Tag: Climate Change

Obama Goes to Paris Climate Change Summit To Pledge OUR Money. Congress to Fight.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

untitled (12)

The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is about to spend a boatload of American Taxpayers’ money on a psuedo-science that the majority of Americans do not believe is an important issue at all.

The New York Times reports the following

WASHINGTON — At a joint news conference here Tuesday with President François Hollande of France, President Obama veered from his focus on the terrorist attacks in Paris to bring up the huge international gathering beginning in the French capital on Monday to hammer out a global response to climate change.

“What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children,” Mr. Obama said of the climate conference.

The segue brought mockery, even castigation, from the political right, but it was a reminder of the importance Mr. Obama places on climate change in shaping his legacy. During his 2012 re-election campaign, he barely mentioned global warming, but the issue has become a hallmark of his second term.

And on Sunday night he arrives in Paris, hoping to make climate policy the signature environmental achievement of his, and perhaps any, presidency.

“He comes to Paris with a moral authority that no other president has had on the issue of climate change,” said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University who noted that Mr. Obama’s domestic climate efforts already stand alone in American history. “No other president has had a climate change policy. It makes him unique.”

In Paris, Mr. Obama will join more than 120 world leaders to kick off two weeks of negotiations aimed at forging a new climate change accord that would, for the first time, commit almost every country on Earth to lowering its greenhouse gas pollution. All year, Mr. Obama’s negotiators have worked behind the scenes to fashion a Paris deal.

Crucial to Mr. Obama’s leverage has been the release of his domestic climate change regulations, which he then pushed other countries to emulate. So far, at least 170 countries have put forth emission reduction plans.

But even as Mr. Obama presses for a deal in Paris, it faces steep obstacles, not least the legal and legislative assault on his own regulations at home. During the course of the Paris talks, Republicans in Congress are planning a series of votes to fight Mr. Obama’s climate agenda. More than half the states are suing the administration on the legality of his climate plan. And all the Republican presidential candidates have said that they would undo the regulations if elected.

On Nov. 19, Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, chairman of the environment committee and the Senate’s most vocal skeptic on climate change science, and Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming sent a letter to Mr. Obama, signed by 35 other senators, promising to block the funding for any climate deal unless the Paris pact is sent to Congress for ratification. A vote on the deal would fail in the Republican-controlled Congress.

“Our constituents are worried that the pledges you are committing the United States to will strengthen foreign economies at the expense of American workers,” the senators wrote. “They are also skeptical about sending billions of their hard-earned dollars to government officials from developing nations.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Obama is pushing forward. He unveiled the rules on curbing heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions with a tight timeline, ensuring that they would be finalized before he leaves office. He has raised the issue of climate change in dozens of speeches and with every recent visiting foreign leader. In Washington, a team of environmental lawyers is preparing to defend the rules in court, while at the State Department, climate envoys are in constant contact with their counterparts around the world

If his domestic regulations and a Paris accord withstand efforts to gut them, “climate change will become the heart and soul of his presidency,” Mr. Brinkley said.

When you attempt to discuss the Global Warming/Climate Change/Whatever-They-Decided-To-Call-It-Today Hoax with one of the members of the Cult, they will tell you that 97% of the World’s Scientists are believers.

Have you ever wondered where they get that outlandish figure from?

Back on May 26, 2014, Joseph Bast, of the Heartland Institute, and Dr. Roy Spencer, Founder of The Weather Channel, wrote the following article for The Wall Street Journal…

Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the “crippling consequences” of climate change. “Ninety-seven percent of the world’s scientists,” he added, “tell us this is urgent.”

Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, “Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”

Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research.

One frequently cited source for the consensus is a 2004 opinion essay published in Science magazine by Naomi Oreskes, a science historian now at Harvard. She claimed to have examined abstracts of 928 articles published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.

Ms. Oreskes’s definition of consensus covered “man-made” but left out “dangerous”—and scores of articles by prominent scientists such as Richard Lindzen, John Christy, Sherwood Idso and Patrick Michaels, who question the consensus, were excluded. The methodology is also flawed. A study published earlier this year in Nature noted that abstracts of academic papers often contain claims that aren’t substantiated in the papers.

Another widely cited source for the consensus view is a 2009 article in “Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union” by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, a student at the University of Illinois, and her master’s thesis adviser Peter Doran. It reported the results of a two-question online survey of selected scientists. Mr. Doran and Ms. Zimmerman claimed “97 percent of climate scientists agree” that global temperatures have risen and that humans are a significant contributing factor.

The survey’s questions don’t reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer “yes” to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change.

The “97 percent” figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make.

In 2010, William R. Love Anderegg, then a student at Stanford University, used Google Scholar to identify the views of the most prolific writers on climate change. His findings were published in Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences. Mr. Love Anderegg found that 97% to 98% of the 200 most prolific writers on climate change believe “anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for ‘most’ of the ‘unequivocal’ warming.” There was no mention of how dangerous this climate change might be; and, of course, 200 researchers out of the thousands who have contributed to the climate science debate is not evidence of consensus.

In 2013, John Cook, an Australia-based blogger, and some of his friends reviewed abstracts of peer-reviewed papers published from 1991 to 2011. Mr. Cook reported that 97% of those who stated a position explicitly or implicitly suggest that human activity is responsible for some warming. His findings were published in Environmental Research Letters.

Mr. Cook’s work was quickly debunked. In Science and Education in August 2013, for example, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found “only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse” the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work.

Rigorous international surveys conducted by German scientists Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch—most recently published in Environmental Science & Policy in 2010—have found that most climate scientists disagree with the consensus on key issues such as the reliability of climate data and computer models. They do not believe that climate processes such as cloud formation and precipitation are sufficiently understood to predict future climate change.

Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.

Finally, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—which claims to speak for more than 2,500 scientists—is probably the most frequently cited source for the consensus. Its latest report claims that “human interference with the climate system is occurring, and climate change poses risks for human and natural systems.” Yet relatively few have either written on or reviewed research having to do with the key question: How much of the temperature increase and other climate changes observed in the 20th century was caused by man-made greenhouse-gas emissions? The IPCC lists only 41 authors and editors of the relevant chapter of the Fifth Assessment Report addressing “anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing.”

Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.). It was most recently published in 2009, and most signers were added or reaffirmed since 2007. The petition states that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

We could go on, but the larger point is plain. There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem.

So, why is Obama on this Quixotic Crusade to make a belief in a pseudo-science his legacy?

1.  Appeasing the Gullible -Hey “The Facts Are In.” The “science” is true. And, as P.T. Barnum said,

There is a sucker born every minute.

Remember…these “true believers of the Goreacle, also voted for Obama. They are easily fooled.

2. Money, Money, Money – Too much money invested by Democrat “Power Brokers” and to much of American Taxpayers money spent needlessly to back down now. Obama’s got political promises to keep.

3. Hey, look! Squirrel! – Obama needs to grasp for whatever national distraction he can come up with bringing in Syrian Refugees by the tens of thousand into our country, imbedded with possible Islamic Terrorists from ISIS, he desperately needs a distraction. The Planned Parenthood Attack in Colorado by a nut job, didn’t provide near enough cover.

4. Well, he sure can’t make his failed Foreign Policy his legacy.

5. Man is his own god – It is an unbelievable arrogance that allows those who believe in “Climate Change” to proclaim that man can lay claim to the Sovereignty of the God of Abraham, by controlling the very weather around us, by recycling plastic bottles, etc.

So, there you go. I wonder what argument Obama is going to present to these World Leaders that he is meeting with? 

Perhaps, he will present a showing of “The Day After Tomorrow”, the movie starring Dennis Quaid, which bombed spectacularly, in which the ice was chasing everybody.

ROFL!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Turkey Shoots Down Russian Jet. Kills Pilots in the Air. Obama to “Rebuke” ISIS By Attending Climate Change Summit. “Hello, McFly!!!”

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

The-Block-NRD-600-578x420And, you don’t believe we’re on the Eve of Destruction… – Barry McGuire (1965)

The Washington Post reports that

BEIRUT — NATO faced being thrust into a new Middle Eastern crisis on Tuesday after warplanes from member state Turkey shot down a Russian jet that Turkish officials said had violated their country’s airspace on the border with Syria.The incident marked a serious escalation that is likely to further strain relations between Russia and the NATO alliance.

Russian officials confirmed that a Russian Su-24 attack aircraft was shot down Tuesday morning but insisted it had not violated Turkey’s airspace.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said one of at least two pilots probably died during the incident, and a marine also was killed by apparent Syrian insurgent fire during a helicopter rescue operation to retrieve the downed airmen.

The downing brings renewed attention to a scenario feared for months by the Pentagon and its partners: a potential conflict arising from overlapping air missions over Syria — with Russia backing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and a U.S.-led coalition conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State.

Turkish officials have accused Russia of repeated airspace violations since it launched airstrikes against Assad’s armed opposition in late September.

Russian President Vladimir Putin had strong words for Turkey, calling the incident a “stab in the back.”

In Washington, President Obama called for de-escalation but said Turkey had the right to defend its airspace.

Turkey’s military said the Russian jet was warned multiple times before it was targeted by two F-16 fighter jets in the border zone in western Syria in mountains not far from the Mediterranean coast.

Turkey called for an emergency NATO session to discuss the incident but has not invoked alliance provisions that would involve other members in its defense.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said after the meeting that NATO allies with intelligence assets near where Turkey shot down the Russian warplane had confirmed Turkey’s version of events and rejected Russia’s claim that its aircraft was flying over Syria and had not crossed into Turkish airspace.

“The information we have from other allies is consistent with what we have got from Turkey,” Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels.

“This is a serious situation” that calls for prudence and de-escalation, Stoltenberg said. “We have to avoid that situations, incidents, accidents spiral out of control.”

A U.S. military spokesman confirmed that Turkish pilots issued 10 notifications to their Russian counterparts warning that they were in Turkish airspace and that the Russians did not respond.

“On the radio . . . we were able to hear everything that was going on,” said Col. Steve Warren, spokesman at the Baghdad headquarters for U.S. forces operating in Iraq and Syria.

Last month, NATO decried a “troubling escalation” by Russian forces in Syria and raised concerns about attack missions within sight of the Western alliance’s borders.

Although Turkey and the United States oppose Assad, their warplanes have avoided the Syrian leader’s military and are instead bombarding the Islamic State militant group, which controls parts of Syria and Iraq. Russian aircraft have primarily hit non-Islamic State rebels, including some groups that are backed by the United States and Turkey.

The fallout could complicate a diplomatic push to bring greater international coordination to the fight against the Islamic State. The radical group has claimed responsibility for the Nov. 13 Paris attacks that killed at least 130, as well as the Oct. 31 downing of a Russian passenger plane over Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula that killed all 224 aboard.

French President François Hollande met with Obama in Washington on Tuesday to discuss strategies against the Islamic State and parallel efforts to seek a negotiated end to Syria’s nearly five-year civil war. Hollande is expected to meet later in the week with Putin and other world leaders.

In the Russian resort city of Sochi, Putin said the plane “did not threaten the territory of Turkey” and that it was “pursuing operations” against the Islamic State in mountainous areas north of the Syrian port of Latakia.

“Today’s tragic cases will have significant consequences for the relations between Russia and Turkey,” Putin told reporters after talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, whose nation is part of the U.S.-led coalition.

Some Russian lawmakers have called for retaliation against Turkey by evacuating Russian tourists from popular vacation destinations. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov canceled a scheduled trip to Turkey.

Video footage of the incident showed a warplane on fire before crashing on a hill and two crew members apparently parachuting down. But a video purportedly posted by Syrian rebels appeared to show the body of a Russian pilot.

Sergei Rudskoi, an officer in the Russian army’s General Staff, said a rescue helicopter sent to retrieve the pilots came under heavy fire. “During the operation, one of the helicopters due to gunfire was damaged and forced to make an emergency landing on neutral territory,” Rudskoi said in a briefing with Russian journalists. “One marine was killed.”

Rebel forces released video footage showing an anti-government fighter using a surface-to-surface missile to destroy what appears to be a Russian helicopter. The authenticity of the video could not be confirmed.

Some rebels have been using U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW missiles as part of a covert program coordinated between the United States and its allies.

In early November, the United States deployed additional fighter aircraft to Turkey’s Incirlik air base to help the country protect its airspace.

