False Religion Debunked: Scientists Prove Human Induced Climate Change a Crock of ....

From CNS News via Sammy at Yid With Lid comes a great piece on mounting challenges to the Left's favorite false religion "Human Induced Climate Change"

Sammy's preface:

Under the cap and trade scheme advocated by Democrats, the federal government would set a limit on the amount of a pollutant that could be emitted. If a company plans to exceed the government cap, it would have to purchase credits from a company that has polluted less. And the fun part is they wouldn't be able to buy the credits directly from the other company, they would have to do it through the US Government. This cap and trade is just another big government tax program. Some studies have said that the plan will increase your household energy bill by $3,100/yr. Even President [Obama] has admitted this proposal will cause the price of your energy to “necessarily skyrocket.”

The worst part of the whole scheme is that the reason for the tax program has not been proved. In fact, recently the evidence disproving the claim that man has anything to climate change. While the President was accepting his Nobel award and John" Why the Long Face" Kerry was writing op-eds supporting camp and trade, a team of scientists were at Capitol Hill, explaining that the Church of Global Warming Moonbats, have been proven wrong:

Scientists Rebut Claim That Man Causes Climate Change
Monday, October 12, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

Fred Singer, founder and chairman of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, holds up a book "Climate Change Reconsidered" that contains hundreds of scientific studies that dispute global warming and CO2 as a pollutant that causes global warming. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)

(CNSNews.com) – As the world focused on President Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday, a small group of determined scientists gathered in a Senate office building to present evidence backing their claim that climate change is caused not by man but by nature, and that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but the hope for a greener planet.

John Kwapisz, organizer and moderator at the panel discussion, recalled Obama’s speech at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, Pa., last month as a way of illustrating the dramatic tone used by those who embrace global warming as a dire and eminent threat.

“That so many of us are here today is a recognition that the threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing,” Obama said on Sept. 22 at the summit. “Our generation's response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it -- boldly, swiftly, and together – we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.”

“No nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline,” Obama said. “More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent droughts and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive.”

“On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees,” he said. “The security and stability of each nation and all peoples – our prosperity, our health, and our safety – are in jeopardy. And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.”

The scientists said they were on Capitol Hill to challenge the president’s claims and show that Mother Nature controls climate around the world and that CO2 in the atmosphere benefits people, plants and animals.

“Nature, not human activity rules the planet,” said Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist and research professor at George Mason University and professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia. “And once you’ve decided that on the basis of evidence, then everything else falls into place.”

“A lot of the problems that President Obama seems to be concerned about are no longer a concern,” Singer said.

H. Leighton Steward holds up his book as he speaks to a crowd on Capitol Hill about the benefits of CO2 to the planet, people, plants and animals. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)

“When there’s more carbon dioxide put into the air, the plants respond in an astonishing fashion,” said H. Leighton Steward, geologist, environmentalist, author and founder of the Web site plantsneedco2.org.

Steward said that since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in 1860, the amount of CO2 put into the air has increased average plant growth by 12 percent and average tree growth by 18 percent around the world.

“So if we want to green the earth,” Steward said, “we need to put more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It’s the earth’s greatest airborne fertilizer.”

“If we want the ecosystems and the habitats to be more robust and hold more animal life, more plant life, we need to put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,” Steward said, adding that proponents of man-made global warming have given CO2 a bad name.

“It’s now being looked at and called a pollutant. I can tell you, I’ve asked every scientist that I’ve ever run into, chemical expert,” Steward said. “There is not one, I repeat, not one instance in which carbon dioxide is a pollutant.”

Roy W. Spencer, researcher at the University of Alabama-Huntsville, author, and a former senior scientist at NASA, presented his research on natural global warming and cooling, including the role that cloud cover and the sun play in the changes of the earth’s climate.

In keeping with scientific protocol, much of the presentation consisted of graphs, charts, and other data to make the case that much of climate change is the result of natural phenomenon rather than human activities and that any contribution by humans is miniscule.

The event on Capitol Hill was not without a political twist, with some global warming advocates speaking out during the question-and-answer period. One scientist from NASA claimed he was available after the discussion if anyone was interested in hearing the other side of the issue.

Many in the room laughed at his comment, but the crowd that gathered in the Rose Garden just moments earlier heard Obama use his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech as an opportunity to again issue a warning about the threat of global warming.

“We cannot accept the growing threat posed by climate change, which could forever damage the world that we pass on to our children – sowing conflict and famine; destroying coastlines and emptying cities,” Obama said.

Marc Morano, former congressional staffer and founder of the Web site climatedepot.com, told the crowd that he thinks the tide is turning against what he called global warming alarmists. He cited a call by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to hold a global warming trial.

“The Chamber seeks to have a complete trial ‘complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect,’” Morano wrote in an editorial he distributed at the event.

DEMS TRADE DOLLAR STATUS FOR UTOPIAN PIPE DREAM

From Breitbart.com via Drudge comes this alarming report of heavy pressure on the greenback as foreign central banks begin to shift their reserves away from the dollar.

It will be exceedingly difficult to muster up any sympathy for Democrats who lose their seats in 2010 and 2012 as a result of their economic and financial betrayal of their constituents in their mindless pursuit of Obama's utopian fantasies.

Dollar facing 'power-shift': analysts

The dollar's position as the world's leading reserve currency faces increased pressure as the financial crisis allows emerging economies greater influence on the world stage, analysts said.

