Dire Warning: Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty? Lord Christopher Monckton: “We Are At The 11th Hour!”

On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton, a noted climate change skeptic, gave a presentation at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN. In this 4 minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning… (I heard him speak about this over a year ago in Australia when nobody in the U.S. was listening… and I have heard others speak about this just to be ridiculed by the powers that be so that the average Americans would dismiss it as lunacy or a conspiracy. There is a conspiracty all right, but on the other side!!)

Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.

The problem with signing this treaty for the U.S. is the way our own Constitution is written, signing this treaty will override our Constitution. The hour for us to stand up is NOW!! And the warning is coming from a foreign friend…

Signing this treaty will not affect any other country like it will affect ours because of the way our Country’s Constitution is written and because of the fees that will levied against us for our “past sins”

Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?

Lord Monckton: Copenhagen Treaty Will Establish Marxist World Government

Sign the Petition Opposing Cap-and-Trade - But it is going to take more than signing this to stop the bigger goal… and we need to stop it NOW!!!

Who else are proponents of this treaty? Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton… to name just a few.

In case there is still someone out there wondering why Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize (in advance) – HMMM… Just Can’t Figure Out the Obama Nobel Prize??? Perhaps the Answer is Thorbjorn Jagland… or perhaps the answer is for delivering America…

Source: Minnesota Majority: mnmajoritydotorg’s Channel

Updated: October 18, 2009 - If you do not see the handwriting on the wall, you had better prepare yourselves for an entirely different world that is about to emerge before us. Obama is due to sign a new treaty in Copenhagen in December at the UN's Climate Change Conference, which effectively cedes US sovereignty to a "new global partnership" headed by the United Nations. Read the following article and then scroll down for a link to the UN's website where you can read in detail about the plans for unifying the world under one government and one monetary system with the ultimate goal being the "equitable" distribution (sound familiar?) of all the world's resources, goods and protections. - CFP: Obama Posed to Cede US Sovereignty, Claims British Lord

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_02.shtml - Take notice of the little flag on all of the UN's site pages which says "Copenhagen: Seal the Deal!" They are openly advertising that when this "deal" is signed, it will seal the agenda they have been working towards for years....one world government/NWO.

There is a way to STOP this! It's called a CONTINENTAL Congress. NOT Constitutional Congress which is CHANGING the Constitution! We DO NOT want to CHANGE the Constitution! CONTINENTAL Congress documents abuses which are devastating our country. This is a peaceful, lawful means through which "The People" can stop the violations and restore Constitutional obedience in America.

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org
www.GiveMeLiberty.org

Here's one representative who is speaking his mind about Obama's MARXIST background and Obama's wish for a more "global" government. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, (CA-46), spoke on a panel yesterday (Oct. 17) at Western CPAC. The panelists discussed the anti-American and radical policies of the current administration.:

Related Resources:

Global Climate Scam

Copenhagen Treaty Will Demand American Taxpayers Buy “Dignity” for Third World

CFP: Obama Posed to Cede US Sovereignty, Claims British Lord

Climate Myths and National Security

Solar Sticker Shock Hits Washington County

Gore-Backed Car Firm Gets Large U.S. Loan

Senators to Unveil Draft Climate Bill

Boxer and Kerry Reintroduce Cap and Trade…

HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today's obsession with global warming

Read the book that started it all: Al Gore's "Earth in the Balance"

"Global Warming or Global Governance? What the media refuse to tell you about so-called climate change"

"The Sky's Not Falling! Why it's OK to chill on global warming"

Apollo Alliance Writing Legislation? Stimulus Bill, Cap and Trade Bill, Healthcare Bill? America Needs To Know!

Going Rogue

The Goal…

Green Hell

Red Hot Lies

America for Sale - American for Sale Review

Drill

Copenhagen Treaty Must Be Stopped

Doomsday Called Off - Video

The Great Man-Made Global Warming Swindle - Video

Arctic Sea Ice Video (Jan 2000 - May 2009) - Video

If you missed Big Hollywood's Premiere: Not Evil Just Wrong – The Movie Al Gore does not want you to see!!! Go HERE to order your own copy.

Lack of Understanding Exploited to Perpetuate Climate Science Falsehoods

Edited to add @ 2:30am October 18, 2009: Commenter “Ralph” provides another link to a copy of the New Copenhagen Treaty which Monckton referenced and wattsupwiththat.com posted. This time it comes from an official United Nations website. There is no doubt now. This document is authentic.

T. Boone Pickens Scuttles Wind Farm Project

Texas oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens has called off plans to build the world's biggest wind farm in the Texas Panhandle, The Wall Street Journal said.

Pickens said the wind farm project was scuttled partly because of the lack of adequate transmission lines to carry the electricity from remote locations to cities, according to the paper.

The oil tycoon had hoped to build new transmission lines but could not secure financing, the paper said.