Friction between Ankara and Moscow has also intensified over alleged Russian airstrikes on Syrian villages dominated by Turkmen, an ethnic minority with cultural ties to Turkey.

Last month, Turkey’s military downed an unmanned aerial vehicle near the border with Syria that military analysts said appeared to be Russian-made. Officials in Moscow denied connection to that downed aircraft and sent a delegation to Turkey to smooth over concerns.

Russia issued a formal apology to Turkey in early October when a jet violated Turkish airspace and Turkish F-16s were scrambled to intercept the plane. The Russians called the mistake “a navigational error.”

Russia has carried out more than 4,000 airstrikes since the beginning of its intervention in Syria, using a force of modern and modified Soviet-era aircraft. Russia has at least 32 fixed-wing aircraft and 16 helicopters at the Khmeimim air base near Latakia, an Assad stronghold on the Mediterranean Sea just 30 miles from the Turkish border.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, said the following about this ominous incident…

This is a mess.  This is a total mess.  And it’s not hard to pinpoint why.  But if I were to say it, I would be accused of the same thing I’m accusing all these Drive-Bys of, drawing this comparison.  Well, if Obama was providing standard, ordinary, expected American leadership in the last seven years, we wouldn’t even be here.  There wouldn’t even be an ISIS.  There wouldn’t be an Iran ascending to run the entire Middle East because they wouldn’t have been enabled to create a military weapons program.  None of this would have happened it’s safe to say if anybody else had been elected president. 

Now, if Hillary had won the Democrat nomination, I don’t know.  But we’re dealing with a dangerous set of circumstances.  On the one hand we’ve got leadership incompetence, or maybe leadership absence on the part of Obama.  It’s just not something he wants to do.  And, by the way, don’t get on me.  It was Obama who said it last week at that press conference he had in Turkey where he said he’s not into sloganeering and these concepts of American leadership and American victory, winning.  Those are things that make him uncomfortable.  It’s not what this is really all about. 

You can interpret that in any number of ways, but one thing, he doesn’t want to lead, he doesn’t want the US in a leadership or dominant position.  And the reasons for that are multi.  He doesn’t think that we deserve it.  We are not the world’s superpower.  We’re illegitimate.  You know the drill.  What my opinion of Obama’s opinion of the United States is.  So a lot of people are understandably worried about what comes next because this is Vladimir Putin who has been attacked, and Putin is interested in winning, and Putin is interested in Russian leadership, and Putin does want to be allied with whoever ends up running the Middle East.  Winning and victory and leadership are not concepts that Putin finds nervous or embarrassing.  He finds them challenging.  So this could go any number of places.  We just have to sit and watch, see how it plays out. 

In a memo e-mailed the week of March 25th, 2009, in the middle of the World Apology Tour, to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department’s office of security review proclaimed that “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’ ”

And so it began.

On Thursday, June 4th, 2009 at the University of Cairo, Obama addressed the Muslim World.  Here is an excerpt from the 6:35 a.m. speech:

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith-based lives upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. 

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. 

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Scooter believed that by reaching out to the Muslim world through changing and softening our terminology as it pertained to the Jihad declared against the United States by Muslim Extremists, his administration would make huge inroads in America’s relationship with the Islamic World.  This action did nothing but encourage our enemies.

As I have written before, Obama’s insistence that Radical Islam does not exist, even now, in the face of the possible beginning of a global Conflict, is either naiveté, stemming from a livelong dhimmitude, or being an intellectual lightweight.

A recent Fox News Poll reveal that the overwhelming majority of Americans view Muslim Terrorist as the number one thing that they are concerned with. Obama’s obsession, Climate Change was down toward the bottom of the list.

And yet, the President of the United States of America, yesterday said that he was going to “strongly rebuke” ISIS by attending the Climate Change summit.

Obama must still be hanging with the Choom Gang, partaking of “herb”, as he did in high school.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Send in the Clowns: The First 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Clown-CarPer gallup.com, Liberalism is America’s least popular political ideology, with only 23% of Americans admitting that they follow its tenets.

Last night’s First Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate of this election season demonstrated very clearly the reasons why.

While over 94 million Americans are absent from our workforce and our Enemies are gathering their armies in a prelude to Armageddon in the Middle East, with the destruction of God’s Chosen People, the nation of Israel, as the appetizer, and the nuclear annihilation of the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave as the main course, a Far Left Confab, featuring a bunch of old white folks from the Northeast, proved that “diversity” is only a word to 2015’s Democratic Party and their Presidential Candidate Hopefuls.

Liberal cause de celebres, such as climate change, gun control, “Black Lives Matter”, “undocumented immigrants” (illegal aliens), and “helping the Middle Class” (straight into poverty) were embraced and repeated ad nauseum by all of the Geritol Gang, firmly entrenched in the shared ignorant bliss of the repetitious mantra of the Liberal Hive-Mind…as their chauffeurs waited for them outside of the venue in their stretch limousines.

To CNN’s credit, they presented the debate in a much better format than Fox News did. And, Anderson Cooper did not allow his previous affiliation with the Clinton Foundation impede his duties as a Moderator.

Of course, the fact that CNN panders to the Left in all of their programming helped the continuity of the broadcast tremendously.

The Democratic Party knows that they are presenting the weakest field of potential Presidential Candidates that America has seen in a very long time.

Inquistr.com summarized this three-ring circus…

The CNN Democratic Presidential Debate, hosted by Anderson Cooper, was held at the luxurious Wynn Las Vegas casino hotel yesterday evening. Topics such as fighting for working class families, gun control, and the economy were addressed by U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, from Vermont; former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; former Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee; former U.S. Senator, from Virginia, Jim Webb; and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.

During his two minute debate introduction, Bernie Sanders did not mince words.

Sanders described an “unprecedented crisis” in America with a “campaign finance system that is corrupt and is undermining American democracy.” Sanders spoke with conviction and also took issue with Super PACs and the taxation of the top one percent earners. Sanders then cited a “moral responsibility” to take action on climate change and to make a concerted effort to make a move away from a fossil fuel-based economy.

