Bloomberg
December 22, 2011, 9:29 a.m.
Crude oil may rise for a fourth year to a record average price in 2012 as demand in emerging markets increases and the U.S. avoids a recession.
West Texas Intermediate oil on the New York Mercantile Exchange will reach an average of $100 a barrel in 2012, based on the median of 27 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg, topping the all-time high of $99.75 set in 2008. The U.S. benchmark is on course to average $95 a barrel this year.
Evidence that stimulus measures are reviving the U.S. economy while countries from India to Brazil keep expanding is raising the outlook for oil consumption next year. Global demand will climb 1.4 percent, with China accounting for more than a 10th of the amount used, according to the International Energy Agency. Crude in New York advanced 8% in the year through yesterday.
"High prices come from very well-supported fundamentals," Mike Wittner, the head of oil-market research at Societe Generale SA in New York, said by phone on Dec. 15. "Supplies are very tight, at five-year lows," in the world's leading economies, said Wittner, who projects West Texas Intermediate oil will average $103 a barrel in 2012.
Industry-held supplies in the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fell 1.4 percent to 2.63 billion barrels in October, leaving them below the five-year average for a fourth month, the IEA said in a Dec. 13 report. Stockpiles of heating oil and diesel held in OECD countries dropped 23.1 million barrels to 538.4 million in October, a three-year low.
"We need to see prices rise to a level where we get supply and demand to balance without drawing on inventories," David Greely, head of energy research at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in New York, said by phone on Dec. 15.
A worsening of Europe's debt crisis or an escalation of tension between Iran and the U.S. and its allies over the Persian Gulf country's nuclear program would negate present oil price projections, Wittner said.
"Saying the market will be broadly range-bound may sound boring but there are big risks out there," said Wittner, the second-most accurate forecaster for Brent among analysts ranked by Bloomberg in the past eight quarters. "The risk of a euro- zone explosion isn't a little bearish, it's a lot bearish. The risk of an escalation of the Iranian situation isn't a little bullish, it's a lot bullish."
Iran pumped 3.56 million barrels of crude a day in November, according to a Bloomberg News survey of oil companies, producers and analysts. It trailed only Saudi Arabia among members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. Crude prices more than doubled in 1979 when Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was toppled, slashing the nation's oil exports.
"Iran remains the wild card," said Chip Hodge, who oversees a $9 billion natural-resource bond portfolio as senior managing director at Manulife Asset Management in Boston. "If conflict rears its ugly head, prices will surge."
The European benchmark grade has advanced to a record average of $110.97 a barrel this year. It will be $109 in 2012, according to the median of 28 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.
"Brent has averaged a little more than $110 a barrel this year and inventories have drawn consistently throughout the year, telling us that demand exceeds supply at $110 a barrel," Greely said.
The collapse of Libyan exports and field maintenance in the North Sea reduced supply and helped increase prices this year. Libyan output rose 155,000 barrels to 500,000 a day in November, the highest level since February, the survey showed. Production in the North African nation had tumbled from 1.585 million barrels a day in January, the last month before an uprising against the government of Muammar Qaddafi disrupted output.
Production at the Buzzard field, the biggest stream in the North Sea Forties oil blend, one of four grades that make up Dated Brent, fell in the third quarter because of maintenance. North Sea output has tumbled since the 1990s, with the U.K. pumping 1.34 million barrels a day last year, down 54% from a peak 2.91 million in 1999, according to BP Plc, which published its Statistical Review of World Energy on June 8.
"The market is still tight even with Libya coming back," Adam Sieminski, chief energy economist at Deutsche Bank AG in Washington, said by phone on Dec. 16. "Global GDP and energy demand are still growing," said Sieminski, who estimates New York futures will average $95 a barrel in 2012.
The world economy is projected to grow 2.7% this year and 2.4% in 2012, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The gross domestic product of the U.S., the biggest crude consuming country, is anticipated to rise 1.8% in 2011 and 2.1% next year, the data show.
Emerging-market crude consumption will grow 2.8% to 43.3 million barrels a day this year and 3.6% to 44.9 million in 2012, according to the IEA, an adviser to 28 industrialized nations including the U.S., Japan and Germany. Chinese consumption will rise 5.3% to 10 million barrels in 2012, the Paris-based agency said Dec. 13.
Russian consumption will surge 6.1% to 3.48 million barrels in 2011, as Indian and Saudi Arabian demand grow more than 3%, the IEA reported.
The prospect of additional stimulus from central banks to bolster economic growth is also supporting prices, Greely said. The U.S. Federal Reserve's present $400 billion "Operation Twist" program to replace some shorter-term debt follows two previous rounds of asset purchases, or quantitative easing.
Crude oil may rise for a fourth year to a record average price in 2012 as demand in emerging markets increases and the U.S. avoids a recession.
West Texas Intermediate oil on the New York Mercantile Exchange will reach an average of $100 a barrel in 2012, based on the median of 27 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg, topping the all-time high of $99.75 set in 2008. The U.S. benchmark is on course to average $95 a barrel this year.
Evidence that stimulus measures are reviving the U.S. economy while countries from India to Brazil keep expanding is raising the outlook for oil consumption next year. Global demand will climb 1.4 percent, with China accounting for more than a 10th of the amount used, according to the International Energy Agency. Crude in New York advanced 8% in the year through yesterday.
"High prices come from very well-supported fundamentals," Mike Wittner, the head of oil-market research at Societe Generale SA in New York, said by phone on Dec. 15. "Supplies are very tight, at five-year lows," in the world's leading economies, said Wittner, who projects West Texas Intermediate oil will average $103 a barrel in 2012.
Industry-held supplies in the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development fell 1.4 percent to 2.63 billion barrels in October, leaving them below the five-year average for a fourth month, the IEA said in a Dec. 13 report. Stockpiles of heating oil and diesel held in OECD countries dropped 23.1 million barrels to 538.4 million in October, a three-year low.
"We need to see prices rise to a level where we get supply and demand to balance without drawing on inventories," David Greely, head of energy research at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in New York, said by phone on Dec. 15.
A worsening of Europe's debt crisis or an escalation of tension between Iran and the U.S. and its allies over the Persian Gulf country's nuclear program would negate present oil price projections, Wittner said.
"Saying the market will be broadly range-bound may sound boring but there are big risks out there," said Wittner, the second-most accurate forecaster for Brent among analysts ranked by Bloomberg in the past eight quarters. "The risk of a euro- zone explosion isn't a little bearish, it's a lot bearish. The risk of an escalation of the Iranian situation isn't a little bullish, it's a lot bullish."
Iran pumped 3.56 million barrels of crude a day in November, according to a Bloomberg News survey of oil companies, producers and analysts. It trailed only Saudi Arabia among members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. Crude prices more than doubled in 1979 when Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was toppled, slashing the nation's oil exports.
"Iran remains the wild card," said Chip Hodge, who oversees a $9 billion natural-resource bond portfolio as senior managing director at Manulife Asset Management in Boston. "If conflict rears its ugly head, prices will surge."
The European benchmark grade has advanced to a record average of $110.97 a barrel this year. It will be $109 in 2012, according to the median of 28 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.
"Brent has averaged a little more than $110 a barrel this year and inventories have drawn consistently throughout the year, telling us that demand exceeds supply at $110 a barrel," Greely said.
The collapse of Libyan exports and field maintenance in the North Sea reduced supply and helped increase prices this year. Libyan output rose 155,000 barrels to 500,000 a day in November, the highest level since February, the survey showed. Production in the North African nation had tumbled from 1.585 million barrels a day in January, the last month before an uprising against the government of Muammar Qaddafi disrupted output.
Production at the Buzzard field, the biggest stream in the North Sea Forties oil blend, one of four grades that make up Dated Brent, fell in the third quarter because of maintenance. North Sea output has tumbled since the 1990s, with the U.K. pumping 1.34 million barrels a day last year, down 54% from a peak 2.91 million in 1999, according to BP Plc, which published its Statistical Review of World Energy on June 8.
"The market is still tight even with Libya coming back," Adam Sieminski, chief energy economist at Deutsche Bank AG in Washington, said by phone on Dec. 16. "Global GDP and energy demand are still growing," said Sieminski, who estimates New York futures will average $95 a barrel in 2012.
The world economy is projected to grow 2.7% this year and 2.4% in 2012, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The gross domestic product of the U.S., the biggest crude consuming country, is anticipated to rise 1.8% in 2011 and 2.1% next year, the data show.
Emerging-market crude consumption will grow 2.8% to 43.3 million barrels a day this year and 3.6% to 44.9 million in 2012, according to the IEA, an adviser to 28 industrialized nations including the U.S., Japan and Germany. Chinese consumption will rise 5.3% to 10 million barrels in 2012, the Paris-based agency said Dec. 13.
Russian consumption will surge 6.1% to 3.48 million barrels in 2011, as Indian and Saudi Arabian demand grow more than 3%, the IEA reported.
The prospect of additional stimulus from central banks to bolster economic growth is also supporting prices, Greely said. The U.S. Federal Reserve's present $400 billion "Operation Twist" program to replace some shorter-term debt follows two previous rounds of asset purchases, or quantitative easing.
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Thursday, December 22, 2011
China-based hackers reportedly targeted U.S. Chamber of Commerce
December 21, 2011
Hackers based in China reportedly pulled off a massive Web attack against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbying group, which resulted in access to a significant number of confidential emails and documents.
Unnamed sources told both Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal that the security breach took place in 2010 and gave the hackers access to information belonging to the Chamber's 3-million members.
The chamber, the U.S.' largest business lobbying group, is still investigating the attack, both reports said.
The strike is believed to be one in a wave of Web attacks from hackers based in China, along with previous reported hackings against "U.S. companies, business associations, and lobbying groups involved in trade policy associated with China," Bloomberg said.
Officials at the Chamber of Commerce were unavailable for comment on Wednesday.
According to the Journal's report, the chamber hasn't yet determined how much of its data was viewed or taken by the hackers, though evidence has been found that "hackers had focused on four chamber employees who worked on Asia policy, and that six weeks of their email had been stolen."
It is also possible that the hackers, who investigators suspect may have ties to the Chinese government, "had access to the network for more than a year before the breach was uncovered, according to two people familiar with the chamber's internal investigation," the Journal said.
— Nathan Olivarez-Giles
Hackers based in China reportedly pulled off a massive Web attack against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbying group, which resulted in access to a significant number of confidential emails and documents.
Unnamed sources told both Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal that the security breach took place in 2010 and gave the hackers access to information belonging to the Chamber's 3-million members.
The chamber, the U.S.' largest business lobbying group, is still investigating the attack, both reports said.
The strike is believed to be one in a wave of Web attacks from hackers based in China, along with previous reported hackings against "U.S. companies, business associations, and lobbying groups involved in trade policy associated with China," Bloomberg said.
Officials at the Chamber of Commerce were unavailable for comment on Wednesday.
According to the Journal's report, the chamber hasn't yet determined how much of its data was viewed or taken by the hackers, though evidence has been found that "hackers had focused on four chamber employees who worked on Asia policy, and that six weeks of their email had been stolen."
It is also possible that the hackers, who investigators suspect may have ties to the Chinese government, "had access to the network for more than a year before the breach was uncovered, according to two people familiar with the chamber's internal investigation," the Journal said.
— Nathan Olivarez-Giles
Finland questioning Patriot missiles aboard China-bound ship
(CNN) — Finnish authorities have launched an review after impounding 69 Patriot missiles from a boat firm for China.
Police pronounced they also found explosives and moving charges aboard a British-flagged load boat Thor Liberty during a pier of Kotka, about 75 miles easterly of Helsinki.
The Patriot is a surface-to-air barb complement made by a U.S. association Raytheon and has been sold to several nations.
The Thor Liberty sailed from Germany on Dec 13, military said. It was set to cruise to Shanghai.
Finnish authorities found a invulnerability materials during a etiquette hunt and are looking into either trade laws were violated.
Police pronounced they also found explosives and moving charges aboard a British-flagged load boat Thor Liberty during a pier of Kotka, about 75 miles easterly of Helsinki.
The Patriot is a surface-to-air barb complement made by a U.S. association Raytheon and has been sold to several nations.
The Thor Liberty sailed from Germany on Dec 13, military said. It was set to cruise to Shanghai.
Finnish authorities found a invulnerability materials during a etiquette hunt and are looking into either trade laws were violated.
FLASHBACK: Obama Postpones Healthcare Related Tax Increase for Unions but NOT for the Rest of Us
The White House on Thursday cut a deal with its closest labor allies to blunt the impact of a new tax on high-cost insurance policies — and blunt their protests against the health reform plan.
Democrats couldn’t eliminate the tax on union members’ high-cost insurance policies altogether but did put off the effective date until 2018, but only for labor agreements and state and local government workers. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31527.html#ixzz0cgeCVtYl
Wow, That's fair isn't it?
Democrats couldn’t eliminate the tax on union members’ high-cost insurance policies altogether but did put off the effective date until 2018, but only for labor agreements and state and local government workers. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31527.html#ixzz0cgeCVtYl
Wow, That's fair isn't it?
Keystone XL pipeline would boost prosperity, not government
"I GUESS THAT’S WHY THE WHITE HOUSE ISN’T CRAZY ABOUT IT"
H/T Glenn Reynolds
By Iain Murray and David Bier
-The Washington Times
Monday, December 19, 2011
Spending on construction and infrastructure jobs is a perennial favorite of government stimulus boosters. “There’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects,” President Obama told an Ohio crowd in September. “There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs.” However, the president now wants to block a massive private-sector construction project that would create the thousands of jobs he demands - the Keystone XL pipeline.
Strangely, the president seemed absolutely opposed to a compromise that would promote the very construction jobs he claims to favor. “Any effort to try to tie Keystone to the payroll tax cut, I will reject,” he said. “The reason is because the payroll tax cut is something House Republicans and Senate Republicans should want to do regardless of any other issues.” The only logical explanation for Mr. Obama’s continuous opposition to constructing XL is that he thinks it’s a bad idea. With that in mind, let’s judge the pipeline on its merits.
TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline is a massive job- and wealth-creation project. The pipeline will snake its way 1,700 miles from Alberta to the Gulf coast with stops in Oklahoma and Illinois. Keystone will create $7 billion in investment without any additional congressional spending. It is exactly the sort of massive construction project Mr. Obama demanded from Republicans in September, with one important exception: It’s private.
In the same Ohio speech, Mr. Obama said, “[W]e used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America. We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System. We built the Hoover Dam.” In other words, big projects are great as long as they are big-government projects. Otherwise, your project can wait.
The logic behind the payroll tax cut, as explained by Mr. Obama, is that “it will spur spending. It will spur hiring.” But the pipeline the administration is fighting will create 20,000 jobs with no new government spending. Detractors who have argued that these jobs are only temporary, that just 50 permanent jobs will be created, miss the point. Economic activity doesn’t exist to create work, but to create wealth. TransCanada isn’t building the pipeline to provide jobs, but to provide energy - oil for people to power their cars, lower their shipping costs and raise their standard of living.
If constructed, Keystone will deliver 303 million barrels of oil into the United States per year. That’s 830,000 barrels perday. This wealth is the purpose of the project; the jobs are part of the means. If TransCanada could build a pipeline without lifting a single finger - that is, create wealth without work - that would be great. Society would benefit at no cost.