A report last week in The Independent claiming that China, Russia and Gulf States are among nations prepared to ditch the dollar for oil trades has heightened the uncertainty surrounding the US currency's future.

The dollar slumped against rivals last week in the wake of the British daily's controversial report.

"The US dollar is being hurt by the continued talk of a shift away from a dollar-centric world," said Kit Juckes, an analyst at currency traders ECU Group.

"Three conclusions stand out very clearly. Firstly, the shift in economic power away from the G7 economies is continuing. "Secondly, there is a growing acceptance amongst those winners that one consequence of this power shift will be to strengthen their currencies.

"And finally, as long as the US economy is not strong enough for any rise in interest rates to be conceivable for a long time, the dollar's underlying downtrend will remain in place," added Juckes.

And Now For Something Completely Different .....

Man cannot live by berating Statist scum alone. Today I had the pleasure of "catching" this Heron at the end of a field adjacent to my property. These birds are rare in my parts, so I'm sure you can imagine how very privileged I felt to have one stop by for a visit. Its simple events like this that make life in the "Boonies" all worthwhile. Can't get this in NYC!!!!

BOYCOTT ROLL INDUSTRIES PRODUCTS

Eric Dondero over at Libertarian Republican has persuaded me to sign on to a boycott of Stewart Resnick's Roll Industries' products. His persuasive post is here. Normally, I'm not a big fan of boycotts because they tend to hurt people who are entirely innocent of nasty conduct (I know this from personal experience).

God knows, I'm also not a giant Sarah Palin fan, but I don't hate her by a long shot. What I do hate however is billionaire industrialists like Stewart Resnick who have benefited mightily under our capitalist system to then use their massive wealth to try to close the system unto themselves. I also can't abide it when they use their power and wealth to attack and damage others, so I reluctantly join this boycott against Resnick's companies and their associated products, a partial list of which follows here-below:

Franklin Mint unique gifts & collectibles (in my opinion, schlock product anyway)

Teleflora, the largest flower delivery service in the world (Don't often send flowers, no big deal)

FIJI bottled water (No great loss to me, metallic after-taste, I prefer Evian anyway)

POM pomegranate products (This one hurts a bit. I liked the Pom drinks, though I didn't buy them too often due to the high sticker)

Paramount citrus and nuts (don't know it, but will use care now when I buy pistachios)

Suterra Pest Control products & services (won't use 'em)

Fire Station Advertising Agency (now I suppose I'll have to track down their clients and boycott them too)

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE COMMITTEE COMMITS CREDIBILITY HARA KIRI

Catchy title isn't it?

I wasn't planning on writing anything on Obama's win of the Nobel Peace Prize today given the extensive and mostly high quality of the coverage in the rational blogosphere (I'll link to some of these at the end of this post) but temptation got the better of me.

Actually I don't think that the NPP Committee (hereinafter "Committee") has in fact - with this award bestowal - committed ritual credibility suicide for the simple reason that one cannot commit suicide TWICE.

From my perspective the Committee's credibility demise dates back to its 1994 award of the prize to Yasser Arafat. Some readers of this blog (to the extent that any exist at all beyond my fifteen "official" followers) may have forgotten just what a venal monster Arafat was, so I'll do a short but hardly comprehensive re-cap of the crimes of this vicious little Nobel "Peace" Laureate.

Yasser Arafat formed Al-Fatah in 1959 and served as the Chairman of the PLO from 1969.

The PLO was an umbrella organization for several different radical Palestinian political/para-military terrorist organizations, of which Fatah was the largest.

Among the many terrorist activities attributable to the PLO over the years were:

• The 1970 Avivim school bus massacre by the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), killed nine children, three adults and crippled 19.
• In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the second-largest PLO faction after al-Fatah, carried out a number of attacks and plane hijackings mostly directed at Israel, most infamously the Dawson's Field hijackings, which precipitated the Black September in Jordan crisis.
• In 1972 the Black September Organization carried out the Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes.
• In 1974 members of the DFLP seized a school in Israel and killed a total of 26 students and adults and wounded over 70 in the Ma'alot massacre.
• The 1975 Savoy Hotel hostage situation killing 8 civilians and 3 soldiers, carried out by Fatah.
• The 1978 Coastal Road massacre killing 37 Israeli civilians and wounding 76, also carried out by Fatah.
• The 1985 Achille Lauro Hijacking during the course of which Leon Klinghoffer, an American Jewish tourist was murdered by 5 PLO terrorists including Abbu Abbas.
  The PLO was sued for its role in the death of Leon Klinghoffer. The $1.5 billion suit was dropped when the PLO paid an undisclosed sum to Klinghoffer's daughters.^[1] The family founded the Leon and Marilyn Klinghoffer Memorial Foundation in cooperation with the Anti-Defamation League, which works to combat terrorism through legal, political and educational means.^[1]

Arafat wasn't just a terrorist, he was also an accomplished corruptocrat who kept his own people in abject poverty while diverting as much as $1 Billion Dollars to his personal accounts:

In August 2002, the Israeli Military Intelligence Chief alleged that Arafat's personal wealth was in the range of USD $1.3 billion,^[92]. In 2003 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) conducted an audit of the PNA and stated that Arafat diverted $900 million in public funds to a special bank account controlled by Arafat and the PNA Chief Economic Financial adviser. However, the IMF did not claim that there were any improprieties, and it specifically stated that most of the funds had been used to invest in Palestinian assets, both internally and abroad.^[93][94]

