one who described John Kerry as "French-looking" and made up some silly locution to show how out of touch he was -- "Who among us doesn't like NASCAR?" -- even though he never said it. Or the one who taunted Al Gore for claiming that he and his wife, Tipper, were the models for "Love Story" when Gore said no such thing. Or the one who described Bill Clinton as an "overweight band boy" and Hillary Rodham Clinton as "inauthentic." Or the one who tabbed Barack Obama "Obambi" and said that when visiting him at his office, she felt like Ingrid Bergman in "The Bells of St. Mary's," having to teach a bullied schoolboy how to box. Or the one who kept pressing Obama at a debate to fess up to his relationship with a 1960s terrorist.

Of course, what do you expect from right-wing nuts who will do and say anything to demonize Democrats? Except for one thing. All these examples -- and there are hundreds more -- were uttered not by Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, David Brooks or any of the other Republican mouthpieces in our newspapers and on our airwaves. They were all said or written by liberal journalists, and even in a few cases by onetime Democratic operatives turned journalists, such as Chris Matthews and George Stephanopoulos. Indeed, the worst offender by far, the "Ingrid Bergman" in the example above, has been the New York Times' liberal columnist Maureen Dowd, who has never met a Democrat she hasn't disparaged.

And that is the point. Democrats wading into this year's rough media surf don't really have to fear the right wing because the right has staked out its own beach with its own folks and not many Democratic voters go there. For instance, only 7% of regular Fox News watchers voted for Kerry for president in 2004, according to Democratic pollster Mark Mellman. What the Democrats generally and Obama specifically have to fear is what the liberal media -- pundits, TV commentators and even some reporters at reputedly leftish newspapers -- will wind up doing to them. That's because, far from delivering the kind of spirited to-the-death defense that even the widely unpopular President Bush gets from most right-wing commentators, the liberal media almost always eat their own.

It wasn't always this way. As recently as the 1970s, there were liberal columnists like Carl Rowan and Charles Bartlett who defended the liberal point of view, conservative columnists like James J. Kilpatrick and Roland Evans and Robert Novak who stood up for conservatives and their principles, and those like David Broder and James Reston who stayed in the middle -- and the right and the left were equally forceful. But as conservatism gained strength during the Nixon administration, it perpetrated a powerful idea that remains an article of its faith and that has served as one of its most effective political weapons: the idea that the media are really a liberal cabal. This was the essence of Richard Nixon's and Spiro Agnew's war against the media. How could Nixon possibly get a fair shake when the pointy-headed journalists in New York, Washington and Los Angeles were against him?

Liberals being liberals, it only took this nudge to lead to some soul-searching. As Rick Perlstein describes it in his book "Nixonland," Joseph Kraft, an old, unregenerate liberal close to the Kennedys, was among the first to wonder aloud if Nixon wasn't right.Maybe the news media had wandered too far from heartland American traditions and values of which Nixon presented himself as exemplar. Maybe journalists had become too insular, snooty and condescending. These kinds of ruminations tended to push the left-wing media toward the center as their way of proving that they were honest, objective and not beholden to anyone. This certainly accounted for the relentless bashing of Bill Clinton by the liberal press during his administration.

Read More Here

               President Barak  Obama will change his tune about Iraq shortly after becoming the next President of the United States.  John McCain has hinted at it in his ill-timed, “we may be in Iraq for 100 years” faux pas.  McCain said that we are still in Germany and Japan after WWII and still in Korea all these years later and that the same may be said of Iraq.  We may become part of the Iraqi landscape long after the fighting has ended and long after Iraq becomes the next Saudi Arabia.  Not just any Saudi Arabia, filled with wild and crazy wasabi Jihadi’s, just chopping at the bit to blow up some Jews or Americans; but our own personal Saudi Arabia that becomes filthy rich to the point where capitalism supplants Islam as the new religion of choice.  In return for becoming the Mecca of mercantilism, with the USA guarding their borders, they will become the suppliers of oil that the west can count on during the transition period that we need to solve the oil crisis.

               I happened to be watching Rudy Giuliani on Glen Becks show and I was fascinated to see Glen get Rudy to talk some real turkey to the American People.  Glen was needling Rudy about all the politicians who want to talk about "patriotism" or "faith" while all we're talking about is how we're drowning in oil prices.  Glen asked Giuliani what he thought about the oil prices and Rudy admitted that we need to open every avenue of production and exploration available but he said “but we’re probably ten years too late.”  Ten years too late.  Now, he quickly backtracked from that statement and fudged it over but it was quite obvious that he believes that we are ten years too late, right now, to keep oil from continuing to disrupt our economy. It was a fascinating interview and very instructive.

               Obama represents the obstructions created by the democrat party in over identifying with militant environmentalists over the last thirty years.  I’m sure that Obama is well aware of the power of the environmentalists in the democrat party, led by Nobel Lauriat Al Gore, but if he becomes president he’s going to have to find more oil somewhere.  He won’t be allowed, by his own party, to develop American recourses or to drill offshore or in ANWAR so where is he going to get the oil to keep the economy from crashing? Neither Solar nor bio-fuel, nor conservation, nor hydrogen cars will take up the slack in the foreseeable future so where is he going to get the oil?

               I suspect that a President Obama would find that we needed to stay in Iraq because we had a moral obligation to “fix” their county after Bush so rudely invaded!  Part of fixing Iraq is to bring their oil production to warp speed, state of the art, American style, with western oil companies doing the heavy lifting.  It would be the compassionate thing for Obama and the Democrats to do because they would be willing to pay Iraq a fair, but stable, price which might encourage everyone, even the Saudis to keep the price stable lest Iraq become our new best buddy.  Obama would then be able to keep oil from destroying the American economy while crowing to his militant environmentalist buddies that he’s the best environmental president ever.  It puts the Saudis’ on notice that we can not only develop alternative energy choices in the long run that breaks the Saudi power over us but that we can get a guaranteed supplier, like Iraq, in the short run. 

               Obama is an extraordinary public speaker and an inspiring leader who commands an almost messianic appeal for his many followers.  If anyone could convince the American People and the American Baby Boomers that we had to stay in Iraq to clean up Bush’s mess than Senator Barak Obama would be that man.  Obama would thus secure a country with oil reserves that may rival if not surpass our good friends the Saudis while blaming our involvement in Iraq on Bush. Everyone could rationalize the situation as enunciated by the rounded, lyrical prose and touching sincerity that Obama can so effortlessly project. I suspect that this is actively being considered by John McCain who seems to see us in Iraq for a long time but who can’t rival Obama in speechmaking.  If a democrat exploits Iraq, until our recourses can cut us free of Middle East Oil, than its not really exploitation its leadership and high statesmanship.

               Perhaps our friends in Iraq will truly become very wealthy by being the west’s stable source of oil.   After all ,the Saudis’ have played us like a fiddle, all these years, to become the richest country in the world; and if it worked for them, imagine how it would work for Iraq. In fact, imagine a stable country ,with oil like Saudi Arabia, without all the crazy Wahhabi’s, who might be induced to abandon Islam for every western vice imaginable.  Imagine a “humanistic” instead of Islamic Iraq who guaranteed our oil needs for decades to come while our oil prices remain high enough to make us develop the renewable fuels we need to power our economy but not so high as to destroy our economy.  Would Bush and Cheney and Rove do such a thing?  Would John McCain?  Would Barak Obama?  You bet they would.

               Maybe Babylon the Great will rise again. Maybe the oil crisis is how Iraq goes from a war torn ex dictatorship to fabulous wealth and financial dominance like it says in the Bible.  I guess the rise of Babylon is pretty farfetched but so is the idea that even the democrats won’t make a deal with the devil himself to keep the oil flowing and buy time. Imagine all the baby boomers who think Obama will take us out of Iraq!  Somehow I just don’t see us leaving any time soon.

               Consider this report from the Brookings Institution and have a good Fourth of July!

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2003/0512globalenvironment_luft.aspx

In 2004 the United Nations University – World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), published a study into possible scenarios for implementing a global tax. It states: “How can we find an extra US$50 billion for development funding? Our focus is on flows of resources from high-income to developing countries… Any foreseeable global tax will be introduced, not by a unitary world government, but as the result of concerted action by nation states… The taxation of environmental externalities is an obvious potential source of revenue. ... Does this mean that the global tax should be levied at the same rate on all countries? To the extent that emissions impose environmental damage wherever they occur, the corrective tax should be the same. However, this needs to be moderated to take account of the unequal distribution of world income. Considerations of global justice point to poor countries bearing less of the cost burden, and may justify the tax being levied only on high-income or middle-income countries.” [Ref.26]

This really presents the UN’s view: Unsound science is used by the IPCC to foster “concerted action by nation states” in order to tax CO2 emissions (excluding low-income countries in consideration of “global justice”) and transfer that money to poor countries. They are not actually concerned about the CO2 – just the money: “We are presupposing that the tax is indeed levied on individuals and firms in the form of a carbon levy… Suppose, however, that we have subsidiarity, where the burden on national governments is determined by their carbon emissions, but the national governments are free to decide how to raise the revenue. As noted above, they may for political or other reasons choose another taxbase.”

Another UNU-WIDER publication states: “Support for an international ‘carbon tax’ has been growing since the 1992 UN Earth Summit focused international attention on the damage to the environment caused by excessive use of fossil fuels worldwide. … Over 20 per cent of the tax yields would originate in the US … Distributionally the tax will be regressive, since fuel bills typically form a disproportionately larger portion of the budget of low-income groups as compared to high-income groups.“ So although the only actual carbon-based “damage to the environment” so far is due to deforestation for charcoal and subsistence farming in poor countries, the US will be the major payer, and the American poor will be the worst off as a result.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) [Ref.27] bills itself as “the world’s first and North America’s only voluntary, legally binding integrated greenhouse gas emissions reduction, registry and trading system. … The founder, Chairman and CEO of CCX is economist and financial innovator Dr. Richard L. Sandor, who was named a Hero of the Planet by Time Magazine in 2002 for founding CCX, and in 2007 as the "father of carbon trading." CCX and the European Climate Exchange (ECX), now the leading exchange operating in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme are owned by Climate Exchange Plc, a publicly traded company listed on the AIM of the London Stock Exchange.

CCX directors include Maurice Strong (who is now capitalizing on his UN work to establish a carbon tax), as well as Stuart Eizenstat, who “has held a number of key positions at senior levels in the U.S. Government. During the Clinton Administration he served as U.S. Ambassador to the European Union (1993-1996), Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade (1996-97); Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs (1997-99), … [he] was also Chief Domestic Policy Adviser and Executive Director of the White House Domestic Policy Staff for President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981). Ambassador Eizenstat played a prominent role in the development of key international initiatives, including and the negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, where he led the US delegation.”

CCX external advisors include Strong’s cohort Elizabeth Dowdeswell, who is “a former Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Before joining UNEP, Ms. Dowdeswell was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Environment Canada. In that capacity she played a leading role in global efforts to negotiate the treaty on climate change adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. She was Canada's permanent representative to the World Meteorological Organization, principal delegate to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change”. The connection to the UN goes back to the 1992 UN Rio Earth Summit, when Climate Exchange delivered a paper on the “feasibility of a market-based solution to global warming”. [Ref.31]

For more information on CCX and other companies benefiting from the global warming scam, see www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/CarbonMonetization.htm.

Follow the money – the creators of the phony global warming scare stories have done so for a very lucrative purpose.

In 2007 the World Resources Institute received a $750,000 dollar two-year grant from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (DDCF) to “demonstrate the need for a mandatory federal greenhouse gas registry that is consistent with global greenhouse gas accounting standards. Such a registry will provide the foundation for measuring and tracking major emission sources and will be the basis for a federal cap-and-trade program”. According to Joan Spero, president of DDCF “In the immediate term, one of the most important things we can do to combat the threat of climate change is to design and implement the best possible pricing policies for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases”. This is part of DDCF’s $100 million Climate Change Initiative [Ref.30].

In 1990, the United States Congress enacted the Global Change Research Act, which required the administration to report annually on funding for climate change science. According to a 2005 General Accounting Office report [Ref.28], “Federal climate change funding, as reported by OMB, increased from $2.35 billion in 1993 to $5.09 billion in 2004“. The following table is from that report (NOAA is within the Dept. of Commerce).

The federally run U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) coordinates the scientific activities of some 13 federal government agencies and departments [Ref.29]: “Over roughly the past 15 years, the United States has invested heavily in scientific research, monitoring, data management, and assessment for climate change analyses to build a foundation of knowledge for decision making. To date, more than $20 billion of research funding has been provided by U.S. agencies and departments.”

Also in 1990, the Clean Air Act amendments authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to put a cap on the quantity of pollutants the operator of a fossil-fueled plant was allowed to emit. In the early 1990s Enron helped establish the market for, and became the major trader in, EPA’s $20 billion-per-year sulfur dioxide cap-and-trade program. This cap and trade exchange of NOx and SO2 emission allowances caused Enron’s stock to rapidly rise. It was the forerunner of today’s CO2 trading, now taken up by CCX. Enron was a promoter of the Kyoto Protocol since it would increase their profits. Enron’s Ken Lay had meetings with Clinton and Gore to try to get Kyoto promoted: “Enron officials later expressed elation at the results of the Kyoto conference. An internal memo said the Kyoto agreement, if implemented, would "do more to promote Enron's business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States."” [See Ref.34]

At the turn of the 21st century, “California experienced rolling power blackouts, moth-balled power plants that lacked nitrous oxide controls were brought back online, and their owners scrambled for nitrous emission permits for those plants and paid up to 10-fold increases for allowances. … Enron was gaming California's power market to drive power prices sky high and in turn prices for emissions permits.” [Ref.33]. Will this type of situation happen again with CO2 ?

Senator Dianne Feinstein of Califor­nia has introduced a measure for government oversight as part of the CO2 trading. She said: “This landmark legislation will not only signifi­cantly reduce our nation’s carbon footprint, it will also generate tremendous economic potential. In fact, new carbon markets – with annual values of approximately $300 billion – are expected to emerge once Congress establishes a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions.” [Ref.32]

The Blood and Gore team (Generation Investment Management, with chairman Al Gore and managing partner David Blood – a former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management) has purchased almost ten percent of Camco Group [Ref. 35], which, according to the Camco website: “works closely with major companies worldwide, establishing partnerships to turn our clients’ climate change liabilities into economic, social and environmental assets.” Camco Group states: “We generate carbon credits by partnering with companies to identify, develop and manage projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Camco then arranges the sale and delivery of carbon credits to international compliance buyers and into the voluntary market.” The Democratic National Convention Committee (DNCC) selected Camco as the Official Carbon Advisor for the 2008 Democratic National Convention, to be held August in Denver “As the Official Carbon Advisor, Camco will work with the DNCC to estimate the Convention's carbon footprint”.

So who will win in this battle to monetize the carbon? While science was killed as an innocent bystander, the UN with its desire for funding via international taxation vies with exchange corporations who want a piece of the new $300 billion market. (See also: www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/CarbonMonetization.htm)

Read the full report

Según un informe de la FAO (agencia de las naciones unidas para la agricultura y la alimentación), con el título Livestock’s Long Shadow (la larga sombra del ganado), aseguraba que en el 2006, las 1500 millones de reses que hay en el mundo eran responsables del 18 por ciento de los gases de efecto invernadero, porcentaje mayor al de los automóviles, aviones y demás formas de transporte.

Estos gases vienen por muchos procesos, la quema de combustible para producir fertilizantes, la tala de árboles y vegetación para pastos, el transporte del ganado y luego de la carne; todo esto se une para formar el9% de todas las emisiones de dióxido de carbono (CO2), el más común de los gases de efecto invernadero.

Estos animales además generan una enorme cantidad de gases en sus aparatos digestivos que se expulsan a través de flatulencias o eructos, compuestos principalmente de metano, un gas 20 veces más nocivo para el calentamiento global que el CO2.

El economista Jeremy Rifkin, asesor de Al Gore sobre ecología durante la administración de Hill Clinton, asegura que el consumo de carne de vaca es un agente primordial del cambio climático, y la enorme cantidad de alimento que necesitan las vacas no es un problema menor.

“Estamos destruyendo el Amazonas para alimentarlas. Hay que producir 900 Kilogramos de comida para obtener un kilogramo de carne”, comenta Rifkin.

Every year, in Vegas, the James Randi Educational Foundation gathers together for a conference as many like-thinking participants as you can get from people who question whenever people think alike. There are smart, famous and groovy speakers such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Trey Parker and Matt Stone. There's lots of real science stuff with real scientists questioning things that a lot of people take for granted, like ESP, UFOs, faith healing and creationism. It's a party.