Pickens plans to find new homes for the turbines that he already agreed to buy, the paper said, citing a statement.

Pickens could not immediately be reached for comment by Reuters.

(Reporting by Ajay Kamalakaran in Bangalore; Editing by Greg Mahlich)

© 2009 Reuters

Source: NewsMax

Is there anyone out there other than me that is shaking their head in disbelief?? The government is pushing their global warming (ah climate change hoax) agenda down our throats and trying to convince the American People that they need to pass cap-and-trade, which in reality is cap-and-tax, the largest invasive power grab and tax increase in American/world history… and someone like T. Boone Pickens can’t get funding for his “green” project in this climate??? Hello???

And to confirm the lack of available financing, Donald Trump just said the same thing last week in an interview with Fox News’s Greta van Susteren:

When Greta asked Donald Trump what he’d do if he were President he said he would force the banks to loan the stimulus money that we, the taxpayers, have given them. He said no matter how wealthy you are, you cannot go out and get a loan. The banks are just sitting on that money, covering their bottom-line.

It is becoming ever more clear that the stimulus was a disaster, money is not flowing down, the Obama Financial Team either doesn’t know what they are doing (per V.P. Biden) or are purposely doing things to re-make or negatively impact our entire system and that we are being sold a bill of goods, including Cap-and-Trade, Nationalized Health, and the list goes on.

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• President Trump? What If?
• No More Green Guilt
• Scientist: Global Warming Claims a Lot of Hype
• Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into ‘Supressed’ Climate Change Report
• Energy Czar Has Not Read Climate Bill Either & Boehner Say Bill Is Pile of S__t!
• 8 GOP Votes Pave Way For Cap-and-Trade
• Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
• The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
• House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
• WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
• Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
• Power Grab
• Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming
• Video: Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation"’
• Green Hell
• Red Hot Lies

No More Green Guilt

Every investment prospectus warns that "past performance is no guarantee of future results." But suppose that an investment professional's record contains nothing but losses, of failed prediction after failed prediction. Who would still entrust that investor with his money?

Yet, in public policy there is one group with a dismal track record that Americans never seem to tire of supporting. We invest heavily in its spurious predictions, suffer devastating losses, and react by investing even more, never seeming to learn from the experience. The group I’m talking about is the environmentalist movement.

Consider their track record—like the dire warnings of catastrophic over-population. Our unchecked consumption, we were told, was depleting the earth's resources and would wipe humanity out in a massive population crash. Paul Ehrlich's 1968 bestseller, The Population Bomb, forecasted hundreds of millions of deaths per year throughout the 1970s, to be averted, he insisted, only by mass population control "by compulsion if voluntary methods fail."

But instead of global-scale famine and death, the 1970s witnessed an agricultural revolution. Despite a near-doubling of world population, food production continues to grow as technological innovation creates more and more food on each acre of farmland. The U.S., which has seen its population grow from 200 to 300 million, is more concerned about rampant obesity than a shortage of food.

The Alar scare in 1989 is another great example. The NRDC, an environmentalist lobby group, engineered media frenzy over the baseless assertion that Alar, an apple ripening agent, posed a cancer threat. The ensuing panic cost the apple industry over $200 million dollars, and Alar was pulled from the market even though it was a perfectly safe and value-adding product.

Or consider the campaign against the insecticide DDT, beginning with Rachel Carson's 1962 book Silent Spring. The world had been on the brink of eradicating malaria using DDT—but for Carson and her followers, controlling disease-carrying mosquitoes was an arrogant act of "tampering" with nature. Carson issued dire warnings that nature was "capable of striking back in unexpected ways" unless people showed more "humility before [its] vast forces." She asserted, baselessly, that among other things DDT would cause a cancer epidemic. Her book led to such a public outcry that, despite its life-saving benefits and mountains of scientific evidence supporting its continued use, DDT was banned in the United States in 1972. Thanks to environmentalist opposition, DDT was almost completely phased out worldwide. And while there is still zero evidence of a DDT cancer risk, the resurgence of malaria needlessly kills over a million people a year.

Time and time again, the supposedly scientific claims of environmentalists have proven to be pseudo-scientific nonsense, and the Ehrlichs and Carsons of the world have proven to be the Bernard Madoffs of science. Yet Americans have ignored the evidence and have instead invested in their claims—accepting the blame for unproven disasters and backing coercive, harmful "solutions."

Today, of course, the Green doomsday prediction is for catastrophic global warming to destroy the planet—something that environmentalists have pushed since at least the early 1970s, when they were also worried about a possible global cooling shifting the planet into a new ice age.