However in 2003, a team of American accountants–hired by Arafat's own finance ministry–began examining Arafat's finances; this team reached a different conclusion. The team claimed that part of the Palestinian leader's wealth was in a secret portfolio worth close to $1 billion, with investments in companies like a Coca-Cola bottling plant in Ramallah, a Tunisian cell phone company and venture capital funds in the US and the Cayman Islands. The head of the investigation stated that "although the money for the portfolio came from public funds like Palestinian taxes, virtually none of it was used for the Palestinian people; it was all controlled by Arafat. And none of these dealings were made public."^[95

So, as I said before, the credibility of the Committee, at least from my perspective, is long dead. The subsequent awards of the prize to Jimmy Carter, the principle Western author of the brutal human rights abusing clerical regime ruling a now nuclear Iran; Al Gore, law school dropout, divinity school dropout and failed politician turned man-made global warming myth-huckster and snake oil salesman and now, Barack Obama, are just more dirt on the grave of the already credibility dead Committee. Or perhaps a better analogy: just more foul smelling gaseous emissions from the Committee's unburied rotting corpse.

Other rational blogs discussing this story:

Left Coast Rebel
SisterToljah
The Reaganite Republican
Not A Potted Plant
Michelle Malkin
Atlas Shrugs
Legal Insurrection
Hot Air
Track-a-'Crat

BREAKING NEWS: OBAMA ACCEPTS TALIBAN ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN

Word is out that BOTUS has announced a willingness to accept a role for the Taliban in Afghanistan's political structure. My immediate question is: in exchange for what? Not too many soccer stadium executions? A lead on Osama's whereabouts perhaps? We'll see... I will Update as information becomes available and as appropriate.

U P D A T E

from The American Pundit

White House: On Second Thought, The Taliban Isn’t Really An Enemy

by Stephan Tawney

Desperation. That’s the only way to describe this new talking point from the White House. According to them, the Taliban that’s been killing American soldiers isn’t really the enemy. In fact, the Obama Administration believes that the terrorist group has a positive role in Afghanistan’s future.

Why this new talking point? Obama doesn’t want to commit more troops to the war, as it would end up pissing off his far-left, anti-war base. So he’s trying to eliminate the enemy by pretending the enemy is no longer an enemy. We’re going to fight a war by pretending that the people we’re fighting are really good people we no longer need to fight. Smart power.

Click the linked Title above to read the whole post.

YID With LID: Oklahoma ACORN Abandons Papers in Old Office--Illegal Tactics Revealed

YID With LID: Oklahoma ACORN Abandons Papers in Old Office--Illegal Tactics Revealed

Sammy Benoit at Yid With Lid has a superb post on papers left behind in a hastily "evacuated" ACORN office in Oklahoma City. Click the link above to read it.

Citizens Against Government Waste - The Senate's "ACORN 7" are September's Porkers of the Month Honorees

Once again, CAGW has found a truly worthy group of recipients for its Porker of the Month award. This time it was a seven way tie. Congratulations Ladies and Gentleman of the U.S. Senate! No doubt you'll wear the distinction proudly.

Seven Nutty Senators Supporting ACORN are CAGW’s September Porkers of the Month

Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today named the seven senators who voted on Monday, September 14 to continue sending tax dollars for housing and community development programs to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) its September Porkers of the Month.

The seven senators are Roland Burris (D-Ill.), Robert Casey (D-Pa.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). The 83-7 vote to cut off funding for the group in the fiscal year 2010 Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act came on the heels of the release of explosive video footage of ACORN’s employees in Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Brooklyn, giving questionable legal and tax advice to filmmaker James O'Keefe and a female friend who posed as a pimp and a prostitute. ACORN’s employees gave guidance on how to illegally shelter income, mislead the Internal Revenue Service, and obfuscate the ages and immigration status of underage girls who were going to be used as prostitutes in a make-believe brothel. All of the videos can be viewed at http://www.biggovernment.com/.

“Cutting off funds to ACORN should have been the easiest vote of the year, yet these senators could not bring themselves to do it,” said CAGW President Tom Schatz. “Taxpayers should not be accomplices in the rampant malfeasance of ACORN. Sen. Gillibrand deserves special opprobrium for her vote, since one of the videos was shot in Brooklyn’s ACORN office, and the New York Post had a story on the scandal prior to the vote. Apparently Sen. Schumer reads the local papers and Sen. Gillibrand does not. There is enough in these videos to warrant a nationwide Justice Department investigation into ACORN’s potentially criminal activities. All funds for ACORN should be cut off, in both the rest of the appropriations bills, and also for any stimulus money for which the group is eligible,” added Schatz.

According to an analysis by the Office of House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), ACORN has received at least $53.6 million in taxpayer-funded grants since 1994, not including millions more from states and localities, as well as foundations. Fannie Mae, for example, which was taken over by the federal government a year ago, bestowed millions in grants on ACORN over the years.

BOTUS Approval Index Slides Again: -11

Obamas Approval Index as measured by Rasmussen Reports polling of likely voters shows that BOTUS is slipping again after a slight uptick following his Health Care speech of a few weeks ago.


Here it is in part:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 28% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -11 (see trends). Republicans have a very slight edge on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

Fifty-one percent (51%) say the President has not been tough enough on Iran while just 30% have confidence in the United Nations’ ability to combat terrorism.

Barack, it seems like your "Fiddling While Rome Burns" strategy isn't gonna cut it. You really are in way over your head.

Shadowstats.com: U.S. Economy Is in a Multiple-Dip Depression.