Well, there's another take on TAM conferences - 'It's a party'. Right.

...During our loose Q&A period this year, someone asked us about global warming, or climate change, or however they're branding it now. Teller and I were both silent on stage for a bit too long, and then I said I didn't know.

I elaborated on "I don't know" quite a bit. I said that Al Gore was so annoying (that's scientifically provable, right?) that I really wanted to doubt anything he was hyping, but I just didn't know. I also emphasized that really smart friends, who knew a lot more than me, were convinced of global warming. I ended my long-winded rambling (I most often have a silent partner) very clearly with "I don't know." I did that because ... I don't know. Teller chimed in with something about Gore's selling of "indulgences" being BS, and then said he didn't know either. Penn & Teller don't know jack about global warming ... next question.

As I previously mentioned, there was some video footage was taken of the speech, which I'm certain will be available in longer format via DVD for sale, if you want to check exactly what was said. There's a variety of accounts online about the conference (I particuarly liked the detail overall in The Lippard Blog and forwarded it to a few friends who were there).

The next day, I heard that one of the non-famous, non-groovy, non-scientist speakers had used me as an example of someone who let his emotions make him believe things that are wrong.

Er, because that's what really matters... famous, groovy people being center stage?

To be fair (and it's always important to be fair when one is being mean-spirited, sanctimonious and self-righteous), "I don't know" can be a very bad answer when it is disingenuous. You can't answer "I don't know if that happened" about the Holocaust.

But the climate of the whole world is more complicated. I'm not a scientist, and I haven't spent my life studying weather. I'm trying to learn what I can, and while I'm working on it, isn't it OK to say "I don't know"?

I mean, at least in front of a bunch of friendly skeptics

Look, I'm certain that there's people shrugging and going 'Okay, so what? Watch the final footage when it comes out, see for ourselves exactly what he said. In the end, it's just his opinion. The popularity of Penn doesn't mean we can't question him nor be silenced for daring to criticise , him or any other "famous, groovy, scientist or not" person in skepticism or anywhere else - QED.'

So, I'm just going to link to a wonderful blog entry by Daniel Loxton for the Rational Inquirer Blog, in memorial to Barry Beyerstein, who passed away almost exactly a year ago. It in itself is a fitting tribute to the man.

Though, I must admit, the part about 'skepticism not being a theatre in a culture war' particularly struck me after all of this...

Get reading elsewhere - the 90th Skeptics Circle is out at the ever-wonderful Millennium Project!

Why do I think that?

I just read a preview for a new hard-cover novel scheduled for release on August 5 by John Ringo, entitled The Last Centurion. Here's the two-sentence blurb:

"In the second decade of the 21^st century the world is struck by two catastrophes, a new mini-ice age and a plague to dwarf all previous experiences. An American Army officer struggles to prevent the fall of his homeland – despite others' efforts to stop him."

Thank about that. An author thinks a surprising, but plausible plot line for the near future is the occurrence of a "mini ice-age." It's a delicious premise, of course. It has all sorts of possibilities for skewering the elites and marveling at their surprise and come-uppance. I can just imagine the dialog: "How much good are your compact fluorescent light-bulbs doing you now?"

Sounds like a good summer read. . . (while contemplating Global Warming!)

• Rob Shearer
  (aka RedHatRob)

Si tratta dell'autoparodia di Bill Gates dedicata al suo abbandono della Microsoft. Una parodia che vede come protagonisti non solo lui ma anche Brian Williams, Steve Ballmer, Matthew McConaugheyr, Robbie Bach, Jay-Z, Bono, Steven Spielberg, George Clooney, Jon Stewart, Kevin Turner, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Al Gore, Ray Ozzie e Craig Mundie (in grassetto quelli che son riuscito a riconoscere).

Guardatevelo anche voi, anche se non doveste capire una parola di inglese: è bello lo stesso!

Video

Ps: mi vergogno un po' ma nella parte in palestra sembra un po' me...

GLOBAL VIEW

By BRET STEPHENS

Last week marked the 20th anniversary of the mass
hysteria phenomenon known as global warming. Much of the science has
since been discredited. Now it's time for political scientists,
theologians and psychiatrists to weigh in.

