Wednesday, January 31, 2007


Read what it says...

Liberal weenies like Hillary who are now touting that they didn't really mean that Bush should start a war, or that Bush deceived them, apparently didn't read the resolution they signed?



And the liberal dittoheads who blithly tout the Democrat talking point memos on the topic probably haven't read it either.


And then tell me they were 'oh so' taken by surprise.



Republicans Block Congressional Pay Hike

Oh cry me a figgin' tear, Lott.  You people are pathetic.  $165,200 a year off the public dole and some of you are whining because you won't get your 1.7%.

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Global Warming "Deniers" Equated to "Holocaust Deniers"

I thought I smelled a Rockefeller. That makes sense since this political man made global warming tripe is all about Global Control. Fits right in with a one-world government, as supported by liberal elitists like Rockefeller. After all, the United States is obviously not capable of taking this crisis seriously enough. No, we need global governance to achieve our goals! And all we need is a few billion (trillion?) dollars from the pockets of the American taxpayer to solve this crisis!

I found this at the John Birch Society. That letter is an amazing display of elitist arrogance:

"Global Warming Deniers" Equated to "Holocaust Deniers" — Galileo Rolls in his Grave

Regarding the on-going "debate" over "man-made" global warming, of note is the recent letter from Senators Olympia Snowe (R.ME) and Jay Rockefeller IV (D.WV) to Exxon/Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson demanding his company cease funding the two dozen or so organizations and individuals the senators termed a "small cadre of global climate change skeptics."


Global hot air: Will Al Gore Melt?

Clearly the fearmongering and hand-wringing over man made global warming is not about objective scientific fact. There are too many good logical arguments out there from credible people to just dismiss them all as being dead wrong or "deniers". There is just as much solid empirical evidence out there that gore and his disciples downplay or completely ignore because those facts pose an 'inconvenient' counter to their thesis.

The fact is no one really knows. Sure, global climate change is of concern to us and should be monitored and studied. Of course, we should work to reduce our creation of pollution. And the fact is we have, immensely. If you're my age or older you may rememeber the smoking factories and high pollution cars. Today's factories and cars are far more efficient. Fuel is cleaner. Water pollution is being handled better. The fact is we are improving things already. But having the audacity to believe we can change the climate of the Earth is so wrought with arrogant elitism that it could only be conceived by the likes of the same bozos who play with our clocks twice a year; Congress. I mean if we can effect climate change, then show me. Why don't you take on something smaller than the whole Earth, say a hurricane, for example. I say you practice on hurricanes and learn how to control them first before you take on the task of controlling the climate of the entire goddamn planet.

Related: Nuremberg for global warming skeptics? by Walter E. Williams


More in the collection of articles that provide 'inconvenient facts' to rebutt algore's Inconvenient Truth nonsense.

Will Al Gore Melt?
The Wall Street Journal
January 18, 2007; Page A16

Al Gore is traveling around the world telling us how we must fundamentally change our civilization due to the threat of global warming. Today he is in Denmark to disseminate this message. But if we are to embark on the costliest political project ever, maybe we should make sure it rests on solid ground. It should be based on the best facts, not just the convenient ones. This was the background for the biggest Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, to set up an investigative interview with Mr. Gore. And for this, the paper thought it would be obvious to team up with Bjorn Lomborg, author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist," who has provided one of the clearest counterpoints to Mr. Gore's tune.

The interview had been scheduled for months. Mr. Gore's agent yesterday thought Gore-meets-Lomborg would be great. Yet an hour later, he came back to tell us that Bjorn Lomborg should be excluded from the interview because he's been very critical of Mr. Gore's message about global warming and has questioned Mr. Gore's evenhandedness. According to the agent, Mr. Gore only wanted to have questions about his book and documentary, and only asked by a reporter. These conditions were immediately accepted by Jyllands-Posten. Yet an hour later we received an email from the agent saying that the interview was now cancelled. What happened?

One can only speculate. But if we are to follow Mr. Gore's suggestions of radically changing our way of life, the costs are not trivial. If we slowly change our greenhouse gas emissions over the coming century, the U.N. actually estimates that we will live in a warmer but immensely richer world. However, the U.N. Climate Panel suggests that if we follow Al Gore's path down toward an environmentally obsessed society, it will have big consequences for the world, not least its poor. In the year 2100, Mr. Gore will have left the average person 30% poorer, and thus less able to handle many of the problems we will face, climate change or no climate change.