Hillary Clinton’s opening two minutes began with a long-winded introduction. Anderson Cooper seemed to momentarily prod Clinton for something a little more substantive. Clinton then talked about job creation, infrastructure investment, sustainable energy, accepting the challenge posed by climate change to spur the U.S. economy, raising wages, and “finding ways so that companies share profits with the workers who help to make them.” Clinton also expressed a belief that the “wealthy pay too little and the middle class pays too much. ” Clinton further pledged to work toward paid family leave for Americans each year, bringing the U.S. in line with other countries. Clinton also discussed inequality in America.

When asked if she was a progressive or moderate, Hillary Clinton responded “I’m a progressive, but I’m a progressive who likes to get things done.”

Bernie Sanders then fielded a question asking about his “democratic socialist” leanings.

Sanders emphatically explained that “it is immoral and wrong that the top tenth of one percent in this country own as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.” Then Sanders spoke of living “in a rigged economy” and “that 57 percent of income is going to the top one percent.” Sanders spoke of Wall Street’s “greed and recklessness.”

“Save capitalism from itself,” Hillary Clinton stated. “So it doesn’t run amok.”

“Of course we have to support small- and medium-sized businesses,” Sanders agrees, “the backbone of our economy.”

Anderson Cooper asked Lincoln Chafee about his different political affiliations over the years. Chafee responded that on the issues, he is a “block of granite.” Chafee cited fiscal responsibility, environmental issues, woman’s choice rights, gay marriage, aversion to overseas “entanglements,” and helping the less fortunate as major issues he has sought change on. 

Martin O’Malley was questioned about his zero tolerance policies and the fact that some point to this causing civil unrest in Baltimore, the city where he was mayor. O’Malley responded that, at the time of the Baltimore riot, arrests in the city had fallen to a “32-year low.” He described a family being “firebombed” after calling the police about drug dealers on a Baltimore street corner.

“We saved lives and we gave our city a better future,” O’Malley stated with regard to Baltimore.

Anderson Cooper spoke of “100,000” arrests and the NAACP and American Civil Liberties Union suing the city. O’Malley spoke of bringing “peace” to Baltimore.

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton then spoke to gun control. Sanders summarized his position, explaining that if a gun shop owner sold a gun to someone legally, and then the person went and committed a criminal act, he feels that the gun shop should not be held liable. Sanders then noted that, if gun shop owners are selling guns illegally, then, “of course” they should be prosecuted.

Debate moderator Anderson Cooper then asked Hillary Clinton if she agrees with Bernie Sanders. Clinton responded “No.”

Sanders reiterated that he believed in “instant” background checks and mental health checks among other measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. O’Malley called for tougher gun controls.

O’Malley and Sanders traded jabs about what Sanders sees as a rural/urban U.S.-divide on gun control. Jim Webb stated that guns should be available for families to protect themselves. Lincoln Chafee described the “gun lobby” fear-mongering the U.S. Congress by stirring panic with talk of “they’re coming to take away your guns,” and attempting to find common ground with them.

Sanders referred to the U.S. invasion of Iraq as the “worst foreign policy” decision of all-time. Lincoln Chafee was then asked what he thinks of Hillary Clinton voting for the U.S. invasion, where he reiterated Sanders’ “worst foreign policy” remarks and that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Clinton spoke about how President Obama, knowing that Clinton had voted for Iraq, still appointed her Secretary of State.

“The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails,” Sanders said, sticking-up for Clinton on her ongoing e-mail scandal, as discussed by the Inquisitr, drawing applause from the debate audience.

“Do black lives matter or do all lives matter?” Bernie Sanders was asked. “Black lives matter,” Bernie Sanders answered. He responded that cases like Sandra Bland’s should never happen. O’Malley echoed Sanders’ thoughts, “we have a lot of work to do.”

“We cannot keep imprisoning” more people than any other country globally, Hillary Clinton stated.

Martin O’Malley spoke about reinstating Glass-Steagall legislation. Clinton and Sanders professed a belief that big banks need to be broken up.

“Fraud is a business model,” Sanders bellowed and cited his opposition to Wall Street deregulation.

“Quit foreclosing on homes, quit engaging in these these kinds of speculative behaviors,” Hillary Clinton stated were her words to Wall Street shortly before the 2008 financial meltdown.

“Break up these banks!” Sanders’ baritone echoed through the Las Vegas debate hall.

Free public college education, current student debt, the middle class paying for the TARP bailout, expanding social security and Medicare, undocumented immigrants, immigration reform, health care for children, differences with Republicans, the treatment of veterans, the Patriot Act and the NSA, Edward Snowden, war, woman’s rights, prescription drug costs, President Obama, political outsiders, and climate change were among many other topics in discussed in substantive debate.

“We are a nation of immigrants,” Martin O’Malley stated.

“The only way we really transform America and do the things that the middle class and working class desperately need is through a political revolution!” Bernie Sanders declared to applause from debate audience members.

Searches for “Bernie Sanders” more than doubled searches for “Hillary Clinton” during the democratic presidential debate.

The members of the Geritol Gang, that are the main players among the potential Democratic Presidential Candidates, are so weak, they make Pee Wee Herman look like Sylvester Stallone.

The wailing and gnashing of teeth by the Leaders of the Democrats is so apparent, that an extra podium was standing by, before the debate, just in case Crazy Uncle Joe Biden, answered their desperate pleas, throwing his hat into the ring, in order to “save” the election for the doomed Democratic Liberals.

Which makes a certain kind of warped sense. Because as divorced from reality as the Far Left Democratic Party of today is, what’s one more clown to stuff in the Circus Clown Car?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Makes Excuses For the World Exploding on 60 Minutes

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

obamamyworkChange is a foreign policy that doesn’t begin and end with a war that should’ve never been authorized and never been waged.

…this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. – Democratic Presidential Candiate Barack Hussein Obama’s Nomination Speech at the 2008 Democratic Convention, St. Paul, Minnesota

That moment never came.

Obama overestimated himself.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama on Sunday acknowledged that his efforts to help resolve the Syria crisis have so far failed but defended his strategy and dismissed assertions that Russian President Vladimir Putin is now the dominant world leader.

“I didn’t say it was going to be done in a year,” Obama said in a CBS “60 Minutes” interview. “Syria has been a difficult problem for the entire world community.  … What we have not been able to do so far — and I’m the first to acknowledge this — is to change the dynamic inside of Syria.”

