Barack Obama Is A Dangerous Leftist of a New Kind

Stolen From Hat Tip to Yid With Lid

By Barry Rubin

Barack Obama is not a Communist, a fascist, a Muslim, a Marxist, a Progressive (in the pre-1920s' meaning of that word, before it just became a cover for Communists and other leftists), or even a socialist. Obama and those who control much of America’s academia, mass media, and entertainment industry—plus a number of trade unions and hundreds of foundations, think tanks, and front groups—are believers in a new, very American form of leftism. It is very statist, very dangerous for freedom, and economically destructive. But we first have to identify what “it” is. Our difficulty in doing so has been a huge reason why we have not persuaded more people--though goodness knows a lot of people have woken up that there is a huge problem here.

Yet calling Obama those various names doesn’t persuade a large portion of the American population because they sense that these definitions aren’t accurate and can come up valid counter-arguments or be fed by schools and media with phony ones. And all of those who rage in the talk-back columns of websites aren’t persuading anyone anything except, perhaps, that Obama’s opponents are delusional. You may not like hearing that but it’s the truth.

I'm amazed and amused by people who say that Obama cannot be a leftist because he--gasp!--appointed people from Wall Street to his cabinet and favors certain specific companies and banks. Excuse me, you are merely saying perhaps that by engaging in corruption and getting some big favored capitalists to give him big campaign donations in exchange for favors that Obama isn't an "honest" leftist. If the left can get support from some such people it would be foolish to throw away the chance. Refusing to act like that was how the Old Left and the 1960s' New Left behaved and we saw what happened to them.

We are in a totally new era. The nineteenth and early twentieth century debates and categories no longer hold. Indeed, when the New Leftists climbed out of the wreckage of the 1960s-early 1970s they realized this and successfully built something very new. (If you are looking for a "prehistoric" founding document in terms of some important themes, albeit very much altered, read the original Weatherman Manifesto and then delete all the hysterical parts. Dress it up in a suit and tie and seat is behind the desk of a professor, foundation director, reporter, or politician. I don’t have the space here to explain this point in detail.)

Let’s start with the word “socialist.” The European socialist, or social democratic, movement was strongly anti-Communist. Did they hate their countries? Remember, these were the people who remained patriots during World War One, that's one of the main reasons they first broke with the Communists. The European Socialists gave up the idea of abolishing capitalism many decades ago. While some parties were further to the left (notably in Spain and Sweden), most had settled into relatively moderate positions. When was the last time they nationalized anything?

Moreover, remember that European statism is as much of conservative as of socialist origin. Consider France, a country whose high degree of centralization goes back to feudal times and Napoleon, not to mention the Gaullists. America is very exceptional all right, but because it broke with both European conservative and leftist models. The welfare states there were the results of multi-partisan efforts.

Have European socialists—I’m not talking here about left-wing academics and journalists—fallen in love with Barack Obama? Not at all. They might like Obama more than George W. Bush but they liked Bill Clinton better than either one. Not only do they not see Obama as a comrade but they could probably give him good advice about why his policies will inevitably fail. They may not have the answers for their own countries but they understand capitalism and how to make it work—and want to make it work—far more than he does.

So here’s a key point: Obama and his ideological comrades—let me call them the New New Left (NNL)—are to the left of almost all of the European Socialist parties.

__________________________________________________

Barry Rubin, Israel: An Introduction (Yale University Press) is the first comprehensive book providing a well-rounded introduction to Israel, a definitive account of the nation's past, its often controversial present, and much more. It presents a clear and detailed view of the country’s land, people, history, society, politics, economics, and culture. This book is written for general readers and students who may have little knowledge but even well-informed readers tell us they’ve learned new things.Please click on the picture of the book on the right column of this site to purchase and/or get more information on the book.

___________________________________________________

Is Obama and company a Marxist group or a bunch of Communists, (referring to the movement begun by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin and run thereafter by Joseph Stalin? Well, certainly there are parallels and ideas taken from that movement. But in many ways they have turned Marxism on its head. Let me give one critical example. Marxists held that material conditions were primary and would determine the course of history. The NNL rejects this and argues that it can use ideas and modern methods of advertising, educational indoctrination, a takeover of most media, and so on to bring about the fundamental transformation of America. They draw mainly from a deviant form developed by such people as Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School. But they have learned the most by taking mainstream American techniques and putting them at the service of radical ideology.