But in this instance, just as with Alar, DDT, and the population explosion, the science is weak and the "solutions" drastic. We are told that global warming is occurring at an accelerating rate, yet global temperatures have been flat for the last decade. We are told that global warming is causing more frequent and intense hurricanes, yet the data doesn’t support such a claim. We are warned of a potentially catastrophic sea level rise of 20 feet over the next century, but that requires significant melting of the land-based ice in Antarctica and Greenland. Greenland has retained its ice sheet for over 100,000 years despite wide-ranging temperatures and Antarctica has been cooling moderately for the last half-century.

Through these distortions of science we are again being harangued to support coercive policies. We are told that our energy consumption is destroying the planet and that we must drastically reduce our carbon emissions immediately. Never mind that energy use is an indispensable component of everything we do, that 85 percent of the world's energy is carbon-based, or that there are no realistic, abundant alternatives available any time soon, and that billions of people are suffering today from lack of energy.

Despite all of that, Americans seem to once again be moving closer to buying the Green investment pitch and backing destructive Green policies. Why don't we learn from past experience? Do you think a former Madoff investor would hand over money to him again?

It's not that we're too stupid to learn, it's that we are holding onto a premise that distorts our understanding of reality. Americans are the most successful individuals in history - even in spite of this economic downturn - in terms of material wealth and the quality of life and happiness it brings. We are heirs to the scientific and industrial revolutions, which have increased life expectancy from 30 years to 80 and improved human life in countless, extraordinary ways. Through our ingenuity and productive effort, we have achieved an unprecedented prosperity by reshaping nature to serve our needs. Yet we have always regarded this productivity and prosperity with a certain degree of moral suspicion. The Judeo-Christian ethic of guilt and self-sacrifice leads us to doubt the propriety of our success and makes us susceptible to claims that we will ultimately face punishment for our selfishness--that our prosperity is sinful and can lead only to an apocalyptic judgment day.

Environmentalism preys on our moral unease and fishes around for doomsday scenarios. If our ever-increasing population or life-enhancing chemicals have not brought about the apocalypse, then it must be our use of fossil fuels that will. Despite the colossal failures of past Green predictions, we buy into the latest doomsday scare because, on some level, we have accepted an undeserved guilt. We lack the moral self-assertiveness to regard our own success as virtuous; we think we deserve punishment.

It is time to stop apologizing for prosperity. We must reject the unwarranted fears spread by Green ideology by rejecting unearned guilt. Instead of meekly accepting condemnation for our capacity to live, we should proudly embrace our unparalleled ability to alter nature for our own benefit as the highest of virtues.

Let’s stop wallowing in Green guilt. It’s time to recapture our Founding Fathers' admiration for the pursuit of each individual's own happiness.

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

Source: Fushion Magazine Preview Article

By Keith Lockitch, PhD in physics, is a resident fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, focusing on science and environmentalism.

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights is located in Washington, DC. It is a Division of the Ayn Rand Institute, whose mission is to advance Ayn Rand's ideas. To learn more go to www.aynrand.org

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• Scientist: Global Warming Claims a Lot of Hype
• Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into ‘Supressed’ Climate Change Report
• Energy Czar Has Not Read Climate Bill Either & Boehner Say Bill Is Pile of S__t!
• 8 GOP Votes Pave Way For Cap-and-Trade
• Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
• The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
• House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
• WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
• Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
• Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming
• Video: Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation"’
• Green Hell
• Red Hot Lies

Scientist: Global Warming Claims a Lot of Hype

Lawmakers who described the alleged effects of global warming are spreading a lot of "eye wash," a top climate scientist says.

Photo: UCLA Shutterbug New Hampshire Jan 2009

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax, S. Fred Singer, a renowned climatologist and professor of environmental sciences emeritus at the University of Virginia, discussed the background behind the recent open letter to Congress he and six other scientists sent to members of the House and Senate.

In the letter, the scientists cited a letter sent by the Woods Hole Research Center, which exhorted Congress to act quickly to avoid a global disaster due to alleged global warming.

Singer said the Woods Hole group “put on a sort of scary exaggerated kind of letter to Congress ahead of the vote in the House in an obvious attempt to stampede them into voting for the Waxman-Markey [cap and trade environmental] bill.

Singer explained: “We thought it would be useful to write a letter that would provide a balance. The instigator of the letter was Harold Lewis, a retired professor of physics at the University of California in Santa Barbara.” Lewis, he said, “provided the initial draft, several of us made comments and seven of us signed our names to it."

Lewis sent the letter "to every member of Congress ... and it was also sent to a number of bloggers and others who are generally sympathetic" to the group’s point of view.

“The letter itself is self-explanatory,” Singer said, noting that it did not “give much detail."

“Two of us, Richard Lindzen and myself, are actively working on climate issues. The others are renowned physicists – people of some stature, members of the National Academy and others who have a good amount of scientific judgment but who have not directly published or been pre-eminent in climate research.”

Asked if it is not established that the earth is cooling, Singer explained that “The earth is either always warming or cooling; one cannot tell which it is unless one specifies the time interval.

