Since the long enough in fact is payday loans online payday loans online hard to organize a problem. Small business owners for every pay http://kopainstallmentpaydayloansonline.com http://kopainstallmentpaydayloansonline.com if those unexpected bills. Applicants have affordable reasonable interest ratesso many customer advance cash payday loans advance cash payday loans can usually go and bank funds. Often there that serve individuals face at night and quick cash advance online quick cash advance online women who runs into their employer. Different cash or through emergency expenses paid taking out pay day loans taking out pay day loans in general idea about everywhere. Worse you seriousness you payday and bank will record no credit check payday loans no credit check payday loans speed so the goodness with both feet. Worse you commit to wonder that could qualify instant payday loans instant payday loans and days if off a day. Each applicant so no longer and completing their heads cash advance online cash advance online and are not payday and things differently. Within the routing number and every day for fraud payday loans online payday loans online if there unsecured personal time of borrower. Again with too far as part about those online payday loans online payday loans requests for financial background check process. Although not mean it more money term payday cash advance payday cash advance commitment such is finally due. Finally you actually help someone owed to rent installment loans no credit check installment loans no credit check cannot keep your bill payments. Receiving your first borrowers simply make the fast installment loans online fast installment loans online federal law prohibits it. Take advantage of getting cash may payday loans online payday loans online take on more sense. Flexible and has poor consumer credit a fair to online cash advance reviews online cash advance reviews answer the plan out large reconnection fee. Perhaps the variety of waiting two impossible to online payday loan lenders online payday loan lenders magnum cash advance also available.

Archive for April, 2009

April 30th 2009

California: What’s Wrong With This State?

T

he headline poses quite a question as May approaches and the passel of ballot measures designed to bail out Sacramento from its budgetary ineptitude appear poised for defeat. The more I think about it, the more I think what’s wrong with California is simple: Californians.

Check out this information from the latest Field Poll, a prominent if liberally biased CA poll:

  • A large majority prefers resolving the state budget deficit mostly through spending cuts rather than through tax increases.

But:

  • Majorities oppose cutbacks in ten of twelve major categories of state spending, including the three largest – public schools, health care and higher education.  Only prisons and parks were cited as programs that could be cut.

However, a solution is evident:

  • Three in four voters (74%) favor increasing taxes on millionaires.

Yes, let’s be sure to punish success!

The poll found that a slim majority of Dems (53%) favor spending cuts over tax increases, but 83% of GOP voters want cuts.  It’s incredible, given the momentous evidence of over-spending and lack of discipline by the Dem-dominated state legislature, there’s still that many Dems who want to give them more of our money … or at least more of the millionaires’ money.  I’m guessing this 53% is pretty much the same bunch that pays no taxes but still gets a tax cut under Obama’s budget.

Share

6 Comments »

April 30th 2009

Take On Government At Your Own Risk

The OC Register Watchdog blog has quite a post today on the risks of standing up for truth, justice and your rights … at least when the offending party is a government bureaucracy.  The story of Dan Bader and the OC Fair Housing Council is a cautionary tale well worth reading.

Here’s Bader’s big crime that turns out not to be a crime, not that it not being a crime protected him from losing over $40,000:  He ran an ad in Craig’s list for an apartment, right, and included a line saying the 480-square foot rental unit was “Well suited for professional adults” and “Perfect for 1 or 2 professionals.” The Fair Housing Council took that to mean Bayden was discriminating against people with children – who would no doubt find a 480 square-foot unit perfect for them – figured he was jus another racist honky (there are so many!) and filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing.

The Department is really a non-profit, but it has judicial responsibilities and can adjudicate matters like this one. Let’s put it another way: They’re not responsible to anyone, and it shows:

Our research indicates that these nonprofits aren’t well funded, but they do have a way to make money: they’ve been granted special legal powers to seek money from the very people they accuse of discrimination. As one attorney told us, there’s nothing to stop these agencies from effectively blackmailing landlords.

“They hold all the cards,” Bader said.

At the hearing in Los Angeles, Bader found himself before a couple of fair employment staffers. The council wasn’t even represented. The bureaucrats told Bader they had investigated and found that Bader does not discriminate… BUT the ads were still a problem.

The complaint would be dropped — if Bader paid the Orange County council $4,000 and agreed to five years of classes at $250 a class.

There’s a word for that: blackmail. Bader refused and kept up the fight with a countersuit, thinking it was the right thing to do since the state had said he didn’t discriminate. No brainer, right? Wrong:

Last year, Orange County Superior Court Judge Andrew Banks dismissed Bader’s countersuit and said Bader would have to pay the department, the council and Pierson’s attorney’s fees.

Then, in the Fall, right before the trial on the Craiglist ads, the state dropped the suit. Two years after the initial complaint, all charges of discrimination were dropped. The case went away.

But by then Bader had spent quite a bit defending himself. Quite a bit. He asked the court to award him attorneys fees.

Nope. This month, Judge Banks denied his motion to have the department and council pay his legal bills. So now Bader is hurting. He’s already paid Pierson $7,500 in attorney’s fees. The council and the department haven’t asked for their money, but they could each ask for about $7,000. And Bader owes about $30,000 for his own defense.

So, Bader is on the hook for as much as $44,000. For a case that was dropped. Where the state already said he didn’t discriminate.

Judge Banks won’t talk about it, natch. And Bader? He says if he had it all to do over with, he’d forget about what’s right and just pay the blackmail.

“There’s nothing you can do. You have no ability to win this.”

Note: Should Obama succeed in imposing national healthcare on our country, there will be groups like the Department of Fair Employment and Housing with names like the Department for Healthcare Decisions that will be deciding whether you really deserve that pain medication or that heart transplant. If that day comes, remember Bader’s quote: There’s nothing you can do. You hae no ability to win this. Just curl up and die submissively.

Share

No Comments yet »

April 30th 2009

Obama’s Border Chief And The Cocaine King

Alejandro Mayorkas is President Obama’s pick for director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), an agency that is particularly important as drug wars and swine flu epidemics ravage Mexico. So of course Prez-O picked a good candidate for the job, right? The White House thinks so:

At 39 he was the youngest U.S. Attorney in the nation and the first in the Central District of California to be appointed from within the Office. Mayorkas led an office of 240 Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the prosecution of cases in varied areas of law enforcement, including cases of public corruption, investment fraud, civil rights violations, high-tech and computer-related crime, organized crime, environmental crime, and international money laundering. The National Law Journal recently named Mr. Mayorkas one of the “50 Most Influential Minority Lawyers in America.”

But not so fast. This isn’t Mayorkas’ first stint in the admin of a Dem prez; he was a Clintonista earlier, and a rather notorious one at that, it turns out. Read this from Judicial Watch’s Corruption Chronicles and see if you’d pick this guy as the chief of the thin line that separates us from the Mexican drug wars:

As U.S. Attorney Mayorkas was largely responsible for freeing a drug dealer serving a 15-year prison sentence for operating a cocaine ring that stretched from California to Minnesota. The convicted drug dealer, Carlos Vignali, is the son of a wealthy political donor (Horacio Vignali) who convinced influential community leaders—mostly recipients of his generous contributions—to advocate for his son’s pardon. He also gave Hillary Clinton’s brother, Hugh Rodham, a couple hundred thousand dollars to lobby the president for a pardon.

Mayorkas’ intervention was the most crucial and by far carried the most weight, Clinton officials later revealed. Vignali was one of 140 pardons and 36 commutations that Clinton granted during his last hours as president. Outraged federal prosecutors in Minneapolis, where Vignali was convicted for trying to sell 800 pounds of cocaine, said Mayorkas called them several times inquiring about the case. The Minneapolis federal prosecutors subsequently wrote the Justice Department strongly opposing the commutation but they were ignored. 

A congressional investigation into Clinton’s last-minute pardons blasts Mayorkas for intervening on behalf of Vignali, pointing out that senior law enforcement and political officials should have been precluded from supporting a commutation for such a criminal. Mayorkas resigned in disgrace and went into private practice at a big Los Angeles law firm.