The president was confronted about several unsuccessful effort in Syria, ravaged by a four-year-long civil war and now by the Islamic State terror group.

Obama also said he had no knowledge that Hillary Clinton, as his secretary of state, used a private server and email accounts to conduct official business.

He acknowledge that the arrangement resulted in security breaches but said he didn’t think she attempted to hide information and declined to address the question of whether she could be prosecuted under his administration.

Obama also acknowledged that Donald Trump has tapped into voters’ dissatisfaction to lead the Republican presidential field and that he has so far run a dynamic campaign but suggested that Trump wouldn’t win the party nomination.

Still, the biggest questions and answers focused on the Putin and the Middle East, specifically the failed, $500 million effort to train and equip a moderate opposition to fight the Islamic State, or ISIL.

The administration ended the program last week, following a report by the U.S. military that efforts to train as many as 5,000 rebels had only done so for about 50 and now only four or five remain.

“There’s no doubt that it did not work,” said Obama, while acknowledging the he was “skeptical” about the plan from the beginning and that he was willing to try several options.

He also said that training Syrians to defeat the Islamic State will be difficult as long as the regime of President Bashar Assad remains in power.

Obama also refused to accept the notion that Putin has challenged his leadership and assertion last year that America is an “indispensable nation.”

“If you think that running your economy into the ground and having to send troops in, in order to prop up your only ally is leadership, then we’ve got a different definition of leadership,” said Obama, referring to Putin’s efforts in Ukraine.

“My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change. … My definition of leadership is  mobilizing the entire world community to make sure that Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon. And with respect to the Middle East, we’ve got a 60 country coalition that isn’t suddenly lining up around Russia’s strategy. To the contrary, they are arguing that, in fact, that strategy will not work.”

Oblivious… Thy name is Barack Hussein Obama.

With the world, as we know it, at the brink of a war which could destroy it, and with his Foreign Policy Efforts of the last 7 years having failed spectacularly, Barack Hussein Obama continues to have the lack of self-awareness to insist that he is not a failure and that Vladimir Putin is not showing him to be a spineless jellyfish, and not a world leader at all.

Who does he think that he is fooling?

Certainly not the innocent Christians whom ISIS has been beheading all of this time, nor even the innocent Muslims whose cities are being overrun, their priceless artifacts which they held, destroyed for the sake of barbarism.

He’s certainly not fooling the citizens of the United States of America, because his popularity numbers remain abysmal.

So therefore, the only one whom Barack Hussein Obama is fooling, as himself.

Now, when you are an average American, like you and me, fooling yourself usually only endangers you. However, in the case of United States of America President Barack Hussein Obama, his lack of self-awareness awareness and his self- delusion, endangers the stability of the whole wide world, beginning with the Mideast, and it leaves wide open the threat of nuclear annihilation for America and our allies, including Israel.

The arrogant stupidity of staking his legacy on being able to deliver something that is way above his pay grade, like attempting to control the Earth’s Climate, is so stupid, that I cannot find the words to accurately describe it.

While Obama is worrying about the effect of plastic water bottles on the earth, Iran continues to build a nuclear weapons which will lead to America’s annihilation.

While Obama is worrying about the Polar Bear, the Russian Bear is doing everything he can to make Obama look like the spineless weakling, which we already knew that he was, and in the meantime, possibly cut off America’s supply of oil from the Middle East.

If that 60 Minutes Interview last night did not scare the snot out of you, and make you realize what a self-absorbed Lightweight that Barack Hussein Obama truly is…you weren’t paying attention.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Tyranny of the Minority: What Happens When Our System of Checks and Balances is Bypassed

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

th (15)Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

Politico.com reports that

Buoyed by the success of his nuclear deal with Iran, President Barack Obama is preparing to move aggressively on other long-delayed priorities, including a major climate change summit this winter and his elusive quest to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

The National Security Council’s directorate of strategic planning has been quietly building an agenda of action items for the closing year of Obama’s presidency, in a White House that sees its work as far from complete, administration officials say.

“We have no intention of resting on our laurels,” said one senior administration official. “We have an ambitious foreign policy agenda that we’ll continue to pursue aggressively throughout the remainder of [the] fourth quarter of the administration.”

Part of that agenda includes striking a calmer post-Iran deal relationship with Israel — including a November visit to the White House by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that officials announced on Friday.

Also high on the to-do list: completing a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal to which Congress gave “fast-track” approval in June; bolstering counter-terrorism partnerships in Asia and Africa; and putting U.S.-China relations on a firmer footing, a project that will include a state visit to Washington by Chinese President Xi Jingping this month.

As Obama’s presidency draws to a close, he will focus increasingly on the policies his successor will inherit after he’s gone, according to sources familiar with the administration’s thinking.

“The last 16 months actually can be very important not only for this president’s legacy, but for setting up the next president’s administration,” said Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who is close to Obama foreign policy officials. “No matter what people say in campaigns, you’re most likely to see incremental change from administration to administration.”

Even as the Iran deal gets implemented in the months ahead, a potentially thorny process that will occupy significant bandwidth in the White House, Obama will shift his focus to climate.

An international climate summit kicks off at the end of November in Paris, where Obama hopes to find agreement on meaningful new limits on carbon gases. The summit is expected to be one focus of Xi’s visit.

Beneath the heady talk of agenda-setting, however, is the grim reality of a global stage where multiple fires burn despite Washington’s efforts to extinguish them. Obama could spend much of his final year performing triage on issues like the Islamic State, Syria’s civil war and the conflict in Ukraine.

Officials are also braced for possible new crises, including in Afghanistan, as U.S. troops withdraw from a country whose government and security forces remain fragile.

One of Obama’s post-Iran deal projects has already run into trouble as Secretary of State John Kerry has begun new diplomacy to find a political resolution to Syria’s civil war. Russia, a key backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad, has recently sent military personnel and equipment to the country—a dramatic escalation that has surprised and angered Obama and Kerry and may derail that project.

“We continue to believe that there needs to be a political solution to the conflict in Syria, and that support for the Assad regime, particularly in a military way, is unhelpful to achieving that goal,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Friday.

And although the White House been working on a new plan to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, a key promise from Obama’s 2008 campaign, it has been bedeviled by old obstacles, including political resistance to the transfer of detainees from Cuba onto U.S. soil.

Some Pentagon and intelligence officials remain deeply wary of freeing other detainees cleared for release, and some top officials are skeptical that the camp can be shut down as long as a Republican Congress remains in power.

When our Founding Fathers sat down to provide form and substance to the laws and procedures for governing this new country, which they had fought and won a bloody war over, by pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, they were very aware of the price of tyranny.

They determined that this new nation would be a Constitutional Republic, having had their fill of monarchies.

In order to ensure that no leader of this new nation would go mad with power, and become a tyrannical despot, our Founders set up a System of Checks and Balances, overseen by Three Branches of Government: the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial, with each branch having a distinct and LIMITED  role.

In an effort to keep this simple (in deference to any Modern American Liberals, who may be reading), here is a description of their powers:

The Legislative Branch is given the powers to make the laws. It has the following checks over the Executive Branch:

  • May override presidential vetoes with a two-thirds vote
  • Has the power over the purse strings to actually fund any executive actions
  • May remove the president through impeachment
  • Senate approves treaties
  • Senate approves presidential appointments

The Legislative Branch has the following checks over the Judicial Branch:

  • Creates lower courts

The Executive Branch is given the power to carry out the laws. It has the following checks over the Legislative Branch:

  • Veto power
  • Ability to call special sessions of Congress
  • Can recommend legislation
  • Can appeal to the people concerning legislation and more

The Executive Branch has the following checks over the Judicial Branch:

  • President appoints Supreme Court and other federal judges

The Judicial Branch is given the power to interpret the laws. It has the following checks over the Executive Branch:

  • Judges, once appointed for life, are free from controls from the executive branch
  • Courts can judge executive actions to be unconstitutional through the power of judicial review

 The Judicial Branch has the following checks over the Legislative Branch:

  • Courts can judge legislative acts to be unconstitutional.

The situation, which we as a nation, find ourselves in today, is one which our Founding Fathers sought valiantly to avoid.

We are suffering under an Imperious Presidency.

One in which the President of the United States does not care about the “Will of the People”, but, rather, is intent on implementing and enforcing his own Far Left Policial Ideology, resulting in a “Tyranny of the Minority”.

For example, the “victory” of The Iran Deal, which the Liberal website, i.com, was lauding in the article posted earlier in this blog, is one which, according to a poll from Pew Research, is supported by only 215 of Americans.

That’s a victory?

Climate Change is the Fool’s Gold of the “Politically Hip”. It is the biggest Con Job since P.T. Barham hung up a sign to fool the rubes, which read

This way to the Egress.

The Syria/ISIS/Middle East Situation is an erupting volcano of Radical Islam, which endangers the whole civilized world. And, make no mistake, boys and girls, it is Obama’s responsibility.

However, the situation which our nation finds itself in, could have been avoided…if there had been EFFECTIVE POLITICAL OPPOSTION to the plans and Machiavellian Machinations of Barack Hussein Obama.

Like the Tin Man, the Scarecrow, and the Cowardly Lion, who accompanied Dorothy down that fabled Yellow Brick Road to the Emerald City of Oz, if the Congressional Republican Elite, led by John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, had only had heart, brains, and courage, they could have used our System of Checks and Balances to thwart, or, at least, to slow down, all of Obama’s Plans, which have succeeded in, literally, “radically changing” the Shining City Upon a Hill, into something almost unrecognizable.

It would have helped if they had found some spines, too.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Obama to Surrender US Climate Sovereignty to United Nations

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

 

obamaburningconstitutionSince He is already in the process of surrendering our safety to Iran, Obama has decided to surrender our sovereignty to the United Nations.

The Washington Post reports that

The White House on Tuesday introduced President Obama’s blueprint for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by nearly a third over the next decade.

Mr. Obama’s plan, part of a formal written submission to the United Nations ahead of efforts to forge a global climate change accord in Paris in December, detailed the United States’ part of an ambitious jointpledge made by Mr. Obama and President Xi Jinping of China in November.

The United States and China are the world’s two largest greenhouse gas polluters. Mr. Obama said the United States would cut its emissions by 26 to 28 percent by 2025, while Mr. Xi said that China’s emissions would drop after 2030.

Mr. Obama’s new blueprint brings together several domestic initiatives that were already in the works, including freezing construction of new coal-fired power plants, increasing the fuel economy of vehicles and plugging methane leaks from oil and gas production. It is meant to describe how the United States will lead by example and meet its pledge for cutting emissions.

But the plan’s reliance on executive authority is an acknowledgment that any proposal to pass climate change legislation would be blocked by the Republican-controlled Congress.

At the heart of the plan are ambitious but politically contentious Environmental Protection Agency regulations meant to drastically cut planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s cars and coal-fired power plants. The plan also relies on a speedy timetable, which assumes that Mr. Obama’s administration will issue and begin enacting all such regulations before he leaves office.

Let me tell any idiotic individuals who might support this insane plan by Petulant President Pantywaist, the way I feel about “answering” to the United Nations.

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above you in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

All those things that you got away with in college, including burning our flag, protesting, being ungrateful, obnoxious, and unpatriotic, does not fly with the overwhelming majority of Americans.

What Americans have witnessed during this pitiful excuse for a President’s Administration, have disgusted Patriotic Americans to the point of rage.

On his nationally syndicated radio program, back in January of this year, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Maha Rushie, himself, spoke about Obama’s “Independence Proclamation” in which he proclaimed that what Congress would not do, he would accomplish by Executive Orders:

Executive orders to make things fair. He can do executive orders and executive actions to get rid of the unfairness. He’s gonna make this lousy country finally fair! … He’s got these Republicans standing in his way. “Okay, I’m gonna just start writing executive orders. “To hell with it! I’m gonna finally make everything fair.” Now, he might have a pen, and he might have a phone, but what he does not have is the constitutional power to run this country like a dictator…

…He’s a constitutional lawyer, and he should know better. But he doesn’t care. He doesn’t care about the Constitution. The Constitution is an impediment to Obama. The Constitution is not something to be respected — and it’s not just Obama, by the way. It’s to the vast majority of the intellectual, leftist elite. They really detest the Constitution, because it thwarts them. Some of you may not know this, but the United States Constitution was written to limit government power.