But should creating more jobs be an end in itself? In a word, no. Work is a means to an end - creating wealth. Governments care excessively about jobs because they want every dollar they spend to conspicuously benefit large groups of people very quickly. That is a misplaced priority. For example, Congress could mandate that every person in the United States build the pipeline. We would all have jobs, but we’d all be much poorer, as other areas of the economy languish.
When technology reduces the labor required to travel, make a meal or build a pipeline, that’s progress. The fact that it takes just 50 people to run a 1,700-mile pipeline is an amazing achievement. It frees labor to create wealth in other ways while everyone still enjoys the benefits.
A private-sector project that employs just a few people can create enormous wealth for all of society. Businesses’ drive to increase productivity - to do more with less - frees up resources that then can be invested where they can be put to the most productive use. That goes for infrastructure as well as for any other investment. Furthermore, greater productivity increases wages, as workers’ time becomes more valuable to employers.
Mr. Obama said last summer, “To maintain our nation’s competitive edge, we must ensure that the United States has fast, reliable ways to move people, goods, energy and information. In a global economy, where businesses are making investment choices between countries, we will compete for the world’s investments based in part on the quality of our infrastructure.” We agree. Now the president has the opportunity to show whether he is serious.
Iain Murray is a vice president and David Bier a research associate at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.
H/T Glenn Reynolds
By Iain Murray and David Bier
-The Washington Times
Monday, December 19, 2011
Spending on construction and infrastructure jobs is a perennial favorite of government stimulus boosters. “There’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects,” President Obama told an Ohio crowd in September. “There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs.” However, the president now wants to block a massive private-sector construction project that would create the thousands of jobs he demands - the Keystone XL pipeline.
Strangely, the president seemed absolutely opposed to a compromise that would promote the very construction jobs he claims to favor. “Any effort to try to tie Keystone to the payroll tax cut, I will reject,” he said. “The reason is because the payroll tax cut is something House Republicans and Senate Republicans should want to do regardless of any other issues.” The only logical explanation for Mr. Obama’s continuous opposition to constructing XL is that he thinks it’s a bad idea. With that in mind, let’s judge the pipeline on its merits.
TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline is a massive job- and wealth-creation project. The pipeline will snake its way 1,700 miles from Alberta to the Gulf coast with stops in Oklahoma and Illinois. Keystone will create $7 billion in investment without any additional congressional spending. It is exactly the sort of massive construction project Mr. Obama demanded from Republicans in September, with one important exception: It’s private.
In the same Ohio speech, Mr. Obama said, “[W]e used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America. We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System. We built the Hoover Dam.” In other words, big projects are great as long as they are big-government projects. Otherwise, your project can wait.
The logic behind the payroll tax cut, as explained by Mr. Obama, is that “it will spur spending. It will spur hiring.” But the pipeline the administration is fighting will create 20,000 jobs with no new government spending. Detractors who have argued that these jobs are only temporary, that just 50 permanent jobs will be created, miss the point. Economic activity doesn’t exist to create work, but to create wealth. TransCanada isn’t building the pipeline to provide jobs, but to provide energy - oil for people to power their cars, lower their shipping costs and raise their standard of living.
If constructed, Keystone will deliver 303 million barrels of oil into the United States per year. That’s 830,000 barrels perday. This wealth is the purpose of the project; the jobs are part of the means. If TransCanada could build a pipeline without lifting a single finger - that is, create wealth without work - that would be great. Society would benefit at no cost.
But should creating more jobs be an end in itself? In a word, no. Work is a means to an end - creating wealth. Governments care excessively about jobs because they want every dollar they spend to conspicuously benefit large groups of people very quickly. That is a misplaced priority. For example, Congress could mandate that every person in the United States build the pipeline. We would all have jobs, but we’d all be much poorer, as other areas of the economy languish.
When technology reduces the labor required to travel, make a meal or build a pipeline, that’s progress. The fact that it takes just 50 people to run a 1,700-mile pipeline is an amazing achievement. It frees labor to create wealth in other ways while everyone still enjoys the benefits.
A private-sector project that employs just a few people can create enormous wealth for all of society. Businesses’ drive to increase productivity - to do more with less - frees up resources that then can be invested where they can be put to the most productive use. That goes for infrastructure as well as for any other investment. Furthermore, greater productivity increases wages, as workers’ time becomes more valuable to employers.
Mr. Obama said last summer, “To maintain our nation’s competitive edge, we must ensure that the United States has fast, reliable ways to move people, goods, energy and information. In a global economy, where businesses are making investment choices between countries, we will compete for the world’s investments based in part on the quality of our infrastructure.” We agree. Now the president has the opportunity to show whether he is serious.
Iain Murray is a vice president and David Bier a research associate at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.
SOPA COULD BE USED TO CENSOR CANDIDATES
SOPA COULD BE USED TO CENSOR CANDIDATES
I predict that it will be used mostly on candidates that Hollywood doesn’t like.
During the waning days of the 2008 presidential race, there was an important but overlooked occurrence on the John McCain campaign. In mid-October, the McCain campaign awoke to find that its Web videos and online advertisements were disappearing from its YouTube page.
The culprit turned out to be a major television network claiming they owned portions of the videos and that posting the clips was a violation of copyright law. Even though the campaign, and many others in the online community, believed the content to be privileged under the “Fair Use Doctrine,” the videos were pulled down.
Fast-forward more than three years, and a new piece of legislation is making its way through Congress that would make it easier for online campaign content and websites to be taken down. Even more concerning, if passed, this bill would allow opposing campaigns or campaign committees — not just the original content provider — to pull down websites harboring “infringing content.”
But I’m probably just cynical.
Posted at 8:22 am by Glenn Reynolds
I predict that it will be used mostly on candidates that Hollywood doesn’t like.
During the waning days of the 2008 presidential race, there was an important but overlooked occurrence on the John McCain campaign. In mid-October, the McCain campaign awoke to find that its Web videos and online advertisements were disappearing from its YouTube page.
The culprit turned out to be a major television network claiming they owned portions of the videos and that posting the clips was a violation of copyright law. Even though the campaign, and many others in the online community, believed the content to be privileged under the “Fair Use Doctrine,” the videos were pulled down.
Fast-forward more than three years, and a new piece of legislation is making its way through Congress that would make it easier for online campaign content and websites to be taken down. Even more concerning, if passed, this bill would allow opposing campaigns or campaign committees — not just the original content provider — to pull down websites harboring “infringing content.”
But I’m probably just cynical.
Posted at 8:22 am by Glenn Reynolds
The Tea Party Train Wreck That Never Happened.
By: Noemie Emery | 12/20/11 8:05 PM
Examiner Columnist
Three weeks ago, E.J. Dionne (or "Baghdad Bob," as James Taranto has called him) saw nothing but doom in the GOP's future, as "the Republican establishment ... is essentially powerless," having surrendered its soul to the evil Tea Party, which has driven the country to hell.
Events since have proved this judgment mistaken: The establishment lives, and is doing its duty; part of the Tea Party has been merging with it; and the "system" is working as planned.
What are the signs that the system is working? When the prospect of former House speaker Newt Gingrich as the presidential nominee of the Republican Party first appeared to be rising, first responders from all parts of the party rushed to their stations en masse.
Former House colleagues called him unstable. The National Review termed him "erratic." Ann Coulter called him all hat and no cattle. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., weighed in with a similar judgment.
Tea Party stars rushed to shore up Mitt Romney, the most probable Gingrich alternative. Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., had already endorsed him. Gov. Nikki Haley, R-S.C., now endorsed him. Christine O'Donnell, who unseated Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware's GOP Senate primary, endorsed the ex-moderate.
This was bad news for Dionne and his friends, who have waiting been three years for a Tea Party blowup (which they ought to know now is not likely to happen), and for the suicide wing of the conservative movement, which blames all its woes on establishment cunning, and calls the Coulters and Coburns RINOs and worse.
For the rest of the world, it was an unrelieved blessing. In a matter of days the Newt boom subsided, and the former speaker fell gently to Earth.
There are two stories here, which are interconnected, one being that the war between the Tea Party and the establishment has been overrated, or may not exist.
At first, the National Republican Senatorial Committee took sides against primary challengers, but dropped that stance quickly and welcomed Sen. Marco Rubio (who beat Charlie Crist) of Florida, Sen. Pat Toomey (who beat Arlen Specter) of Pennsylvania, and Sen. Rand Paul (who beat Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's handpicked protegee) of Kentucky as the assets they turned out to be.
Tea Party stars are becoming Republican leaders, seeing the virtues of "nuance in politics," as Politico tells us of Rep. Allen West. Establishments die when they refuse to make changes; insurgencies die when they fail to discover that protest and governing are not the same things. The establishment altered, as did the insurgents. And then they moved on to Act Two.
Weeks before, when the primary race was still more chaotic, Daniel Henninger joined Robert Merry and others in lamenting the end of the old "smoke-filled rooms" of past generations, in which political fixers plucked out the unfit and ill-suited, based upon knowledge that they alone shared.
Party professionals controlled the selection, as Merry tells us, and "took very seriously" their critical function of weeding out "risks." With "risk" thus defined, Herman Cain and Rick Perry weeded themselves out without intervention.
"Risk" defined the lower-tier candidates, with no chance of succeeding. Then "risk" defined Newt, who looked to be surging, and the Establishment became its own smoke-filled room in the minute, wheeling out all of the heavy artillery to show the whole world the Gingrich it knew.
The establishment is the smoke-filled room of this era, and tea is served in it. Sorry, E.J., but your "train wreck" won't happen. That's what establishments do.
Examiner Columnist Noemie Emery is contributing editor to TheWeekly Standard and author of "Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families."
Examiner Columnist
Three weeks ago, E.J. Dionne (or "Baghdad Bob," as James Taranto has called him) saw nothing but doom in the GOP's future, as "the Republican establishment ... is essentially powerless," having surrendered its soul to the evil Tea Party, which has driven the country to hell.
Events since have proved this judgment mistaken: The establishment lives, and is doing its duty; part of the Tea Party has been merging with it; and the "system" is working as planned.
What are the signs that the system is working? When the prospect of former House speaker Newt Gingrich as the presidential nominee of the Republican Party first appeared to be rising, first responders from all parts of the party rushed to their stations en masse.
Former House colleagues called him unstable. The National Review termed him "erratic." Ann Coulter called him all hat and no cattle. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., weighed in with a similar judgment.
Tea Party stars rushed to shore up Mitt Romney, the most probable Gingrich alternative. Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., had already endorsed him. Gov. Nikki Haley, R-S.C., now endorsed him. Christine O'Donnell, who unseated Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware's GOP Senate primary, endorsed the ex-moderate.
This was bad news for Dionne and his friends, who have waiting been three years for a Tea Party blowup (which they ought to know now is not likely to happen), and for the suicide wing of the conservative movement, which blames all its woes on establishment cunning, and calls the Coulters and Coburns RINOs and worse.
For the rest of the world, it was an unrelieved blessing. In a matter of days the Newt boom subsided, and the former speaker fell gently to Earth.
There are two stories here, which are interconnected, one being that the war between the Tea Party and the establishment has been overrated, or may not exist.
At first, the National Republican Senatorial Committee took sides against primary challengers, but dropped that stance quickly and welcomed Sen. Marco Rubio (who beat Charlie Crist) of Florida, Sen. Pat Toomey (who beat Arlen Specter) of Pennsylvania, and Sen. Rand Paul (who beat Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's handpicked protegee) of Kentucky as the assets they turned out to be.
Tea Party stars are becoming Republican leaders, seeing the virtues of "nuance in politics," as Politico tells us of Rep. Allen West. Establishments die when they refuse to make changes; insurgencies die when they fail to discover that protest and governing are not the same things. The establishment altered, as did the insurgents. And then they moved on to Act Two.
Weeks before, when the primary race was still more chaotic, Daniel Henninger joined Robert Merry and others in lamenting the end of the old "smoke-filled rooms" of past generations, in which political fixers plucked out the unfit and ill-suited, based upon knowledge that they alone shared.
Party professionals controlled the selection, as Merry tells us, and "took very seriously" their critical function of weeding out "risks." With "risk" thus defined, Herman Cain and Rick Perry weeded themselves out without intervention.
"Risk" defined the lower-tier candidates, with no chance of succeeding. Then "risk" defined Newt, who looked to be surging, and the Establishment became its own smoke-filled room in the minute, wheeling out all of the heavy artillery to show the whole world the Gingrich it knew.
The establishment is the smoke-filled room of this era, and tea is served in it. Sorry, E.J., but your "train wreck" won't happen. That's what establishments do.
Examiner Columnist Noemie Emery is contributing editor to TheWeekly Standard and author of "Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families."
Cameltoe Is The New Mistletoe.
21ST CENTURY RELATIONSHIPS:
via instapundit:
I mean really, it’s antediluvian, not to mention totally cliche, to steal a kiss under the mistletoe. That was so last century. Way more romantic (and modern) than mistletoe is cameltoe. A new mobile app, Under the Cameltoe, allows you to log on, pick from a variety of genitals in too-tight garments, hold that “toe” up, and kiss your sweetie underneath it. Romantic!
H/T Glenn Reynolds
via instapundit:
I mean really, it’s antediluvian, not to mention totally cliche, to steal a kiss under the mistletoe. That was so last century. Way more romantic (and modern) than mistletoe is cameltoe. A new mobile app, Under the Cameltoe, allows you to log on, pick from a variety of genitals in too-tight garments, hold that “toe” up, and kiss your sweetie underneath it. Romantic!
H/T Glenn Reynolds
A BUBBLE OF LIES:
US Housing Market Was Artificially Inflated By 14% In 2007-2010 NAR Reports.
via instapundit:
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/21/2011
Just the headlines for now:
EXISTING U.S. HOME SALES REVISED DOWN BY 14% FROM 2007-2010
EXISTING HOME SALES REVISED DOWN BY 15% IN 2010 TO 4.19 MLN
Thank you NAR for proving what everyone knew: that the US housing market is one big lie. And next: here come the historical GDP revisions.
The three charts that matter:
And the reasons for the "rebenchmarking"
Fewer FSBO home sales and more REALTOR®-assisted home sales (e.g., no net increase in home sales in a case where 80 MLS sales and 20 FSBOs shifts to 90 MLS sales and 10 FSBOs)
More Homebuilders seek REALTOR®-assistance in listing properties on MLSs (More MLS count even though there is no increase in existing home sales)
Flipping of a home (re-sell within 12 months)
Re-benchmarked figure excludes the second sale, while they are counted as twice in MLS count
Enlarged MLS geographic coverage
Some of the home sales are not an increase in home sales but are just due to enlarged sampled areas
Double counting as one single property is listed in two or more MLSs
Example: a home in Colorado Springs is listed in MLS in Colorado Springs and is also listed in MLS in Denver.
Odd: no mention of the primary reason for the "rebenchmarking", namely that the NAR is nothing but an advertising front for the US housing industry.
NAR Rebenchmarking
H/T Glenn Reynolds
via instapundit:
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/21/2011
Just the headlines for now:
EXISTING U.S. HOME SALES REVISED DOWN BY 14% FROM 2007-2010
EXISTING HOME SALES REVISED DOWN BY 15% IN 2010 TO 4.19 MLN
Thank you NAR for proving what everyone knew: that the US housing market is one big lie. And next: here come the historical GDP revisions.
The three charts that matter:
And the reasons for the "rebenchmarking"
Fewer FSBO home sales and more REALTOR®-assisted home sales (e.g., no net increase in home sales in a case where 80 MLS sales and 20 FSBOs shifts to 90 MLS sales and 10 FSBOs)
More Homebuilders seek REALTOR®-assistance in listing properties on MLSs (More MLS count even though there is no increase in existing home sales)
Flipping of a home (re-sell within 12 months)
Re-benchmarked figure excludes the second sale, while they are counted as twice in MLS count
Enlarged MLS geographic coverage
Some of the home sales are not an increase in home sales but are just due to enlarged sampled areas
Double counting as one single property is listed in two or more MLSs
Example: a home in Colorado Springs is listed in MLS in Colorado Springs and is also listed in MLS in Denver.
Odd: no mention of the primary reason for the "rebenchmarking", namely that the NAR is nothing but an advertising front for the US housing industry.
NAR Rebenchmarking
H/T Glenn Reynolds
HOW OBAMACARE is destroying medical innovation
Coal In Our Stockings: The Destruction of Medical Innovation
Obamacare's "Comparative Effectiveness Review" process will stifle medical technology innovation.
Benjamin Zycher
December 21, 2011
The holidays are fast approaching, and the “elves” are busy at the North Pole. No, not the presidential candidates. No, not the Capitol Hill pols. And no, not those unrelenting pursuers of objectivity and truth: the journalists.
I refer instead to the bureaucrats, in particular those implementing the new “comparative effectiveness review” (CER) process for comparing alternative treatments for given medical conditions.
The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — aka Obamacare — established the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to “conduct research to provide information about the best available evidence to help patients and their health care providers make more informed decisions.” What could be wrong with that? CER is supposed to be “a rigorous evaluation of the impact of different options that are available for treating a given medical condition for a particular set of patients.”
Alas, there is a problem: The federal government does not have patients. Instead, it has interest groups engaged in a long twilight struggle over shares of the federal budget pie. Less for one group means more for others, and even modest reductions in the huge federal health-care budget are a tempting goal for other constituencies.
In other words, there can be no such thing as unpoliticized science in the Beltway. It is inevitable that political pressures will lead policymakers to use the findings yielded by CER analyses to influence decisions on coverage, reimbursement, or incentives within Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health programs.
Consider the new environment confronting would-be investors in new and improved medical technologies, examples of which are pharmaceuticals and medical devices and equipment. One cannot know in advance either how CER analyses of interest will turn out or how the findings will be used. Indeed, the uncertainties are enormous. The findings of statistical analyses are driven in substantial part by the design of the underlying studies.
Such studies always will conflict to some degree, introducing considerable subjectivity into the process of deriving “conclusions” from the CER process. Even for a given study, experts inevitably will differ on conclusions to be learned and/or recommendations to be made. More important, the process of scientific discovery is dynamic: Later findings can call earlier findings into question, and CER analysis necessarily will find itself “behind the curve” as medical technologies and treatment protocols evolve over time. And what is true for a population may not be true for a given subset of patients, a problem for which such top-down approaches as CER are particularly ill-conceived.
As an example, let us recall the experience of the “ALLHAT” (The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack) clinical trial, conducted over the eight-year period from 1994 through 2002. ALLHAT was a large (over 42,000 patients) and well-publicized comparative analysis of four alternative hypertension drugs, as well as the effects of lipid drugs, on the rates of heart attacks, strokes, and early deaths. Substantial disagreement emerged in the scientific literature over the design of the trial, the interpretation of the data, the importance of observed side effects, and a number of other parameters. Other CER analyses suggested differing conclusions. As the end of the ALLHAT study approached, new drugs (in particular the statin class of cholesterol drugs) and drug combination therapies reduced somewhat the usefulness of the ALLHAT findings, and there is little evidence in the literature that the ALLHAT trial has had an appreciable effect upon clinical practice.
Nonetheless, the likelihood that CER studies will be used one way or another is very high. This means that private-sector investors in new technologies will perceive four new or strengthened parameters. First, there will arise a need to expand private clinical testing to include preliminary CER analysis, as a means of acquiring information about future federal findings and government reactions. Second, increased pricing pressures can be expected as a result of CER analyses that are inconclusive or adverse. Third, CER raises the risk of non-approval or limited approval for federally-financed programs, perhaps as a tool with which to force ever-greater price reductions. Finally, CER is likely to yield a longer regulatory approval process, and thus a shortening of the effective patent period and a delay in expected sales revenues.
Recent research from the Pacific Research Institute examined the likely effects of these CER implications for R&D investment in new and improved pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment. Using data from the National Science Foundation and other sources, R&D investment would be reduced by about $10 billion per year over the period 2014 through 2025, or about 10-12 percent. Based upon the scholarly literature on the benefits of medical innovation, this reduction in the advance of medical technology would impose an expected loss of about 5 million life-years annually, with a conservative economic value of $500 billion, an amount substantially greater than the entire U.S. market for pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment.
This adverse effect would be concentrated upon technological advances likely to serve the needs of smaller subgroups within the overall patient population, upon riskier investments among new treatments, and upon drugs and equipment expected to prove relatively less profitable.
In short: An expanded federal CER effort — a top-down process — is likely to prove very unwise as a matter of public policy. A renewed emphasis upon a bottom-up approach of experimentation by many millions of practitioners and patients would be a more fruitful vehicle for the acquisition of information about the comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical approaches.
Benjamin Zycher is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute.
Obamacare's "Comparative Effectiveness Review" process will stifle medical technology innovation.
Benjamin Zycher
December 21, 2011
The holidays are fast approaching, and the “elves” are busy at the North Pole. No, not the presidential candidates. No, not the Capitol Hill pols. And no, not those unrelenting pursuers of objectivity and truth: the journalists.
I refer instead to the bureaucrats, in particular those implementing the new “comparative effectiveness review” (CER) process for comparing alternative treatments for given medical conditions.
The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — aka Obamacare — established the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to “conduct research to provide information about the best available evidence to help patients and their health care providers make more informed decisions.” What could be wrong with that? CER is supposed to be “a rigorous evaluation of the impact of different options that are available for treating a given medical condition for a particular set of patients.”
Alas, there is a problem: The federal government does not have patients. Instead, it has interest groups engaged in a long twilight struggle over shares of the federal budget pie. Less for one group means more for others, and even modest reductions in the huge federal health-care budget are a tempting goal for other constituencies.
In other words, there can be no such thing as unpoliticized science in the Beltway. It is inevitable that political pressures will lead policymakers to use the findings yielded by CER analyses to influence decisions on coverage, reimbursement, or incentives within Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health programs.
Consider the new environment confronting would-be investors in new and improved medical technologies, examples of which are pharmaceuticals and medical devices and equipment. One cannot know in advance either how CER analyses of interest will turn out or how the findings will be used. Indeed, the uncertainties are enormous. The findings of statistical analyses are driven in substantial part by the design of the underlying studies.
Such studies always will conflict to some degree, introducing considerable subjectivity into the process of deriving “conclusions” from the CER process. Even for a given study, experts inevitably will differ on conclusions to be learned and/or recommendations to be made. More important, the process of scientific discovery is dynamic: Later findings can call earlier findings into question, and CER analysis necessarily will find itself “behind the curve” as medical technologies and treatment protocols evolve over time. And what is true for a population may not be true for a given subset of patients, a problem for which such top-down approaches as CER are particularly ill-conceived.
As an example, let us recall the experience of the “ALLHAT” (The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack) clinical trial, conducted over the eight-year period from 1994 through 2002. ALLHAT was a large (over 42,000 patients) and well-publicized comparative analysis of four alternative hypertension drugs, as well as the effects of lipid drugs, on the rates of heart attacks, strokes, and early deaths. Substantial disagreement emerged in the scientific literature over the design of the trial, the interpretation of the data, the importance of observed side effects, and a number of other parameters. Other CER analyses suggested differing conclusions. As the end of the ALLHAT study approached, new drugs (in particular the statin class of cholesterol drugs) and drug combination therapies reduced somewhat the usefulness of the ALLHAT findings, and there is little evidence in the literature that the ALLHAT trial has had an appreciable effect upon clinical practice.
Nonetheless, the likelihood that CER studies will be used one way or another is very high. This means that private-sector investors in new technologies will perceive four new or strengthened parameters. First, there will arise a need to expand private clinical testing to include preliminary CER analysis, as a means of acquiring information about future federal findings and government reactions. Second, increased pricing pressures can be expected as a result of CER analyses that are inconclusive or adverse. Third, CER raises the risk of non-approval or limited approval for federally-financed programs, perhaps as a tool with which to force ever-greater price reductions. Finally, CER is likely to yield a longer regulatory approval process, and thus a shortening of the effective patent period and a delay in expected sales revenues.
Recent research from the Pacific Research Institute examined the likely effects of these CER implications for R&D investment in new and improved pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment. Using data from the National Science Foundation and other sources, R&D investment would be reduced by about $10 billion per year over the period 2014 through 2025, or about 10-12 percent. Based upon the scholarly literature on the benefits of medical innovation, this reduction in the advance of medical technology would impose an expected loss of about 5 million life-years annually, with a conservative economic value of $500 billion, an amount substantially greater than the entire U.S. market for pharmaceuticals and devices and equipment.
This adverse effect would be concentrated upon technological advances likely to serve the needs of smaller subgroups within the overall patient population, upon riskier investments among new treatments, and upon drugs and equipment expected to prove relatively less profitable.
In short: An expanded federal CER effort — a top-down process — is likely to prove very unwise as a matter of public policy. A renewed emphasis upon a bottom-up approach of experimentation by many millions of practitioners and patients would be a more fruitful vehicle for the acquisition of information about the comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical approaches.
Benjamin Zycher is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute.
When the Police Knock on Your Door
December 21, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Last week the gent who writes the Tallbloke’s Talkshop climate skeptic blog in the UK was raided by police. In some places the incident has been described as a ‘midnight raid.’ But when I double-checked that point, Tallbloke said that although his first blog post on the matter appeared just before midnight, in fact the police showed up somewhere between 6:30 and 7 in the evening. They then stayed for more than three hours. (See the comment dated Dec. 20th at 7:22 am here.)
I’ve received one speeding ticket in my life and there was nothing particularly threatening about the brief conversation I had with the officer involved. But having six police officers enter one’s home and hang around for hours is no one’s idea of a good time.
Before any citizen in a free country is subjected to that sort of treatment there ought to be a highly compelling reason. Here in Canada the legal term is probable cause. And yet Tallbloke says the police have so far declined to provide any information that explains their actions – despite having told him he isn’t a suspect.
In another blog post Tallbloke describes the past few days:
For my good lady and myself, it has been a dark and difficult time over this last week. We have been raided by the police, had our main means of communication with the outside world confiscated [laptops and router] and our telephone line ripped out [apparently inadvertently by one of the officers], hounded by the press, libeled by a Harvard PhD and a Penn State professor among others and vilified by half the climateering blogosphere. We have cried tears of fear and frustration, endured quizzical looks from work colleagues and neighbours, lost sleep [and] had to support worried parents and relatives.
This is so not good.
Much of the discussion of the above event has mentioned the formal notice sent to WordPress by the US Justice Department. That notice asked WordPress to freeze records associated with three blogs hosted on its US-based servers. Those blogs were:
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com (written by Tallbloke, who is a UK resident)
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com (aka the Air Vent written by Jeff Id who lives in the US)
http://climateaudit.org (written by Steve McIntyre who resides in Canada)
In some quarters the second blog on the list has been confused with my own website – NOconsensus.org. Quite independently of each other, Jeff and I have both been riffing on the NOconsensus meme, but it is his blog that has had the misfortune to attract the attention of the US Justice Department.
Invited to write a piece for Canada’s National Post regarding the above matters, I did so yesterday. Published online last night under the headline Climate Crackdown, it appears on page FP13 of today’s print edition.
As I say on the About page here at this blog:
Climate skepticism is free speech. Alternative points-of-view deserve to be heard.
Not all the links made it into the newspaper version, so below is a cut-and-paste of the story I filed:
In recent days I’ve been receiving calls and e-mails asking what the US Justice Department wants with me. In fact, there has been a misunderstanding.
I write a blog about climate change dogma which has a similar web address to a blogger in the United Sates. It is that person – who publishes under the pen name Jeff Id at NOconsensus.wordpress.com – who is being targeted.
Earlier this month a trial attorney employed by the criminal division of the US Department of Justice sent a formal request to WordPress (the blogging software company owned by Automattic Inc.) to freeze for 90 days “all stored communications, records, and other evidence in your possession” regarding three climate skeptic blogs.
ClimateAudit.org – written by Canadian Steve McIntyre and hosted on WordPress’ US-based servers – was one of that trio. So was Tallbloke’s Talkshop, written by a UK resident and published at tallbloke.wordpress.com.
The Justice Department is interested in WordPress records spanning three days – November 21st to 23rd inclusive. At 4:09 am on November 22, someone calling themselves FOIA made a comment on McIntyre’s blog. It consisted solely of a link to a zip file posted online at a Russian web address. The zip file contained 5,000 e-mails written by some of the most prominent names in climate science.
Dubbed Climategate 2, these documents are still being examined and sifted. But e-mails have already come to light in which scientists employed by publicly funded universities in the UK and elsewhere discuss the deliberate deletion and removal of records from university computers. (In the UK, altering or deleting documents in an attempt to circumvent Freedom of Information legislation is a criminal offense.)
In these e-mails individuals such as the University of Pennsylvania’s Michael Mann also talk about ‘the cause’ they feel they are advancing. Moreover, these exchanges make it abundantly clear that the experts who’ve been conducting climate research (and writing reports about that research for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have privately expressed doubts about the robustness of many of their findings.
The unidentified person who left the link to the zip file at McIntyre’s blog also left it at Jeff’s Id’s blog – and at Tallbloke’s. Since the latter resides in a timezone five hours ahead of McIntyre, Tallbloke received the link shortly past 9 am and appears to have been the first person to blog about it.
Which may be the reason he has attracted special police attention. Last week six officers, from three different divisions and armed with a search warrant, raided his Yorkshire home. They spent more than three hours there and although they assured him he isn’t a suspect, seized two of his laptops and an Internet router.
Tallbloke says the UK police told him they requested the assistance of the US Justice Department, rather than the other way around. He also says they were “well mannered and did not over-react” when he declined to give them his WordPress password. “I politely explained that they had a warrant to search my house, not my head.”
If the authorities are trying to identify the person who calls themselves FOIA (an acronym often associated with the Freedom of Information Act) who left these links, it makes sense for them to examine WordPress records since all three blogs are hosted on its servers. But I am aware of no reasonable explanation as to how violating the sanctity of a non-suspect blogger’s home and invading his privacy by seizing his laptops (which, no doubt, contain banking and other sensitive information) could possibly be helpful.