Moreover, in contrast to the NNL, Marxists saw the “bourgeois” government as an inevitable enemy. Impossible to change it could only be overthrown. The NNL sought to take over that government and use it to force “revolution” from above. The Marxists focused on the proletariat; while working with some (mostly government workers’) trade unions, the NNL bases itself on certain elements of the upper middle class while trying to buy off crony capitalists and the poor, who Marx called the lumpenproletariat.

Well, of course, the result is a disaster when an anti-capitalist regime takes over a capitalist system. How can the system do anything but crash? The pilots are motivated by something that blends deliberate suicide with incompetence, and an ideology that ensures a crash. And they will never ever get better because they are just uninterested in learning what to do that works.


So what are we dealing with here? A radical leftist movement pretending to be liberal, growing out of the New Left of the 1960s, painfully aware of how the far left miserably failed in American history, and trying to create a twenty-first century stealth leftism. The first step was to gain hegemony in the key institutions that created ideas, rather than the factories that created material goods. They succeeded brilliantly.

The next step was to shape millions of Americans, especially young Americans, to accept their ideas that the United States was a force for evil in the world; a failed society; a place of terrible racism and hatred for women; a country where the vast majority didn’t have a fair chance because the system was unfair. In fact, if you take away the varnish rhetoric, they argue that America is a virtual dictatorship of a small minority of wealthy people who just set everything up for their own convenience. Obviously this parallels both Marxist and non-Marxist historical leftism.

The fact that their description of America has so little to do with the actual country makes it all the more impressive that they’ve been able to sell this set of ideas. Having one of their indoctrinated products become president was a special bonus. That doesn’t mean Obama was backed by some conspiracy or singled out for highest office. There are thousands of such people who are in positions of power, including one-third of the Democrats in the House of Representatives. Obama just perfectly fit the needs of the moment.

Is Obama a Muslim? Of course not and there is no evidence that he is no matter how much you jump up and down and holler about it. On one side, Obama is—like his NNL colleagues--rather obviously a cynical atheist who has no serious religious belief.

On the other side, he certainly had close contact with Islam and functioned as a Muslim in Indonesia. It is worth mentioning that generally speaking Indonesia has about the most moderate form of Islam in the world. Note how in his autobiography, Obama describes his Muslim step-father’s tolerance for “pagan” Indonesian practices. This would be virtually unimaginable in any other country.

Coming from that experience, Obama fancies himself as an expert on Islam with a special rapport and sympathy to Muslims. His policy is a disaster because he refuses to recognize that non-al-Qaida Islamists are extremely anti-American, totalitarian, and anti-democratic. Does Obama want to help Islamists take power? In many cases, yes, but that isn’t because he’s a Muslim but because he falsely believes—encouraged by various “experts”—that this would tame them and they will like America and become democratic.

Has this kind of thinking happened before? Absolutely yes. In the 1950s, the U.S. government decided that Arab nationalists would be anti-Communist modernizers when they turned out to be bloodthirsty anti-American tyrants. In the early 1990s, both the U.S. and Israeli governments decided that helping Yasir Arafat would transform him into a statesman who just wanted to have his own country and settle down to fixing potholes.

Note that even if Obama were to be defeated in the election, the far left's relative monopoly over mass media, academia, many schools, and much of publishing and entertainment would not be affected. The left-wing's control over the Democratic Party might also well not be affected, because that would require a revolt by courageous people, further motivated by disastrous defeat, of which so far there is no sign whatsoever.

Obviously, only so much can be said about these things in 1000 words and these are central themes in a book I hope to complete before year’s end called Silent Revolution. But unless we can persuasively explain what is going on and avoid being labeled—at least by anyone who has been duped but wants to be honest—as a bunch of crazy name-callers, there's just going to be years more of the same.
********************************************************************************

Barack Hussein Obama is an amateur in on the scene.  His lack of understanding of simple economics has brought the American economy to a stand still.  His foreign policy of appeasement has made the United States look weak to our enemies and destroyed the rapport we had with our allies.  His "Leading From Behind" shows him to be the coward he is.  His lack of a work ethic shows the laziness of the man.  A man who spends more time campaigning and not governing.

4 more years of Barack Hussein Obama's policies and the United States will no longer exists as a strong, vibrant nation.  It will become a pale imitation of Europe, with the same debt problems and Nanny State programs that is destroying those counties.