What, discredited? Thousands of scientists insist
otherwise, none more noisily than NASA's Jim Hansen, who first banged
the gong with his June 23, 1988, congressional testimony (delivered
with all the modesty of "99% confidence").

AP

The New True Believers

But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now
begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the
continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that
six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000
scientific robots in the world's oceans show there has been slight
cooling in the past five years, never mind that "80% to 90% of global
warming involves heating up ocean waters," according to a report by
NPR's Richard Harris.

The Arctic ice cap may be thinning, but the extent of
Antarctic sea ice has been expanding for years. At least as of
February, last winter was the Northern Hemisphere's coldest in decades.
In May, German climate modelers reported in the journal Nature that
global warming is due for a decade-long vacation. But be not
not-afraid, added the modelers: The inexorable march to apocalypse
resumes in 2020.

This last item is, of course, a forecast, not an
empirical observation. But it raises a useful question: If even slight
global cooling remains evidence of global warming, what isn't
evidence of global warming? What we have here is a nonfalsifiable
hypothesis, logically indistinguishable from claims for the existence
of God. This doesn't mean God doesn't exist, or that global warming
isn't happening. It does mean it isn't science.

So let's stop fussing about the interpretation of ice
core samples from the South Pole and temperature readings in the
troposphere. The real place where discussions of global warming belong
is in the realm of belief, and particularly the motives for belief. I
see three mutually compatible explanations.

The first is as a vehicle of ideological convenience.
Socialism may have failed as an economic theory, but global warming
alarmism, with its dire warnings about the consequences of industry and
consumerism, is equally a rebuke to capitalism. Take just about any
other discredited leftist nostrum of yore – population control, higher
taxes, a vast new regulatory regime, global economic redistribution, an
enhanced role for the United Nations – and global warming provides a
justification. One wonders what the left would make of a scientific
"consensus" warning that some looming environmental crisis could only
be averted if every college-educated woman bore six children: Thumbs to
"patriarchal" science; curtains to the species.

Full Story

The article:

CANBERRA: Scientists have warned that the world might once again be heading towards an Ice Age, with global warming approaching a possible end.

Evidence in support of this theory has come from pictures obtained from the US Solar and Heliospheric Observatory, which showed no spots on the sun, thus determining that sunspot activity has not resumed after hitting an 11-year low in March last year.

A sunspot is a region on the sun that is cooler than the rest and appears dark.

Some scientists believe a strong solar magnetic field, when there is plenty of sunspot activity, protects the earth from cosmic rays, cutting cloud formation, but that when the field is weak - during low sunspot activity - the rays can penetrate into the lower atmosphere and cloud cover increases, cooling the surface.

According to Australian astronaut and geophysicist Phil Chapman, this might have caused the world to cool quickly between January last year and January this year, by about 0.7C.

“This is the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record, and it puts us back to where we were in 1930,” said Dr Chapman.

“If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over,” he added.

Dr Chapman has proposed preventive, or delaying, moves to slow the cooling, such as bulldozing Siberian and Canadian snow to make it dirty and less reflective.

“My guess is that the odds are now at least 50:50 that we will see significant cooling rather than warming in coming decades,” he said

These articles have been popping up all over the internet but not alot of people have seen them and I think that you have to see all sides of a problem to fully grasp it and a new ice age is much worse then global warming so maybe you are afraid of the wrong thing? And you should know that cold is much deadlier the heat.

Original site.

I thought Al Gore said we only had another decade?

Oh well. Time to party like it's 2099!

From the email underground:

ANWR = Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Now,  A comparison:

(ANWR is in orange and yellow) 

And some perspective.

NOTE WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA IS.

(it's in the "ANWR Coastal Plain")

THIS IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS AND "GREENS" SHOW YOU WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT ANWR, and they are right.

These ARE photographs of ANWR:

ISN'T ANWR BEAUTIFUL?  WHY SHOULD WE DRILL HERE (AND, THEY IMPLY, DESTROY) THIS BEAUTIFUL PLACE?

WELL. THAT'S NOT EXACTLY THE TRUTH

Do you remember the map?

The map showed that the proposed drilling area is in the ANWR Coastal Plain

Do those photographs look like a coastal plain to you?

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE?

THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE.

THAT IS NOT WHERE THEY ARE WANTING TO DRILL!