Clearly we need to ask hard questions. Is Mr. Gore's world a worthwhile sacrifice? But it seems that critical questions are out of the question. It would have been great to ask him why he only talks about a sea-level rise of 20 feet. In his movie he shows scary sequences of 20-feet flooding Florida, San Francisco, New York, Holland, Calcutta, Beijing and Shanghai. But were realistic levels not dramatic enough? The U.N. climate panel expects only a foot of sea-level rise over this century. Moreover, sea levels actually climbed that much over the past 150 years. Does Mr. Gore find it balanced to exaggerate the best scientific knowledge available by a factor of 20?

Mr. Gore says that global warming will increase malaria and highlights Nairobi as his key case. According to him, Nairobi was founded right where it was too cold for malaria to occur. However, with global warming advancing, he tells us that malaria is now appearing in the city. Yet this is quite contrary to the World Health Organization's finding. Today Nairobi is considered free of malaria, but in the 1920s and '30s, when temperatures were lower than today, malaria epidemics occurred regularly. Mr. Gore's is a convenient story, but isn't it against the facts?

He considers Antarctica the canary in the mine, but again doesn't tell the full story. He presents pictures from the 2% of Antarctica that is dramatically warming and ignores the 98% that has largely cooled over the past 35 years. The U.N. panel estimates that Antarctica will actually increase its snow mass this century. Similarly, Mr. Gore points to shrinking sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere, but don't mention that sea ice in the Southern Hemisphere is increasing. Shouldn't we hear those facts? Mr. Gore talks about how the higher temperatures of global warming kill people. He specifically mentions how the European heat wave of 2003 killed 35,000. But he entirely leaves out how global warming also means less cold and saves lives. Moreover, the avoided cold deaths far outweigh the number of heat deaths. For the U.K. it is estimated that 2,000 more will die from global warming. But at the same time 20,000 fewer will die of cold. Why does Mr. Gore tell only one side of the story?

Al Gore is on a mission. If he has his way, we could end up choosing a future, based on dubious claims, that could cost us, according to a U.N. estimate, $553 trillion over this century. Getting answers to hard questions is not an unreasonable expectation before we take his project seriously. It is crucial that we make the right decisions posed by the challenge of global warming. These are best achieved through open debate, and we invite him to take the time to answer our questions: We are ready to interview you any time, Mr. Gore -- and anywhere.

Mr. Rose is culture editor of Jyllands-Posten, in Copenhagen. Mr. Lomborg is a professor at the Copenhagen Business School.


Friday, January 26, 2007

Yeah. John "Two Americas" Edwards hovel

Oh the humanity. Pity that poor little girl that doesn't have a darn coat to wear. John "Two Americas" Edwards has to be one of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.


Carolina Journal Exclusives

Edwards Home County's Largest

By Don Carrington

The 28,200-square-foot home also Orange County's most valuableRALEIGH - Presidential candidate John Edwards and his family recently moved into what county tax officials say is the most valuable home in Orange County. The house, which includes a recreational building attached to the main living quarters, also is probably the largest in the county.

The Edwardses residential property will likely have the highest tax value in the county,- Orange County Tax Assessor John Smith told Carolina Journal. He estimated that the tax value will exceed $6 million when the facility is completed.

The rambling structure sits in the middle of a 102-acre estate on Old Greensboro Road west of Chapel Hill. The heavily wooded site and winding driveway ensure that the home is not visible from the road. "No Trespassing" signs discourage passersby from venturing past the gate.

Don Knight, Orange County building plans examiner, told CJ that, including the recreational building, the Edwardses' home would be one of the largest in Orange County.

Knight approved the building plans that showed the Edwards home totaling 28,200 square feet of connected space. The main house is 10,400 square feet and has two garages. The recreation building, a red, barn-like building containing 15,600 square feet, is connected to the house by a closed-in and roofed structure of varying widths and elevations that totals 2,200 square feet.

The main house is all on one level except for a 600-square-foot bedroom and bath area above the guest garage.