From Shadowstats.com's publicly available archive comes this very sobering report on the current state of the U.S. economy. I am no economist but this report hews awfully close to my experience and observations over the last few years and indicates that our "leaders" in Washington have indeed sold us out.

DEPRESSION SPECIAL REPORT

Number 52

August 1, 2009

__________

Current Economic Downturn Is Worst Since Great Depression

Recession Started a Year Earlier Than Official Reckoning

Business Contraction Triggered Systemic Solvency Crisis
Not the Other Way Around

Still Heavily Gimmicked, Post-Revision GDP Shows More Realistic Numbers

Economic Crisis Is Far from Over

__________

OVERVIEW

U.S. Economy Is in a Multiple-Dip Depression. The grand benchmark revision of the national income accounts on July 31, 2009 confirmed that the U.S. economy is in its worst economic contraction since the first downleg of the Great Depression, which was a double-dip depression. The current economic downturn increasingly will be referred to as a depression, and it is far from over. There will be intermittent blips of new activity, such as the current cash-for-clunkers automobile giveaway program that appears to be generating a one-time spike in auto sales. Yet, this downturn will continue to deteriorate, proving to be extremely protracted, extremely deep and particularly nonresponsive to traditional stimuli.

As discussed in recent writings, the economy suffers from underlying structural problems tied to consumer income, where households cannot keep up with inflation and no longer can rely on excessive debt expansion for meeting short-falls in maintaining living standards. The structural issues are not being addressed meaningfully and cannot be addressed without a significant shift in government economic and trade policies, which under the best of circumstances still would drag out economic woes for many years.

The current depression likely will show multiple dips in business activity, as was seen during the Great Depression and in the double-dip recession of the early-1980s. I shall argue that the current downturn started at least a year earlier than the December 2007 onset proclaimed by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), official arbiter of U.S. recessions. The current depression is the second dip in a multiple-dip downturn that started back in 1999, and it preceded and in fact was the proximal trigger for the systemic solvency crisis that rose to public view in August 2007. The ensuing systemic problems did not cause the slowdown in business activity, but they exacerbated it significantly.

While the current circumstance should become recognized as a "depression," worse lies ahead as the U.S. government’s long-range insolvency and current efforts at debasing the U.S. dollar trigger a hyperinflation in the next five years. Risks for the onset of a hyperinflation in the United States are particularly high during the next year. As will be discussed in the soon-to-be-updated Hyperinflation Special Report (see the existing April 2008 version for basic background), the United States would be particularly hard hit by such a circumstance. Unlike Zimbabwe, which has been able to maintain some level of functioning commerce during its hyperinflation, due to the backstop of an active black market in U.S. dollars, the United States has no such backstop. Accordingly, a U.S. hyperinflation likely would force cessation of regular commerce, triggering a great depression of a magnitude never before seen in the United States.

Read the rest of this compelling report here

OBAMACARE SUPPORT HITS NEW LOW AMONG LIKELY VOTERS

From Scott Rasmussen's outfit comes a new poll report on health care coverage legislation shaping up in Congress that shows that support for the Democrat plans has hit a new low among likely voters.

Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% are opposed to the plan.

Senior citizens are less supportive of the plan than younger voters. In the latest survey, just 33% of seniors favor the plan while 59% are opposed. The intensity gap among seniors is significant. Only 16% of the over-65 crowd Strongly Favors the legislation while 46% are Strongly Opposed.

Read the whole report here

Holder Busts Polanski:

Child molester and Oscar winning director Roman Polanski was arrested in Zurich, Switzerland on September 26 on a U.S. warrant seeking his extradition to the United States for his 1978 Flight from justice. Polanski fled the U.S. before sentencing on a reduced charge of unlawful intercourse with a minor, down from a statutory rape charge, for having sex with a 13 year old girl in 1977 at Jack Nicholson's house where Polanski was staying.

Polanski had plead guilty to the reduced charge that sent him to jail for 42 days observation, however he fled California and the United States when he learned that the judge who had initially approved his plea deal, was attempting to renege on it and send the Director to the can for an extended sentence.

Polanski is a darling of the Hollyweird elite. In the eyes of the glitterati, he can do no wrong, from their perspective even un-consenting sex with a child (a legal redundancy) is heavily outweighed by his brilliant artistry as a director. Why should mundane laws like statutory rape apply to him, he's an artist and therefore he's ENTITLED to an exemption from kid-rape rules. So then what the F**K is Eric Holder thinking????

Eric, you dumb-ass, you really know how to step in it dont'chya? You just succeeded in pissing off pretty much ALL of your Boz's Hollywood constituency. JUST BLOODY BRILLIANT MATE!!!

Bring Roman back for sentencing or maybe to get off the rap too, since it seems Polanski may very well have a strong case to void his earlier plea deal on the grounds of both judicial and prosecutorial misconduct in the original case. Time will tell.

In the meantime, Hollywood is PISSED OFF, the French are PISSED OFF, and you and yer Boz keep looking like bumbling nincompoops as we come nose to nose with Ahmedi-Nejad and his impending nuke arsenal.

ANGER MANAGEMENT: Rasmussen Poll Shows "59% Say Americans Angrier Now Than Under Bush"

More bad news for the Demoncrats from Rasmussen Reports:

59% Say Americans Angrier Now Than Under Bush

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of U.S. voters believe that the current level of political anger in the country is higher than it was when George W. Bush was president.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 22% think the level of political anger is lower now, while 16% rate it as about the same.

Despite frequent Republican complaints about the vitriol leveled at President Bush, 69% of GOP voters say the level of anger is higher now, a view shared by 53% of Democrats and 56% of voters not affiliated with either party.

But just 12% of voters nationwide say that the opposition to President Obama’s health care plan and other initiatives is racist, as some prominent Democrats, including former President Jimmy Carter, have charged.

....

Sixty-six percent (66%) of all voters say they’re at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government, including 36% who are Very Angry.

Among those voters who are Very Angry, 74% say the level of anger is higher now, while 13% say it’s lower and 12% say it’s about the same.

Even the majority of those who are now very or not at all angry about the government’s actions right now say the level of political anger is higher under Obama. For the rest of the poll report, click here

Here's a tip for you Democrats who don't want to see your party swirl down the bowl in 2010 with a second flush in 2012: Get over your enthrallment by Barack Obama and his crooked crew of Chicago cohorts.

Ray LaHood: C'mon guys! Play Nice... I Wanna Keep my Job

RINO Ray, Boz's Transportation Secretary, is whining about the lack of civility in Washingtoon and on the Air Waves, moping that:

"He (Obama) can't even compete with all this stuff that people are saying about him, so the idea that he did five interviews on Sunday, that's just minuscule compared to the kind of trash talk that goes on all week prior to that"

and,

"All of this background, all of this trash talk in the background, it does not contribute to civil discourse, and it does not contribute to the government or the country's ability to solve big issues,"

Ray! Pay attention. Americans are pissed off at BOTH parties right now. Your Boz is a principal target for that expression of discontent and anger because he's PRESIDENT, but he's also far from being alone as a deserving target of Americans' derision. Don't believe me? See it for yourself in this very recent Rasmussen Reports article "66% Angry at Government Policies, 60% Say Neither Party Has Answers".

Also, Ray, if you're that unhappy about it, feel free to follow Specter out the door; we won't miss you. Ohhh, BTW, if you do go, take Snowe and Collins with you please.

Obama Whitehouse Staff: Waaaaah, Waaaah ... You Made Me Go Wee Wee. Waaaahhhh!

Chris Wallace on O'Reilly explaining that the Obama White House staffers are the worst cry-babies he's dealt with in 30 years of covering Washingtoon.

Chris, did you really expect adult behavior from this crew of spoiled yuppies and serial tax cheats?

And Now, From the Folks Who Gave Us Food for Oil, a Brand New Shakedown

Per the WHO, the U.N.'s health arm, AH1N1 b/k/a Swine Flu is likely to hit Asian and poor countries hard, possibly killing millions and leaving anarchy in its wake of collapsed economies. BUT something can stop that from happening. YUP, THAT'S RIGHT FOLKS, a net transfer of wealth from the rich nations to the U.N. in the amount of $1.4464 billion in greenbacks, or 900 Million Pounds Sterling, or for any Eurozone readers 995 million Euros....
Could it be true, sure! but it sounds an awful lot like like an extortion scam to me. Especially when one considers my post of last week based on Stratfor's analysis of the lethality of Swine Flu.

From the U.K Guardian:

Swine flu 'could kill millions unless rich nations give £900m'

The swine flu pandemic could kill millions and cause anarchy in the world's poorest nations unless £900m [that's US $ 1,464,367,104 on 9/20/09] can be raised from rich countries to pay for vaccines and antiviral medicines, says a UN report leaked to the Observer.

The disclosure will provoke concerns that health officials will not be able to stem the growth of the worldwide H1N1 pandemic in developing countries. If the virus takes hold in the poorest nations, millions could die and the economies of fragile countries could be destroyed.

Health ministers around the globe were sent the warning on Thursday in a report on the costs of averting a humanitarian disaster in the next few months. It comes as officials inside the World Health Organisation, the UN's public health body, said they feared they would not be able to raise half that amount because of the global downturn.

Gregory Hartl of WHO said the report required an urgent response from rich nations. "There needs to be recognition that the whole world is affected by this pandemic and the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. We have seen how H1N1 has taken hold in richer nations and in the southern hemisphere. We have been given fair warning and must act soon," he said.

The report was drawn up by UN officials over the last two months. It was commissioned in July after Ban ki-moon, the UN's secretary general, expressed concern that the H1NI virus could have a severe impact on the world's poorest countries.

It paints a disastrous picture for the world's most vulnerable people unless there is immediate action. "There is a window in which it will be possible to help poor countries get as ready as they can for H1N1 and that window is closing rapidly," it says.

"Countries where health services are overburdened by diseases, such as HIV/Aids, tuberculosis and malaria, will have great difficulty managing the surge of cases. And if the electricity and water sectors are not able to maintain services, this will have serious implications for the ability of the health sector to function.

"If suppliers of fuel, food, telecommunications, finance or transport services have not developed plans as to how they would continue to deliver their services, the consequences could be significantly intensified," it adds.

The 47-page report provides a detailed breakdown of the basic needs of 75 vulnerable countries with the weakest capacity to withstand an escalation of the virus. Six countries from Latin America, including Cuba and Bolivia, 21 countries from Asia and the Pacific such as North Korea and Bangladesh, and 40 countries from Africa such as Congo and Eritrea are included in the survey.

UN officials say in the report that £700m should be spent on antiviral drugs and vaccines to protect health care workers and other essential personnel as well as cover those suffering from severe illness. They have identified 85 countries that do not have the ability to access vaccines from any other source and intend to cover 5-10% of each population.