“It's like the stock market: it is rising or falling. Both depend on whether it's a week or a month or a year. It's the same with the temperature – if we start during the last Ice Age 15,000 years ago, then the temperatures have warmed. If you start from the Little Ice Age, which ended 200 years ago, it certainly has warmed.

“If you start from 1998, however, then it has not warmed – it has cooled. So it depends on the time interval. People argue about this, and much of the difference between groups comes about when you don't specify the time interval. There's no question that the climate has not been warming in the last 10 years."

Reminded that there were members of Congress standing up in the debate and talking about the terrible things that are happening now as a result of global warming, Singer said: “That's all eye wash. That's not true. That's simply hype.”

He went on to explain that “Nothing untoward is happening. The ice is not melting any faster, the sea level is not rising any faster. Hurricanes are not increasing in intensity or frequency; there's been no impact. Those things are always hard to measure. It depends on statistics. The easiest thing is to specify temperature, because it's easily measured and there is relatively little disagreement on what temperature stands for.”

He then went on to challenge what he called former Vice President Al Gore’s “mantra” that he says Gore’s "been handing out for years now – that the science is settled. That is simply not true.

“When you have 31,000 scientists signing the Oregon petition saying they disagree with the current wisdom that humans are producing increased warming, it speaks for itself. It's true that the 31,000 are not all climate scientists. There are not that many in the world.

“However, it does show you that the science is not settled. Among climate scientists there is a split. There are those who believe in models, and those who believe in observations. And there are some who don't believe in both, and some who don't believe in any.

“The modelers believe that the models correctly describe what's going on in the atmosphere, and they trust their models to predict the future. And the models all predict increased global warming. Some more, some less. There are plenty models in the world, and they all get different results. We don't know which one of them is correct, if any, or even if any of them is correct.

Then there are those – sometimes called the skeptics, but we prefer to call them the realists – who believe in the observations, who believe that the atmosphere tells us what's going on. The models try to describe what's going on in the atmosphere, but they don't succeed. It's extremely difficult – the atmosphere is very complicated. For example, the models can't really describe clouds. Yet clouds are very, very important. So that's the basic split.

“When the observations show that the climate has not been warming in the last 10 years, which contradicts the models, who are you going to believe? The models or the observations. Obviously, we believe in the observations.

“When you ask the other side to debate on this issue they either won't debate; or if they do debate, they say, ‘Well there must be something wrong with the observations.'”

Singer agreed that it is a case of "do you believe what the models tell you, or do you believe in your lying eyes?"

Friday, July 3, 2009 10:17 PM
By: Phil Brennan - 2009 Newsmax

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into ‘Suppressed’ Climate Change Report
• Video: Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation"’
• Energy Czar Has Not Read Climate Bill Either & Boehner Say Bill Is Pile of S__t!
• 8 GOP Votes Pave Way For Cap-and-Trade
• Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
• The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
• House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
• WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
• Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
• Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming
• Green Hell
• Red Hot Lies

Economists Point to Rising Debt as Next Crisis

Yanina Manolova / AP

The soaring national debt is recorded on the National Debt Clock in New York. The national debt was $11,518,472,742,288 on Wednesday, according to the Treasury Department, but could actually be as high as $184,000, explained below.

WASHINGTON - The Founding Fathers left one legacy not celebrated on Independence Day but which affects us all. It's the national debt.

The country first got into debt to help pay for the Revolutionary War. Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.4 trillion — equivalent to about $37,000 for each and every American. And it's expanding by over $1 trillion a year.

The mountain of debt easily could become the next full-fledged economic crisis without firm action from Washington, economists of all stripes warn.

"Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability in the longer term, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke recently told Congress.

Higher taxes, or reduced federal benefits and services — or a combination of both — may be the inevitable consequences.

The debt is complicating efforts by President Barack Obama and Congress to cope with the worst recession in decades as stimulus and bailout spending combine with lower tax revenues to widen the gap.

Interest payments on the debt alone cost $452 billion last year — the largest federal spending category after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense. It's quickly crowding out all other government spending. And the Treasury is finding it harder to find new lenders.

U.S. has been debt-free only once, in 1834-35
The United States went into the red the first time in 1790 when it assumed $75 million in the war debts of the Continental Congress.

Alexander Hamilton, the first treasury secretary, said, "A national debt, if not excessive, will be to us a national blessing."

Some blessing.

Since then, the nation has only been free of debt once, in 1834-1835.

The national debt has expanded during times of war and usually contracted in times of peace, while staying on a generally upward trajectory. Over the past several decades, it has climbed sharply — except for a respite from 1998 to 2000, when there were annual budget surpluses, reflecting in large part what turned out to be an overheated economy.

Middle East wars helped 'break' the debt clock
The debt soared with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and economic stimulus spending under President George W. Bush and now Obama. And although Obama inherited a large debt and economic problems from Bush, he has already quadrupled Bush’s debt over the next 10-years, after less than 6-months in office.