Nor is it obvious why the Justice Department asked WordPress “not to disclose the existence” of its notice to the bloggersthemselves . (To its credit WordPress forwarded a copy of the Justice Department’s letter to those concerned nonetheless.)
This is all rather chilling. It appears that being the proprietor of blog in which strangers leave links pointing to material on third-party websites now exposes one to being raided by the police.
As a commenter on another skeptic blog has observed: “the mere fact of the raid is ‘intimidating’ (potentially) to many…Some are braver or better situated than others to handle police scrutiny but NO ONE should have to face police raids merely for having a blog.”
Donna Laframboise is the author of the recently-published exposé of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert. She blogs at NoFrakkingConsensus.org
Last week the gent who writes the Tallbloke’s Talkshop climate skeptic blog in the UK was raided by police. In some places the incident has been described as a ‘midnight raid.’ But when I double-checked that point, Tallbloke said that although his first blog post on the matter appeared just before midnight, in fact the police showed up somewhere between 6:30 and 7 in the evening. They then stayed for more than three hours. (See the comment dated Dec. 20th at 7:22 am here.)
I’ve received one speeding ticket in my life and there was nothing particularly threatening about the brief conversation I had with the officer involved. But having six police officers enter one’s home and hang around for hours is no one’s idea of a good time.
Before any citizen in a free country is subjected to that sort of treatment there ought to be a highly compelling reason. Here in Canada the legal term is probable cause. And yet Tallbloke says the police have so far declined to provide any information that explains their actions – despite having told him he isn’t a suspect.
In another blog post Tallbloke describes the past few days:
For my good lady and myself, it has been a dark and difficult time over this last week. We have been raided by the police, had our main means of communication with the outside world confiscated [laptops and router] and our telephone line ripped out [apparently inadvertently by one of the officers], hounded by the press, libeled by a Harvard PhD and a Penn State professor among others and vilified by half the climateering blogosphere. We have cried tears of fear and frustration, endured quizzical looks from work colleagues and neighbours, lost sleep [and] had to support worried parents and relatives.
This is so not good.
Much of the discussion of the above event has mentioned the formal notice sent to WordPress by the US Justice Department. That notice asked WordPress to freeze records associated with three blogs hosted on its US-based servers. Those blogs were:
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com (written by Tallbloke, who is a UK resident)
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com (aka the Air Vent written by Jeff Id who lives in the US)
http://climateaudit.org (written by Steve McIntyre who resides in Canada)
In some quarters the second blog on the list has been confused with my own website – NOconsensus.org. Quite independently of each other, Jeff and I have both been riffing on the NOconsensus meme, but it is his blog that has had the misfortune to attract the attention of the US Justice Department.
Invited to write a piece for Canada’s National Post regarding the above matters, I did so yesterday. Published online last night under the headline Climate Crackdown, it appears on page FP13 of today’s print edition.
As I say on the About page here at this blog:
Climate skepticism is free speech. Alternative points-of-view deserve to be heard.
Not all the links made it into the newspaper version, so below is a cut-and-paste of the story I filed:
In recent days I’ve been receiving calls and e-mails asking what the US Justice Department wants with me. In fact, there has been a misunderstanding.
I write a blog about climate change dogma which has a similar web address to a blogger in the United Sates. It is that person – who publishes under the pen name Jeff Id at NOconsensus.wordpress.com – who is being targeted.
Earlier this month a trial attorney employed by the criminal division of the US Department of Justice sent a formal request to WordPress (the blogging software company owned by Automattic Inc.) to freeze for 90 days “all stored communications, records, and other evidence in your possession” regarding three climate skeptic blogs.
ClimateAudit.org – written by Canadian Steve McIntyre and hosted on WordPress’ US-based servers – was one of that trio. So was Tallbloke’s Talkshop, written by a UK resident and published at tallbloke.wordpress.com.
The Justice Department is interested in WordPress records spanning three days – November 21st to 23rd inclusive. At 4:09 am on November 22, someone calling themselves FOIA made a comment on McIntyre’s blog. It consisted solely of a link to a zip file posted online at a Russian web address. The zip file contained 5,000 e-mails written by some of the most prominent names in climate science.
Dubbed Climategate 2, these documents are still being examined and sifted. But e-mails have already come to light in which scientists employed by publicly funded universities in the UK and elsewhere discuss the deliberate deletion and removal of records from university computers. (In the UK, altering or deleting documents in an attempt to circumvent Freedom of Information legislation is a criminal offense.)
In these e-mails individuals such as the University of Pennsylvania’s Michael Mann also talk about ‘the cause’ they feel they are advancing. Moreover, these exchanges make it abundantly clear that the experts who’ve been conducting climate research (and writing reports about that research for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have privately expressed doubts about the robustness of many of their findings.
The unidentified person who left the link to the zip file at McIntyre’s blog also left it at Jeff’s Id’s blog – and at Tallbloke’s. Since the latter resides in a timezone five hours ahead of McIntyre, Tallbloke received the link shortly past 9 am and appears to have been the first person to blog about it.
Which may be the reason he has attracted special police attention. Last week six officers, from three different divisions and armed with a search warrant, raided his Yorkshire home. They spent more than three hours there and although they assured him he isn’t a suspect, seized two of his laptops and an Internet router.
Tallbloke says the UK police told him they requested the assistance of the US Justice Department, rather than the other way around. He also says they were “well mannered and did not over-react” when he declined to give them his WordPress password. “I politely explained that they had a warrant to search my house, not my head.”
If the authorities are trying to identify the person who calls themselves FOIA (an acronym often associated with the Freedom of Information Act) who left these links, it makes sense for them to examine WordPress records since all three blogs are hosted on its servers. But I am aware of no reasonable explanation as to how violating the sanctity of a non-suspect blogger’s home and invading his privacy by seizing his laptops (which, no doubt, contain banking and other sensitive information) could possibly be helpful.
Nor is it obvious why the Justice Department asked WordPress “not to disclose the existence” of its notice to the bloggersthemselves . (To its credit WordPress forwarded a copy of the Justice Department’s letter to those concerned nonetheless.)
This is all rather chilling. It appears that being the proprietor of blog in which strangers leave links pointing to material on third-party websites now exposes one to being raided by the police.
As a commenter on another skeptic blog has observed: “the mere fact of the raid is ‘intimidating’ (potentially) to many…Some are braver or better situated than others to handle police scrutiny but NO ONE should have to face police raids merely for having a blog.”
Donna Laframboise is the author of the recently-published exposé of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert. She blogs at NoFrakkingConsensus.org
Wasting Away in Obamaville: MACT Rule May Shut Down a Whole Town
Nice town ya got there. Would be a pity if Democratic policies happened to it.
For more than 90 years, the coal-fired power plant in Glen Lyn, Va., has been churning out electricity and contributing to local prosperity. Of late, it has generated nearly a quarter of the revenue for the $1 million budget of the town.
Yet when the plant ultimately shuts down to comply with new federal air pollution regulations by the end of 2014, says Town Manager Howard Spencer, so too might the community of 200.
“If the town lost all of that revenue,” he says, “we would struggle to even continue to be incorporated.”
An Associated Press analysis has found that more than 32 mostly coal-fired power plants in a dozen states will be forced to close because of the new, more stringent regulations. Another 36 plants are at risk of closing.
That’s a lot of jobs the administration is regulating away, while another 20,000 are being aborted via the president’s XL pipeline shenanigans. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, President Obama’s anti-economic growth czar, is announcing the MACT rule’s implementation this afternoon. She wants you to know that she’s killing jobs and possibly a whole town for the children.
Lisa Jackson has a surprise in store today when she releases EPA’s first-ever rules for mercury and air toxics emissions from power plants.
The finalized rules include so-called safety valve provisions that would give some power plants an extra year – beyond the three or four usually allowed under the Clean Air Act – to comply with the utility MACT, a source close to the agency tells POLITICO.
DETAILS – Jackson will unveil the rule at 2 p.m. today at the Children’s National Medical Center, where she’ll be flanked by doctors and the hospital’s CEO.
For more than 90 years, the coal-fired power plant in Glen Lyn, Va., has been churning out electricity and contributing to local prosperity. Of late, it has generated nearly a quarter of the revenue for the $1 million budget of the town.
Yet when the plant ultimately shuts down to comply with new federal air pollution regulations by the end of 2014, says Town Manager Howard Spencer, so too might the community of 200.
“If the town lost all of that revenue,” he says, “we would struggle to even continue to be incorporated.”
An Associated Press analysis has found that more than 32 mostly coal-fired power plants in a dozen states will be forced to close because of the new, more stringent regulations. Another 36 plants are at risk of closing.
That’s a lot of jobs the administration is regulating away, while another 20,000 are being aborted via the president’s XL pipeline shenanigans. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, President Obama’s anti-economic growth czar, is announcing the MACT rule’s implementation this afternoon. She wants you to know that she’s killing jobs and possibly a whole town for the children.
Lisa Jackson has a surprise in store today when she releases EPA’s first-ever rules for mercury and air toxics emissions from power plants.
The finalized rules include so-called safety valve provisions that would give some power plants an extra year – beyond the three or four usually allowed under the Clean Air Act – to comply with the utility MACT, a source close to the agency tells POLITICO.
DETAILS – Jackson will unveil the rule at 2 p.m. today at the Children’s National Medical Center, where she’ll be flanked by doctors and the hospital’s CEO.
Tell Us What You Really Think? No Need....
IBM Predicts Mind-Reading Machines
Wednesday, 21 Dec 2011
ARMONK, N.Y. - Century-old technology colossus IBM on Monday depicted a near future in which machines read minds and recognize who they are dealing with.
The " IBM 5 in 5 " predictions were based on societal trends and research which the New York State-based company expected to begin bearing fruit by the year 2017.
"From Houdini to Skywalker to X-Men, mind reading has merely been wishful thinking for science fiction fans for decades, but their wish may soon come true," IBM said in its annual assessment of innovations on the horizon.
"IBM scientists are among those researching how to link your brain to your devices, such as a computer or a smartphone," it continued.
IBM gave the examples of ringing someone up just by thinking it, or willing a cursor to move on a computer screen.
Biological makeup will become the key to personal identity, with retina scans of recognition of faces or voices used to confirm who people are rather than typing in passwords, the company forecast.
"Imagine you will be able to walk up to an ATM machine to securely withdraw money by simply speaking your name or looking into a tiny sensor that can recognize the unique patterns in the retina of your eye," IBM said.
"Or by doing the same, you can check your account balance on your mobile phone or tablet," it continued.
Technology will also be able to produce electric power from any types of movement from walking or bicycle riding to water flowing through pipes of homes, IBM predicted.
Mobile phones will narrow the digital divide between "haves and have-nots" by making information easily accessible and junk email will be eliminated by smarter filtering and masterful targeting of ads people like, according to IBM.
>Watch the "IBM Next 5 in 5: 2011" video.
Copyright 2011 AFP. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, 21 Dec 2011
ARMONK, N.Y. - Century-old technology colossus IBM on Monday depicted a near future in which machines read minds and recognize who they are dealing with.
The " IBM 5 in 5 " predictions were based on societal trends and research which the New York State-based company expected to begin bearing fruit by the year 2017.
"From Houdini to Skywalker to X-Men, mind reading has merely been wishful thinking for science fiction fans for decades, but their wish may soon come true," IBM said in its annual assessment of innovations on the horizon.
"IBM scientists are among those researching how to link your brain to your devices, such as a computer or a smartphone," it continued.
IBM gave the examples of ringing someone up just by thinking it, or willing a cursor to move on a computer screen.
Biological makeup will become the key to personal identity, with retina scans of recognition of faces or voices used to confirm who people are rather than typing in passwords, the company forecast.
"Imagine you will be able to walk up to an ATM machine to securely withdraw money by simply speaking your name or looking into a tiny sensor that can recognize the unique patterns in the retina of your eye," IBM said.
"Or by doing the same, you can check your account balance on your mobile phone or tablet," it continued.
Technology will also be able to produce electric power from any types of movement from walking or bicycle riding to water flowing through pipes of homes, IBM predicted.
Mobile phones will narrow the digital divide between "haves and have-nots" by making information easily accessible and junk email will be eliminated by smarter filtering and masterful targeting of ads people like, according to IBM.
>Watch the "IBM Next 5 in 5: 2011" video.
Copyright 2011 AFP. All rights reserved.
NFL playoffs, Super Bowl to be streamed online
By Mark Milian, CNN
updated 7:22 PM EST, Tue December 20, 2011
For the first time ever the Super Bowl, along with some postseason NFL games, will be streamed online and through the league's mobile apps, the NFL and partner Verizon Wireless announced Tuesday.
The upcoming wild card games, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl -- TV's most-watched annual event -- will be streamed for free to computers on NFL.com and NBCSports.com.
NBC's live stream will run different ads from those on TV, but Super Bowl viewers will be able to pull up the TV commercials on demand through the website shortly after they air, an NBC Sports spokesman said.
On phones and tablets, Verizon is the only cellular carrier that offers NFL games through an exclusive deal.
Verizon smartphones with a high-speed 4G LTE data plan can stream the games through the NFL Mobile app for free, a spokeswoman for the carrier said. Mobile devices with 3G service, such as the iPhone, iPad or older smartphones, require a $10-per-month Verizon Video subscription, she said.
The NFL does not stream most games for free during the regular season. NBC began streaming Sunday Night Football games through its sports website three years ago. NBC announced last week that it had extended its contract with the NFL through 2022.
The playoffs start on January 7. The Super Bowl will be played on February 5 in Indianapolis.
updated 7:22 PM EST, Tue December 20, 2011
For the first time ever the Super Bowl, along with some postseason NFL games, will be streamed online and through the league's mobile apps, the NFL and partner Verizon Wireless announced Tuesday.
The upcoming wild card games, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl -- TV's most-watched annual event -- will be streamed for free to computers on NFL.com and NBCSports.com.
NBC's live stream will run different ads from those on TV, but Super Bowl viewers will be able to pull up the TV commercials on demand through the website shortly after they air, an NBC Sports spokesman said.
On phones and tablets, Verizon is the only cellular carrier that offers NFL games through an exclusive deal.
Verizon smartphones with a high-speed 4G LTE data plan can stream the games through the NFL Mobile app for free, a spokeswoman for the carrier said. Mobile devices with 3G service, such as the iPhone, iPad or older smartphones, require a $10-per-month Verizon Video subscription, she said.
The NFL does not stream most games for free during the regular season. NBC began streaming Sunday Night Football games through its sports website three years ago. NBC announced last week that it had extended its contract with the NFL through 2022.
The playoffs start on January 7. The Super Bowl will be played on February 5 in Indianapolis.
Trouble in First Family's Marriage?
WH releases no details of Michelle's 'private vacation'
By Peter Nicholas
December 21, 2011, 6:00 a.m.
Reporting from Kailua, Hi.— Meantime, here in paradise ….
It’s not clear when President Obama will decide it’s safe to walk away from the latest congressional impasse and join his family for their annual holiday retreat.
But a visit to the vacation spot Tuesday afternoon confirmed that First Lady Michelle Obama and daughters Sasha and Malia must be having a far better week than the president.
