Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Thursday, December 10, 2009


How on earth does anyone explain this level of absurdity? Barack Obama as the "evolutionary flashpoint for humanity"?! Frankly, unbeknownst to Smith, this might be his own way of hedging his previous bets - although he doesn't do a very good job of it. Remember, Smith was one of the most star struck celebrities when it came to Obama's hope and change before we saw it in action.

Notice that Smith has now moved to championing Barack Obama "the Idea" over Barack Obama "the person".

Whatever that means. All I know is that Will Smith may have lost against the aliens in Independence Day. It's things like this that really make me question his ability to engage in cognitive thought.


h/t to NB


Ok, I really need help understanding this one. Climate change is an issue of national security? I know that Al Gore did a skit on Saturday Night Live in which he was elected president and said, "glaciers that once were melting are now on the attack" but did Obama really have to take him seriously?

Here is a quote from Obama that appears on the Copenhagen Conference WEBSITE:
"There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement – all of which will fuel more conflict for decades," and then he drew attention to the question of security in the climate problem:

"It is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action – it's military leaders in my own country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance."
I wonder if General McChrystal is putting climate change at the top of his priority list for defending America.

By the way, if Obama is so interested in preventing drought and famine, how come he doesn't turn the water back on for the farmers in SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA?

Yeah, in addition to the EPA naming CO2 - a gas exhaled by each member within the EPA (I think) - as something harmful to the earth, it is also helping to cause drought and famine by demanding that a 2" Delta Smelt fish be protected ahead of farmers who are now in food lines.


If you had any doubt that politicians have no shame, look no further than Congress, which seems to be allowing an agency that answers to the Executive Branch (Obama) to enforce laws the congress won't enact. It has the stench of both blackmail and doubling down in light of climategate.

By threatening to declare carbon dioxide (CO2) a gas that is harmful to the enviornment, the EPA is laying the groundwork for policy that would be more harmful than any Cap & Trade legislation.

So how tied to climategate is this threat from the EPA? NEWSMAX reports on the notion that Obama should demand the EPA withdraw such a claim about CO2 because that claim is based on the faulty data at the heart of climategate:
Republicans and conservative think tanks are calling for the Obama administration to revoke its declaration that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant subject to EPA regulation on the grounds that the EPA's primary source of information for the finding was the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

An important source of data for the IPCC was the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in England, the source of the highly controversial "climategate" e-mails. IPCC officials deny that their data on climate change is in any way biased.
This is where the doubling down takes place. However, the bigger climategate gets and the more that's exposed, the more Obama will have tied himself and his agenda to fraudulent science. And the more he does that, the more complicit he becomes in perpetuating it.

How about the response of EPA head, Lisa Jackson, to the question about why she didn't consider requests to deny her agency's action based on climategate?
When Jackson was asked during Monday's news conference why she didn't accede to GOP requests to put off the EPA finding until the climategate e-mails could be investigated, she replied: "I didn't delay it because there is nothing in the hacked e-mails that undermine the science upon which this decision was made," adding, "This issue has not raised new scientific questions that are not addressed already in this finding."


h/t to FR


If you needed further proof that Allegory's climate change movement is nothing other than paganism under the guise of science, here it is. Frankly, this may also be proof that climategate is starting to get to him. While roaming the halls of CNN with his book in tow, Allegory explains how his poem came to be and then reads it aloud for the viewers.

As Allegory reads the poem penned by himself from his book that features a photo of what the world will look like if we continue down our carbon-emitting path, despite the fact that a world where Cuba is underwater and Denver is not being a physical impossibility, one is struck by how truly insane this man is looking.

After watching him spout this garbage I began actually considering the possibility that he truly believes it. If he truly believes it, he's championing paganism. If not, he's a fraud. Either way, he's misleading a lot of people.

Now that we know that data was manipulated, we know man-made climate change is not proven. Therefore, those who are adamant that it is taking place are going on faith. Faith is something the followers of the one True God (Yahweh) are constantly derided for having.

Time for the climate change pagans to be derided a little bit.

h/t to GP
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive