TELLING IT LIKE IT IS !

An authoritative new book draws on thousands of peer-reviewed research papers and books, plus additional scientific research, as it challenges popular concerns that global warming is either man-made or would have harmful effects.

The hefty “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change” weighs in at more than 4 pounds, and is available free online.

“We see no evidence whatsoever for the claim that the warming of the last 50 years is due to human activities,” co-author Dr. S. Fred Singer said in presenting the report. “On the contrary … we see evidence against man-made global warming.”

Singer and Dr. Craig Idso, as well as 35 contributors and reviewers, offer an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress have relied for regulatory proposals, including the energy tax known as “Cap and Trade.”

“This is really not about science,” Singer said. “What is really going on – not only in Washington, but in Europe and elsewhere – is money and power. That is what it’s all about.”

Learn more online.

Download the Report in pdf format.

Planet Earth is actually in a cooling cycle … except around Washington where the hot air of a fake crises so Gore and his “the sky is falling” cronies who stand to make huge profits are heating up the rhetoric. All this, of course, on the backs of Americans in the form of MORE TAXES after the many promises of “no new taxes” from Obama.

In the last week of June, the House of Representatives passed a bill intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050.

The politics of what used to be called “global warming,” and now labeled “climate change,” isn’t limited to Capitol Hill. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal tells us, at the same time that the House was debating its bill, other countries were having second thoughts about their already enacted measures.

The Polish Academy of Sciences, for one, has publicly challenged the science behind man-made global warming. And only 11% of Czech citizens believe that human activity contributes to the measured rise in temperatures. Even New Zealand, rightly regarded as an ecological wonderland, suspended its emissions-reduction program.

Then there’s Australia. Earlier this year, the government submitted its proposal to limit CO2 emissions. Given the potential costs and the prospect of, as some Australian commentators put it, “carbon cops” knocking on people’s doors, Australian senator Steve Fielding asked the obvious question: Is this necessary?

Fielding, an engineer, was concerned that the government had accepted “one scientific explanation for climate change at face value” without looking at all the data … the scientific data and scientists that didn’t agree with what has been stated. Just like our EPA and government has done.

So he examined the science himself, including asking the Obama administration to address his concerns about the science. While the administration didn’t respond to his request, what Fielding learned persuaded him not to support the proposal. He realized that those in the EPA and others would risk job losses for not following the party line.

And Fielding is far from alone. As the Journal put it, “The number of [global warming] skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling.”

Even if some of the “green science” were convincing, there are good reasons to be skeptical about the approach being debated in Congress. Columnist David Brooks spoke for many when he called the bill “a morass of corporate giveaways.” No one knows what effect it will have on CO2 emissions. A similar European effort failed and actually was followed by a rise in emissions.

Then there’s the elephant in the room: China. China is building two coal-fired power plants every week. It’s estimated that, within 20 years, China’s CO2 emissions will be equal to the entire world’s today. Other developing countries are following China’s lead. Even the European Union is increasing its use of coal.

As any one of these alone would overwhelm American reductions, together they make the House vote seem almost perverse. A massive transfer of wealth from ordinary Americans to favored industries in furtherance of a policy that won’t work in response to a “crisis” whose scientific basis is far from proven. What am I missing here?

Would-be technocrats whose goal is to manage and shape our society are working hand in hand with those who would profit from their efforts. They insist that the global warming debate is “over” and compare those who disagree, or even ask questions, to Holocaust deniers.

Outrageous? Sure. Surprising? Not really look who is in office. What do they do when their argument is unconvincing … they take away more of your freedoms … because they have the power to do so!

If things are on the up and up and so good for people … why do you need to stage it and filter out real concerns and real facts?

Welcome To Obamacare Theater

Michelle Malkin – Syndicated Columnist – 7/6/2009 8:35:00 AM

The White House sure likes to put on a show.  Fresh off its joint stage production with ABC News, the Obama administration broadcast another healthcare propaganda play last week under the guise of a citizen “town hall.”

Chicago consigliere and senior adviser Valerie Jarrett managed the floor and human props for Obama.  In a telling moment as the event kicked off, she protested a wee bit much: “I want to emphasize that the president has not seen the questions ahead of time.”  The audience responded with polite laughter.

But the denials of pre-planning and stacked decks deserve nothing but derisive mockery.  Obama’s town hall was filled with backroom players and a supporting cast of socialized medicine activists and ideologues.  One of the three lucky audience members whom Obama chose for questioning was Jason Rosenbaum.  Rosenbaum works for the Washington, DC-based Health Care for America Now (HCAN).  That’s the same K Street Astroturf outfit I reported on last week – the one with a $40 million budget to lobby for government-run healthcare.  The one inextricably linked to left-wing billionaire George Soros.

Let’s look at who else miraculously drew a golden ticket.  Another one of the three softball-tossing citizen questioners at the White House forum identified herself as a member of the Service Employees International Union.  That’s the same SEIU whose president, Andy Stern, boasted of spending nearly $61 million in members’ dues to elect Barack Obama.  It’s the same union that produced Patrick Gaspard, former SEIU healthcare lobbyist and now White House director of the Office of Political Affairs.

But the Obama healthcare town hall’s climactic moment came when the consoler in chief plucked Debby Smith from the crowd to tell her personal healthcare horror story.  She choked back tears as she talked of her battle with kidney cancer, her joblessness, and her lack of insurance.  Obama hugged the trembling woman and dubbed her “Exhibit A” for his massive entitlement program.

Debby Smith, however, is no ordinary patient.  While she may be “unemployed,” she has been rather busy working for the Obama campaign – as a volunteer for Organizing for America.  It’s the old Obama for Change political machine now housed under the Democratic National Committee.  Smith has also identified herself as a worker for the Virginia Organizing Project, which has been coordinating lobbying trips and healthcare forums with HCAN.  Yes, that same HCAN.

In December, Smith moderated “a community discussion on healthcare issues” in Appalachia, VA, and told her local paper that the meeting “would be reported back to former Sen. Tom Daschle, who has been directed by President-elect Barack Obama to form a committee to report on healthcare issues.”

Daschle may be out of the spotlight since his Health and Human Services Cabinet-nomination fiasco.  But he is in constant contact with Team Obama.  As he told The Associated Press earlier this week in a media meeting on healthcare reform, “We interact with them daily.”  No doubt.

Veteran liberal journalist Helen Thomas earned some accolades for challenging the tightly controlled White House events.  But where was she back in March, when Team Obama pulled the same stunt?  At a healthcare event in the East Room, the questioners included an Obama donor, a Democratic National Committee member, a former Democratic candidate for the Virginia statehouse who had publicly endorsed Obama and a member of the SEIU.  Yes, that SEIU.

The growing irritation of the once-smitten Beltway media is better late than never, I suppose.  But one wonders what took so long for the sedatives to wear off the watchdogs.  Team Obama has screamed “kabuki” from day one.

A European filmmaker is warning the U.S. about the disastrous cost of cap and trade.

The U.S. House last week passed the Waxman-Markey Energy Bill, otherwise known as “cap and trade.” This legislation seeks to limit the emission of carbon dioxide.

Carbon dioxide that the EPA is trying to control but alas have a scandal in that area as they try to hide conflicting reports so that only the Democrat politically approved version gets through.

Opponents of the measure argued that implementation of cap and trade would destroy the American economy and dramatically increase energy costs for the average American – something then-presidential candidate Barack Obama stated clearly while on the campaign trail in late 2008.

“Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket…regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad – because I’m capping green house gases..,.” Obama said. This, is good for the economy, people and jobs?

Documentary film producer and director Ann McElhinney is perplexed at the recent passage of cap and trade. Her latest film, Not Evil Just Wrong, takes an in-depth look at how environmental policy can do more harm than good. She sees some irony in the effect of the Kyoto Protocol – an international environmental treaty the U.S. has symbolically signed but never ratified.

“Countries in Europe that signed up to Kyoto, which is our equivalent of this cap and trade, …have seen a loss in jobs – and funny enough they’ve lost jobs to America,” she observes, “because they can’t compete, because it immediately affects how much electricity costs to people.” So now we are going to push jobs away?

And utility costs, she contends, are a particularly sensitive issue to people. “It’s sensitive to people on low incomes, but it’s a very sensitive issue for industries that are trying to make a profit and that can only succeed in a very competitive world, that can only succeed if they can keep their energy prices low,” McElhinney explains. “So for Europe, [cap and trade] has been a total disaster.”

It will be the same for America unless we throw it out!

The June jobs report shows the president’s economic “stimulus” package is not producing the quick results the Obama administration promised Americans.