The recreation building contains a basketball court, a squash court, two stages, a bedroom, kitchen, bathrooms, swimming pool, a four-story tower, and a room designated "John's Lounge."

Edwards was the Democratic candidate for vice president in 2004 and a former N.C. senator.

Thursday afternoon, the Edwards for President press office was unable to provide information on any additional buildings planned for the estate.

Don Carrington is executive editor of Carolina Journal.

Saturday, January 20, 2007

Rush on Pelosi on Global Warming

If ever there was a hoax perpretrated on the American public, this will prove out to be the Granddaddy of them all. Look for yourself. Observe exactly who is touting the global warming crisis and why. Make no mistake; this is about money and power. Can you honestly believe and support anything the U.N. is pushing, with its long established history of trying to globally govern the world? This battle for money and global control will be the biggest boondogle we pass on to our grandchildren. The indoctrination in schools is already well underway, and it will be relentless.


RUSH: What a joke.

PELOSI: I promise to do everything in my power to achieve energy independence and to do so within ten years and to stop global warming, which says to the American people that we are about the future, about addressing how we create jobs, how we care for our children, how we grow our economy, and how we preserve our planet.

RUSH: I'll tell you, the economy is undergoing its biggest growth threat right now with these people in charge. The economy is doing fabulous, and it has been for awhile. You know why it's not a story anymore? It's because we are so affluent, we expect a good economy. A little recession, we get mad, “Do something about it! Somebody fix it, do it now!” Good economy, no longer a big political asset, we expect it. Yet, listen to her and we've got soup line America still out there. She's going to achieve energy independence in ten years. These are people who will not let us drill for oil anywhere near our border or on our land. How we going to do this, madam, and stop global warming? The arrogance, the conceit. What are you going to do? Are you going to find a way to make the earth stop rotating on its axis? You going to put out the sun? What are you going to do? Anyway, as I told you, Dingell criticized her, said, (paraphrasing) “This is just something that's going to lead to junkets and all kinds of things, not going to get anything done.” Good Morning America today, Diane Sawyer was interviewing Pelosi, quoting Dingell as saying, “We need more committees like a fish needs feathers. We already have five committees dealing with this.” Pelosi's response:

PELOSI: And they will all continue to deal with it. This is a new way, we’re democratizing Congress.

RUSH: Really? Democratizing Congress. Let's see what we have here. We had every one of her six issues in the 42 hours instead of 100. They really rammed it through. There was no bipartisan input. A new Democratic Congress? We're democratizing Congress? They told the Republicans to go to hell. By the way, I would do that, too, if I were the Republicans and I were in the majority. But I mean don't sit there and tell us that you're bipartisanshiping everything and you're democratizing, madam, when you're not. All these issues except the minimum wage that you've rammed through there are flawed and unfounded and denounced as dead in the Senate. So this is a big nothing. She's democratizing the Senate. This is who's running the place, folks. We couldn't have asked for anything more, believe me.

END TRANSCRIPT (excerpt from Rush


On the same day of Pelosi's big 'Global Warming' announcement in California...

Rare cold wave hits California - Jan 18,2007

California's deep-freeze could triple produce prices - Jan 17, 2007

Read the Background Material...

(Heidi Cullen: A Very Political Climate)
(ABC-TV Meteorologist: I Don't Know A Single Weatherman Who Believes 'Man-Made Global Warming Hype')
(Citrus freeze leaves thousands out of work)
(Strip "Man-Made" Global Warming Skeptics of Credentials?)
(Pelosi Targets Global Warming)
(Charles puts his (carbon) foot in it)
(The Wall Street Journal: Will Al Gore Melt?)
(James Lewis: Why Global Warming is Probably a Crock)
(Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming)
(Boston Globe: Markey caught in wrangling on global warming)
(Michael Crichton: Environmentalism as Religion)
(Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century)
(WorldNetDaily: Loophole could benefit company with headquarter's in Pelosi district)
(Boston Globe: With bangs of gavel, Frank lays down law)
(CNN: Home Depot's new CEO gets a full workload)
(CNSNews: Income Gap Not Growing, Data Shows)
(American Thinker: Barmy Barney)
(Washington Post: "Mayflower Madam" Gave Gobie Idea)
(Washington Post: Chevy Chase Principal Resigns)


Friday, January 19, 2007


Thank God. My faith in human intelligence has been restored.

At least there's a few people out there who aren't running around like Chicken Little yelling 'The Sky is falling! The Sky is falling!' This guy pegs it. It's all about money and who can get some of it.

I copied the post here so it doesn't get lost. I hope everyone who fears the 'global warming crisis' will read this.



January 19, 2007

Posted by Marc Morano

After EPW blog post yesterday Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics check out this blog post from ABC-TV Alabama affiliate weatherman James Spann

Also check out Weather Channel response to the controversy

From Spann blog - his bio:

"In 2005 I upgraded the AMS seal of approval to the new "Certified Broadcast Meteorologist" designation. The CBM is the highest level of certification from the AMS, and involves academic requirements, on-air performance, a rigorous examination, and continuing education.Official bio here:

The Weather Channel Mess

January 18, 2007 James Spann Op/Ed
Well, well. Some "climate expert" on "The Weather Channel" wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent "global warming" is a natural process. So much for "tolerance", huh?
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can't find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:
*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at "The Weather Channel" probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.
*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.
If you don't like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.
In fact, I encourage you to listen to WeatherBrains episode number 12, featuring Alabama State Climatologist John Christy, and WeatherBrains episode number 17, featuring Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University, one of the most brilliant minds in our science.
WeatherBrains, by the way, is our weekly 30 minute netcast.
I have nothing against "The Weather Channel", but they have crossed the line into a political and cultural region where I simply won't go.


Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Democrats 'Hooked' on Corruption

I got this in my email last night and I think it's halarious. It's a good example of the watchdog power that the internet provides us. Huey P. Long wouldn't last 5 minutes in today's world. The eyes and ears of the internet are upon all of them, be they Republican or Democrat. But it's sure fun to watch the Dems squirm after such highfalutin '100 hours' and the 'end of corruption' proclamations. Silliness.

I use W Kethchup and I have to tell you, every time I pour some I smile. Plus it just tastes good.

Oh yeah, if Starkist is your brand of tuna, better grab some quick before the price goes up. Who do you think is going to pay for that $3.65 an hour raise!


For media inquiries contact Bill Zachary (917) 733-3038

Democrats First Week: Hooked on Corruption

Eagle Bridge, NY — January 16, 2007 — On January 4 the Democratic Party took control of the House of Representatives under the leadership of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the first 100 legislative hours the Democrats netted their first victory by passing a bill to raise the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour for all Americans, except those living in American Samoa where the minimum wage will remain $3.26 an hour. The largest employer in American Samoa is StarKist, a tuna cannery owned by Del Monte Foods that pays its workers an average of $3.60 an hour. Del Monte's headquarters are located in Speaker Pelosi's congressional district, and it has been widely reported that Pelosi's husband may own up to $17 million in Del Monte stock.

Responding to criticism over the weekend, Speaker Pelosi promised to amend the bill to include American Samoa. Bill Zachary, Chairman of W Ketchup, reacted: "Speaker Pelosi, who is reportedly worth between $30 and $100 million, promised to 'drain the swamp that is in Washington.' Apparently at the bottom of the swamp is the rotting stench of Democratic corruption."

Del Monte Foods is the third largest producer of ketchup in the United States after Heinz and Hunts. In 2002, the H.J. Heinz Company acquired 75% of Del Monte Foods. Teresa Heinz, wife of failed Presidential Candidate John Kerry, reportedly controls up to $750 million of Heinz stock.

W Ketchup CEO Dan Oliver commented: "It's not easy untangling the tentacles of influence that control the Democratic Party, but last week's vote revealed that Pelosi's efforts to reform Congress have already floundered. 'Big Tuna' Pelosi may have flip-flopped after being snagged by the press, but it shows she's already hooked on corruption. Unlike other leading brands, which fish for favors in Washington, we at W Ketchup focus on making delicious ketchup that all Americans can enjoy, and W Ketchup is also the only ketchup that supports the Freedom Alliance Scholarship Fund."

To order delicious W Ketchup, please visit our website at:

Founded in 2004, W Ketchup™ is a private company that makes ketchup in America solely from ingredients grown in the USA and does not support any liberal agendas. Unlike other leading brands, W Ketchup does not own any subsidiaries that harm dolphins. For more information visit or contact 1-866-WKETCHUP, or write to 954 Lexington Ave, #236, New York, NY 10021-5013

You received this email because you ordered W Ketchup in the past.