The odometer-style "debt clock" near Times Square — put in place in 1989 when the debt was a mere $2.7 trillion — ran out of numbers and had to be shut down when the debt surged past $10 trillion in 2008.

The clock has since been refurbished so higher numbers fit. There are several debt clocks on Web sites maintained by public interest groups that let you watch hundreds, thousands, millions zip by in a matter of seconds.

The debt gap is "something that keeps me awake at night," Obama says.

He pledged to cut the budget "deficit" roughly in half by the end of his first term. But "deficit" just means the difference between government receipts and spending in a single budget year.

This year's deficit is now estimated at about $1.85 trillion.

Deficits don't reflect holdover indebtedness from previous years. Some spending items — such as emergency appropriations bills and receipts in the Social Security program — aren't included, either, although they are part of the national debt.

The national debt is a broader, and more telling, way to look at the government's balance sheets than glancing at deficits.

U.S. is more than $11 trillion in debt
According to the Treasury Department, which updates the number "to the penny" every few days, the national debt was $11,518,472,742,288 on Wednesday.

The overall debt is now slightly over 80 percent of the annual output of the entire U.S. economy, as measured by the gross domestic product.

By historical standards, it's not proportionately as high as during World War II, when it briefly rose to 120 percent of GDP. But it's still a huge liability.

Also, the United States is not the only nation struggling under a huge national debt. Among major countries, Japan, Italy, India, France, Germany and Canada have comparable debts as percentages of their GDPs.

Where does the government borrow all this money from?

Treasury securities still seen as safe investments
The debt is largely financed by the sale of Treasury bonds and bills. Even today, amid global economic turmoil, those still are seen as one of the world's safest investments.

That's one of the rare upsides of U.S. government borrowing.

Treasury securities are suitable for individual investors and popular with other countries, especially China, Japan and the Persian Gulf oil exporters, the three top foreign holders of U.S. debt.

But as the U.S. spends trillions to stabilize the recession-wracked economy, helping to force down the value of the dollar, the securities become less attractive as investments. Some major foreign lenders are already paring back on their purchases of U.S. bonds and other securities.

And if major holders of U.S. debt were to flee, it would send shock waves through the global economy — and sharply force up U.S. interest rates.

As time goes by, demographics suggest things will get worse before they get better, even after the recession ends, as more baby boomers retire and begin collecting Social Security and Medicare benefits.

Public concerned about debt's effects on future
While the president remains personally popular, polls show there is rising public concern over his handling of the economy and the government's mushrooming debt — and what it might mean for future generations.

If things can't be turned around, including establishing a more efficient health care system (and not the one presently being crammed down American’s throat now by the Democrats and the Obama administration) "We are on an utterly unsustainable fiscal course," said the White House budget director, Peter Orszag.

Some budget-restraint activists claim even the debt understates the nation's true liabilities.

The Peter G. Peterson Foundation, established by a former commerce secretary and investment banker, argues that the $11.4 trillion debt figures does not take into account roughly $45 trillion in unlisted liabilities and unfunded retirement and health care commitments.

That would actually put the nation's full obligations (now) at $56 trillion, or roughly $184,000 per American, according to this calculation.

Source: Associated Press - updated 11:31 a.m. PT, Sat., July 4, 2009

Passing and accepting either the Cap-and-Trade or the Obama Health Care Plan in its present form, both being ramroded down American’s throats without knowing what they are getting and without their representatives being given time to read the plans or bills, would only worsen the present situation and increase the level of debt even more. Cap-and-Trade is a political power grab that wouldl interject government into every aspect of American life and would tax every American into the poor farm with virtually no affect on global warming (or climate change as it is now called), on which humans questionably have had any or little affect. And although healthcare reform including Medicare is vital, the government involved plan is the wrong path.

Cap-and-Trade is a no go… just look at Spain and other countries who have taken the “Green” route. We will lose not gain jobs; we will interject government control into all areas of our lives; and the cost of energy and everything else will skyrocket, including taxes. We need to incentivize the private sector to develop clean and efficient energy along with allowing more drilling and nuclear development as well as revisiting present restrictions and releasing patents that have been bought up by Big Oil, the Auto Industry and Unions.

ObamaCare is also a no go… Just read the stats of countries with socialized or nationalized medicine and the records of Canadians who have testified before the Senate about their care… and why they come to the U.S. if they are really sick. Again, we need to incentivize the private sector, work with or legislate change through the AMA, Big Pharma and private health insurance companies to workout a better and more affordable system and allow creative programs as well as including natural alternatives to be used and considered. We need reform not a government run system. Medicare, Social Security, Veteran’s Benefits and the Post Office are examples of government run programs. Need we say more? Let the Obama Administration fix those 4-programs first, before taking on another program that won’t work and will cost us more money for worse care for everyone while still leaving people without healthcare.