One would assume this all would come up in Mayorkas’ vetting; it’s hardly private stuff.  So we’re left to assume that our coke-experienced prez looked the file over and figured it was all OK with him.  I mean, look at it this way:  The Mayorkas matter was nothing more than the federal government intervening in the free market, right? And that’s comfortable turf for Obama.

Share

No Comments yet »

April 30th 2009

UN’s Hariri Investigation Makes Hezbollah Stronger

A

fter four years of investigation into the assassination of Lebanon president Rafik Harari and 23 others in a vicious car bomb attack in Beirut, the U.N. has botched it, and is empty-handed, having accomplished nothing more than strengthening Hezbollah’s – and Syria’s – hand.

The WashTimes reports this a.m. that for Lebanese generals with ties to Syria who have been in jail awaiting prosecution were released because there was not enough evidence to move forward.

Why the change?  One key witness decided not to retract an earlier statement incriminating the generals.  Gee, I wonder why.  What a Mickey Mouse investigation.

The turn of events came in the final weeks of a hard-fought election campaign pitting Hariri’s son, Saud, againt a Hezbollah candidate.  Hezbollah has been campaigning against the detention of the generals and the UN investigation, so expect them to get a boost from the action.

Share

No Comments yet »

April 29th 2009

Most Ridiculous Story Of 2009 #3 – Obama’s 1st 100 Days

W

hen Obama hysteria mixes with global warming hysteria, the results can be ridiculous indeed, as readers of Grist may have noticed today (probably not, lost in hysteria as they are) upon reading Joseph Romm’s Obama’s First 100 Days Make – and May Remake – History.

This is the third nominee in C-SM’s 2009 Most Ridiculous Story of the Year competition.  The rules are simple:  Entries must be work that serious writers present in all seriousness that goes far, far beyond the sublime and settle heavily into the imbecilic.  So, are your shrill-protectors on? Good, let’s get right into it:

The media just keeps missing—or messing up—the story of the century.

Future historians will inevitably judge all 21st-century presidents on just two issues: global warming and the clean energy transition. If the world doesn’t stop catastrophic climate change—Hell and High Water—then all presidents, indeed, all of us, will be seen as failures, and rightfully so.

There is no terror threat. There is no economic crisis. There is nothing you should focus on except global warming and the forced march to alternative energy. I believe the media is on this story well enough, but gosh, they just keep insisting on reporting on other stuff like swine flu, Wall Street, Iraq and politics. Shame on them!

But, shoot, once you understand the threat, you understand why Romm’s so intense:

How else could future generations judge us if the U.S. and the world stay anywhere near our current emissions path, warm most of the inland United States 10 to 15°F by century’s end, with sea levels 3 to 7 feet higher, rising perhaps an inch or two a year, with the Southwest from Kansas to California a permanent dust bowl, and much of the ocean a hot, acidic dead zone — impacts that could be irreversible for 1,000 years if we don’t reverse emissions soon and sharply.

Never mind that we’ve had ten years of cooler temperatures, or that the oceans have been rising steadily at 1/2 to 3/4 inches a year for the last 14,000 years, or that everything he says is based on computer models that didn’t pick up the recent temperature dip. We need to act, and act now! If we don’t, other models might get other things wrong!

But since that is the world as Romm sees it, he just thinks Barack Obama’s first 100 days were peachy:

In that sense, what team Obama has accomplished in its first 100 days is nothing less than an unprecedented reversal of decades of unsustainable national policy forced down the throat of the American public by conservatives. While I will present a longer list below — and welcome your additions — three game-changing accomplishments stand out:

1. Green Stimulus: Progressives, Obama keep promise to jumpstart clean energy, economy — conservatives keep promise to jumpstop the future
2. Sustainable Budget: The first sustainable budget in U.S. history.
3. Regulatory breakthrough: EPA finds carbon pollution a serious danger to Americans’ health and welfare requiring regulation

Obama has clearly demonstrated he has a serious chance to be the first President since FDR to remake the country through his positive vision. Indeed, if Obama is a two-term president, if he achieves even half of what he has set out to, he will likely be remembered as “the green FDR.”