What Barack Hussein Obama Has Done For America

Stolen from Texas Fred

31 Foregone Facts Barack Obama Fans Should Ponder!

1. If a previous president had doubled the national debt which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in just one year, would you have approved?

2. If a previous president had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

3. If a previous president would have spent nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus and guaranteed unemployment would not exceed 8%, would you have called him a liar?

4. If a previous president would have played golf for thirteen weekends in a row leaving it up to congressional leaders to deal with the greatest financial crisis since the great depression, would you have considered him disengaged and out of touch?

5. If a previous president had criticized a state law that he admitted to never even reading, would you have thought him an ignoramus?

6. If a previous president had passed an unconstitutional law that would have absorbed 1/6th of the America’s entire GDP, forced Americans to purchase a private product (in violation of the commerce clause), fined them if they didn’t, hired 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce it, and exempted 1400 organizations from having to abide by that new law, would you have thought him a mafia boss?

7. If a previous president joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in America to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you have questioned his patriotism and priorities and wonder who his allegiance was to?

8. If a previous president had pronounced Army Corpsman like you pronounce a dead corpse, would you have thought he was stupid?

9. If a previous president had put 87,000 people out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records because one foreign company had an accident, would you have agreed?

10. If a previous president had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87,000 American workers unemployed would you have supported him?

11. If a previous president had been the first president to need a teleprompter to get through a press conference, would you have thought this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and that he’s really controlled by smarter people behind the scenes?

12. If a previous president had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take his wife to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

13. If a previous president had reduced your retirement plan holdings of GM stock by 90%, given the unions a majority stake in the car maker and shut down 789 perfectly profitable Chrysler dealerships because they were were owned by registered republicans, would you have approved?

14. If a previous president had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

15. If a previous president had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs when Gordon Brown gave him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

16. If a previous president had given the Queen of England an iPod containing audios of his speeches, would you have thought it a proud moment for America, or that a narcissist occupied the White House?

17. If a previous president had bowed to Kings of third world countries while on an apologetic tour, would you have approved?

18. If a previous president had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent “Austrian language,” would you have thought it a minor slip?

19. If a previous president had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who don’t pay their own income taxes, would you have approved?

20. If a previous president had said there were 57 states in the United States, wouldn’t you have been shocked?

21. If a previous president would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out of his front door in his home town, would you not have thought him a conceited, egomaniac?

22. If a previous president had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have not been embarrassed?

23. If a previous president had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on “Earth Day,” would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?

24. If a previous presidents’ administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan that caused widespread panic, would you have thought him insensitive and clueless about what actually happened on 9/11?

25. If a previous president had created the position of 45 Czars who reported directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate and usurping the Constitution, would you have ever approved?

26. If a previous president had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

27. If a previous president had spent nearly $2 million dollars hiding his identity all the way back to his childhood, would you have been suspicious?

28. If a previous president had been raised a Muslim, spent more time living abroad in Islamic countries than he did in the United States, hung out with terrorists, and attended a hate church for 20 years, would you have not thought him brainwashed?

29. If a previous president had received a Nobel Peace Prize for nothing more than out campaigning his competitors, would you have thought him the laughing stock of recipients?

30. If a previous president had ordered a botched illegal gun running operation that resulted in American arms winding up in the hands of foreign drug cartels who in turn murdered Americans, would he have not had blood on his hands and been ordered to resign?

31. If a previous president had released a fraudulent long form birth certificate and was factually proven ineligible to even be the president whether he was born on American soil or not, would you have not demanded impeachment?

If any of this was done by George W. Bush the Main Lame Stream Media would have been their top story for weeks if not months.

Remember this:  Franklin Delano Roosevelt inherited a real economic mess.  Never once during his administration did he, his advisors or members of the Democratic Party ever try to push the blame of a slow economic recovery on Herbert Hoover.  In fact they went out of their way not to.

Remember all of this on Election Day, Tuesday, November 6th, 2012 when you are in the voting booth and wondering who to vote for.

Watching America

Dry Bones says it all.  Plan after plan and yet the problem will not be solved.

As we go the world goes.  We need the courage to stand firm and force Congress to do the necessary work instead of these stop gap measures.

Call Congress and let them know your anger.

State Of The Nation

Book of Obama:  Chapter 10

 


e placed The Holy Suit and Tie once again upon His body, and ascended once again to the Dome.  There the assembled chapter of the Congress, the Holy Justices of the land, the members of the anointed Cabinet and guests from near and far sat awaiting His words.  Unlike the year before, He wasn't popular.  Every plan, every idea He had, was rejected by the people.

"We do not want your Cap and Trade, Health Care, or other Moonbat ideas.  Your bowing down to dictators, despots and tyrants around the world does not put us at ease You have apologized to everyone for all the supposed evils that we were suspected of doing.  You are getting ready to destroy our laws, by declaring the Holy Document invalid.  We have heard enough lies from you, your dogs Emanuel, Axelrod, Pelosi and Reid.  We've heard them all and we've learned a couple of things."

The Anointed One just smiled and then addressed the Nation:

short year ago I took office, but that is just a breeze in time.  Look back upon our Founding Fathers, our struggles during the Civil War, the Depression.  We did not flounder or despair.  Nor did we despair through out the struggles of the Civil Rights Movement.  And I will not despair now.

For I inherited a bad economy that was shaken to its core.  I opposed all of the bailouts done, for I saw the harm they will do.  My stimulus plan has created jobs in teaching, rescue, construction and other sectors.

We need Health Care now!  I demand Congress to pass.  Cap and Trade too.  Forget about the Holy Document.  There is too much to do.

I am a man of the people, representative of the Middle Class, My values are the same as yours.  I love this country so much I would never bad name it.  But we did wrong with the Muslim world, and other places too.  I said to them I am sorry, there is nothing you can do.

I said I would create jobs, and that I will do.  For every man and woman.  New industries, new factories, Red, White, Blue, and Green.  We must compete with China, Korea, and Germany too.  This we must excel in if we are going to continually survive.

I will eliminate the nukes of the world, starting with our own.  For did not the Great Reagan of old try to achieve this very goal.

People through out the land write to Me with their problems.  A businessman in Denver*, or in Philadelphia, a teacher in the city, the cop on the beat, a child who wants to know why Mommy and Daddy lost their jobs, another who just lost his home.  I read all their letters, I know all their problems, and I will solve them all.

I could go on all night, but that will do no good at all.  I promised you Hope and Change, and did not lie to you on that, for I am not President #43.

And after The Anointed One had finished His speech, His  followers were full of glee.  For they just knew that once again He had saved the day.

But from right across the river, from the city of Richmond in the land of Virginia, came a new prophet from the right.  Bob The Wise McDonnell.

The Prophet spoke of those with a job, how 1 in 10 lost theirs.
He spoke of the despair the nation felt, of how the economy  was gone.
He spoke of the need for smaller government, how The Anointed One did spend.
He said that the time for spending cuts and freezes were last year, not when your polling number has shown you have failed.

The Prophet McDonnell told the people that it isn't too late.
That the time has come to sit and wait,
So The Anointed One could not shove His agenda down our throats.

He told the assembled people and media the truth.
And our solutions aren't 1,000-page bills that no one has fully read,
After being crafted behind closed doors with special interests.
In fact, many of our proposals are available online at solutions.gop.gov, and we welcome your ideas on Facebook and Twitter.

He told them this and more.

 And through it all, the world went on, the nation will endure.

The GOP got Teddy's seat, they can get more they will.
For the people have seen the truth, heard the lies and broken promises.
Unlike those on the left, the right will not just yell.
They are the ones, in Midterm years, come out in droves to vote.

Reid, Frank and Boxer, plus many more are running scared tonight.
For the GOP has the will, the drive and the clout,
To drive the Moonbats back into the dark.

We just have to wait for November to do it!


*  The President mentioned many people in his speech, but none by name, nor did he recognize any of them in the balcony (he only recognized his wife).  Could it be they are all named:  Ellie Light?

Things To Look For In Tonight's Speech

In tonight's State of the Union speech we will hear President Obama declare himself to be a "Man Of The People" looking out for the Middle Class men and women like you and me. Just plain working Joes.

Just a plain working stiff.

How he has a plan to make America work again.  How his foreign policy is working and how to pass Health Care, Cap and Trade, and destroy the 2nd Amendment too.

What you also will see and hear is this:

The new whipping boy for the Obama Administration:

We will see an appearance of the President's closest aides. No not Axelrod and Emanuel, but this pair:

And we will see a repeat of the Pelosi Boing Dance:



Oh and the reason that the State of the Union is on a Wednesday night instead of the Tuesday night it is normally held on is because last night was the season opener of the series LOST.  A show that has more holes in the plot than Swiss Cheese, is poorly written and badly acted.  But because followers of the show raised a stink (They formed FACEBOOK group and in today's PC climate that is as powerful as marching in the streets.), the Obama Administration caved into overwhelming pressure.