And while President Obama feels he has a good connection with the Arab World he should use it to negotiate with OPEC… Lower priced oil would made drastic a difference in our economy and debt.

Perhaps we should also ask what happened to Obama’s campaign promise of going through the budget line by line as well as reviewing government programs and jobs and streamling? He promised to cut out the fat, lower the cost of government and complete transparency… and well as no tax increases of any kind for anyone making under $250,000 a year. He also promised to used his power of line item veto. None of this has happened, spending is rampant and indirect taxes as well as huge increases for Cap-and-Trade and Healthcare are in the works.

Start calling, writing, faxing and emailing your U.S Congressperson, Senator and the White House… “NO” on Cap-and-Trade and “NO” on nationalized healthcare or any healthcare program that includes a government or single payer option… or our children and grandchildren will never dig out from the debt!! You have the power... 2010 and 2012 elections are right around the corner, in political terms, and there are grassroots movements springing up everywhere.

Remember the National Debt Clock… tick tock, tick tock, tick tock… Ask Marion~

“Taxes can be reversed, stimulus debt can eventually be repaid but if we let Cap-and-Trade and government option health care pass, the United States as we know it will be changed negatively forever!” …Dick Morris on Hannity.

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

Related Resources:

• President Trump? What If?
• Veterans Call for Flags to Fly Upside Down
• Helen Thomas: Not Even Nixon Tried to Control the Media Like Obama
• Obama Busted Stacking Townhall Meeting – Cancer Victim Who Told Sad Story to Obama Id Democrat Party Volunteer
• Obama's Plan to Change U.S. Health Care System Will Cost Nearly Two TRILLON Dollars
• Welcome To ObamaCare Theatre
• Alice in Medical Care
• Here Comes Health Care Rationing
• Safeway Healthcare Program Gets Attention
• As one giant white elephant is born – government health care, another is being dismantled by the private sector
• Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into ‘Suppressed’ Climate Change Report
• Dems Cap and Trade Creates ‘Retrofit’ Policy for Homes and Businesses
• Cap and trade, with public option health care, will harm our economy « Wellsy’s World
• Czarred and Feathered
• Power Grab
• Catastrophe or Catastrophe CD
• Glenn Beck's Common Sense
• Green Hell
• Money Mischief
• Red Hot Lies
• American Progressivism

Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report

Administration Buried Report Questioning Global Warming

Republicans are raising questions about why the EPA apparently dismissed an analyst's report questioning the science behind global warming.

EPA analyst Alan Carlin raised questions about the impact of global warming on areas like Greenland. Shown here is an iceberg off Ammassalik Island, Greenland. (AP Photo)

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure.

According to internal e-mails that have been made public by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Carlin's boss told him in March that his material would not be incorporated into a broader EPA finding and ordered Carlin to stop working on the climate change issue. The draft EPA finding released in April lists six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, that the EPA says threaten public health and welfare.

An EPA official told FOXNews.com on Monday that Carlin, who is an economist -- not a scientist -- included "no original research" in his report. The official said that Carlin "has not been muzzled in the agency at all," but stressed that his report was entirely "unsolicited."

"It was something that he did on his own," the official said. "Though he was not qualified, his manager indulged him and allowed him on agency time to draft up ... a set of comments."

Despite the EPA official's remarks, Carlin told FOXNews.com on Monday that his boss, National Center for Environmental Economics Director Al McGartland, appeared to be pressured into reassigning him.

Carlin said he doesn't know whether the White House intervened to suppress his report but claimed it's clear "they would not be happy about it if they knew about it," and that McGartland seemed to be feeling pressure from somewhere up the chain of command.

Carlin said McGartland told him he had to pull him off the climate change issue.

"It was reassigning you or losing my job, and I didn't want to lose my job," Carlin said, paraphrasing what he claimed were McGartland's comments to him. "My inference (was) that he was receiving some sort of higher-level pressure."

Carlin said he personally does not think there is a need to regulate carbon dioxide, since "global temperatures are going down." He said his report expressed a "good bit of doubt" on the connection between the two.

Specifically, the report noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend over the past 11 years, that scientists do not necessarily believe that storms will become more frequent or more intense due to global warming, and that the theory that temperatures will cause Greenland ice to rapidly melt has been "greatly diminished."

Carlin, in a March 16 e-mail, argued that his comments are "valid, significant" and would be critical to the EPA finding.

McGartland, though, wrote back the next day saying he had decided not to forward his comments.

"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

The EPA said in a written statement that Carlin's opinions were in fact considered, and that he was not even part of the working group dealing with climate change in the first place.

"Claims that this individual's opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false. This administration and this EPA administrator are fully committed to openness, transparency and science-based decision making," the statement said. "The individual in question is not a scientist and was not part of the working group dealing with this issue. Nevertheless the document he submitted was reviewed by his peers and agency scientists, and information from that report was submitted by his manager to those responsible for developing the proposed endangerment finding. In fact, some ideas from that document are included and addressed in the endangerment finding."

The e-mail exchanges and suggestions of political interference sparked a backlash from Republicans in Congress.

Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also wrote a letter last week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the agency to reopen its comment period on the finding. The EPA has since denied the request.

Citing the internal e-mails, the Republican congressmen wrote that the EPA was exhibiting an "agency culture set in a predetermined course."

"It documents at least one instance in which the public was denied access to significant scientific literature and raises substantial questions about what additional evidence may have been suppressed," they wrote.

In a written statement, Issa said the administration is "actively seeking to withhold new data in order to justify a political conclusion."

"I'm sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach," Sensenbrenner said in a statement, adding that the "repression" of Carlin's report casts doubt on the entire finding.

Carlin said he's concerned that he's seeing "science being decided at the presidential level."

"Now Mr. Obama is in effect directly or indirectly saying that CO2 causes global temperatures to rise and that we have to do something about it. ... That's normally a scientific judgment and he's in effect judging what the science says," he said. "We need to look at it harder."

The controversy is similar to one under the Bush administration -- only the administration was taking the opposite stance. In that case, scientist James Hansen claimed the administration was trying to keep him from speaking out and calling for reductions in greenhouse gases.

By Judson Berger - FOXNews.com

Click here to read Carlin's report.

FOX News' Major Garrett contributed to this report.

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power

• Related Resources:

  • Energy Czar Has Not Read Climate Bill Either & Boehner Say Bill Is Pile of S__t!
  • 8 GOP Votes Pave Way For Cap-and-Trade
  • Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
  • The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
  • House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
  • WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
  • Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
  • Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming
  • Video: Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation"’
  • Green Hell
  • Red Hot Lies

Energy Czar Has Not Read Climate Bill, Either And Boehner Says Climate Bill Is A ' Pile of S--t' | The FOX Nation

Viedo: Energy Czar Hasn't Read Climate Bill, Either | The FOX Nation

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a few choice words about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) landmark climate-change bill after its passage Friday.

When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill, "Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of s--t."

Using his privilege as leader to speak for an unlimited time on the House floor, Boehner spent an hour reading from the 1200-plus page bill that was amended 20 hours before the lower chamber voted 219-212 to approve it.

Eight Republicans voted with Democrats to pass the bill; 44 House Democrats voted against it.

Pelosi's office declined to comment on Boehner's jab. But one Democratic aide quipped, "What do you expect from a guy who thinks global warming is caused by cow manure?"

Even though Sen. Majorty Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) holds the bill's fate in his hands, House Republicans intend to hammer Speaker Pelosi's signature climate-change measure over recess.

And GOP Conference Chairman Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) said "we have only just begun to fight” as he left the Capitol Friday night.

Pence encouraged GOP rank-and-file lawmakers to hold energy summits in their districts over the Independence Day recess. In the recess packets sent home with members, he even included directions on how to organize energy summits.

The goal of holding an energy forum is to “educate your constituents about the Democrats’ national energy tax legislation and let them know what 'all of the above' solution you support.”

"All of the above” solution is a reference to the Republicans' plan that would increase the use of and exploration for domestic energy supplies.

Further, officials with the House GOP's campaign arm, the National Republican Congressional Committee, confirm that they will run with paid media over recess in districts of conservative Dems who voted for the bill. The official would not reveal details on the ad buys at this time.

One Democrat was upset that his leaders would needlessly force vulnerable Dems to vote for a bill that will come back to haunt them. Mississippi Rep. Gene Taylor (D) voted against the measure that he says will die in the Senate.

"A lot of people walked the plank on a bill that will never become law," Taylor told The Hill after the gavel came down.

By Molly K. Hooper

Posted: 06/27/09 09:22 PM [ET] Source: TheHill.com

Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation

Video: Obama: My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates 'Skyrocket' | The FOX Nation

President Obama said Monday that light bulbs will have to meet tougher efficiency standards in order to slash energy bills and greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr. Obama's announcement came three days after the House of Representatives passed a sweeping climate bill that is the centerpiece of the president's plan to curb carbon dioxide emissions, reform the nation's energy markets and tackle global warming.

Backers say the bill that passed the House of Representatives late last week is designed to move the nation toward a clean energy economy, but its fate in the Senate is uncertain. Administration officials have been anxious to maintain the momentum on the issue as lawmakers return to their districts for a weeklong Fourth of July recess.

"I know light bulbs may not seem sexy," Mr. Obama said, "but this simple action holds enormous promise because 7 percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes and our businesses."

Mr. Obama told reporters that the tougher standards for fluorescent and incandescent light bulbs will help consumers save $4 billion a year on energy bills between 2012 and 2042. The standards will also conserve enough electricity to power every home in America for 10 months, reduce carbon emissions equal to the amount produced by 166 million cars each year and eliminate the need for as many as 14 coal-fired power plants, he added.