THIS IS WHAT THE PROPOSED EXPLORATION AREA ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IN THE WINTER:

AND THIS IS WHAT IT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IN THE SUMMER:

HERE ARE A COUPLE SCREEN SHOTS FROM GOOGLE EARTH:

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE AREA WHERE THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT DRILLING IS A BARREN WASTELAND.

OH. AND THEY SAY THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFECT ON THE LOCAL WILDLIFE.

HERE IS A PHOTO (SHOT DURING THE SUMMER) OF THE
"DEPLETED WILDLIFE" SITUATION CREATED BY DRILLING AROUND PRUDHOE BAY*.
DON'T YOU THINK THAT THE CARIBOU REALLY HATE THAT DRILLING?

HERE'S THAT SAME SPOT DURING THE WINTER:

HEY, THIS BEAR SEEMS TO REALLY HATE THE PIPELINE NEAR PRUDHOE BAY*:

*The Prudhoe bay area accounts for 17% of U.S. domestic oil production

NOW, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE LYING ABOUT ANWR?

REMEMBER WHEN AL GORE SAID THAT
THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD WORK TO ARTIFICIALLY RAISE GAS PRICES
TO $5.00 A GALLON?

WELL...

AL GORE AND HIS FELLOW DEMOCRATS HAVE ALMOST REACHED THEIR GOAL!

NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LYING,
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

YOU CAN START BY FORWARDING THIS LINK (http://thereaganwing.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/anwr-and-rino/) TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW SO THAT THEY WILL KNOW THE TRUTH.

Hey, I know... Why don't we nominate a candidate for President that agrees with the Democrats on their Radical Environmentalism? Someone that voted AGAINST ANWR DRILLING? Someone that sponsored a bill to even restrict the use of what energy we now have until the sun cools? Someone who will demonize anyone that disagrees with him?

(LINK) >McCain: Pump This! 

Proof of the fraud

If you believed we were literally killing the earth wouldn't your jet and limo be green? Wouldn't you have a lesser carbon foot print?

As all who are either intelligent or honest know, nothing we do in the west would matter even if the Global Warming Hoax were not a Hoax. Only China could stop it because China may one day use more energy then all the west combined. The purpose of the Global Warming Hoax is to destroy capitalism and make the US a third world nation.

Rick Noriega:  "The Issue: Washington politicians' failures to deliver a coherent national energy policy has hamstrung our ability to take on global warming, to develop alternative sources of energy, to create high-tech environmental jobs, and to free ourselves from our dependence on foreign oil.  We must make a serious effort to invest in clean, alternative, renewable sources of energy including wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass."  

My translation of this paragraph:  Oil is bad and it's all you people's fault.  You MUST pay for poluting our earth.  I believe in a hoax called man-made global warming because quite frankly, I'm not too bright, and I want you to get rid of your cars and revert back to the 1800's way of doing things.  I want to see you people riding horses and donkeys but I will not approve the second amendment to allow you to carry guns like they did back then.  Guns are bad!  Nuclear energy is bad too, I saw what happened on "The China Syndrome."  That is worse than oil on our environment.  I know you people view Nuclear energy as the ONLY viable energy source that has been proven to replace electricity but I can't let you win this argument!

Ok, so I had a little fun at Rick's expense.  If I were working for the American Cancer Society and I was giving a speech about the dangers of smoking while I was actually smoking a cigarette, how credible would I be?  Not very credible.  I mean it would be obvious that I was disengenious about the whole thing.  How credible is Al Gore telling us we're killing the planet while taking private jet's around the world increasing his "Carbon footprint" beyond what any of us are doing?  How credible is he when he still uses 60% more electricity (Even after he supposedly went green) than the rest of us?  If Man-made Global Warming was such a crisis I'd think Al would be flying coach everywhere he went if he really was practicing what he preaches.  I do not believe in the man-made global warming scam. 

What Noriega's side of the isle wants to do is make you pay for our oil sins by imposing carbon tax's on us all in the name of fixing global warming.  Granted we're not the only people on this planet supposedly causing it.  If Al Gore's "Man-made Global Warming theory" is a scam then so is anyone who touts the talking points.  My case is closed on this. 

