It’s so cold; it’s GLOBAL WARMING – No, it’s a HOAX!
[CWNewsONLINE.net]
April 10, 2013
By Justin Waldman
Last week I was listening when this young 13-year-old boy named Alex called Rush Limbaugh. Funny, how the Left Liberals get so pushed out of shape with people who don’t believe in “man-made global warming.” This call is reverberating across the media. And it’s all because of this call to Rush.
Why is the left so worried about a young boy doing his own research come to that conclusion? Just as Alex said, they do not want to believe the lie and the evidence. It’s also because of the AGENDA behind all of the proposed precepts that global warming is caused by carbon released into the air.
FACT: DID YOU KNOW THAT PLANTS DEPEND ON CARBON DIOXIDE TO SURVIVE? AND WE DEPEND ON PLANTS BECAUSE THEY PRODUCE OXYGEN.
Obama’s agenda includes getting into this global lie of climate change and man-made global warming is bad, therefore, we must do something about it. In his first term, the progressive Left tried to pass a law that would enact Cap and Trade, which would be a way to tax industry for carbon (CO2) pollution.
This “science” and it’s proponent politicians have been trying to make carbon units a “commodity” for trading. I know it’s hard to believe, but it’s true. Be like Alex and do your own research. This is why the progressive left is so afraid! It’s a hoax to make money.
That’s why there is this global push for “green” energy, carbon reduction, pollution taxes, etc. It’s all based on a lie. The University East Anglia emails have proved it. To me, this is rotten how the progressive Left still wants people to believe this LIE.
Maxine Waters: ‘Over 170 Million Jobs Could Be Lost’ Due To Sequestration [Intentional mistake?]
[FoxNation]
Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) claimed today that “over 170 million jobs” could be lost due to sequestration. Later in the presser, Rep. Waters corrected herself, saying it was only “750,000 jobs” that could be lost.
Starting at around 0:30…
Krugman rips Romney for ‘flat-out untruths,’ gives Obama pass on ‘minor fudges’
[FoxNews.com]
Published October 08, 2012
Aug. 10, 2009: Paul Krugman speaks during a press conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (AP)
A fib is a fib is a fib. – Unless you’re President Obama.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, speaking on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, ripped into Mitt Romney for telling “flat-out untruths” at last week’s debate.
But when asked about Obama’s on-stage misstatements, The New York Times columnist called them just “minor fudges.”
The discrepancy drew a pronounced “Ugh” from Republican strategist Mary Matalin, a panel member who later told Krugman: “You are hardly credible on calling somebody else a liar.”
Labor report reflecting falling jobless rate stirs campaign firestorm
[FoxNews.com]
Published October 05, 2012
Sept. 28, 2012: Job-seekers hand in resumes during a job fair at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx. (AP)
In the homestretch of a presidential race where every minute shift in the economy can translate into potential votes, both campaigns took aim Friday at the Labor Department’s estimate that the jobless rate fell below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years.
President Obama’s team touted the numbers as a sign the economy is improving. Mitt Romney, along with several economists, expressed deep skepticism about the report.
The data even elicited a conspiracy theory from former General Electric CEO Jack Welch, who tweeted: “Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers.”
The Labor Department reported that the rate dipped in September from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent. It was a glimmer of good news for Obama, who’s trying to recover from a disappointing debate performance and whose central argument is that the economy is moving in the right direction.
“This morning, we found out that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level since I took office,” Obama said at a Virginia rally Friday. “It’s a reminder that this country has come too far to turn back now. … We’ve made too much progress to return to the policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”
But skeptics pointed out that not only is 7.8 percent unemployment hardly a “real recovery,” but the report reflected an uptick in part-time jobs and the number of self-employed. Further, they stressed that there appeared to be a huge disconnect between the modest number of new jobs reported and the significant decrease in the unemployment rate.
The Labor Department, based on a broad survey of employers, said 114,000 jobs were added in September.
But the unemployment rate itself is based on a separate “household survey,” which showed a whopping 873,000 new jobs in September.
“This must be an anomaly,” former Congressional Budget Office director Doug Holtz-Eakin said in a snap analysis of the numbers. “It is out of line with any of the other data..”
Holtz-Eakin noted the household survey is smaller, suggesting it is not as reliable. He called estimate of 873,000 new jobs “implausible.”
He said the report was otherwise “solid,” but reflected “the economy is merely moving sideways.”
Liberal economist Dean Baker, with the Center for Economic and Policy Research, called the September rate drop “almost certainly a statistical fluke.”
“It is common to have large monthly changes in the employment numbers that are not consistent with other economic data. For example, employment reportedly rose by 649,000 in November of 2007, the month before the recession began,” he said in a statement. “Still, this month’s numbers almost certainly indicate that the unemployment rate is moving downward, even if the speed is considerably slower than the latest data indicate.”