They’re staying in a five-bedroom home sandwiched between a canal and Kailua Bay on the east side of Oahu. Once he tears himself away from House Speaker John Boehner, the president can look forward to drinking in the 80-degree sunshine and gazing at the green sea turtles.
Neighbors seemed ambivalent about the inconvenience that goes with having the first family move onto your street, if only temporarily. Mary Bibby, whose house is opposite the security checkpoint, is spending her fourth straight Christmas in proximity to the Obamas. One year, she says, she shook the president’s hand at a nearby church service.
Bibby could live without the bomb-sniffing dogs constantly checking her car. Asked about Obama's performance in office, she pointed a thumb earthward. “I don’t think he’s healing any of the ails that bother people so much,’’ she said.
Ruth Bessinger, 45, who recently moved into the neighborhood, said she was excited to have caught the first lady’s glance as the motorcade returned home one day. She looked at one of the passing cars, realized she was staring straight at Michelle Obama through the window, and smiled and waved. She said she was delighted when the first lady smiled and waved in return.
Bessinger said she has one regret: she was holding bag from McDonald's. Knowing the first lady is a stickler about nutrition, she said she felt a bit “embarrassed.’’
“For us, it’s exciting and nice that they come here,’’ she said. “If it were my husband, I’d be like — ‘When is he coming?’ ’’
With children about the same age as the two first daughters, Bessinger added: “They’re welcome to come over for a play date.’’
Michelle Obama’s office would give no details of the first lady’s activities, saying in an email message that she and her daughters are on “a private vacation.’’
By Peter Nicholas
December 21, 2011, 6:00 a.m.
Reporting from Kailua, Hi.— Meantime, here in paradise ….
It’s not clear when President Obama will decide it’s safe to walk away from the latest congressional impasse and join his family for their annual holiday retreat.
But a visit to the vacation spot Tuesday afternoon confirmed that First Lady Michelle Obama and daughters Sasha and Malia must be having a far better week than the president.
They’re staying in a five-bedroom home sandwiched between a canal and Kailua Bay on the east side of Oahu. Once he tears himself away from House Speaker John Boehner, the president can look forward to drinking in the 80-degree sunshine and gazing at the green sea turtles.
Neighbors seemed ambivalent about the inconvenience that goes with having the first family move onto your street, if only temporarily. Mary Bibby, whose house is opposite the security checkpoint, is spending her fourth straight Christmas in proximity to the Obamas. One year, she says, she shook the president’s hand at a nearby church service.
Bibby could live without the bomb-sniffing dogs constantly checking her car. Asked about Obama's performance in office, she pointed a thumb earthward. “I don’t think he’s healing any of the ails that bother people so much,’’ she said.
Ruth Bessinger, 45, who recently moved into the neighborhood, said she was excited to have caught the first lady’s glance as the motorcade returned home one day. She looked at one of the passing cars, realized she was staring straight at Michelle Obama through the window, and smiled and waved. She said she was delighted when the first lady smiled and waved in return.
Bessinger said she has one regret: she was holding bag from McDonald's. Knowing the first lady is a stickler about nutrition, she said she felt a bit “embarrassed.’’
“For us, it’s exciting and nice that they come here,’’ she said. “If it were my husband, I’d be like — ‘When is he coming?’ ’’
With children about the same age as the two first daughters, Bessinger added: “They’re welcome to come over for a play date.’’
Michelle Obama’s office would give no details of the first lady’s activities, saying in an email message that she and her daughters are on “a private vacation.’’
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Obama's Job-Killing Machine Rolls On
Posted 12/20/2011 07:04 PM ET
Jobs: President Obama tells anyone who'll listen that from dawn until dusk he's focused on job creation. Apparently, no one in his administration listens, since day after day they keep making job-killing decisions.
In fact, when it comes to jobs, Obama's policies are so bad that even his union pals are starting to notice.
The latest to take notice is the Communications Workers of America union. It reported last month that AT&T's $39 billion bid for T-mobile would have brought 5,000 quality jobs back from overseas and created "as many as 96,000 additional quality jobs in the build-out of high-speed wireless broadband."
Instead, AT&T this week decided to spike its acquisition plans after Obama's Justice Department sued and his Federal Communications Commission came out against it, claiming the merger would result in higher consumer costs. Even if that risk were true, it's cold comfort to all those who won't get these jobs.
Then there's Obama's own decision to put the protection of environmentalist votes over the creation of tens of thousands of good jobs by delaying his Keystone XL pipeline decision until after the election.
Terry O'Sullivan, general president of the Laborers' International Union of North America was astonishingly blunt in his response: "The administration chose to support environmentalists over jobs — job-killers win, American workers lose."
And Obama's attacks on the private jet industry caused International Association of Machinists President Tom Buffenbarger to take offense. "In this industry, a few misguided words can put at risk even the ever-so-modest recovery we have experienced."
Meanwhile, Obama's supposed focus on job creation has failed to penetrate the walls of the Environmental Protection Agency. New EPA air pollution rules, for example, will shutter three dozen power plants, putting all their employees out to pasture, with three dozen more plants at risk, according to a new AP analysis of the effects of the mandates. All this to produce air quality improvements that will provide negligible health benefits.
The list goes on. The medical device tax — tucked into ObamaCare — the net neutrality rule, the anti-drilling policies, and so on all get enacted without any apparent regard for the impact they've have on jobs.
Rather than spend all day thinking about job creation, Obama would do the country much better if he spent that time rooting out his own job-destroying policies.
Jobs: President Obama tells anyone who'll listen that from dawn until dusk he's focused on job creation. Apparently, no one in his administration listens, since day after day they keep making job-killing decisions.
In fact, when it comes to jobs, Obama's policies are so bad that even his union pals are starting to notice.
The latest to take notice is the Communications Workers of America union. It reported last month that AT&T's $39 billion bid for T-mobile would have brought 5,000 quality jobs back from overseas and created "as many as 96,000 additional quality jobs in the build-out of high-speed wireless broadband."
Instead, AT&T this week decided to spike its acquisition plans after Obama's Justice Department sued and his Federal Communications Commission came out against it, claiming the merger would result in higher consumer costs. Even if that risk were true, it's cold comfort to all those who won't get these jobs.
Then there's Obama's own decision to put the protection of environmentalist votes over the creation of tens of thousands of good jobs by delaying his Keystone XL pipeline decision until after the election.
Terry O'Sullivan, general president of the Laborers' International Union of North America was astonishingly blunt in his response: "The administration chose to support environmentalists over jobs — job-killers win, American workers lose."
And Obama's attacks on the private jet industry caused International Association of Machinists President Tom Buffenbarger to take offense. "In this industry, a few misguided words can put at risk even the ever-so-modest recovery we have experienced."
Meanwhile, Obama's supposed focus on job creation has failed to penetrate the walls of the Environmental Protection Agency. New EPA air pollution rules, for example, will shutter three dozen power plants, putting all their employees out to pasture, with three dozen more plants at risk, according to a new AP analysis of the effects of the mandates. All this to produce air quality improvements that will provide negligible health benefits.
The list goes on. The medical device tax — tucked into ObamaCare — the net neutrality rule, the anti-drilling policies, and so on all get enacted without any apparent regard for the impact they've have on jobs.
Rather than spend all day thinking about job creation, Obama would do the country much better if he spent that time rooting out his own job-destroying policies.
What's Behind PolitiFact's “Lie Of The Year?”
Posted by Dan Riehl Dec 20th 2011
The Left is apoplectic over this year’s PolitiFact Lie of the Year. Given that PolitiFact came under so much fire from the right this year, conservatives should be cautious, even if optimistic. A year-end gift, or a big show of balancing of the scale, will not undo any damage PolitiFact might do during the course of any year. In fact, leftists may be upset precisely because they are more generally accustomed to PolitiFact having their backs.
PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.
Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year.
It’s the third year in a row that a health care claim has won the dubious honor. In 2009, the winner was the Republicans’ charge that the Democrats’ health care plan included “death panels.” In 2010, it was that the plan was a “government takeover of health care.”
Criticisms from the right can easily be found via the PolitiFact Wiki. Certainly, now they can claim to have received harsh criticism from both sides in 2011–they must be doing something right, right?
Yet in critical times with the constant churn of daily news cycles, any damage done day-to-day on a host of critical issues could easily outweigh one year-end gift, however grand.
PolitiFact.com has faced assertions among some politically conservative commentators that it is politically biased in its declarations of truth and untruth. Mark Hemingway of The Weekly Standard criticized PolitiFact, in addition to similar recently-created fact-checking projects from other news organizations, writing that they “aren’t about checking facts so much as they are about a rearguard action to keep inconvenient truths out of the conversation.” Hemingway cited a study by the University of Minnesota Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs that found that, of 98 statements by American political figures that PolitiFact judged to be false from January 2010 to January 2011, 74 were by Republicans, while 22 were by Democrats.
Taranto of the Wall Street Journal called PolitiFact.com “less seeker of truth than servant of power”[4], while a Wall Street Journal editorial wrote that PolitiFact is “part of a larger journalistic trend that seeks to recast all political debates as matters of lies, misinformation and ‘facts,’ rather than differences of world view or principles.”[8] In The American Spectator, conservative analyst Matthew Vadum, citing several of PolitiFact.com’s analyses, called their content “political opinion masquerading as high-minded investigative journalism.”
The Left is apoplectic over this year’s PolitiFact Lie of the Year. Given that PolitiFact came under so much fire from the right this year, conservatives should be cautious, even if optimistic. A year-end gift, or a big show of balancing of the scale, will not undo any damage PolitiFact might do during the course of any year. In fact, leftists may be upset precisely because they are more generally accustomed to PolitiFact having their backs.
PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.
Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year.
It’s the third year in a row that a health care claim has won the dubious honor. In 2009, the winner was the Republicans’ charge that the Democrats’ health care plan included “death panels.” In 2010, it was that the plan was a “government takeover of health care.”
Criticisms from the right can easily be found via the PolitiFact Wiki. Certainly, now they can claim to have received harsh criticism from both sides in 2011–they must be doing something right, right?
Yet in critical times with the constant churn of daily news cycles, any damage done day-to-day on a host of critical issues could easily outweigh one year-end gift, however grand.
PolitiFact.com has faced assertions among some politically conservative commentators that it is politically biased in its declarations of truth and untruth. Mark Hemingway of The Weekly Standard criticized PolitiFact, in addition to similar recently-created fact-checking projects from other news organizations, writing that they “aren’t about checking facts so much as they are about a rearguard action to keep inconvenient truths out of the conversation.” Hemingway cited a study by the University of Minnesota Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs that found that, of 98 statements by American political figures that PolitiFact judged to be false from January 2010 to January 2011, 74 were by Republicans, while 22 were by Democrats.
Taranto of the Wall Street Journal called PolitiFact.com “less seeker of truth than servant of power”[4], while a Wall Street Journal editorial wrote that PolitiFact is “part of a larger journalistic trend that seeks to recast all political debates as matters of lies, misinformation and ‘facts,’ rather than differences of world view or principles.”[8] In The American Spectator, conservative analyst Matthew Vadum, citing several of PolitiFact.com’s analyses, called their content “political opinion masquerading as high-minded investigative journalism.”
Dozens of Power Plants Closing Due to New# EPA Rules
Written by Brian Koenig
Tuesday, 20 December 2011 10:13
Due to new federal air pollution regulations, more than 32 power plants across the country will be forced to close their doors, according to a recent Associated Press survey. Those plants, which are mostly coal-fired, discharge enough electricity to supply more than 22 million households, the survey notes, and their closure will lead to job layoffs, depleted tax revenues, and a considerable hike in electric bills. The areas that will be hit hardest are the Midwest and in the coal belt (Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky), where dozens of plants will likely be retired.
Two regulations are in question: One aims to curb air pollution in states downwind from pollutant-heavy power plants; and the second, which was finalized last week, would enact the first standards for mercury, acid gas, and other pollutants from plant smokestacks. In total, the new regulations could eliminate more than eight percent of coal-fired generation nationwide.
AP’s survey, the first of its kind, looked at the analyses by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of plant retirements and interviewed 55 power plant operators about the effects on power supply and about their plans to deal with the new regulations.
Basing their assertions on energy analyses, congressional reports, and government regulators, critics have predicted that the new EPA regulations will lead to widespread blackouts, and possibly the retirement of coal as a power source altogether. However, proponents of the rules claim that those studies inflate closure numbers by considering plants shutting down for reasons other than the EPA’s new restrictions.
Opponents of the regulations have voiced their concerns. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) asserted in a recent letter to the White House that the mercury rule could "unintentionally jeopardize the reliability of our electric grid." At a recent speech in New Hampshire, former Utah Governor and GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman warned of summer blackouts. And a U.S. Chamber of Commerce advertisement warned that the regulations "could threaten America’s energy supply."
For some plant owners, the EPA rules will dissolve facilities that are likely to fail anyway, but for others, the rules will mean retirements for generators already planning to comply with state laws and other EPA requirements. "The EPA regulation became a game changer and a deal changer for some of these units," said Ryan Stensland, a spokesman for Alliant Energy, which has four plants that will be retired, and four more that are at risk of closing. "Absent the EPA regulations, I don’t think we would be seeing the transition that we are seeing today. It became a situation where EPA broke the back of coal."
For some of the country’s oldest coal-fired plants, retirement is the most cost-effective alternative. "It is more expensive to retrofit these plants than retire them and build new generation," asserted Chris Whelan, spokeswoman for Kentucky Utilities, which recently announced it will be closing three of its plants. Due to the closures, and the $800 million it’s spending to make its plants EPA-compliant, Kentucky Utilities expects its customers to see a 14-percent rate hike to deal with the additional costs and leaner supply.
Among some of the retired plants, Arizona’s largest utility will be deadbolting three of five generating units in 2013 at a facility in northwestern New Mexico, a decision the company largely attributes to the EPA’s mercury rule. The 2,040-megawatt Four Corners Power Plant is one of the largest in the United States, and it currently supplies electricity to about 300,000 households in Arizona, Texas, California, and New Mexico.
While some say the regulations are beneficial, and critical in order to address environmental concerns, others characterize them as inefficient and costly. Emerson Farley, who works at Four Corners Power Plant, said the union made up of trade groups from around the area has been battling to minimize the EPA’s mandates, and that statements about pollution adversely affecting public health are not the case with his plant’s workers, who work in close proximity to the emissions. "We have people working into their early 60s without any problems," Farley attested. "We’re seeing quite a bit of retirees at that age leading the plant. Those are celebrations on our part."
Government officials in Salem, Massachusetts, are now scrambling to identify new sources of revenue as the city’s coal- and oil-fired power station begins shutting its doors, which will weed out Salem’s largest taxpayer. While tourism remains the economic engine in the city, notorious for the 1692 witch trials, the retirement of the Salem Harbor Station will devastate city revenues. Because of the station’s closing, Salem will have to forfeit $4.75 million of its $70 million in annual tax revenues.
Salem Mayor Kimberley Driscoll said finding new revenue sources without giving in to a substantial boost in property and business taxes will far surpass any other challenge she has faced in her six years in office. "When you take a large chunk of tax revenues like that out of the revenue stream coming into the city, it has an impact if we have to make it up on the backs of other taxpayers," she lamented. "And 85 percent of our taxpayers are residents, so you are talking mostly residential home owners who are feeling struggles and [are] strapped already in meeting their tax obligations."