A further £147m should be put aside to organise vaccine campaigns, improve communications, monitor levels of illness and improve laboratory capacity in 61 countries, the report claims. The remainder should be used to pay for the WHO and other UN-related organisations to help in these countries as well as an emergency fund for additional antiviral medicines, it argues.

The UN's efforts were boosted last week when nine countries, including Britain and the US, pledged to give the equivalent of a 10% share of their swine flu vaccine supply to help fight the deadly virus's global spread. In Britain, Douglas Alexander, the development secretary, pledged to give £23m.

Some officials within WHO believe, however, that this will not be enough. One said that richer countries were reluctant to pay out all of the money that was needed. "The downturn means that governments countries are reluctant to give," he said.

Another said: "The money is a trickle, not a flood. It is going to be a struggle. If we are not careful, the virus could destroy a burgeoning economy or democracy."

The UN's request for the money comes as the virus begins to establish itself in some of the world's most vulnerable countries. On Wednesday, health officials told one website that the African continent had recorded 8,187 confirmed cases of swine flu and 41 deaths. [note from Libertarian Advocate: that's a rate of .005 deaths per hundred cases of Swine Flu or 1/2 of 1%]

Swine flu was declared a pandemic in June and has since been identified in 180 countries. Pandemic experts believe that the western world, including Britain, is facing a second wave of the virus.

45% of Medical Professionals May Retire if Obama/Dem Care Becomes Law

From Investors Business Daily comes this cautionary story about how the majority of MD's in the United States view the Democrat health plans now emerging from Congress

Grim Prognosis From Doctors Opposed To Health Care Plan

By TERRY JONES, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 09/16/2009 07:07 PM ET

Doctor opposition to health care overhaul proposals is broad and deep, revealing concerns not just about soaring costs, declining care, possible rationing and a lack of limits on malpractice suits, but also about government competence and motives, detailed responses to a new IBD/TIPP Poll show.

As reported Wednesday, 65% of the 1,376 practicing physicians who responded to a mailed questionnaire over the last two weeks said they opposed health care plans that have emerged from the administration and Congress. Just 33% supported them.

Perhaps the most shocking result: 45% of these professionals said they would consider closing their practices or retiring early if the reforms now under consideration were enacted.

The questionnaires were sent out Aug. 28 to 25,600 doctors nationwide. The sample was purchased from a list broker, Lake Group Media of Rye, N.Y. One hundred of those responding were retired, and their answers were not included in the final results.

Our poll also invited those taking part to tell us the reasons why they didn't like the health care reforms — or, in the minority of cases, why they did. The outpouring of written responses IBD received — about 1,300 in all — was stunning.

Doctors Speak Up

Those in Washington would do well to pay attention to the 65% who don't like reforms, whom we will quote today. (Tomorrow we will give space to the minority of doctors who support reform.)

These opposing physicians' opinions will be significant for the upcoming debate over health care, since any program that's passed will depend greatly on the support of doctors.

That includes the new plan unveiled Wednesday by Sen. Max Baucus. This plan, which Baucus estimates will cost an estimated $856 billion over 10 years, includes health care "co-ops" to compete with private insurers, and will likely require large tax hikes on many Americans — including the middle class.

Given the proliferation of plans, we wondered: What is it that bothers doctors so?

21 Objections

In combing through the responses, we identified no fewer than 21 separate issues doctors felt either weren't addressed or weren't solved by proposed reforms. The issues are many, but boil down to three big categories: costs, controls and courts.

One complaint was common: Doctors feared any government reform would turn into a kind of "socialized" medicine. Some were quite blunt: "I oppose socialism in all its forms or incarnations ... government should be shrunk drastically, not expanded."

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., leaves his health care news conference on Capitol Hill. Baucus' $856 billion plan drew criticism from liberals and Republicans. AP View Enlarged Image

"No government 'option' or government-run program should be allowed," said another doctor. "It would ultimately lead to total government takeover of health care, with high costs and low quality."

The strong convictions of some came from a direct experience with socialism. "We came from a socialist country and we know socialized systems do not work!!!" wrote one emphatic physician.

Still others were adamant that any nationalized health care scheme — and a significant number see the plans emerging from Congress and the White House as just that — is against basic American constitutional law.

"This unconstitutional plan gives sovereignty over our bodies to unelected, unaccountable, ignorant bureaucrats," went one response along these lines. "Every governmental micromanagement of our lives has failed in its objective, and caused moral and economic bankruptcy."

But constitutional concerns were eclipsed by anger over the lack of tort reform — mentioned by hundreds of respondents. Physicians say they practice too much defensive medicine, which drives up costs, just to protect themselves from lawsuits.

The costs of this are enormous, though hard to precisely quantify. Estimates range from $100 billion to $200 billion in total added costs to both doctors and patients. Doctors in some specialties, such as neurology, pay as much as $250,000 a year for malpractice insurance.

Fear Of Lawyers

A number of our respondents used identical wording for why they didn't support health care reform: "No tort reform."

"The more lawsuits against doctors, the more testing is done," said one respondent, uttering a frequent complaint. "The government never interferes with lawyers — why? They are afraid, or they're all lawyers."

A big issue for others was efficiency. They fear government control would mean massive waste and interference with their practices. "All the efficiency of the post office, all the compassion of the motor vehicle bureau," quipped one doctor.

Another looming worry: exploding costs. With expectations that the government will spend upward of $1 trillion on reform, doctors fear the inevitable controls, including rationing, that will come to rein in costs down the road.