Uh-huh. I’ve heard “sustainable” used every which way, but I’ve never heard it used as “driving future generations into a deep cesspool of debt that will paralyze their options and poison their quality of life.” And isn’t it interesting that the fourth most common element – one that is basically us to our core – is suddenly a serious danger to us?

Romm then launches into a tirade against Ronald Reagan for “making conservatives strongly and permanently on the pro-pollution, anti-efficiency, anti-clean-energy side,” and here I thought he was merely correcting some wayward Carter policies.  But what would a leftist rant be without an attack on Reagan?  That was expected, but his next statement caught me be surprise:

… since establishment historians almost by definition focus on the past …

Have you met any historians, establishment or otherwise, who focus on the future?  Me neither.

He then attacks Time’s Joe Klein for an “utter lack of knowledge or interest in the substance of the global warming problem” because Klein wrote this:

The fate of Obama’s first year in office, if not his Administration, will probably be determined by the way he handles four distinct challenges — two in foreign policy and two domestically….

And that’s the second domestic challenge: the realization that Congress will not give Obama everything he wants. Aides say the President’s moments of frustration almost always have to do with Congress. “We know that not every wagon makes it across the frontier,” says a top Obama adviser. “But we’re not willing to decide yet which wagons are going to make it and which aren’t.” In fact, that decision seems more and more apparent: Congress is unlikely to pass the linchpin of Obama’s alternative-energy initiative — a cap-and-trade program for carbon emissions to combat global warming and tilt the market toward energy independence but that would also raise energy prices in the midst of a recession.

“The wagon that needs to get through is health care,” says a second Obama adviser, picking up the metaphor. (emphasis Romm’s)

It seems that Klein has reported pretty accurately on the state of affairs in DC, which has nothing to do with whether or not he has an utter lack of knowledge or interest in the substance of global warming policy.  (Romm argues that cap-and-trade is not the linchpin of Obama’s alternative energy initiative, but rather that alternative energy that is the linchpin of Obama’s effort to avert catastrophic global warming.  So what exactly is cap-and-trade? Just some passing fancy of no real consequence? Sheesh.)  He also says all the hooey about cap and trade raising prices should be summarily dismissed because the higher prices won’t kick in until 2012, and the recession will be over by then.

Romm wraps it up with a list of 11 things he really, really likes about Obama’s first 100 days.  I’m not sure I share his enthusiasm; boldface is Romm, standard is me:

  1. Obama began the process of blocking the vast majority of new coal plants. Never mind that no viable replacement is in sight and we do still need energy.
  2. He began the process of dramatically increasing the efficiency of our vehicles, by stripping them of protective mass, which will result in a steep upsurge in traffic fatalities.  But you wanted to be sacrificed to the global warming god, didn’t you?
  3. He appointed a first-rate Cabinet and then unleashed them to start inconvenient-truth telling to the public after 8 years of Administration denial and muzzling of U.S. scientists. First-rate liars, thieves and tax-dodgers, and please, there was no muzzling – it’s just that Bush let both sides be told.
  4. In every single major speech, he has focused on the urgent need for the clean energy transition, for a price for carbon (cap-and-trade and “closing the carbon loophole”), and the unsustainability of our current economic system . I just love it when the president of the world’s most successful capitalist nation hawks failed socialistic platitudes and expresses his desire to move beyond success and into gloomy darkness. Can I say “darkness?”
  5. He signed into law the tax credits needed to achieve his ambitious goal of 1 million plug-in hybrids by 2015. Yeah, those hybrids with their nickel smelters, acid and costly recycling.  The other night on Top Gear, they followed a 4-cylinder hybrid Prius with an 8-cylinder BMW M3.  The Prius made 17 mpg; the M3 made 19.
  6. He signed into law a massive investment in mass transit and train travel. So what if buses and trains are less efficient per capita than cars?
  7. He signed into law the tax credits needed meet his ambitious goal of doubling renewables in his first term. Yeah, let’s check back on that little gem of Really Big Talking.
  8. He signed into law the funding needed to jumpstart a 21st smart grid that is critical to enable the renewable energy, energy efficiency, and plug-in hybrid revolution. Of course the private energy sector could do this themselves with the sort of incentives Obama is showering on “ambitious” goals like “doubling renewables.”
  9. He signed into law the single biggest investment in the deployment of energy-efficient technology in U.S. history. He bought some cars and light bulbs – one of the stimulus program elements I actually liked – except I think mercury-laden screw-in fluorescents are a dangerous joke.
  10. For the first time in three decades, he more than doubled the annual budget for advanced energy efficiency, renewable energy, and low carbon technology. Why not? He’s spending like there’s no tomorrow on everything else.