Many companies — most notably Southern Company, as well as American Electric, which has a slew of aging coal plants scattered throughout the Midwest — assured that they will be forced to retire facilities and terminate hundreds of jobs if they have to meet full EPA compliance by 2014. Officials from American Electric, which is based in Columbus, Ohio, said in June that the proposed rules would shut down parts of or all 11 of their plants, eliminating 600 jobs. The federal regulations would cost the company $8 billion, officials averred, mostly on retrofitting or shutting down plants which lack EPA-mandated equipment upgrades.
In response to an EPA analysis that he said was somewhat skewed, Scott Segal, who represents coal-fired plant operators, asserted, "For every one job that may be created in order to comply with the rule, we expect four higher-paying energy and manufacturing jobs to be lost."
Tuesday, 20 December 2011 10:13
Due to new federal air pollution regulations, more than 32 power plants across the country will be forced to close their doors, according to a recent Associated Press survey. Those plants, which are mostly coal-fired, discharge enough electricity to supply more than 22 million households, the survey notes, and their closure will lead to job layoffs, depleted tax revenues, and a considerable hike in electric bills. The areas that will be hit hardest are the Midwest and in the coal belt (Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky), where dozens of plants will likely be retired.
Two regulations are in question: One aims to curb air pollution in states downwind from pollutant-heavy power plants; and the second, which was finalized last week, would enact the first standards for mercury, acid gas, and other pollutants from plant smokestacks. In total, the new regulations could eliminate more than eight percent of coal-fired generation nationwide.
AP’s survey, the first of its kind, looked at the analyses by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of plant retirements and interviewed 55 power plant operators about the effects on power supply and about their plans to deal with the new regulations.
Basing their assertions on energy analyses, congressional reports, and government regulators, critics have predicted that the new EPA regulations will lead to widespread blackouts, and possibly the retirement of coal as a power source altogether. However, proponents of the rules claim that those studies inflate closure numbers by considering plants shutting down for reasons other than the EPA’s new restrictions.
Opponents of the regulations have voiced their concerns. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) asserted in a recent letter to the White House that the mercury rule could "unintentionally jeopardize the reliability of our electric grid." At a recent speech in New Hampshire, former Utah Governor and GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman warned of summer blackouts. And a U.S. Chamber of Commerce advertisement warned that the regulations "could threaten America’s energy supply."
For some plant owners, the EPA rules will dissolve facilities that are likely to fail anyway, but for others, the rules will mean retirements for generators already planning to comply with state laws and other EPA requirements. "The EPA regulation became a game changer and a deal changer for some of these units," said Ryan Stensland, a spokesman for Alliant Energy, which has four plants that will be retired, and four more that are at risk of closing. "Absent the EPA regulations, I don’t think we would be seeing the transition that we are seeing today. It became a situation where EPA broke the back of coal."
For some of the country’s oldest coal-fired plants, retirement is the most cost-effective alternative. "It is more expensive to retrofit these plants than retire them and build new generation," asserted Chris Whelan, spokeswoman for Kentucky Utilities, which recently announced it will be closing three of its plants. Due to the closures, and the $800 million it’s spending to make its plants EPA-compliant, Kentucky Utilities expects its customers to see a 14-percent rate hike to deal with the additional costs and leaner supply.
Among some of the retired plants, Arizona’s largest utility will be deadbolting three of five generating units in 2013 at a facility in northwestern New Mexico, a decision the company largely attributes to the EPA’s mercury rule. The 2,040-megawatt Four Corners Power Plant is one of the largest in the United States, and it currently supplies electricity to about 300,000 households in Arizona, Texas, California, and New Mexico.
While some say the regulations are beneficial, and critical in order to address environmental concerns, others characterize them as inefficient and costly. Emerson Farley, who works at Four Corners Power Plant, said the union made up of trade groups from around the area has been battling to minimize the EPA’s mandates, and that statements about pollution adversely affecting public health are not the case with his plant’s workers, who work in close proximity to the emissions. "We have people working into their early 60s without any problems," Farley attested. "We’re seeing quite a bit of retirees at that age leading the plant. Those are celebrations on our part."
Government officials in Salem, Massachusetts, are now scrambling to identify new sources of revenue as the city’s coal- and oil-fired power station begins shutting its doors, which will weed out Salem’s largest taxpayer. While tourism remains the economic engine in the city, notorious for the 1692 witch trials, the retirement of the Salem Harbor Station will devastate city revenues. Because of the station’s closing, Salem will have to forfeit $4.75 million of its $70 million in annual tax revenues.
Salem Mayor Kimberley Driscoll said finding new revenue sources without giving in to a substantial boost in property and business taxes will far surpass any other challenge she has faced in her six years in office. "When you take a large chunk of tax revenues like that out of the revenue stream coming into the city, it has an impact if we have to make it up on the backs of other taxpayers," she lamented. "And 85 percent of our taxpayers are residents, so you are talking mostly residential home owners who are feeling struggles and [are] strapped already in meeting their tax obligations."
Many companies — most notably Southern Company, as well as American Electric, which has a slew of aging coal plants scattered throughout the Midwest — assured that they will be forced to retire facilities and terminate hundreds of jobs if they have to meet full EPA compliance by 2014. Officials from American Electric, which is based in Columbus, Ohio, said in June that the proposed rules would shut down parts of or all 11 of their plants, eliminating 600 jobs. The federal regulations would cost the company $8 billion, officials averred, mostly on retrofitting or shutting down plants which lack EPA-mandated equipment upgrades.
In response to an EPA analysis that he said was somewhat skewed, Scott Segal, who represents coal-fired plant operators, asserted, "For every one job that may be created in order to comply with the rule, we expect four higher-paying energy and manufacturing jobs to be lost."
Eric Holder: 'Critics Don't Like Me Because I'm Black'
Can I catch a gigantic WAAAAHHHHHHH!?!?!?
by Jason Mattera
12/20/2011
It wasn’t the disastrous Fast and Furious gunrunning operation that armed the Mexican drug cartel and led to the death of a border patrol agent that has led conservatives to call for Eric Holder’s resignation. Nope. Nor was it the fact that Holder’s office inexplicably refuses to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and his decision to sue Arizona over its sensible law to check the legality of people living in the state.
In reality, Eric Holder is under undue scrutiny because he’s a black man. And his boss, Barack Obama, also takes the heat because, he too, is a black man.
So says the Attorney General anyway: “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he told the New York Times, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”
Holder labeled these critics the “more extreme segment,” which, as the Times describes them as, consists of Republican officials, conservative bloggers, and media commentators.
The Sunday front-page story was designed to dismiss the growing calls for Eric Holder to step down as mere partisan politics and “Washington gotcha” games; “A Partisan Lightning Rod Is Undeterred,” reads the article’s headline. According to the Times, Holder has no intention of resigning before the 2012 election, but he is currently unsure if he’ll remain attorney general if Obama were to win November.
Holder’s comments drew sharp criticism from Congressman Steve King, who has gone head-to-head with the attorney general in House Judiciary Committee hearings.
“This administration has far more racial marks against it than the people they accuse,” he told HUMAN EVENTS. “They [Holder and Obama] have racial bias within them.”
King noted that it was Eric Holder’s Justice Department that “refused to bring actions against certain parties if the end result would disadvantage a minority group,” a discriminatory policy that was exposed by Christian Adams, a lawyer with the U.S. Civil Rights Commission and author of Injustice.
Or how about the Justice Department’s actions against the town of Kinston, North Carolina? Here we had Holder’s office block an election where voters overwhelmingly decided to abolish political party labels for candidates running in future elections. The reasoning from the Obama administration, as Rep. King recalled, was because without party labels, blacks wouldn’t get elected.
There would be no slot in the voting booth tagged “Democratic,” suggesting that black candidates and voters will always be committed followers of whatever the DNC line of the day is.
“Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, eliminate the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office,” said Loretta King, who led the Justice Department’s civil rights division at the time.
And who could forget President Obama interjecting himself in the mistaken arrest of his Harvard Professor Henry Gates, mouthing off to the television cameras that the arresting officer James Crowley acted “stupidly.”
“Obama was pro Gates and against officer Crowley because he perceived it as a race issue,” argued King.
King says that such “racial politics” works successfully by Democrats against a lot of his Republican colleagues because they are, rightfully so, “sensitive to the charges of being called racist.”
And as a result, “Democrats have played race-based politics their entire political careers.”
But if Holder and the Democrats want to find racial politics at play, perhaps they should look to none other than the halls of their own Congress, claims King.
“The Congressional Black Caucus should be called the self-segregated caucus.”
The Iowa congressman says that it is unlikely that Holder will be impeached. King doesn’t want Holder to resign until Congress can get to the bottom of his exact involvement in the deadly Fast and Furious operation.
“Someone at ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms] had to know that those guns were going to kill Mexicans,” added King. “What if the guns were approved to kill African Americans?” King asked rhetorically.
“Was race a factor [at the ATF]? I don’t know.”
by Jason Mattera
12/20/2011
It wasn’t the disastrous Fast and Furious gunrunning operation that armed the Mexican drug cartel and led to the death of a border patrol agent that has led conservatives to call for Eric Holder’s resignation. Nope. Nor was it the fact that Holder’s office inexplicably refuses to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and his decision to sue Arizona over its sensible law to check the legality of people living in the state.
In reality, Eric Holder is under undue scrutiny because he’s a black man. And his boss, Barack Obama, also takes the heat because, he too, is a black man.
So says the Attorney General anyway: “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he told the New York Times, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”
Holder labeled these critics the “more extreme segment,” which, as the Times describes them as, consists of Republican officials, conservative bloggers, and media commentators.
The Sunday front-page story was designed to dismiss the growing calls for Eric Holder to step down as mere partisan politics and “Washington gotcha” games; “A Partisan Lightning Rod Is Undeterred,” reads the article’s headline. According to the Times, Holder has no intention of resigning before the 2012 election, but he is currently unsure if he’ll remain attorney general if Obama were to win November.
Holder’s comments drew sharp criticism from Congressman Steve King, who has gone head-to-head with the attorney general in House Judiciary Committee hearings.
“This administration has far more racial marks against it than the people they accuse,” he told HUMAN EVENTS. “They [Holder and Obama] have racial bias within them.”
King noted that it was Eric Holder’s Justice Department that “refused to bring actions against certain parties if the end result would disadvantage a minority group,” a discriminatory policy that was exposed by Christian Adams, a lawyer with the U.S. Civil Rights Commission and author of Injustice.
Or how about the Justice Department’s actions against the town of Kinston, North Carolina? Here we had Holder’s office block an election where voters overwhelmingly decided to abolish political party labels for candidates running in future elections. The reasoning from the Obama administration, as Rep. King recalled, was because without party labels, blacks wouldn’t get elected.
There would be no slot in the voting booth tagged “Democratic,” suggesting that black candidates and voters will always be committed followers of whatever the DNC line of the day is.
“Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, eliminate the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office,” said Loretta King, who led the Justice Department’s civil rights division at the time.
And who could forget President Obama interjecting himself in the mistaken arrest of his Harvard Professor Henry Gates, mouthing off to the television cameras that the arresting officer James Crowley acted “stupidly.”
“Obama was pro Gates and against officer Crowley because he perceived it as a race issue,” argued King.
King says that such “racial politics” works successfully by Democrats against a lot of his Republican colleagues because they are, rightfully so, “sensitive to the charges of being called racist.”
And as a result, “Democrats have played race-based politics their entire political careers.”
But if Holder and the Democrats want to find racial politics at play, perhaps they should look to none other than the halls of their own Congress, claims King.
“The Congressional Black Caucus should be called the self-segregated caucus.”
The Iowa congressman says that it is unlikely that Holder will be impeached. King doesn’t want Holder to resign until Congress can get to the bottom of his exact involvement in the deadly Fast and Furious operation.
“Someone at ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms] had to know that those guns were going to kill Mexicans,” added King. “What if the guns were approved to kill African Americans?” King asked rhetorically.
“Was race a factor [at the ATF]? I don’t know.”
DOJ Confirms Mexican Drug Cartels Operating Inside U.S.
December 16, 2011
In yet another compelling reason to beef up border security, a new federal court case outlines how Mexican drug cartels have teamed up with violent street gangs to operate inside the United States.
The case involves dozens of members of the Barrio Azteca gang charged with operating a massive drug-trafficking and money-laundering enterprise. A handful of members have already been convicted and were sentenced in Texas this week, while others face trial next spring for racketeering, murder, drug offenses, money laundering and obstruction of justice.
Information released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) this week says Barrio Azteca is also responsible for the March 2010 murders in Juarez of a U.S. Consulate employee, her husband and another associate. Details of the gang’s vast operations in Mexico and the U.S. illustrate how violence has gone well beyond the southern border despite assurances from Homeland Security officials that the region is safer than ever.
According to the DOJ documents members and associates of the Barrio Azteca have engaged in a host of criminal activity since 2003, including drug trafficking, extortion, money laundering, kidnapping and murder. The gang makes money by importing heroin, cocaine and marijuana into the United States from Mexico, according to the DOJ. Some of the profits are used to help incarcerated gang members pay for defense lawyers or fines while a chunk of it is used to buy more drugs, guns and ammunition.
This is a sophisticated enterprise operating on American soil with money from Mexican drug proceeds. The DOJ says the gang has a militaristic command structure and includes captains, lieutenants, sergeants, soldiers and associates – all with the purpose of maintaining power and enriching its members and associates through drug trafficking, money laundering, extortion, intimidation, violence, threats of violence and murder.
These sorts of gangs have been working in the U.S. for years, according to various federal reports that have provided alarming statistics about the criminal enterprises. As far back as 2008, the DOJ’s National Drug Intelligence Center revealed how Mexican drug trafficking organizations represent the greatest crime threat in the U.S. Two years later, a separate report said Mexican drug cartels have expanded into every region of the country, including idyllic rural areas.
A few months ago Texas state authorities published yet another report documenting how Mexican drug cartels have transformed parts of the state into a war zone where shootings, beheadings, kidnappings and murders are common. It further revealed that drug-cartel violence is so severe that Texas counties along the Mexican border are under attack around the clock.
In yet another compelling reason to beef up border security, a new federal court case outlines how Mexican drug cartels have teamed up with violent street gangs to operate inside the United States.
The case involves dozens of members of the Barrio Azteca gang charged with operating a massive drug-trafficking and money-laundering enterprise. A handful of members have already been convicted and were sentenced in Texas this week, while others face trial next spring for racketeering, murder, drug offenses, money laundering and obstruction of justice.
Information released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) this week says Barrio Azteca is also responsible for the March 2010 murders in Juarez of a U.S. Consulate employee, her husband and another associate. Details of the gang’s vast operations in Mexico and the U.S. illustrate how violence has gone well beyond the southern border despite assurances from Homeland Security officials that the region is safer than ever.
According to the DOJ documents members and associates of the Barrio Azteca have engaged in a host of criminal activity since 2003, including drug trafficking, extortion, money laundering, kidnapping and murder. The gang makes money by importing heroin, cocaine and marijuana into the United States from Mexico, according to the DOJ. Some of the profits are used to help incarcerated gang members pay for defense lawyers or fines while a chunk of it is used to buy more drugs, guns and ammunition.
This is a sophisticated enterprise operating on American soil with money from Mexican drug proceeds. The DOJ says the gang has a militaristic command structure and includes captains, lieutenants, sergeants, soldiers and associates – all with the purpose of maintaining power and enriching its members and associates through drug trafficking, money laundering, extortion, intimidation, violence, threats of violence and murder.
These sorts of gangs have been working in the U.S. for years, according to various federal reports that have provided alarming statistics about the criminal enterprises. As far back as 2008, the DOJ’s National Drug Intelligence Center revealed how Mexican drug trafficking organizations represent the greatest crime threat in the U.S. Two years later, a separate report said Mexican drug cartels have expanded into every region of the country, including idyllic rural areas.
A few months ago Texas state authorities published yet another report documenting how Mexican drug cartels have transformed parts of the state into a war zone where shootings, beheadings, kidnappings and murders are common. It further revealed that drug-cartel violence is so severe that Texas counties along the Mexican border are under attack around the clock.
Taxpayer-funded Hamas Public High School in Lutz, Florida
December 19, 2011
Over at American Thinker, Pamela Geller asks why is a representative of a terror-linked organization, a defender of jihad terror groups and an apologist for Islamic supremacism welcome to speak in public schools? As Geller points out at the link, the "speaker" is none other than Hassan Shibly, who has a track record of defending jihad terrorist groups and acting as an apologist for worldwide jihad and Islamic supremacism.
More specifically, why is Kelly Miliziano, a World History teacher at Steinbrenner High School in Hillsborough County, Florida allowing "many speakers" from CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas-linked organization a magnificent platform to spread their disinformation among the students?
Geller's right, readers (and especially parents of students at Steinbrenner High School) should contact the school and politely request that the children be given balanced lessons on this crucial subject matter. Anywhere CAIR speaks, freedom's defenders must be given a platform as well. We are not an Islamic nation in which truth is blasphemy.
Perhaps Ms. Kelly Miliziano and Ms. Brenda Grasso (principal of the school) need to be made aware of some of the statements that Senior CAIR/HAMAS leaders have made regarding their loyalty to America, statements that include the following:
Omar M. Ahmad (Co-founder and former National Chairman of CAIR) - "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant" ... "The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Ibrahim "Dougie" Hooper (National Spokesman of CAIR and former employee of CAIR's (dissolved) parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine) - "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education."
Ihsan Bagby (National Board Member of CAIR, Executive Committee Member of the Board of CAIR-Kentucky) - "Ultimately we (Muslims) can never be full citizens of this country ... because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country."
Hamza Yusuf Hanson (CAIR Board Member & Founder of 1st Islamic College (Zaytuna) in America) - "I am a citizen of this country not by choice but by birth. I reside in this country not by choice but by conviction in attempting to spread the message of Islam in this country. I became Muslim in part because I did not believe in the false gods of this society, whether we call them Jesus or democracy or the Bill of Rights or any other element of this society that is held sacrosanct by the ill-informed peoples that makes up this charade of a society."
And perhaps they're not aware of CAIR's agenda, as they should be.
Contact: Kelly R. Miliziano, Ph.D.(extended the invitation to CAIR) Social Studies Department
Steinbrenner High School - (Rt 2)
5575 W. Lutz Lake Fern Rd.
Lutz, FL. 33558
813 792-5131 Ext. 264
Kelly.miliziano@sdhc.k12.fl.us
813-792-5131 Ext. 264
813-792-5135 (Fax)
Also work the phones: Brenda Grasso, Principal email: brenda.grasso@sdhc.k12.fl.us Phone 813-792-5131
Over at American Thinker, Pamela Geller asks why is a representative of a terror-linked organization, a defender of jihad terror groups and an apologist for Islamic supremacism welcome to speak in public schools? As Geller points out at the link, the "speaker" is none other than Hassan Shibly, who has a track record of defending jihad terrorist groups and acting as an apologist for worldwide jihad and Islamic supremacism.
More specifically, why is Kelly Miliziano, a World History teacher at Steinbrenner High School in Hillsborough County, Florida allowing "many speakers" from CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas-linked organization a magnificent platform to spread their disinformation among the students?
Geller's right, readers (and especially parents of students at Steinbrenner High School) should contact the school and politely request that the children be given balanced lessons on this crucial subject matter. Anywhere CAIR speaks, freedom's defenders must be given a platform as well. We are not an Islamic nation in which truth is blasphemy.
Perhaps Ms. Kelly Miliziano and Ms. Brenda Grasso (principal of the school) need to be made aware of some of the statements that Senior CAIR/HAMAS leaders have made regarding their loyalty to America, statements that include the following:
Omar M. Ahmad (Co-founder and former National Chairman of CAIR) - "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant" ... "The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Ibrahim "Dougie" Hooper (National Spokesman of CAIR and former employee of CAIR's (dissolved) parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine) - "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education."
Ihsan Bagby (National Board Member of CAIR, Executive Committee Member of the Board of CAIR-Kentucky) - "Ultimately we (Muslims) can never be full citizens of this country ... because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country."
Hamza Yusuf Hanson (CAIR Board Member & Founder of 1st Islamic College (Zaytuna) in America) - "I am a citizen of this country not by choice but by birth. I reside in this country not by choice but by conviction in attempting to spread the message of Islam in this country. I became Muslim in part because I did not believe in the false gods of this society, whether we call them Jesus or democracy or the Bill of Rights or any other element of this society that is held sacrosanct by the ill-informed peoples that makes up this charade of a society."
And perhaps they're not aware of CAIR's agenda, as they should be.
Contact: Kelly R. Miliziano, Ph.D.(extended the invitation to CAIR) Social Studies Department
Steinbrenner High School - (Rt 2)
5575 W. Lutz Lake Fern Rd.
Lutz, FL. 33558
813 792-5131 Ext. 264
Kelly.miliziano@sdhc.k12.fl.us
813-792-5131 Ext. 264
813-792-5135 (Fax)
Also work the phones: Brenda Grasso, Principal email: brenda.grasso@sdhc.k12.fl.us Phone 813-792-5131
Freedom Protesters Cry Out For George W. Bush in Syria
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, December 20, 2011, 8:36 PM
The Freedom Protesters in Syria are calling out for George W. Bush.
God bless the brave Syrians in their quest for freedom.
It is another travesty that this administration has ignored their pleas.
The Freedom Protesters in Syria are calling out for George W. Bush.
God bless the brave Syrians in their quest for freedom.
It is another travesty that this administration has ignored their pleas.
Reports: Gary Johnson will seek Libertarian nomination
By Ryan Teague Beckwith
Roll Call Staff
Dec. 20, 2011, 9:54 p.m.
Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson will drop out of the Republican presidential primary and run for the Libertarian nod, media reports said today.
With just two weeks until the Iowa caucuses begin winnowing the GOP field, the former two-term governor will announce soon that he will run for a third-party nomination, according to reports in Politico and CNN.
Johnson’s anti-tax, socially liberal views did not endear him to Republican primary voters, and he’s not included in most recent polls of the field. Excluded from most of the major debates, he’s taken to Twitter to express his views.
During the Iowa debate on Thursday, he tweeted that he agreed with fellow Republican candidate Rep. Ron Paul (Texas).
“Ron Paul is right — but what if he is not nominated? There must be a real libertarian choice next Nov.,” he wrote.
According to CNN, Johnson’s campaign staff confirmed that he is planning a major announcement in Santa Fe, N.M., on Dec. 28.
Roll Call Staff
Dec. 20, 2011, 9:54 p.m.
Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson will drop out of the Republican presidential primary and run for the Libertarian nod, media reports said today.
With just two weeks until the Iowa caucuses begin winnowing the GOP field, the former two-term governor will announce soon that he will run for a third-party nomination, according to reports in Politico and CNN.
Johnson’s anti-tax, socially liberal views did not endear him to Republican primary voters, and he’s not included in most recent polls of the field. Excluded from most of the major debates, he’s taken to Twitter to express his views.
During the Iowa debate on Thursday, he tweeted that he agreed with fellow Republican candidate Rep. Ron Paul (Texas).
“Ron Paul is right — but what if he is not nominated? There must be a real libertarian choice next Nov.,” he wrote.
According to CNN, Johnson’s campaign staff confirmed that he is planning a major announcement in Santa Fe, N.M., on Dec. 28.
Police break up drunken game of handicap scooter bumper cars at WAL-MART
Handicap Scooter Bumper Car Competition At Walmart Ends In 2:30 AM Arrest Of Drunken Louisiana Guy
December 19, 2011
An early morning game of drunken bumper cars--using Walmart handicap scooters--was broken up Saturday morning by Louisiana cops who arrested a 22-year-old man who copped to driving to the store while intoxicated.
Officers with the West Monroe Police Department arrived at the Walmart around 2:30 AM in response to a call about a disturbance. Store management told cops that a group of intoxicated suspects were “playing ‘bumper cars’ with the handicap scooters in the store,” according to a probable cause affidavit.
A police sergeant contacted Christopher Butler, who appeared “very intoxicated.” Butler, pictured at right, admitted driving his 2004 Ford truck to the retailer after consuming “five to six beers.” A subsequent Breathalyzer recorded Butler’s blood alcohol content as .133 (the legal limit is .08).
Butler’s fellow bumper car enthusiasts apparently escaped arrest.
December 19, 2011
An early morning game of drunken bumper cars--using Walmart handicap scooters--was broken up Saturday morning by Louisiana cops who arrested a 22-year-old man who copped to driving to the store while intoxicated.
Butler’s fellow bumper car enthusiasts apparently escaped arrest.
Sheila Jackson Lee: Obama Should Use Executive Order to Extend Payroll Tax Cut/Unemployment
By Doug Powers • December 20, 2011 06:54 PM
**Written by Doug Powers
According to Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, there are times when the country doesn’t have any need for the US House of Representatives. Because of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, I often agree with her on that.
From The Hill:
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said Tuesday that President Obama “absolutely” should use his executive power to continue the unemployment benefits and payroll tax cut extension and said she hoped to discuss the option with the White House later in the day.
“It is extraordinary, don’t get me wrong. But I’m feeling the pain of the constituents I left [at] home,” Jackson Lee said, speaking on the progressive Ed Schultz’s radio show. “I consider this a crisis. I consider leaving Americans without unemployment insurance for January and February a crime. I consider not extending the payroll tax cut … a crime.”
A member of Congress being this ignorant about the Constitution is… a crime.
But Jackson Lee shouldn’t take my word for it. This is from today’s White House press briefing:
Q: Can the president offer any assurances to the American people that this will get done before January 1st?
Carney: In order for it to get done, it has to pass the House. This is one area where his executive authority does not extend. He cannot order an extension of the payroll tax cut.
Sorry, Sheila.
Some of Sheila Jackson Lee’s greatest hits here, here, here, here and here.
**Written by Doug Powers
**Written by Doug Powers
According to Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, there are times when the country doesn’t have any need for the US House of Representatives. Because of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, I often agree with her on that.
From The Hill:
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said Tuesday that President Obama “absolutely” should use his executive power to continue the unemployment benefits and payroll tax cut extension and said she hoped to discuss the option with the White House later in the day.
“It is extraordinary, don’t get me wrong. But I’m feeling the pain of the constituents I left [at] home,” Jackson Lee said, speaking on the progressive Ed Schultz’s radio show. “I consider this a crisis. I consider leaving Americans without unemployment insurance for January and February a crime. I consider not extending the payroll tax cut … a crime.”
A member of Congress being this ignorant about the Constitution is… a crime.
But Jackson Lee shouldn’t take my word for it. This is from today’s White House press briefing:
Q: Can the president offer any assurances to the American people that this will get done before January 1st?
Carney: In order for it to get done, it has to pass the House. This is one area where his executive authority does not extend. He cannot order an extension of the payroll tax cut.
Sorry, Sheila.
Some of Sheila Jackson Lee’s greatest hits here, here, here, here and here.
**Written by Doug Powers
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
How The Democrats Stole Christmas
“Every Who down in Whoville liked Christmas a lot, But the Grinch who lived just North of Whoville did not” Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas.
This classic tale of Christmas theft is well loved by children and adults around the world. Who knew that today it would ring true in life.
Now the story reads, Every American down in Americaville liked jobs a lot but the Democrats who lived in Washington, D.C. did not.
This tale is far from classic but not far from truth. A series of policies from the current administration and congress have ruined jobs and successfully pulled off a heist of Christmas that even the Grinch could be proud of.
The Democrats and various Liberals from around America have stolen the world’s favorite holiday from children everywhere by putting their parents out of work.
Various legislation and policies like Obamacare, repealing of tax cuts and the mismanagement of federal dollars like the stimulus has ground American prosperity to a sudden halt.
The American people have noticed but unfortunately for Christmas we have noticed too little too late. The national average of unemployment in this country is at almost nine percent according to Google statistics with the highest state unemployment up over thirteen percent in Nevada. Isn’t that Harry Reid’s home state? I guess his heart is two sizes too small as well.
A recent report from the House Ways and Means Committee reveals that American’s are not holding their breath for a solution anytime soon.
Of those polled sixty-five percent believe that the general economic landscape has negatively effect their ability to do business. In the next six months seventy-seven percent of employers plan to maintain current staff levels compared with the seven percent that plan to hire.
What we can make of this is that the largest complaint from small business is they can’t hire due to the uncertainty in the economic arena.
President Obama championed his healthcare plan as the savior of the United States. Unfortunately since it’s creation the economy has plummeted. The month before Obamacare was signed into law there was talk of a “recovery summer”. According to the Heritage Foundation the months before Obamacare was signed, the private sector created 67,000 jobs a month. The very next month after Obamacare was passed it fell to 6,500. Most small business owners cite Obamacare as the number one cause of uncertainty and reluctance to hire.
The “Bush-Era” tax cuts have been a hot topic debate and with the prospect of them not returning or only returning for a limited time, businesses and the evil one percent are faced with having to lose more capital without laying off employees.
Because of this, those in the middle class who do have jobs are in constant fear of more layoffs or down sizing. This keeps them from buying the Christmas presents that they want to for their kids.
On top of the tax cuts being eliminated, the president has seen fit to be extra giving this year and wait until after the election to “decide” on the Keystone Pipeline. Wait, let me clarify, he is being giving to the Chinese. If he ignores this pipeline, the Chinese will get a whole new supply of oil from Canada with a big American bow on it.
The Keystone Pipeline would in fact create many jobs. Recently John Boehner, the House Majority Leader, echoed this statement in a quote. “The Keystone energy project would create tens of thousands of American jobs.” The problem is Obama is stuck between two of his greatest bases, unions and environmentalists, because of the president’s second-term aspirations there are still no jobs for those Americans in Americaville.
Last but not least is the infamous stimulus. The president put unprecedented money into the “economy” in order to save America. Instead for Christmas he saddled us with a ton of debt. The most beautiful thing about the stimulus is that we spent a ton of money and got nothing in return. As a matter of fact the greatest job creation that it fostered was in the clean energy sector. According to the Department of Energy, they have spent almost thirty-six billion dollars to create 64,776 jobs. That means that we spent a little more than $554,000 dollars per job created in the green jobs sector.