Thank you for supporting W Ketchup.


Sunday, January 14, 2007

Global Warming? Or the next Ice Age?

For all you folks who ran right out and saw Algore's new movie "An Inconvenient Truth",
please take a few minutes to read this article:
Fire and Ice

Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years,
but can't decide whether we face an ice age or warming

By R. Warren Anderson
Research Analyst

Dan Gainor
The Boone Pickens Free Market Fellow

See Executive Summary | PDF Version

U.S. Funds Nearly $4 Billion in Climate-Change Research
The Times Warms to Cooling
Al Gore: Still Hot for Global Warming
Climate Change: Unpredictable Results

After reading this article I'm starting to be inclined to think that maybe the media is simply thriving on controversy to sell papers and magazines.
It's all like professional wrestling.  The fix is in and it doesn't really matter who wins as long as there is controversy.  And if there's no controversy
naturally, we'll by-god create some.  We got mortgages to pay after all!
Anyone who simply accepts the "Global Warming" mantra, especially "Man-made Global Warming" as fact is either ignorant, a fool, or is in the money chain.
Oh, and as for Algore, most of the Big Media and the U.N., read this one too!

Has John "Two Americas" Edwards seen the light?

"If you think about everyday life,
people are more likely to take responsibility
when no one else is helping them
or propping them up," John Edwards told Larry King. (aired January 10, 2007)
What's this?  Has John "Two Americas" Edwards seen the light?  Does be really believe that people who step up and take personal responsibility without someone propping them up, are likely to be stronger and more successful in their every day lives?  Eureka!  I'm voting for John Edwards!
But wait.  Edwards wasn't talking about Americans. Americans, who have created more by-their-bootstrap success stories than any society in history.  Oh, no, he didn't mean Americans. 
Edwards will quickly point out how the quote was taken out of context.  But it hasn't been really.  People are people everywhere.  The statement is true no matter where it's applied.  Everywhere people are allowed to live free and take personal responsibility for their every day lives you will find successful people (barring someone trying to shoot them or blow them up at any given moment).  Freedom and Liberty are the tenets of personal responsibility and of genuine personal success.
No, Edwards was talking about Iraqis.  You know, those folks who've had all the opportunities to just step up and take over control of their "everyday life" handed to them on a silver platter. From fixing their kids breakfast in the morning and patting them on their butts before sending them off to school, to running their police stations, Quick Stops and, oh yeah their entire government.  After all, it's been three years for crying out loud!
But regular Americans?  I mean the one Edwards usually refers to.  You know, the bottom half of his "Two Americas" mantra.  No, they can't make it on their own.  They aren't capable, even generation after generation of making it without being propped up.  They can't find a job themselves that pays more than $5.15 an hour without his help.  They can't be trusted to choose where they want to send their kids to school without his help. They're certainly not capable of taking a small piece of their own retirement fund out of the hands of government and learning how to handle investing it themselves for a vastly greater return.  And let's not even get started on what he and his party think of someone having the right and the means to take personal responsibility to defend themselves and their property.
No, we need him and his party to protect us and take care of us and look out for us from the cradle to the grave in his "Two Americas" world.
Mr. Edwards I'm offended.  In fact, you have offended every American in this country.  You're prepared to set a higher standard for Iraqis than you think your own fellow citizens are capable of achieving.  How dare you disrespect us so.
Why would anyone want to have you for a leader when you think so little of your fellow Americans?  How could anyone follow your ideology when the very core of it strives to stifle personal responsibility and curtail the freedom that comes with it?
No sir, there is only one America.  There is only one Iraq.  The only thing there are two us is both sides of your mouth, and the eyes and ears of the Internet are upon you.
The fact is, people will succeed if you will get out of the way and let them.  The Iraqis need our help, not to be propped up, or to take over their personal responsibilities, but to eliminate the real threat they face in their daily lives of being killed.  If we can drive off or kill or even change the hearts of the terrorists and insurgents so these people can live in peace, then you'll find they will do just fine on their own. 
Democracy works, if you give it a chance.  You folks should try it sometime.
Larry Wright