"A government-run plan will be too expensive and will not be effective," according to one physician. "The plan will expect doctors to take a lower fee for a given service. The private plans will follow, and outpatient medical services will be forced out of business."

This is "typical government, throwing trillions of dollars in one swoop to 'fix' the system," said another. "They need to slow down, dissect the system and fix it properly."

"There will be mandated protocols, long waits, rationing of care, infringement upon a doctor's right of conscience, abortion paid for by (tax) dollars, with eventual euthanasia and infanticide," said still another, voicing the ethical concerns of many.

The federal government's notorious lack of success in running enterprises of any size, let alone one as big and complicated as a health care system — was also cited frequently.

"Health care in the VA (Veterans' Administration) shows how well government can render care," said one. "It is disgraceful."

Gov't Can't Run Diddly

Others pointed to the troubles with government-run Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which are all verging on insolvency and now account for an estimated $51 trillion in unfunded liabilities over the next half-century.

Government-funded rail was a favorite foil — so was the Cash for Clunkers program. The House health bill "is 1,200-plus pages of miniature and legalese," joked one eye-sore physician. "Please recall 130 pages of forms for each 'cash for clunkers' transaction!"

"Government control? Give me a break," said another. "Look what they've done to Social Security, the Post Office, the bailouts, etc. Medicare and Medicaid are not paying doctors enough, and the paperwork to participate is huge."

Other irate docs agreed: "Government has proven unable to manage many other programs, including Social Security, Medicare, and the postal service. Why do they think they can (run) a health care program?"

"Government health care will wipe out the private insurance companies," said another. "Most of the doctors in private practice will give up ... because of a low reimbursement from the government. The Medicare, Medicaid program is a good example of government-run health care."

Still others railed against what they saw as the real villains: insurance companies. Anger at insurance companies, which are now the main brake on health care costs, was plentiful.

"Between the government and insurance companies, I now only collect 28% to 30% of billed charges. No other business can function at that rate," this doctor added.

As many noted, all of the plans now being discussed would require massive tax hikes — and debt.

Foreign Experience

Many of those who opposed the plan had a unique perspective: They had practiced or lived under national health care systems in other countries.

Their comments about the experience were often scathing. To paraphrase progressive journalist Lincoln Steffens, they have seen the future — and it doesn't work.

"I trained and worked in Canada prior to coming to the U.S.," went one typical letter. "The same arguments were used in Canada to launch 'universal health care.' It is anything but universal and free."

Others had similar complaints.

"I did two years of training in Canada — disaster. When the government needed money, it decided patients with a stroke would not get a hospital bed. I had to have interns carry hemiplegic (a condition in which half a patient's body is paralyzed) patients to their families' cars."

"I am a former Canadian and I am a physician," added another. "I know a lot about government-run health care. If it's so good, then all members of Congress, the president and all federal employees should be the first to try it."

'Real Horror Stories'

Yet another: "I don't believe Congress has the requisite knowledge to know what to do with health care. After experiencing Britain's health care system firsthand, I cannot feel anything positive about government-run health care."

"I grew up and was trained in Romania," still another physician said. "At the time, it was a communist country with a socialist medical system. The system continued after the communist regime fell. I find this socialist health care system a complete disaster with real horror stories being heard every day with huge limitations in health care and huge bureaucracy."

Others argued passionately on behalf of the quality of the U.S. health care system — while admitting it has faults.

"I have firsthand experience with European and Canadian national health plans — they stink," said one physician. "My medical training was at the Mayo Clinic where people came from all over the world. Why did they come? Because we have the best (care) in the world."

That was echoed by many others who wondered why 18% of the U.S. economy needed to be put under direct government control to cover the 40-million-plus uninsured — and how we could care for millions more people, while supposedly cutting costs, without increasing the number of physicians.

More Taxes, Debt

As many noted, all of the plans now being discussed would require massive tax hikes — and debt — for little real benefit.

"It will take away consumer choice, drive up health care costs, and drive down health care quality," said one. "It will sharply increase the demand for health care providers and sharply decrease the supply as doctors like me will retire early and students will avoid the field."

"No need to overhaul the whole system," summed up one doctor. "Just find a solution to the 47 million that have no insurance."

"Unless the government uses magic tricks," argued another, "it is impossible to care for 47 million uninsured people and lower the cost."

The disgust with the notion of a government-run system was almost palpable in some comments:

"The U.S. government is already bankrupt. Its health care plan is too expensive," said one typical comment. "The government will end up rationing health care. Taxes will surely go up for the middle and upper class. We are in a recession."

He added: "This is not a good time to increase government expenditures and increase taxes."

Friday: A second opinion — from the doctors who support reform.

Rich Socialist Michael Moore Calls for Overthrow of Capitalism

Associated Press reports that the gargantuan waste of human tissue known as Michael Moore has called for the overthrow of capitalism at a pre-release screening of his deranged agitprop celluloid screed "Capitalism: A Love Story"

BELLAIRE, Mich. - Filmmaker Michael Moore gave residents of his adopted Michigan community an early showing of his new documentary on Saturday and urged them to help overthrow an economic system he said was beyond redemption.

First off, Moore does not make documentaries. Documentaries assume a ruthlessly unbiased documentation of events or lives or phenomena. Moore makes movies consisting of a cleverly edited mosaic of often funny vignettes guided entirely by Alinsky's Rules.

For the whole nauseating story, go here. Hopefully the link will survive a few days.