Romney’s campaign quickly pointed out the number of people who have left the workforce has also helped keep the jobless rate down.
“This is not what a real recovery looks like. We created fewer jobs in September than in August, and fewer jobs in August than in July, and we’ve lost over 600,000 manufacturing jobs since President Obama took office,” Romney said in a statement. “If not for all the people who have simply dropped out of the labor force, the real unemployment rate would be closer to 11 percent.”
The recovery has been tepid, but the president is trying to show that it’s at least improving. The Labor Department report showed the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.
The revisions also show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. Still, the 2012 average of 146,000 jobs per month remains lower than last year’s average of 153,000 jobs per month.
The monthly numbers are subject to change. Voters will see one final jobless report on Nov. 2, just days before the election.
The increase in September was due in part to employment growth in the health care and transportation sectors. The unemployment rate fell from 8.1 percent in August, matching its level in January 2009, when Obama took office.
The decline could help Obama, who is coming off a disappointing debate performance against Romney. Stock futures rose modestly after the report. Dow Jones industrial average futures, up 30 points just before the report came out, were up 45 points after it was released.
The job market has been improving, sluggishly but steadily. Jobs have been added for 24 straight months. There are now 325,000 more than when Obama took office.
Still, many of the jobs added last month were part time. The number of people with part-time jobs who wanted full-time work rose 7.5 percent to 8.6 million.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
US officials knew Libya attack was terrorism within 24 hours, sources confirm
[FoxNews.com]
Published September 27, 2012
U.S. intelligence officials knew within 24 hours of the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya that it was a terrorist attack and suspected Al Qaeda-tied elements were involved, sources told Fox News — though it took the administration a week to acknowledge it.
The account sharply conflicts with claims on the Sunday after the attack by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice that the administration believed the strike was a “spontaneous” event triggered by protests in Egypt over an anti-Islam film.
Two senior U.S. officials said that the Obama administration internally labeled the attack terrorism from the first day in order to unlock and mobilize certain resources to respond, and that officials were looking for one specific suspect. The officials said the intelligence community knew by Sept. 12 that the militant Ansar al-Shariah and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb were likely behind the strike.
Further, an official said, “No one … believed that the mortars, indirect and direct fire, and the RPGs were just the work of a mob — no one.”
Yet a congressional source told Fox News that CIA Director David Petraeus, during a briefing with members of the House Intelligence Committee three days after the attack, espoused the view that Benghazi was an out-of-control demonstration prompted by the YouTube video. According to the source, this was “shocking” to some members who were present and saw the same intelligence pointing toward a terrorist attack.
As Carney labels Libya strike terrorism, Obama continues to cite anti-Islam film
[FoxNews.com]
Published September 20, 2012
After the White House for the first time Thursday explicitly called the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya an act of terror, President Obama ducked an opportunity to clear up the confusion about the ever-changing narrative — appearing to hold firm to the story that an anti-Islam film was to blame.
The president spoke Thursday at a town hall hosted by the Spanish-language Univision. He declined to get into specifics, even as lawmakers said after an intelligence briefing that there clearly was “some pre-planning” in last week’s deadly attack.
Instead, Obama launched into an explanation about how the U.S. saw something it’s seen before, where “there is an offensive video or cartoon directed at the Prophet Muhammad” and that is used “as an excuse by some to carry out inexcusable violent acts” against the U.S.
Obama stressed that we’re “still doing an investigation” and said he didn’t know whether Al Qaeda was involved.
What If the Government Rejects the Constitution?
[Townhall.com]
April 12, 2012
What if the government never took the Constitution seriously? What if the same generation — in some cases the same human beings — that wrote in the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech,” also enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts, which made it a crime to criticize the government? What if the feds don’t regard the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land?
What if the government regards the Constitution as merely a guideline to be referred to from time to time, or a myth to be foisted upon the voters, but not as a historic delegation of power that lawfully limits the federal government? What if Congress knows that most of what it regulates puts it outside the confines of the Constitution, but it does whatever it can get away with? What if the feds don’t think that the Constitution was written to keep them (the Government) off the people’s backs?
Will Jack Lew please report to the Obama “Truth Team” desk now?; Update: Obama Budget Fail
[MichelleMalkin.com]
By Michelle Malkin • February 13, 2012 10:57 AM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Ow. Phew. Let me catch my breath. I just heard about the launch of the Obama administration’s new “Truth Team.”
(Which is, in truth, the same thing as Attack Watch and all the other Obama snitch brigades created over the past three years.)
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahah.
[Wiping tear from eye.]
Yes, the “Truth Team” is here to correct all the lies about the budget process. Michael Czin of Obama for America tweets that the new squad will “help communicate a positive message about the President’s record of keeping his word.”