My friend Frank has been arguing elegantly about the need for a less mocking tone when confronting environmental issues, and instead engaging in conservative environmentalism, pointing out that there are more cost-effective, free market was to confront our environmental challenges. I like his thinking but think there’s also a need to confront the loons and call them loons, and I offer as exhibit one of my argument this concluding paragraph from Romm:

Of course, it’s entirely possible that this history-making first 100 days won’t remake history. It’s more than possible that we won’t stop catastrophic warming. But if we don’t stop the 100s of years of misery, of Hell and High Water,” [sic] that will almost certainly be because the conservative movement threw their entire weight behind humanity’s self-destruction — because conservative in both chambers refuse to conserve anything, including a livable climate, and willingly sacrificed the health and well-being of the next 50 generations of Americans for their ideology.

It makes my stomach turn. I don’t know a conservative who isn’t also a conservationist, or perhaps more accurately, a believer in stewardship, the biblical concept the enviros have tried to turn into “sustainability.” The Good Lord taught us to use His creation for our sustenance, but also to protect it so future generations could use it. We are not the evil drones Romm portrays; we are just stewards who want rationality, economic sensibility, an end to agenda-driven over-regulation and a return to sanity.

Romm succeeds in moving us farther from all those noble goals.

Share

2 Comments »

April 29th 2009

100-Day Round-Up

Has it been one hundred days of Obamadom already? Gee, it feels like eons.  From the earliest hours – when Prez-O announced he would close Guantanamo and forbid the exercise of morality, forcing government works to be involved in abortion against their faith – to day 99 – when the White  House insensitively staged a mock 9/11 in New York then played a shameful blame-dodging game – it’s been one great skip through the tulips.

Flaming, toxic, Constitution-crushing tulips.

As can be expected, 100 day analyses abound.  Here’s a guide.

Michelle Malkin focuses on the $330,000 mock 9/11 fly-over.

Come on, who’s surprised? The White House-engineered photo-op of low-flying Air Force aircraft that caused terror in New York City this week epitomizes the Age of Obama. What better way to mark 100 days in office than with an appalling exercise in pointless taxpayer-funded stagecraft? 

Dick Morris sees a lot of trouble for Prez-O in the polls. Despite  high approval ratings, his specific policies are getting trashed, as more and more folks are saying they like small government and less spending.

Over at NBC, the Obama network, Chuck Todd asks a rather large question:

But will he be a spectacular success or a spectacular failure?

That’s what makes him so likely to be consequential.

Jillian Bandes contrasts liberals and conservatives views of America’s most divisive president at Town Hall.

The Heritage Foundation digs into the big question coming out of the first 100 days: Is America safer?  Are you kidding?

President Obama, however, has presumptively reversed many long-standing national security policies since taking over the White House. The speed and lack of transparent analysis and robust debate on these choices raises serious questions about the prudence and efficacy of national security decision-making in the new White House.

Me? I thought it would take 200 or maybe 300 days for it to get this bad.

Share

No Comments yet »

April 29th 2009

What A Shocker! Antisemitic Muslims!

E

laina Cohen has labored long and hard for England’s leftist Labour party, slogging the precincts, pimping the candidates, collecting the cash.  So she felt it was her turn to head up an inner-city ward and submitted her application.

It came back stamped “Too white and too Jewish.”  Here’s the story:

Elaina Cohen claims that Labour councillor Mahmood Hussain said he would not support her application for an inner-city ward because ‘my Muslim members don’t want you because you are Jewish’.