Michelle Goes Food Shopping

In the category of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" comes this story - quite surprisingly - from the Washington Post:

Hi-Ho, the Derry-O

By Dana Milbank
Friday, September 18, 2009

Let's say you're preparing dinner and you realize with dismay that you don't have any certified organic Tuscan kale. What to do?

Here's how Michelle Obama handled this very predicament Thursday afternoon:

The Secret Service and the D.C. police brought in three dozen vehicles and shut down H Street, Vermont Avenue, two lanes of I Street and an entrance to the McPherson Square Metro station. They swept the area, in front of the Department of Veterans Affairs, with bomb-sniffing dogs and installed magnetometers in the middle of the street, put up barricades to keep pedestrians out, and took positions with binoculars atop trucks. Though the produce stand was only a block or so from the White House, the first lady hopped into her armored limousine and pulled into the market amid the wail of sirens.

Then, and only then, could Obama purchase her leafy greens. "Now it's time to buy some food," she told several hundred people who came to watch. "Let's shop!"

Cowbells were rung. Somebody put a lei of marigolds around Obama's neck. The first lady picked up a straw basket and headed for the "Farm at Sunnyside" tent, where she loaded up with organic Asian pears, cherry tomatoes, multicolored potatoes, free-range eggs and, yes, two bunches of Tuscan kale. She left the produce with an aide, who paid the cashier as Obama made her way back to the limousine.

There's nothing like the simple pleasures of a farm stand to return us to our agrarian roots.

The first lady had encouraged Freshfarm Markets, the group that runs popular farmers markets in Dupont Circle and elsewhere, to set up near the White House, and she helped get the approvals to shut down Vermont Avenue during rush hour on Thursdays. But the result was quite the opposite of a quaint farmers market. Considering all the logistics, each tomato she purchased had a carbon footprint of several tons.

The promotion of organic and locally grown food, though an admirable cause, is a risky one for the Obamas, because there's a fine line between promoting healthful eating and sounding like a snob. The president, when he was a candidate in 2007, got in trouble in Iowa when he asked a crowd, "Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?" Iowans didn't have a Whole Foods.

For that reason, it's probably just as well that the first lady didn't stop by the Endless Summer Harvest tent yesterday. The Virginia farm had a sign offering "tender baby arugula" -- hydroponically grown, pesticide free -- and $5 for four ounces, which is $20 a pound.

Obama, in her brief speech to the vendors and patrons, handled the affordability issue by pointing out that people who pay with food stamps would get double the coupon value at the market. Even then, though, it's hard to imagine somebody using food stamps to buy what the market offered: $19 bison steak from Gunpowder Bison, organic dandelion greens for $12 per pound from Blueberry Hill Vegetables, the Piedmont Reserve cheese from Everson Dairy at $29 a pound. Rounding out the potential shopping cart: $4 for a piece of "walnut dacquoise" from the Praline Bakery, $9 for a jumbo crab cake at Chris's Marketplace, $8 for a loaf of cranberry-walnut bread and $32 for a bolt of yarn.

The first lady said the market would particularly appeal to federal employees in nearby buildings to "pick up some good stuff for dinner." Yet even they might think twice about spending $3 for a pint of potatoes when potatoes are on sale for 40 cents a pound at Giant. They could get nearly five dozen eggs at Giant for the $5 Obama spent for her dozen.

But whatever the socioeconomics, there can be no doubt that Obama brought some serious attention to her cause. Hundreds of people crowded the market entrance on I Street as police directed pedestrians to alternative subway entrances. Hundreds braved a light rain and gave a hearty cheer when Obama and her entourage took the stage. "I can't imagine there's been a day in the history of our country when people have been more excited about farmers markets," Mayor Adrian Fenty, Obama's warm-up act, told the crowd.

The first lady, in gray slacks and blue sweater, marveled that the people were "so pumped up" despite the rain. "I have never seen so many people so excited about fruits and vegetables!" she said. (Must be the tender baby arugula.)

She spoke of the global reach of her cause: "The first thing world leaders, prime ministers, kings, queens ask me about is the White House garden. And then they ask about Bo."

She spoke of the fuel fed to the world's most powerful man: "I've learned that when my family eats fresh food, healthy food, that it really affects how we feel, how we get through the day . . . whether there's a Cabinet meeting or whether we're just walking the dog."

And she spoke of her own culinary efforts: "There are times when putting together a healthy meal is harder than you might imagine."

Particularly when it involves a soundstage, an interpreter for the deaf, three TV satellite trucks and the closing of part of downtown Washington.

Hmmm.... Could it be that the spell is wearing off ???

Backdoor BOTUS: Obama Does Want Coverage For Illegals... by Making em all Legal

From the Washington Times comes the following story - via Drudge - that Boz does indeed want to extend medical insurance coverage to any and all in the USA legally, basically by rahming through comprehensive immigration reform that would instantly make the 12 million or so illegal aliens now here, legal, medically insured and SEIU member eligible.

Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.

He also staked out a position that anyone in the country legally should be covered - a major break with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which limited most federal public assistance programs only to citizens and longtime immigrants.

"Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don't simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken," Mr. Obama said Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. "That's why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else.

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all."

Republicans said that amounts to an amnesty, calling it a backdoor effort to make sure current illegal immigrants get health care.

"It is ironic that the president told the American people that illegal immigrants should not be covered by the health care bill, but now just days later he's talking about letting them in the back door," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

"If the American people do not want to provide government health care for illegal immigrants, why would they support giving them citizenship, the highest honor America can bestow?" Mr. Smith said.

Read the rest of the story here