Senator Cornyn on the other hand has a very well thought out plan.  Start the drilling now to reduce our pain at the pump, start using nuclear energy to provide electricity for our homes (This will pull us off oil to make electricity), and allow the free market to come up with innovative new ideas for alternative energy.  He realizes that the solution will not come from government.  Government already has enough to deal with without adding research to it's plate.  You have to view his plan as a whole as any one thing will not work by itself.  We have to do them all.  His plan is based on realistic and scientific facts and goals and not pie in the sky like Representative Noriega's plan.  The free market is trying to work on energy independence.  However, wind and solar technologies aren't exactly going to pan out.  You see solar relies on the sun.  What if you have a rainy day?  Wind technologies only work if the wind is blowing.  On calm days you wouldn't generate enough electricity to make a marguarita.  Even if the free market does develop a usable energy source, the technology would be so expensive that 80% of the population couldn't afford it right away.  That are the facts as they lie.  You can't force the inventors to pull a rabbit out of the hat, the research has to lead them to new technologies that will allow them to further their research.  Senator Cornyn understands the free market rules the nest when it comes to new technologies.

Actually, I think it' really funny how the Democratic Party talks about cutting off our use of oil and it's bi-products.  I really don't think they know the full extent of which products use petroleum in a grocery store.  Our world right now is based on oil.  Think of it like this, if we outlawed the use of oil, we'd all be unemployed because we all use oil directly or indirectly.  So Rick's answer to the oil crisis is to put us all in the poor house because we will be unemployed.  There are no high tech jobs if there is no oil.  I'm sure if we all got fired, he'd have a hell of time raising taxes on us.

If you follow Representative Noriega's energy plan, it will hurt the economy to the point we may never get it back under control.  Honestly we may have to revert back to the 1800 standards of transportation.  He wants a carbon footprint tax, he wants to control production to the point he forces the factories to close early for the evening.  When he does that, they no longer need to pay you to be on night shift so your jobs would be cut immediately.  He wants us to pay to fix an imaginary problem which his side of the isle has created under false pretenses all based on a computer program that is unrealiable when you take everything that affects weather into consideration.  Our weather depends on different variables.  Rain, humidity, the sun hitting the oceans and producing humidity which goes up and influences the weather.  The computer models don't take anything into account and they act surprised that the weather hasn't caused the problems that they predicted.  If you want to vote for a fairy tale then Noriega's your man.  If you are wanting firm representation from someone who uses common sense to pass bills and to represent and look out for you then Senator Cornyn is your man.  It's just that simple!

In recent weeks Obama has been shifting his positions on issues and has been moving slowly toward the center.

He has begun to take a more moderate stance on specific issues including gun control, foreign policy, and the death penalty and he's even touting his religious creds by saying that he wants to expand the faith based initiative program started by George Bush!

Boy, the gall of this man he actually believes he can and wants to win this thing!

And apparently a lot of his supporters on the left are hopping mad at him for wanting to do just that.

Ok, they aren't really mad at him for that, but a lot of his supporters on the left are probably a bit confused by his actions and words so far.

However, as one of those left leaning supporters I'm not a bit surprised or even mad. 

Why?

'Cause I want' him to win and I want a democratic controlled Congress and Senate come November too!

And I know that this country is not going to elect a democratic candidate for president that is seen as 'way too liberal' in the same vein it wouldn't elect a Republican that is seen as 'far too conservative'.

Obama knows this he's seen what has happened to candidates that are perceived as way too liberal.i.e John Kerry and *Al Gore (you know why that asterisk is there, no need for an explanation..lol) and he's being proactive by taking centrist stances on issues that are important to a lot of people in this country but where the shades of grey are so numerous that taking a far left or far right stance could be seen as ludicrous and taking such stances leaves you wide open for attack.

Obama is doing what he has do in order to win.

And I'm not mad at him.

And less we forget he's a politician and he has an agenda. That agenda meshes a lot with what most of us on the left want to see occur in this country but remember he's not the second coming of Christ, nor is he the next Martin Luther King so when he starts to tactfully shift some of his positions to the center we shouldn't get mad or upset that is of course if we want to win the White House in November.

Woodrow Wilson
The French loved Woodrow
But he's no Jerry Lewis
Makes Gore look relaxed

posted by Rena Silverman

h/t smalldeadanimals