I hope for many things:

1. This to be the last season of Lost.
2. The Democrats to lose their majority in both Houses of Congress this November.
3. President Obama to be a one-term President.

One can only hope.

Flight 93 Blogburst: Cash for clunkers: two crimes, justified by a lie.

A guest post from Alec Rawls.

Crime 1: Another multi-billion dollar subsidy for Government Motors.

When Obama stole Chrysler from its stockholders and gave it to his union cronies, we knew he would take every opportunity to waste taxpayer dollars trying to keep this lead balloon afloat. The Cash for Clunkers subsidy is just particularly egregious, since it works by subsidizing the last people in the world who need a subsidy: those who are well off enough to be buying new cars in the midst of a deep recession. Talk about a middle class welfare program!

Crime 2: Eliminating Government Motors’ competition by gratuitously slagging an expected 750,000 perfectly good used cars in the sub-$4500 price range.

The Obamacrats aren’t just subsidizing cars for the well-to-do. They are destroying the cars that the less well-off are in the market for, driving up used car prices as part of their effort to make new cars more attractive:

Some parts may be kept but the engine and drive-train must be destroyed. Specifically the engine will be injected with a liquid glass solution to permanently disable the engine and it will be the responsibility of the dealer to make sure this is done to the engine.

Injected with liquid glass? Sounds like a Quentin Tarentino murder fantasy, and the reality isn't any prettier. Witness Obama's procedure for destroying the would-be cars of the non-wealthy:



Here is another one, a spiffy-looking Volvo that holds out for 4-plus minutes. Some clunker, and check out the row of semi-new cars lined up to go next:



Take THAT all you graduate students, newlyweds, store clerks, aspiring actors, single moms, non-deadbeat dads, warehouse workers, journalists, hippies, and other assorted poor relations. You want a car, you can scrape together your savings for a down payment on the privilege of paying hundreds of dollars a month to Government Motors for FIVE YEARS, just like everybody else.

How big is this crime?

A very substantial portion of the population NEVER buys a new car. I, for instance, have never bought a new car, and I never expect to. Why would I, when California has the best used car market in the world? In the last 10 years I have bought two 1984 Toyota Vans, one with 45,000 miles, one with 115,000 miles, each for $1500. Both still run great. One is set up as a work vehicle. One converts from passenger van to camper. No new vehicles would serve as well, or look as sharp.



My two uber-vans, one extra-dirty from its recent 2000 mile trek to Seattle and back. (Shasta, Crater Lake, Boeing Museum of Flight, Blue Angels, Olympic Peninsula, Fort Stevens, Oregon Dunes, North Coast, and back across the Golden Gate. Ain’t that America?)

The vehicles that are being gratuitously destroyed are newer than my two vans (which are just outside the 25 year age limit) and they are up to three times the price. For instance, the immensely popular Toyota Previa vans (1990-96) all qualify.

A good California Previa with a hundred thousand miles left on it sells for two to three thousand dollars. The government's offer of 35-45 hundred is outbidding the market even on these top quality used vehicles. Cash for Clunkers is a misnomer. Some bottom-of-the-barrel cars will be turned in, but the rules insure that most will not be these “clunkers.”

To qualify, a car must have been registered the name of the new car buyer for the last 12 months and it must have been insured for the last 12 months. These actively-used cars of people who buy new cars are the quality core of the used car market. Most “clunkers” will be perfectly good cars that would be prize possessions for a half million less well-off Americans, wantonly destroyed only because the Obamacrats prefer that they be destroyed. Dollar for dollar, this is the equivalent of trying to solve the glut of housing foreclosures by purchasing the houses with taxpayer money then burning them down.

Any Obama supporter who claims to be motivated by distributional justice, go soak your head. You want to subsidize the better off? Be as stupid as you want. But don’t go destroying en masse what the less well-off need to survive.

All justified by a lie

Obama’s excuse for decimating the last two generations of used vans, SUV’s, pick-up trucks and full size cars is the global warming hoax. The ascendancy of Obama is, in his own narcissistic vision:

...the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

Energy consumption must be curtailed in the extreme:

…under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

It is all about CO2 and the phony global warming industry that Vice President Al Gore created with $10b of seed money when he pioneered and administered the executive branch’s global warming portfolio (now called “climate change,” since the earth stopped warming 10 years ago). Gore’s appointees have directed almost all of the full $79b that the U.S. has spent on climate science since 1989, and they don't care at all whether CO2 is actually warming the planet. Their real motivation is an eco-religious belief that economic activity is gobbling up the natural world, so that for the natural world to survive, economic activity must contract.