Employers cut 467,000 jobs in June, and the unemployment rate rose to a 26 year high of 9.5%. The Heritage Foundation, says the Obama administration has failed to deliver on its vow to create new jobs for Americans.

“You know, we heard buzz words like ‘shovel-ready construction projects’ – and [now we can] look at the job numbers,” says Hederman. “We see that construction has continued to shed jobs. We know that 5% of all architects have lost their jobs in 2009 alone because there is not enough construction planning coming forward.”

The stimulus bill was a huge amount of money that is being poorly spent, poorly targeted, and is not having the effect that was promised to us.

Back in February, the director of President Obama’s National Economic Council, Larry Summers, promised the effects of the stimulus would “begin almost immediately.” In addition, White House Budget Director Peter Orszag said Americans would see stimulus benefits in “weeks to months,” and Christina Romer, chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, predicted “we will start adding jobs, rather than losing them, at more than half a million a month.”

It is easy to see why the stimulus has been ineffective. The majority of provisions in the package were typical government pork spending – members doing favors for their districts back home. Most of these aren’t focused on happening quick … and in most cases were far from necessities.

Hederman observes, “We’ve taken money from the private sector to have to pay for the stimulus package – so it is not really going to have a big effect.”

Once again the fear mongering lies are exposed.

• Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.6 trillion.
  

• Destroy an average of 1-3 million jobs, every year.
  

• Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation.
  

• Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74%.
  

• Raise residential natural gas prices by 55%.
  

• Raise an average family’s annual energy bill by $1,500 annually.
  

• Increase the federal debt by 26%, which is $29,150 per person.

Why would these congressmen support a bill that drives up the cost of energy and destroy jobs during a recession?
Bono Mack, Mary (CA-45) 202-225-5330
Castle, Mike (DE) 202-225-4165
Kirk, Mark (IL-10) 202-225-4835
Lance, Leonard (NJ-7) 202-225-5361
LoBiondo, Frank (NJ-2) 202-225-6572
McHugh, John (NY-23) 202-225-4611
Reichert, Dave (WA-8) 202-225-7761
Smith, Chris (NJ-4) 202-225-3765

Notice they all serve on different committees. We all know there are dozens of different committees in the House. But what was promised to them for voting yea. Could they have been promised more influence in each of the positions? Why did these individuals vote against the wishes of the very people who put them in office? Some of that has been found in the 300 pages of amendments that was distributed in the wee hours of the morning that once again no one read before they voted.

The final vote was 219 yeas and 212 nays. Had these “Elite Eight” voted according to their constituents wishes vs. their own potential political gain, the vote would have been 211 yeas and 220 nays. But we didn’t need all 8 to vote correctly. We only needed 4. If only 4 had voted nay, the final tally would have been 215 yeas and 216 nays.

Speaker Pelosi stated to the House before the vote was cast, “… just remember these four words for what this legislation means: jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs. Let’s vote for jobs.” She forgot to finish each phrase, in China, in China, in China, in China. Obviously, she and all who voted to pass this legislation didn’t think very far into the future or even use common sense. Not only will the American people be taxed so much they will feel “out of business”, but our major employers will be “moving out their business” to countries that don’t even care about clean air, let alone tax upon it. It will have nothing to do about anti-patriotism. It will simply be a financial business decision.

We are fed-up with spineless, gutless Progressives and Liberals like this. They need to be removed from office and replaced with true Conservatives. Call them and tell them.

I am more and more convinced that these new Democrats want as many Americans as possible living in poverty and ignorance, dependent upon government, Democrat Government, for food, clothing, shelter, heat, electric, cars, trucks, everything possible and more. This is what uninformed voters or voters on the take cause.

What is going to happen to America after the producers (taxpayers) quit working because the Democrats take too much out of their paychecks in taxes and productive work just isn’t worth it anymore? Gee, that sounds like what happened to the Soviet Union.

But seriously, just who will the Democrats tax to support the extravagant Democrat spending and the lifestyles of their voters? Democrats have pandered to those who don’t pay taxes to buy their votes, and left so few of us paying taxes, to be redistributed to those on the public dole, that Democrats are going to be in a real bind to support their paid-for voters in very short order. Then what will the Democrats do? Seize property and give it to their voters?

Oops! They already did that with GM and Chrysler! The bondholders got taken and the Unions got 55%! This stuff used to be illegal but not under these New Democrats. What happened to that “Shining City On A Hill” that Ronald Reagan spoke so proudly of?

What a sad day for America. All I can say is the American people had better wake-up and start fighting for this country, and I mean quickly, or Obama and the Democrats are rapidly going to destroy this country. They are systematically, like a Blitzkrieg, moving this country into Fascism and Stalinism. I wouldn’t have believed it were possible if I haven’t been seeing it with my own eyes. If this madness doesn’t stop the possibility of Americans rising up and supporting a Revolution is in our very near future.

Our Founding Fathers warned if Government got out of control of the people, that it would be proper to replace it and start all over again removing the power from Washington.

This cap-and-trade bill heading to the Senate will raise energy costs, increase unemployment, and weaken the economy, if enacted.

The Washington think tank The Heritage Foundation estimates that House-approved legislation (219-212).limiting greenhouse gas emissions will hit consumers with a 60% spike in gasoline prices and a 90% increase in electricity prices, after inflation.

David Kreutzer, a senior policy analyst in energy, economics, and climate change at Heritage, says Congress needs to hear a bigger uproar from taxpayers about the economic impact of the bill.

“But we will also find that virtually everything will go up in price because everything uses energy, and energy gets much more expensive. So we find that the impact per household will be, for a family of four, about $3,000 per year for the first 24 years, and that’s as far out as we analyzed it,” he notes. “The CO2 caps get drawn down lower and lower and lower even beyond that, so the cost will continue to rise.”

Kreutzer says although the cap-and-trade bill faces tougher sledding in the Senate, President Obama was able to successfully employ “arm-twisting, tradeoffs, and back-room deals” to pass the measure in the House. So Americans “can’t rest if they don’t want higher energy prices,” advises the Heritage analyst.

Obama continues to twist things to get his way!

Temperatures seem to be dropping everywhere but at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where leaders are on the hot seat for burying a report on global warming. Days after the House passed an expensive Cap-and-Trade bill to reduce greenhouse gases, even the EPA’s own employees saying it is unnecessary. In a deplorable cover-up the agency hid a report disputing the threat of climate change. EPA Analyst Alan Carlin wrote 98 pages deconstructing the global warming phenomenon, only to have it concealed by the EPA’s leadership. Carlin told Fox News that his boss told him to stop working on the project, which found that global temperatures are actually cooling.

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is launching an investigation into the incident, telling reporters yesterday that the EPA fears the truth. “We’re going to expose it,” he said. Hopefully, he will manage to do so before the Senate delves into a Cap-and-Trade bill that will not have any measurable effect on the atmosphere but could ship an estimated 2.5 million U.S. jobs overseas … on top of the tremendous costs to every American taxpayer.

8 GOP Votes Paved Way For Unnecessary Climate Bill

President Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi scored a major victory with the House’s approval of a landmark climate bill – thanks to help from a handful of Republicans who have been deceived by the climate fear mongers who do not have science on their side.

In Friday’s vote of 219-212, the legislation was supported by 211 Democrats and 8 aisle-crossing GOP members: Reps. Mary Bono (Calif.), Michael Castle (Del.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Leonard Lance (N.J.), Frank LoBiondo (N.J.), John McHugh (N.Y.), David Reichert (Wash.) and Christopher Smith (N.J.). It is obvious these GOP members are just Liberals hiding in Republican clothing.

What amazed me was 44 Democrats voted against the bill which was because they are either becoming educated to the truth about climate change fear mongering, or it is a tax increase issue and they want to be re-elected. Unfortunately it is probably the latter even though I wish it was the former.

House Minority Leader John Boehner was right when he said after the vote. “This is the biggest job-killing bill that’s ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives. And I don’t think that’s what the American people want.”

According to The Associated Press, the “cap-and-trade” legislation places the first national limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases from major sources like power plants, refineries and factories. It requires:

– A 17% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

– An 83% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

– That 20% of all electricity in the United States be generated by renewable sources and/or more efficient methods by 2020.

When you add the spinoff costs to the Congressional Budget Office estimate, due to increased manufacturing, transportation, and retail costs that will be passed back to the consumers,  some estimate up to $3,000 a year  per average household.

The 1,200-plus-page bill now goes to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain future … hopefully defeat … as this legislation by definition is really a national energy tax. We will have many more such taxes as long as the Obama administration is at the helm.

Republicans need to clean up the party and be truly conservative as they are expected to be or they will not be elected in the next elections. The place to start is to get rid of these 8 who voted for this climate bill.