Media Matters Puts Tax-Exempt Status in Jeopardy
FoxBusiness.com
Published August 03, 2011
Media Matters CEO David Brock
First of a three-part series
David Brock, chairman and chief executive of Media Matters for America, told a news website earlier this year that his nonprofit is now moving to “sabotage” FOX News because it says the network is now the “de facto head of the GOP,” among other things.
Anchors and guests appearing on FOX News have said because of such statements, the nonprofit is violating U.S. tax law.
There is no indication the IRS is auditing or probing Media Matters for these alleged violations.
However, interviews with current and former IRS officials, tax lawyers and tax experts, as well as a review of Media Matters’ IRS documents and its activities indicate the nonprofit has put its tax-exempt status in jeopardy for reasons beyond those allegations.
Lies our leaders tell us
PersonalLiberty.com
July 29, 2011 by Chip Wood
OK, this is it, I promise: my last column on the so-called debt crisis (at least until next month). I know you’re getting tired of hearing about it. Heck, I’m getting tired of writing about it.
But the lies and distortions have gotten so outrageous in the past few days that I simply must get up on my soapbox one more time and try to clear up a few of the biggest piles of malarkey. (Some of you may prefer a stronger word for what’s being thrown around.) Here are the latest “Big Four” that got my goat.
There is no Aug. 2 deadline
I know; it’s hard to believe. All we’ve heard for months is economic catastrophe will befall us if the debt ceiling isn’t raised by Tuesday.
But where did that date come from? It was plucked out of thin air by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. It has no basis in fact, in law or in any accounting data anyone can present. The big spenders in Washington simply picked a date at random with which to frighten the American public.
Even Geithner admits that “technically” the government ran out of money two months ago. He says he used “extraordinary measures” and “accounting maneuvers” to delay the crisis as long as possible. But if he could do it for eight weeks, why not nine? Or 10?
Obama threatens to stiff seniors and vets
This one really has me steamed. Two weeks ago, the President told CBS News, “I cannot guarantee that those [Social Security] checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. …this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans’ checks, these are folks on disability and their checks.”
All of which, as I showed in last week’s column, is a big, fat lie. (Click here if you missed that one.) If Social Security checks go out late, it will be because Barack Obama and his henchmen wanted to frighten our senior citizens and disabled vets out of their wits. (And frighten them into voting for him again in 2012, I should add.)
Can you think of anything this man has done that’s more despicable? (Well, OK, I’ll admit that killing a bunch of innocent civilians in Libya and other places is also pretty bad.)
Grand Jury Probes What Edwards Knew About Cover-Up Money
FoxNews.com | AP
Published January 17, 2011
FILE: In this 2006 picture, Rielle Hunter, background left, holds a video camera as former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards campaigns in Portsmouth, N.H. A federal criminal investigation is examining how much the two-time presidential candidate knew about money used to cover up his extramarital affair and illegitimate child with Hunter.
WASHINGTON — A federal criminal investigation targeting John Edwards is examining how much the two-time presidential candidate knew about money used to cover up his extramarital affair and out-of-wedlock child and whether he had other practices that pushed the bounds of campaign finance laws, people involved in the case have told The Associated Press.
A federal grand jury meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, is combing through records and testimony involving several political organizations and individuals connected to Edwards and trying to determine if the former U.S. senator from North Carolina and 2004 vice presidential nominee broke any laws. A recently issued subpoena focuses on a web of these political groups allied with Edwards, according to subpoena details provided to AP that offer a glimpse into the investigation being conducted behind closed doors.
The case largely stems from money spent to keep Edwards’ mistress, Rielle Hunter, in hiding along with former campaign aide Andrew Young, who initially claimed paternity so Edwards could continue pursuing the White House without the taint of the affair.
Investigators are looking chiefly at whether funds paid to Hunter and Young — from outside political groups and Edwards’ political donors — should have been considered campaign donations since they arguably aided his presidential bid, according to several people involved in the case who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing probe. And they’re also looking closely at whether any entities linked to Edwards operated illegally.
While it could not be learned if federal prosecutors have found violations of a specific statute, federal election laws require disclosure of the money spent on campaigns for federal offices, limit the amounts of such donations and prohibit the conversion of campaign funds to personal use.
Federal Judge Allows Multi-State Suit Against Health Care Law to Proceed
FoxNews.com
Published October 14, 2010
In this Thursday, Aug. 5, 2010 file picture, Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum speaks during a gubernatorial candidate debate in Tampa, Fla. (AP)
A multi-state lawsuit against the federal health care overhaul will go forward, after a Florida federal judge on Thursday rejected the Obama administration’s request to dismiss the case.
District Judge Roger Vinson dismissed four of the six counts in the lawsuit led by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, who is representing a challenge from 20 states. But he allowed two counts, including one challenging the law’s controversial requirement that Americans buy health insurance, to proceed. Opening arguments are scheduled for mid-December.