To these high priests of green religion, CO2 is the perfect fall guy, no matter how insignificant its actual impact on climate. If the CO2 released by fossil fuel burning can be framed as a threat to the planet, that provides a rationale for drastically curtailing human economic activity, thereby stopping economic activity from gobbling up the natural world, whether or not CO2 itself actually has any harmful effects.

CO2 alarmists reject the scientific method

We can say with nearly complete certainty that the bulk of 20th century warming was NOT caused by CO2. This is because we know what DID cause the warming: the “grand maximum” levels of solar-magnetic activity that obtained for most solar cycles between 1930 and 2003.

Numerous studies have found a high degree of correlation (.6 to .8) between solar-magnetic activity and global temperature. That is, solar-magnetic activity "explains" statistically 60-80% of global temperature change on all time scales. That degree of correlation, observed over thousands and millions of years, HAS to be causal, and the causation can only go one way. It is not the temperature of the earth that is causing sunspots.

What is not well understood is HOW solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature. We just know that it does, just as before Einstein we did not know what mechanism causes massive objects to fall towards each other, we just knew that they do.

We actually have some pretty good theories of how solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature but set that aside. The eco-religionists, who thanks to Al Gore control ALL of the research funds for the “climate change” industry, use uncertainty about HOW solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature as an excuse for completely omitting the solar-magnetic variable from their models. They explicitly put theory over data, exactly the opposite of the scientific method, which says that data is always supposed to trump theory.

This anti-scientific method misattributes to CO2 the warming caused by high 20th century levels of solar-magnetic activity. Put solar-magnetic activity back into the equation, attributing to it what warming has historically been correlated with high levels of solar-magnetic activity, and the levels of warming that could possibly be attributable to CO2 become small. In particular, they become benign.

Warming in general is good. When Greenland was green, civilization prospered, as did plants and other living things. Nothing gobbles up the natural world like ice. It is only by claiming that CO2 could cause some unprecedented “runaway warming” that the alarmists have been able to present CO2 as dangerous. Stop misattributing solar-magnetic warming to CO2 and that possibility is off the table.

The dominant driver of global climate is solar-magnetic activity and any modicum of warming we can get out CO2 is all to the good. If our fossil fuel burning has the side effect of making our warm times a little warmer and our cold times a little less cold, that is a happy bit of luck for a world that ALWAYS seems to be colder than the optimum, with the next glacial period due any Millennia.

Proof that the IPCC completely omits the solar-magnetic variable

Just look at any of the IPCC assessment reports. They all include the following graphic (slightly updated over the years):


From the 4th Assessment Report (figure 2.4 on page 39 of the Synthesis Report).

The only "natural" climate influence accounted by the IPCC is "solar irradiance," which means visible light and other electro-magnetic radiation. It does in any way include the solar-magnetic flux, which is completely omitted from all IPCC models, even though every climate scientists knows full well that, according to the raw data, magnetic effects are the primary driver of global temperature.

EVERY educated person who accepts CO2 alarmism on the authority of the global warming anti-scientists is failing the most basic due diligence.

Technically, the alarmists’ anti-scientific inversion of theory and evidence takes the form of what is called “omitted variable fraud,” where the omission of any important explanatory variable causes its explanatory effect to be misattributed to whatever correlated variables are included (in this case CO2 which, like solar activity, also went up in the 20th century). This is the most basic, the most common, the most familiar form of statistical fraud. Everyone who has ever studied not just any physical science but any social science at any moderately high level is fully competent recognize for themselves the statistical fraud that is being committed by the CO2 alarmists.

The educated Democrat-voting elites who are pushing to unplug industrial capitalism on the authority of alarmist anti-scientists have an obligation of due diligence to check for themselves whether the facts of the matter are beyond their own competence, and they are ALL failing this basic obligation. They are just assuming that they have to accept on authority that the survival of the planet requires the radical curtailment of CO2, when even a quick look at the facts reveals that the statistically most important variable is omitted from the alarmist models.