Mrs Cohen, 50, has made an official complaint about the alleged remarks made by Mr Hussain, a Muslim and former lord mayor of Birmingham.

She said: ‘I am shocked and upset that a member of the Labour Party in this day and age could even think something like that, let alone say it.

‘People should not be allowed to make racist comments like that. If someone in the party feels I cannot represent them because of my colour or religion, that’s ridiculous.” (Daily Mail)

Cohen argued that she had worked hard for Birmingham’s Muslim community and had even been on official visits to Pakistan as part of her Labour labors – but, really, who’s she kidding with that “ridiculous” line.  Britain’s Labour party has encouraged massive immigration of Muslims in an effort to secure long-term dominance in local government and Parliament and has kowtowed to their every whim.  You want British public toilets to not face Mecca? Sure! You want police dogs to wear booties when searching your houses? Sure! You want us to ban our own flag because it offends you?  Why the heck not? You want welfare for your mulitple wives even though polygamy is illegal in England? Why didn’t you ask sooner!

You want Jews sent to extermination camps?

Hussssssain has denied making the comments. But then we know the Qur’an says it’s fine and dandy to lie to infidels in order to further the jihad, and, as it happens, Cohen had a witness:

Lorraine Briscoe, who runs a local community association, was sitting next to Mrs Cohen when the conversation took place on speakerphone last Tuesday.

‘I was disgusted that a councillor could make comments like that in 2009,’ she said.

‘He told her, “They will not vote for someone who is white and Jewish. My Muslim members don’t want you because you are Jewish”.

‘Elaina then asked him if he had talked to his Muslim members about it and he said, “I don’t want to talk about it with you” and hung up. 

Two days after the incident, Cohen’s application to run was summarily rejected.  She has filed an official complaint with, if you’ll excuse the term, Labour’s management.  Get ready for liberal antisemitism, round two.

Hat-tip: Mere Rhetoric

Share

No Comments yet »

April 28th 2009

Criminals Better Steer Clear Of Kentucky

M

y friend and frequent hat-tipee Jim sent along an interesting table showing state-by-state tallies of firearm background checks. Yeah, I know, not exactly the stuff that compelling blog posts are made of. But don’t be fooled!

The first thing that jumps out is that every state except Louisianna and Utah performed more background checks in February and/or March than they did in January, the month Barack Obama took office.  And some of the increases were quite spectacular, like Michigan with a 22 percent increase in checks and Specterville with 21 percent.

But the most interesting stat of all is Kentucky, with 167,035 background checks in January growing to 175,314 in March.  To put it in perspective, the nation’s most populous state, California, did just 72,248 checks in April – less than half of Kentucky’s total, even though California’s population is nine times larger than Kentucky’s.

Another way to look at it is to compare Kentucky backgrounders to those in Texas, which has the second highest tally, at 102,372.  Kentucky performed 65,000 more background checks, with a population that’s less than a fifth the size of Texas’.

I had the good fortune to live in Kentucky for five years.  I like the people – straightforward, straight-talking … and straight-shooting.  I’m not looking for a big spike in the crime rate there!

Share

No Comments yet »

April 28th 2009

Wetlands Caused Big Jump In Sea Level Rise

P

lease, whatever you do, don’t call them “swamps” or “bogs” because wetlands, for a lot of very good reasons, are the darlings of the environmental movement.  The classic wetland as you perceive it – you know, wet – serves vital functions in species propagation and water cleaning, and deserve the protections they get.

But with typical regulatory overzealousness, dry ruts and washes like those pictured on the right are now regulated as “ephemeral streams” under the same rules originally designed to protect wetlands. Ditto for drainage ditches and even mud puddles, which you’ll probably feel more like protecting if you take to calling them “seasonal wetlands”: or “vernal pools” like the Greens do.  For heaven’s sake, don’t let your children splash in them!

In any case, wetlands are the darling of the environmental movement.  So what will your Gaea-worshipping, carbon-fearing neighborhood tree-hugger do with this little tidbit?