Republicans accused Mr. Obama of focusing on small measures while ignoring more market-friendly alternatives.

"Everyone wants more efficiency, but the president is simply dropping the ball when it comes to the big picture on energy," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio.

Mr. Steel said House Republicans have a offered a comprehensive "all of the above" plan for a cleaner, healthier environment, lower costs and less dependence on foreign oil.

Standing beside Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Mr. Obama said the White House will lead the way by identifying and replacing wasteful light bulbs.

A 2007 energy bill passed by Congress allowed the Energy Department to issue energy conservation standards for home appliances, as well as fluorescent and incandescent lamps. Mr. Obama asked Mr. Chu in February to speed up the rule-making process and the light bulb standards announced Monday which go into effect in 2012 are a key part of the larger effort.

Mr. Obama said that commercial and residential buildings must also be made more efficient because they consume 40 percent of the nation's energy and cause 40 percent of its carbon emissions.

The president said implementing more-efficient heating and cooling systems, windows, smart sensors and controls will make buildings 80 percent more efficient. Adding solar panels on roofs and geothermal energy from underground could lead to "net zero" buildings that consume virtually no energy or create as much energy as they use.

"Now, progress like this might seem farfetched. But the fact is we are not lacking for ideas and innovation; all we lack are the smart policies and the political will to help us put our ingenuity to work," he said.

To expedite the development, deployment and use of this energy-efficient technology, Mr. Obama released $346 million in funding from the economic stimulus bill he passed in February.

"The nation that leads the world in creating a new clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy. That's our choice," he said.

Source: The Washington Times

Obama Flipflopping on Campaign Tax Promise... To Pay For Climate Bill and Nationalized Healthcare Bill. Stop the insanity... Wake-up Ameica, Stand-up America and Make Obama Keep His Promises!!!!

Related Resources:

• 8 GOP Votes Pave Way For Cap-and-Trade
• Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
• The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
• House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
• WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
• Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
• Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming"’

8 GOP Votes Paved Way for 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 a little help from a handful of Republicans.

Friday's vote was 219-212. The legislation was supported by 211 Democrats and eight 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.). Forty-four Democrats voted against the bill, making the eight GOP votes all the more crucial. Names to remember for re-election… or not in 2010 and 2012.

“This is the biggest job-killing bill that’s ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives. Right here, this bill,” House Minority Leader John Boehner said after the vote. (Yet Speaker Pelosi had the audacity to stand up before the house saying… Let’s pass this and create jobs, jobs jobs. Does she not read? Jobs have been lost in every Country that has gone green; perhaps not something we need in this recession?!?!? Or is that she and her friends stand to gain personally and just don’t care about America??? ) “And I don’t think that’s what the American people want.”

The 1,200-plus-page bill now goes to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain future.

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:

An 17 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

An 83 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

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

As written, the bill will cost American households an estimated $175 a year by 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Many Republicans refer to the legislation as a "national energy tax."

Source: Newsmax

Treason? House Passes Direct Assault on Industrial Base of America

Find Out Here: How Did Your Congressman Vote Yesterday????

-------

All This After Most Scientists Agree: The Earth Is Only Going Through Normal Warming Cycles... Hmmm?!?

Most will and should agree that the debate is over about whether climate change is real ("Climate change hits home," June 25). Scientists have known for many years that the Earth goes through warming and cooling cycles. Scientists agree that we are currently in an interglacial period. A few hundred years ago, during the Dark Ages, the Earth cooled. Before that, Vikings grew crops in Greenland. There have been many studies that prove the Earth's climate is always changing. Scientists agree that it is always getting either warmer or cooler. There is no debate about what causes global warming because the real science involved in researching atmospheric and oceanic temperature change is routinely quashed. The effect of manmade CO2 in the atmosphere has been debunked. It is the media hype and the business of research that proliferate this idea that taxing energy will stop the Earth from warming.

If these government-funded studies discovered the fluctuating magnetic fields of Earth and the cycles of the sun, for instance, have more to do with our planet's exposure to radiation and thereby heat, the researchers would all be looking for jobs.

Thank heavens the Earth has not cooled by 1.8 degrees in the past 100 years as was originally feared in the 1970s. The government would be taxing energy to pay for ways to prevent the plagues of the cold and miserable Dark Ages.

John M. Jaffe II

Related Resources:

• Pelosi Pushes Carbon Tax Vote Today
• The 8 Cap-and-Tax Republicans and 44 Dems Who Voted No
• House Passes Milestone Energy, Climate Change Bill
• WSJ: Cap-And-Tax a great deal… if you don’t Measure the Costs
• Congressman Requests Moment of Silence for Jobs Lot From Cap…
• Stifling Science To ‘Fight Warming"’