Why this willingness uncritically enlist as foot-soldiers for the destruction of modernity? Because like the CO2 anti-scientists themselves, these Democrat elites also don’t care whether CO2 is actually a threat. They too are eco-religionists who are glad for any excuse to curtail the economic growth that according to their presumptions is gobbling up the natural world.

Wrong about economics too

Of course the eco-religionists are also wrong about economic growth being bad for the environment. Economic growth creates and is created by technological advance, and it is technological advance that is allowing mankind and the natural world to both thrive at once. Economic activity is not the enemy of the natural world. It is the salvation of the natural world.

Having dedicated their intellectual resources to maintaining their religious presumptions instead of following reason and evidence, our Democrat elites have become pure political animals in the lowest sense, driven entirely by their lust for power. Every excuse, be it phony concern for distributive justice or phony concern for the environment, is wielded with complete dishonesty, utterly heedless of how distributive justice or the environment are actually affected, until all that is left is their ultimate presumption: that the one thing most necessary is that THEY have power.

This pathology finds its epitome in President Obama. Cash for Clunkers is just one paltry multi-billion dollar program, but the same coming-and-going perversity is manifest in Obama’s larger jihad against CO2—his push for cap and trade legislation. If we would uncork energy, the economy would rebound tomorrow, but Obama is determined to close the energy spigot down, not open it up.

Anybody who thinks this recession is ending is out of their minds. Obama is draining the oil and pouring in the silica slurry. If you want to hear where the economy is headed, listen to the “squirk” from the end of the Obama-car-death video, when the engine jerks at the end of the hangman’s rope.



This is the sound of a valuable helper being sacrificed by government to the false idols of green religion. It isn’t just barbarous. It is a clear violation of the establishment clause. Execute the worst human criminals, yes, but Mission Solano has it right: “No Death Penalty for Cars!”

I Thought We All Could Use A Laugh!

This was sent to me by my friend Angel.

LETTER FROM THE BOSS:

As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barack Obama is our President and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way.

To compensate for these increases, our prices would have to increase by about 10%. But since we cannot increase our prices right now due to the dismal state of the economy, we will have to lay off sixty of our employees instead.

This has really been bothering me, since I believe we are family here and I didn't know how to choose who would have to go.

So, this is what I did. I walked through our parking lots and found sixty 'Obama' bumper stickers on our employees' cars and have decided these folks will be the ones to let go. I can't think of a more fair way to approach this problem.

They voted for change, I gave it to them. I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.

Have a good day!

Obama's Change

A short video from American Sentinel

Obama's Change



View at YouTube

Visit American Sentinel

Obama's Plan For The Economic Ruin Of America

Barack Hussein Obama proposed to the American people that we "redistribute the wealth" by taxing all people who make over $250,000 a year and up. To many that sounds good. We should do that, so everyone is equal and has the same. That dear truthseeker is called Socialism. Everyone making the same and receiving the same salary. There is no incentive for a person to work hard, for a business to grow. This was tried by the Soviet Union, its satellites and China. They all came to the realization that without incentives, an economy cannot grow and people become discontent.

After 4 years of an Obama economy will we be better off? If he actually is able to impose his ideas on the American economy, we will be in big economic trouble.

After 4 years of Obama's economic policy there will be at least 25% unemployment. With at least 10% of small businesses gone, those workers will be on the Obama welfare programs or forced into jobs in his National Civilian Police Force. For 80% of all businesses are small businesses. Most of those businesses make over $250,000 a year in profit. That money doesn't just go into the boss' pocket. It goes for new equipment and jobs. Take away the profit, and business cannot grow.

After 4 years of Obama's economic policy the stock market will have dived to the lowest levels since 1929. With massive unemployment and the loss of many businesses, larger companies are having a harder time selling their goods. With the tax rate at higher levels, the price of American goods have gone sky high. Companies cannot make a profit and their dividends to their stock holders have stopped.

After 4 years of Obama's economic policy, banks will still be in trouble. By not allowing banks to sink or swim, Obama's policy of bailing out the banks will cost more and more money as more and more banks step up to the Federal Gravy Train. As they gain more and more Federal funds, they dry up credit and loans to business and people. They are sitting pretty, and with just the hint that they might go under, the Congress will throw funds at him.

After 4 years of Obama's economic policy, we will be $10 trillion in debt. With less and less tax money coming in and the costs of Obama's welfare programs rising higher and higher, we will have to go deeper and deeper into debt. We will borrow trillions of dollars just to pay for it all.

After 4 years of Obama's economic policy, we will be in a Depression. And when our economy collapses, the world's will collapse after us. The whole world will be in dire straits. China will discover that they cannot sell their goods in the US, since nobody has the money to buy them. Europe won't have the funds to buy any foreign goods. And with such an economic disaster, war could break out very easily.

After 4 years under Obama will we be better off than we are now?

No. Obama will have taken the United States from the position of the World's Leader and will turn us into a Third World Nation.

Barack Hussein Obama is naive at best. He is wrong choice for President. His policies are so far to the left that you can call him a Socialist, not just a liberal. He will destroy all that we have worked for and hope for.

A Horror Tale of Financial Woes

Hat tip to Maggie's Notebook

Once upon a time, in a land called the United States, people would try and buy a home. They would save for years and keep their credit clean. They would look through out the neighborhood for a home they would like to buy. Then they would hope and pray that their local bank would grant them the all important mortgage. When the bank would grant this wondrous gift, they would rejoice and move into their new home. But this gift of mortgage came with a price. They had to pay it back to the bank. A payment to be made on the 1st of each month, over the course of 30 years. The people did not mind paying the mortgage. It was not as much as the rent they had been paying. The nation was in good shape when this was done.

Then in 1977 a strange thing happened. Jimmy Carter, then the President of the United States, convinced the members of Congress (the people who make the laws) to pass the Community Reinvestment Act. This Act gave birth to 2 children: Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. This Act was a good idea, for it gave the gift of mortgage to more people, in neighborhoods in which the banks originally gave a redline to. As long as the people had good credit and some savings, the bank would give them a mortgage and the nation was in good shape.

Then one day in 1995, a new President by the name of Bill Clinton decided that although the Community Reinvestment Act was good, it needed to become better, to let more people buy a home. So he changed the Act so everybody could buy a home.

This should have been a good thing, but it was the worst thing that could have been done. For no longer would the people have to have good credit and savings to get the gift of mortgage. They could have no savings, bad credit and still get this marvelous gift.

And no longer would the gift of mortgage be fixed at a special rate. It would be variable and be able to climb to any rate the bank wanted. These special mortgages were called Subprime and allowed the banks to make a lot of money on their mortgages.

And the people rejoiced and everyone went out to buy their home. But a strange thing started to happen. Homes that once were $60,000 or $70,000 were now being sold for $250,000, $400,000 or even $500,000. Builders started to build new homes and selling them for more than they were actually worth. But the people would scream "We want this house!" and the bank would give them the gift of mortgage.

But not all was right. A new President, George W. Bush, saw that this could become a problem. People with low incomes buying homes they really could not afford. And he tried to make it better. In the year 2003 he tried to move governmental supervision of Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. But the evil Democrats who ruled the Congress said, NO!

Again voices were raised that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not well. They tried to sound the alarm in the year of 2005. A group of Senators from the Congress, headed by John McCain, tried to heal the 2 children, but to no avail. For the evil Democrats said NO! IT WOULD HURT THE POOR. So nothing again was done.

Then came the bad year, 2007. What was warned about started to happen. The people who didn't have the good credit or the savings found that their gift of mortgage was not a very good gift. The payment that they owed each month was getting bigger and bigger, while their paycheck was getting smaller and smaller. And when they could not pay their mortgage to the bank, the bank took their house away.

This was happening to many people who cried to their President and Congress for help. But what did their Congress do? They just laughed. For Fanny and Freddie were sneaky children. They would give their friends in Congress many gifts and presents. Gifts of special mortgages (that the poor people could never get) and gifts of money. Some got many gifts. Dodd of Connecticut got $133,900, Obama of Illinois got $105,849, Pelosi of California got $32,750. And they did nothing for they wanted more gifts.

And then the crash came, August of 2008. The banks started failing and there was no one to give the gift of mortgage. For Fanny and Freddie were very, very ill. They couldn't save the banks or even themselves. And the Congress finally had to do something before they would die. But what did they do? They gave them more money. $700 trillion of the people's money they would give. It would help save the 2 children and give the banks a chance to live.

But them people who knew how the banks should have worked said please don't do this, it will do more harm than good. To give such a sum without government oversite, would only create the same conditions we now face.

So nothing is being done, and banks are failing. The people are still losing their homes, and all we get is the evil Democrats crying: IT'S JOHN MCCAIN'S FAULT!

IT IS NOT!

If you have like this little tale feel free to cross post it, just give me a link back to my site.




View at YouTube