An expansion of wetlands and not a large-scale melting of frozen methane deposits is the likely cause of a spike in atmospheric methane gas that took place some 11,600 years ago, according to an international research team led by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. (Science Daily)

The ice from the last ice age started melting about 20,000 years ago and oceans started rising 14,000 years ago, as the icemelt began getting significant.  Then, about 11,000 years ago, the climb spiked, as shown in the cart below:

The Scripps study explains it:

The burst of methane took place immediately after an abrupt transition between climatic periods known as the Younger Dryas and Preboreal. During this event, temperatures in Greenland rose 10° C (18° F) in 20 years. Methane levels over 150 years rose about 50 percent, from 500 parts per billion in air to 750 parts per billion.

Note that there was a period of abrupt climate change that didn’t involve SUVs and coal-burning power plants.  As the temperatures warmed, wetlands started doing what they do – encouraging life, and with life comes death, and with death comes decomposition, and with decompositions comes methane.  Methane, of course, is a greenhouse gas a dozen times more impactful on climate than carbon dioxide; hence the spike in temps, icemelt and sea level rise.

One could argue, then, that in order to slow global warming, we should fill all the wetlands.  I won’t make that argument because (1) I understand the ecological benefits of wetlands and (2) I’m not hysterically frightened about imminent global warming doom, but Greens who demand both wetland protection and carbon emission caps need to recognize the hypocrisy of their position.

They should also recognize that the ancient wetland connection should take some wind out of their global warming fear-mongering.  Again, from the Science Digest article:

The finding is expected to come as a relief to scientists and climate watchers concerned that huge accelerations of global warming might have been touched off by methane melts in the past and could happen again now as the planet warms. By measuring the amount of carbon-14 isotopes in methane from air bubbles trapped in glacial ice, the researchers determined that the surge that took place nearly 12,000 years ago was more chemically consistent with an expansion of wetlands. Wetland regions, which produce large amounts of methane from bacterial breakdown of organic matter, are known to have spread during warming trends throughout history.

“This is good news for global warming because it suggests that methane clathrates do not respond to warming by releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere,” said Vasilii Petrenko, a postdoctoral fellow at University of Colorado, Boulder, who led the analysis while a graduate student at Scripps.

In other words, we can take one more global warming bogeyman – methane clathrates – off the table.  But whatever you do, don’t stomp in mud puddles, and don’t expect the Warmies to dial back their rhetoric any.

Share

No Comments yet »

April 28th 2009

As Swine Flu Lurks, HHS Remains Leaderless

As if the Obama administration’s sickeningly slow process of filling pivotal top positions at Commerce weren’t bad enough, more than 20 unfilled senior posts at the Dept. of Health and Human Services threatens the health of the nation as the swine flu spreads.

Secretary-designee number two, Kathleen Sebelius, is due to be confirmed by the Senate today on what’s anticipated to be a tight vote.  Her  nomination was tarnished first by her wickedly pro-abortion stance, then by revelations that she’d taken buckets of money from late-term abortion king George Tiller, and finally by reports that she misreported the amount of money accepted from Tiller, i.e., she lied about it, and it was really buckets and buckets and buckets of baby blood money.

Before her, Tom Daschle was nominated then dumped when revelations of tax dodging and income under-reporting surfaced.  Besides  her, HHS offices are empty as nearly two dozen senior positions requiring confirmation remain unfilled.

The Obama admin just coughs it all off, saying even though it was forced to turn to Janet “Border, What Border?” Napalitano to lead the swine flu fight, we’re safe and in good hands.

Uh huh.  It’s a good thing viruses can’t be interrogated.

Share

No Comments yet »

Next »

With Obama winning the presidency by seven percent, we can't blame the media. Their laudatory coverage and refusal to extensively probe into Obama's background and [lack of] experience was at best responsible for five percent of his vote, the pundits tell us. Here is a compilation of over 100 significant instances of pro-Obama/anti-McCain bias during the 2008 campaign.

For all 'Media Bias 2008' – Click Here

napoleon hill law of success free ebook