McCollum, hailing the decision as a “victory” of sorts, said the move confirms the “significance” of the states’ challenge.
“This ruling is a victory for the states, small businesses and the American people. It is the first step to having the individual mandate declared unconstitutional and upholding state sovereignty in our federal system,” he said in a written statement.
Prosecution Lays Out Case in Closing Argument at Blagojevich Trial
FoxNews.com | AP
Published July 26, 2010
CHICAGO — A federal prosecutor is detailing Rod Blagojevich’s alleged schemes as part of closing arguments in the former governor’s corruption trial, arguing that the 24 different counts all boil down to something simple: the former governor cannot exchange doing something for the state for something personal.
Prosecutor Chris Niewoehner said Monday that jurors heard Blagojevich try to shake down president-elect Barack Obama for a job in exchange for appointing an Obama friend to his U.S. Senate seat.
He said they heard Blagojevich trying to get a $100,000 campaign contribution in exchange for signing a racetrack bill and trying to shake down a children’s hospital for another contribution.
And, he argued, Blagojevich lied to the FBI about the alleged schemes.
Blagojevich has pleaded not guilty in an alleged scheme to sell Obama’s old Senate seat and plotting to illegally pressure people for campaign contributions.
Earlier in the proceedings Monday, the government asked to drop one count of wire fraud against Blagojevich’s brother, Robert, who has been implicated as helping the former governor.
The Beast Behind Facebook Fascism: Censoring Palin
Atlas Shrugs
Thursday, July 22, 2010
The hatred of the good for being the good. Ayn Rand.
I was shocked (shocked, I tell ya!) to find out that the liberal goosestepping fascists over at the beastly Daily were behind the silencing of free speech. Poor, poor Tina Brown, oh how the mighty has fallen.
The Palin post removal was pushed by a beast who scribbles for the Daily Beast. The spammer is a notorious hater. He best reflects the moochers, looters and destroyers that Ayn Rand so brilliantly describes in Atlas Shrugged. This, yet again, best displays destroyers at work or at play…..
Obama AZ border claims false, say three … Democrats?
HotAir.com
posted at 6:55 pm on July 5, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
printer-friendly
When Barack Obama insisted last week that the southern border was more secure than at any time over the past 20 years, no one was surprised to hear Republicans scoffing at the claim. However, they’re not the only people calling Obama’s claim false. Three Arizona Democrats in Congress blasted Obama this weekend, worried that voters in their districts might hold them accountable for Obama’s posturing:
Anticipating a furor of voter criticism over the July Fourth recess, Democratic lawmakers from the border region shot back at the White House last week, challenging the president’s speech on immigration in which he said that the southern border is secure.
Arizona Democratic Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick, Harry Mitchell and Gabrielle Giffords joined a growing Republican chorus in denouncing President Barack Obama for not pushing for more specific action in his Thursday speech on the nation’s immigration and border security issues.
Then: Zero Population Growth, Now, Zero Population (!)
PajamasMedia.com
The Singer Not the Song
Peter Singer, writing in the New York Times, asks whether a world without people wouldn’t be a better place. His argument is simple. If nobody is alive then nobody’s human rights can be violated. “Have you ever thought about whether to have a child? … But very few ask whether coming into existence is a good thing for the child itself.”
The ultimate act of altruism, he argues, may be a conscious choice to be the last generation on earth. In that way there would be no one left to suffer the depredations of capitalism such as climate change. “Most thoughtful people are extremely concerned about climate change. … But the people who will be most severely harmed by climate change have not yet been conceived. If there were to be no future generations, there would be much less for us to feel to guilty about.” As a society we are terminally guilty, irrevocably condemned. And since we cannot help living, then the solution is to do away with ourselves. By far the best way to prevent anyone from feeling guilty is for no one to feel guilt. “So why don’t we make ourselves the last generation on earth? If we would all agree to have ourselves sterilized then no sacrifices would be required — we could party our way into extinction!” The only way you’re going to eat that can of beans is you agree to off yourself after dinner.
URGENT: Congressman; White House Job Offer to SESTAK May Be an ‘Impeachable’ Offense
FOXNews.com
Published May 25, 2010
Rep. Darrell Issa (r) said Tuesday that Rep. Joe Sestak’s (l) allegation that the White House offered him a job to coax him out of a race against Arlen Specter could be an “impeachable” offense. (AP)
Rep. Joe Sestak’s allegation that the White House offered him a job to drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary race against Arlen Specter is a crime that could lead to the impeachment of President Obama, Rep. Darrell Issa said.
But the decision by the Pennsylvania congressman not to elaborate on a so-called deal also could become a political problem as Sestak tries for the U.S. Senate seat.
CWNews Posted Comments