The US Constitution’s first 10 amendments specifically limit government’s power. Well, that’s not cool if you’re Obama or any of today’s liberal Democrats. That, to you, is shackles. They call that “a charter of negative liberties.” Stop and think of that. A document founded in the belief, the proclamation, the declaration, the primacy of individual liberty and freedom is considered “a charter of negative liberties.”

It’s something that gives the people individual primacy and freedom — and, to the left, that’s negative — and the reason they call it “a charter of negative liberties” is because it limits government. They don’t like that, and that’s what Obama was talking about, “You know, the heck with it!”

…Violating the Constitution — there’s no question about this, folks. It’s just a matter of whether people in power and who have the authority to do so want to stop it. Because if nobody’s gonna stop Obama, he’s gonna be able to keep doing it.

President Obama has been on a mission during his presidency to circumvent the system of checks and balances which Our Founding Fathers have so wisely put in place, in order to prevent exactly what our Imperial President is attempting to do.

Therefore, one can say that the president’s actions, concerning the issuance of “Memoranda”, are no less than tyrannical.

What did our Founding Fathers have to say about Tyranny?

The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men. -Samuel Adams

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.- Thomas Jefferson

And, this final quote, which is amazingly prophetic:

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

If you haven’t noticed, there has been an explosion of Conservative Bloggers during the Obama Administration. There is a reason for this.

Just as Benjamin Franklin (Poor Richard’s Almanac) and Thomas Paine (Common Sense) used their biting wit, as communicated by the Written Word, to fight tyranny in their time, so are “Citizen Bloggers” using the power of the Written Word once again, this time magnified in scope a thousand-fold by the power of the Internet, to fight an Imperious President.

Because…

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. – Edmund Burke

Speak your mind. It is your right and legacy as an American Citizen.

Do not allow yourself and the country which has been bequeathed to us by the blood, sweat, and tears of those who have gone before us, to “go gently into that good night”.

Rage, rage against the dying of The Light.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Why Obama is Still Wasting OUR Money on “the Fight Against Climate Change (Global Warming)”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

climate changeHave you ever wondered why President Barack Hussein Obama is still so preoccupied with Global Warming/Climate Change?

I mean, how arrogant do you have to be to believe that you can make a change in the very weather itself, which is controlled by Someone way above your pay grade?

This faux science, invented by Al Gore, and propagandized in the book and the movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”, has become an industry, a failed one, but an industry none the less.

Ranging from washouts like Solyndra to GreenTech Automotive, millions of taxpayer dollars have been sunk into these so-called green projects, since the advent of the Obama administration.

Now, word comes that Obama is going to meet with climatologists, in an effort to fight “Climate Change”.

Obama doesn’t even have a decent jump shot. How can he control the Earth’s Weather?

Have you ever wondered why Obama has been so gung-ho about Global Warming/Climate Change in the first place?

Well, we can trace Obama’s  concern back to his days in Chicago, as I wrote about in the blog, “Psst. Bud. You Want to Buy Some Air?”, posted on 4/29/10:

It all began with the Joyce Foundation.  This foundation started as the financial back-up plan of a widow whose family had made millions in the lumber industry.

After her death, it was run by philanthropic people who increasingly dedicated their giving to Liberal causes, including gun control, environmentalism and school changes.  It has grown over the years until it is now bigger than the TIDES Foundation and actually funds it.

The Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the capitol outlay to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it trades is, believe it or not, air.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is proud to let everyone know that it is “North America’s only cap-and-trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.” Barack Obama served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002 . What a coincidence, that, as president, pushing cap-and-trade is one of his highest priorities, huh?

Currently, CCX members are legally bound together by a  voluntaryagreement to regulate greenhouse gases.

The CCX provides the vehicle by which to trade the very pollution permits and carbon offsets that would be  imposed by government mandate through the administration’s cap-and-trade proposals .

Climate trading could be a $10 trillion dollar market if cap-and-trade measures like Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer are signed into law.  These measures will make energy prices go through the roof, even as companies buy and sell permits for permission to emit those six “greenhouse” gases (like paying for forgiveness of your sins).

Founders of the CCX include former Vice-President of the United States Al Gore.  Gore is co-founder of Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offsets of no value whatsoever.  These offsets allow rich polluters to continue to pollute with a clear conscience (go and sin no more, wink, wink).  Other founders include former Goldman Sachs partner David Blood, as well as Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris, also of Goldman Sachs.

In 2006, CCX received a big boost when another investor bought a 10% stake on the prospect of untold riches. That investor was (ta daaah) Goldman Sachs, currently in the spotlight for selling financial instruments it knew never had the chance of a snowball in July of succeeding.

The actual mechanism that enabled trading on the exchange was bought and patented by none other than Franklin Raines, who was CEO of Fannie Mae at the time.

Raines struck it rich to the tune of some $90 million by buying and bundling bad mortgages that led to the horrible economy that we are still dealing with.  Why would a mortgage guy be interested in Climate Change?  Simple.   Cap-and-trade will make housing costs go up, too.

Goldman and Sachs, who gave around $1,000,000 to Obama’s Presidential Campaign, is under investigation by the SEC and in the midst of an inquisition by the U.S. Senate, as I alluded to previously.  Why are they putting up with this abuse when the Democrats themselves are the ones who have benefited the most from the political benevolence  of Wall Street in the past?

Answer:  money and power.  Goldman Sachs is going along with this dog and pony show because of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  If Cap and Trade is passed, they and the rest of the investors that comprise the Chicago Climate Exchange are going to be swimming in a moat of money.

President Barack Hussein Obama was also one of those Board Members of the Joyce Foundation, who helped to found the CCX to the tune of $1,100,000.

Back on 6/29/09, canadafreepress.com reported that

If we follow the time line on where Obama was during the funding of the Chicago Climate Exchange, he was still a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School teaching constitutional law, with his law license becoming inactive a year later in 2002.

It may be interesting to note that the Chicago Climate Exchange in spite of its hype, is a veritable rat’s nest of cronyism. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers.

What a flap when it was discovered that the senator from Chicago had nursed on Saul Alinsky’s milk, had his political career launched at a coffee party held by domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, and sat for 20 years, uncomplaining in front of the “God-dam-America pulpit of resentment-challenged Jeremiah Wright.

Folk were naturally outraged that the empty suit who would go on to become TOTUS was spawned from such anti-American activism.

But the media should have been hollering, “Stop Thief!” instead.

The same Chicago Climate Exchange promoting public rip-off was funded by Obama before he was POTUS.

Even as man-made global warming is being exposed as a money-generating hoax, Obama is working feverishly to push the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme through Congress.

Fortunately for our nation, Obama’s Cap and Trade Bill failed to leave the Senate in July of 2010, leading the Chicago Climate Exchange closed up shop in November of 2010.

So, why is Obama still on this Quixotic Crusade?

1.  Appeasing the Gullible -Hey “The Facts Are In.” The “science” is true. And, as P.T. Barnum said,

There is a sucker born every minute.

Remember…these “true believers of the Goreacle, also voted for Obama. They are easily fooled.

2. Money, Money, Money – Too much money invested by Democrat “Power Brokers” and to much of American Taxpayers money spent needlessly to back down now. Obama’s got political promises to keep.

3. Hey, look! Squirrel! – With Obama and his minions about to get a Proctological Exam by the Congressional Select Committee on Benghazi, Obama needs to grasp for whatever national distraction he can come up with.

So, there you go. I wonder what argument Obama is going to present to those climatologists he is meeting with? 

Perhaps, he will present a showing of “The Day After Tomorrow”, the movie starring Dennis Quaid, which bombed spectacularly, in which the ice was chasing everybody.

ROFL!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama Issuing EO to Change Fuel Standards of Trucking Industry to Combat “Climate Change”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

trucking21814President Barack Hussein Obama is using his #2 pencil and Big Chief Tablet to write another Executive Order, and this time he may just erase an entire American Industry with it.

The New York Times reported that

President Obama on Tuesday ordered the development of tough new fuel standards for the nation’s fleet of heavy-duty trucks as part of what aides say will be an increasingly muscular and unilateral campaign to tackle climate change through the use of the president’s executive power.

The new regulations, to be drafted by the administration by March 2015 and completed a year later so they are in place before Mr. Obama leaves office, are the latest in a series of actions intended to cut back on greenhouse gases without the sort of comprehensive legislation the president failed to push through Congress in his first term.

The new regulation would primarily affect the country’s 600 coal-fired power plants, like this one in Texas, and could ultimately shutter hundreds of them.E.P.A. Staff Struggling to Create Pollution RuleFEB. 4, 2014

The limits on truck tailpipe pollution would combine with previous rules requiring passenger cars and light trucks to burn fuel more efficiently and pending rules to limit the carbon emissions of power plants. Cumulatively, experts said the à la carte approach should enable Mr. Obama to meet his target of cutting carbon pollution in the United States by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. But they said he would still be far short of his goal of an 80 percent reduction by 2050.

“Improving gas mileage for these trucks is going to drive down our oil imports even further,” Mr. Obama said at a Safeway grocery distribution center here, flanked by a Peterbilt truck and Safeway and Coca-Cola cabs. “That reduces carbon pollution even more, cuts down on businesses’ fuel costs, which should pay off in lower prices for consumers. So it’s not just a win-win, it’s a win-win-win. We got three wins.”

Not everyone sees it that way. United States car and truck manufacturers have lobbied heavily against aggressive increases in federal fuel economy standards, saying that they could increase vehicle prices and diminish safety. More broadly, Republicans have said that the president should not single-handedly impose what they consider onerous requirements on vast swaths of the energy economy when Congress has opted against its own intervention.

The announcement was part of the president’s vow in his State of the Union address last month to advance his agenda “with or without Congress.” But while most of the actions taken since then have been relatively modest, like ordering a study of job training programs, one area where Mr. Obama both has the power to take more sweeping action and seems intent on using it is the environment.

…A coalition of shippers that stand to benefit from lower fuel costs, including FedEx, Wabash National Corporation and Waste Management Inc., welcomed the president’s action and released its own suggestions to shape the administration’s new regulations.

“This collaborative approach will result in realistic, achievable goals and an effective regulatory framework to improve fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Douglas W. Stotlar, president of Con-way Inc., the nation’s third-largest freight company and a member of the coalition.

The American Trucking Association took a more cautious view, saying that it had worked with the administration on previous rules. “As we begin this new round of standards, A.T.A. hopes the administration will set forth a path that is both based on the best science and research available and economically achievable,” said Bill Graves, the association’s chief executive.

Mr. Obama pointed to what he called an emerging consensus. “If rivals like PepsiCo and Coca-Cola or U.P.S. and FedEx or AT&T and Verizon, if they can join together on this, then maybe Democrats and Republicans can do the same,” he said.

The fact that the Trucking Industry plays a crucial part in our nation’s economy is no surprise to anyone who works in it.

But, did you know how big a role the Trucking Industry plays?

According to the Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, trucks moved 73.7 percent of the country’s freight in 2012, carrying $10 trillion worth of the country’s $13.6 trillion in freight.

These fact come straight from the DOT’s recently released Commodity Flow Survey, a survey which is  done roughly every five years.

Trucks also carried 70 percent of the tonnage moved in 2012, hauling 8 billion of the 11.7 billion tons shipped last year.

Per the CFS, the for-hire trucking industry carried $6.6 trillion in freight, or 48.5 percent of the total, while private trucks hauled 25.2 percent, or $3.4 trillion.

In the Trucking Industry, like every other industry, the name of the game is revenue.

When this battle in Obama’s Quixotic tilt against his evil nemesis, the fictional Climate Change, comes to fruition, it will damage the Trucking Industry, by cutting into their profitability.

This decrease in revenue will be compensated for by raising their price per mile to their clients, who include the Food Industry, the Construction Industry, the Retail Industry, the Pharmaceutical Industry, and, to bring it around full-circle, the Oil Industry itself, among others.

Obama, in his zeal to “appear to be doing something” about a Liberal and Celebrity Cause Du Jour, will harm our nation’s economy, placing American workers even further behind the eight ball than we are now, regarding of what his sycophants in the industry and he himself will tell you.

Obama’s over-reaching economic ignorance will leave our nation in a hole we will never be able to climb out of, if he is not stood up to…immediately.

Until He Comes,

KJ