Truth be told this is but a snippet of the horrific financial management that is happening under Liberal control. So for the time being I guess all we can do is hope that the Democrat’s hearts grow three sizes some day soon. So they will bring back Christmas and every family will get to carve their own Roast Beast.
This classic tale of Christmas theft is well loved by children and adults around the world. Who knew that today it would ring true in life.
Now the story reads, Every American down in Americaville liked jobs a lot but the Democrats who lived in Washington, D.C. did not.
This tale is far from classic but not far from truth. A series of policies from the current administration and congress have ruined jobs and successfully pulled off a heist of Christmas that even the Grinch could be proud of.
The Democrats and various Liberals from around America have stolen the world’s favorite holiday from children everywhere by putting their parents out of work.
Various legislation and policies like Obamacare, repealing of tax cuts and the mismanagement of federal dollars like the stimulus has ground American prosperity to a sudden halt.
The American people have noticed but unfortunately for Christmas we have noticed too little too late. The national average of unemployment in this country is at almost nine percent according to Google statistics with the highest state unemployment up over thirteen percent in Nevada. Isn’t that Harry Reid’s home state? I guess his heart is two sizes too small as well.
A recent report from the House Ways and Means Committee reveals that American’s are not holding their breath for a solution anytime soon.
Of those polled sixty-five percent believe that the general economic landscape has negatively effect their ability to do business. In the next six months seventy-seven percent of employers plan to maintain current staff levels compared with the seven percent that plan to hire.
What we can make of this is that the largest complaint from small business is they can’t hire due to the uncertainty in the economic arena.
President Obama championed his healthcare plan as the savior of the United States. Unfortunately since it’s creation the economy has plummeted. The month before Obamacare was signed into law there was talk of a “recovery summer”. According to the Heritage Foundation the months before Obamacare was signed, the private sector created 67,000 jobs a month. The very next month after Obamacare was passed it fell to 6,500. Most small business owners cite Obamacare as the number one cause of uncertainty and reluctance to hire.
The “Bush-Era” tax cuts have been a hot topic debate and with the prospect of them not returning or only returning for a limited time, businesses and the evil one percent are faced with having to lose more capital without laying off employees.
Because of this, those in the middle class who do have jobs are in constant fear of more layoffs or down sizing. This keeps them from buying the Christmas presents that they want to for their kids.
On top of the tax cuts being eliminated, the president has seen fit to be extra giving this year and wait until after the election to “decide” on the Keystone Pipeline. Wait, let me clarify, he is being giving to the Chinese. If he ignores this pipeline, the Chinese will get a whole new supply of oil from Canada with a big American bow on it.
The Keystone Pipeline would in fact create many jobs. Recently John Boehner, the House Majority Leader, echoed this statement in a quote. “The Keystone energy project would create tens of thousands of American jobs.” The problem is Obama is stuck between two of his greatest bases, unions and environmentalists, because of the president’s second-term aspirations there are still no jobs for those Americans in Americaville.
Last but not least is the infamous stimulus. The president put unprecedented money into the “economy” in order to save America. Instead for Christmas he saddled us with a ton of debt. The most beautiful thing about the stimulus is that we spent a ton of money and got nothing in return. As a matter of fact the greatest job creation that it fostered was in the clean energy sector. According to the Department of Energy, they have spent almost thirty-six billion dollars to create 64,776 jobs. That means that we spent a little more than $554,000 dollars per job created in the green jobs sector.
Truth be told this is but a snippet of the horrific financial management that is happening under Liberal control. So for the time being I guess all we can do is hope that the Democrat’s hearts grow three sizes some day soon. So they will bring back Christmas and every family will get to carve their own Roast Beast.
Wisconsin Carry Offers FREE Concealed Carry License Training Class
Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 12:44 PM
Wisconsin --(Ammoland.com)- Wisconsin Carry, Inc. firmly believes in, and advocated for constitutional carry this past legislative session.
While we were successful in putting constitutional carry front and center on the legislative and media radar, ultimately, Wisconsin’s concealed carry law that passed requires mandatory proof of training to be supplied with your application to the DOJ.
A hunters education certificate serves as proof of training as does your DD214 showing honorable discharge from the military. In addition, a concealed carry permit (current or expired) from another state will also serve as proof of training.
Wisconsin Carry believes that there are thousands of Wisconsin residents who have extensive firearms experience but because that experience was gathered through family/friends/self-teaching etc they may not have the formal proof of training certificate.
We are also concerned that for many people in this economy, paying $80 to $150 for a training class may be prohibitive and prevent some individuals from being able to obtain the proof of training certificate they need to apply for their concealed weapon license.
Lastly, Wisconsin Carry believes that there are many people that may not have experience with firearms but who have a great interest in taking personal accountability for the safety of themselves and their loved ones. Wisconsin Carry would like to give these people an avenue to enter the right-to-carry movement in Wisconsin as well. We believe that the more law-abiding citizens carrying for self-defense, the more people who will be there to stand up and push-back should future legislatures try to take the right to carry away. We also believe that every law abiding citizen we can bring into the carry movement will be another voter who will not want to pay the renewal tax every 5 years to continue to exercise a human-right to self-defense that they have enjoyed. We believe these people will stand with us to demand constitutional carry from the legislature in the future.
In consideration of these factors and objectives, Wisconsin Carry has devoted a huge amount of resources into developing a 4 hour training course that will exceed the “proof of training” requirements of Act 35. We have certified a handful of qualified instructors across the state to begin to teach this class FREE OF CHARGE to members AND non-members who would like to obtain their concealed carry permit but are encumbered because they do not have a “proof of training” certificate.
We have already begun to schedule and conduct these classes across the state. Initial classes we have scheduled on a limited basis and announced only to dues paying members to ramp up slowly and manage the demand.
I will be sending email notification around of all classes that have openings. (You must Subscribe to Our Email List to Receive Updates)
For each of these classes I ask that you contact the instructor by email to reserve a FREE space in the class. Please do not contact me with questions about possible future classes in different parts of the state. AS SOON AS we have a class together, I will send a notice around. If you contact me to ask, I won’t have any information to share because nothing would have been set (except for those which announcements have been made)
Please *DO* contact me if you have a venue that would have space available at no cost to WCI to HOST a class.
If this class below is not in your area, please STAY TUNED, we will have many many more FREE classes across the state in the upcoming months.
WCI FREE training class: Amberg, WI – Marinette, County
Amberg Community Center,
N15035 Grant
St, Amberg WI 54102
Saturday, 14 Jan 2012 at 9:00 AM.
20 openings in this class. To attend this class email WCI Certified instructor Ron Holmes:
ronald682@centurytel.net
IF YOU ATTEND THIS CLASS YOU ARE ASKED TO GO TO THE FOLLOWING LINK AND DOWNLOAD PRINT AND BRING THE DOCUMENTS TO CLASS:
http://www.dwave.net/~phred/WCI_Downloads.html
This class is free and open to WCI Members AND friends and family of WCI members. Non-members who are on our email list and their family and friends are welcome to attend as well. You do *NOT* need to be a member to attend.
Carry On,
Nik Clark Chairman – Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
P.O. Box 270403
Milwaukee, WI 53227
nik@wisconsincarry.org
About:
Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is a non-profit corporation dedicated to the preservation and reclamation of the rights of law-abiding Wisconsin residents to carry in the manner of their choosing. We believe that “open carry” and “concealed carry” are choices to be made by law-abiding citizens based on their situation and preference. Wisconsin Carry, like many gun-rights organizations in Wisconsin, is investing a great deal of resources to get Wisconsin law changed to allow concealed carry this next legislative session by proposing Constitutional Carry. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. will continue to use legal recourse to deter unlawful treatment of law-abiding Wisconsin residents who currently exercise their right to open carry, and soon will exercise their right to concealed carry in Wisconsin. Visit: www.wisconsincarry.org
Wisconsin --(Ammoland.com)- Wisconsin Carry, Inc. firmly believes in, and advocated for constitutional carry this past legislative session.
While we were successful in putting constitutional carry front and center on the legislative and media radar, ultimately, Wisconsin’s concealed carry law that passed requires mandatory proof of training to be supplied with your application to the DOJ.
A hunters education certificate serves as proof of training as does your DD214 showing honorable discharge from the military. In addition, a concealed carry permit (current or expired) from another state will also serve as proof of training.
Wisconsin Carry believes that there are thousands of Wisconsin residents who have extensive firearms experience but because that experience was gathered through family/friends/self-teaching etc they may not have the formal proof of training certificate.
We are also concerned that for many people in this economy, paying $80 to $150 for a training class may be prohibitive and prevent some individuals from being able to obtain the proof of training certificate they need to apply for their concealed weapon license.
Lastly, Wisconsin Carry believes that there are many people that may not have experience with firearms but who have a great interest in taking personal accountability for the safety of themselves and their loved ones. Wisconsin Carry would like to give these people an avenue to enter the right-to-carry movement in Wisconsin as well. We believe that the more law-abiding citizens carrying for self-defense, the more people who will be there to stand up and push-back should future legislatures try to take the right to carry away. We also believe that every law abiding citizen we can bring into the carry movement will be another voter who will not want to pay the renewal tax every 5 years to continue to exercise a human-right to self-defense that they have enjoyed. We believe these people will stand with us to demand constitutional carry from the legislature in the future.
In consideration of these factors and objectives, Wisconsin Carry has devoted a huge amount of resources into developing a 4 hour training course that will exceed the “proof of training” requirements of Act 35. We have certified a handful of qualified instructors across the state to begin to teach this class FREE OF CHARGE to members AND non-members who would like to obtain their concealed carry permit but are encumbered because they do not have a “proof of training” certificate.
We have already begun to schedule and conduct these classes across the state. Initial classes we have scheduled on a limited basis and announced only to dues paying members to ramp up slowly and manage the demand.
I will be sending email notification around of all classes that have openings. (You must Subscribe to Our Email List to Receive Updates)
For each of these classes I ask that you contact the instructor by email to reserve a FREE space in the class. Please do not contact me with questions about possible future classes in different parts of the state. AS SOON AS we have a class together, I will send a notice around. If you contact me to ask, I won’t have any information to share because nothing would have been set (except for those which announcements have been made)
Please *DO* contact me if you have a venue that would have space available at no cost to WCI to HOST a class.
If this class below is not in your area, please STAY TUNED, we will have many many more FREE classes across the state in the upcoming months.
WCI FREE training class: Amberg, WI – Marinette, County
Amberg Community Center,
N15035 Grant
St, Amberg WI 54102
Saturday, 14 Jan 2012 at 9:00 AM.
20 openings in this class. To attend this class email WCI Certified instructor Ron Holmes:
ronald682@centurytel.net
IF YOU ATTEND THIS CLASS YOU ARE ASKED TO GO TO THE FOLLOWING LINK AND DOWNLOAD PRINT AND BRING THE DOCUMENTS TO CLASS:
http://www.dwave.net/~phred/WCI_Downloads.html
This class is free and open to WCI Members AND friends and family of WCI members. Non-members who are on our email list and their family and friends are welcome to attend as well. You do *NOT* need to be a member to attend.
Carry On,
Nik Clark Chairman – Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
P.O. Box 270403
Milwaukee, WI 53227
nik@wisconsincarry.org
About:
Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is a non-profit corporation dedicated to the preservation and reclamation of the rights of law-abiding Wisconsin residents to carry in the manner of their choosing. We believe that “open carry” and “concealed carry” are choices to be made by law-abiding citizens based on their situation and preference. Wisconsin Carry, like many gun-rights organizations in Wisconsin, is investing a great deal of resources to get Wisconsin law changed to allow concealed carry this next legislative session by proposing Constitutional Carry. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. will continue to use legal recourse to deter unlawful treatment of law-abiding Wisconsin residents who currently exercise their right to open carry, and soon will exercise their right to concealed carry in Wisconsin. Visit: www.wisconsincarry.org
Obama and Holder Should Put the Race Card back in the Deck
David Limbaugh
Dec 20, 2011
President Obama led us to believe that he would be a post-racial president who would bring the races together, but it's gotten to where you can't criticize this most leftist administration in American history without someone accusing you of racism.
The most recent example involves criticism of Attorney General Eric Holder over Fast and Furious, an operation conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which was overseen by the Justice Department. It involved the indirect sale of weapons to Mexican drug cartels, which resulted in some 300 killings in Mexico, including the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Throughout, despite having received detailed memos from DOJ officials about it, Holder has denied he was aware of it.
The scandal and Holder's stonewalling have led to some 60 congressmen demanding his resignation, and 75 cosponsoring a House resolution calling for a "no-confidence" vote on his performance as attorney general.
Holder has defiantly denied culpability, and President Obama, without betraying the slightest concern, has proclaimed his complete confidence in Holder. In a New York Times interview, Holder suggested race was partially driving a "more extreme segment" against him and Obama.
Holder said, "This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him, both due to the nature of our relationship, and, you know, the fact that we're both African-American." When pressed for some proof to support Holder's allegation, the Justice Department did not respond. Nor has the White House distanced itself from Holder's comments.
Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson had earlier played the race card regarding Fast and Furious, calling it "another manufactured controversy by the Second Amendment, NRA Republican tea party movement." He said, "Now, how many firearms are sold to al-Qaida terrorists, to other convicted felons, to domestic violence perpetrators, to convicted felons, to white supremacists?"
Nor was this the first time Holder had invoked the issue of race. During a speech commemorating Black History Month shortly after he became attorney general, Holder said the American people are "essentially a nation of cowards when it comes to racial matters."
This seemed to many a curious way to celebrate the election of an African-American president, not to mention reflecting Holder's sizable preoccupation with race and his apparent perception of societal problems through a racial lens. It could also help to explain his Justice Department's indefensible dismissal of an already won voter intimidation case against New Black Panther Party members using the specious excuse that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute.
None of this comes as any surprise, however, because President Obama had telegraphed his race-oriented mindset in his book, in his church association and in his projecting statement that small-town people "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." He has worn race on his sleeve numerous times as president.
When a white police officer in Cambridge, Mass., arrested Harvard professor Henry Gates, an African-American, Obama, without having heard both sides of the case, publicly injected himself into the local matter and gratuitously smeared the entire police department as having "acted stupidly." In addition, Obama told guests at a private dinner at the White House that race was probably a key component in the rising opposition to his presidency, especially among tea party members.
Not only has Obama made these viscerally charged racial statements, he has also consciously appealed to minority groups with specific reference to their race. In a Democratic National Committee video in April 2010, he urged "young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women ... to stand together once again." Shortly before the November 2010 congressional elections, he told an audience that Republicans "are counting on black folks staying home." Separately, he appealed to Latino voters not to stay home at election time but to "punish our enemies" and not go along with the Republicans' "cynical attempt to discourage Latinos from voting."
These developments are most disturbing and discouraging. There exists a great ideological divide in this nation over which of two primary sets of policy prescriptions ought to be adopted to rescue America from its economic malaise, its bankrupting debt and a host of other major issues.
Conservative opposition to Obama isn't about race, and I'm confident this administration is well aware of that but is using the race card anyway, out of political desperation, to the destruction of the nation, and to racial relations. It's disgraceful and unconscionable.
Dec 20, 2011
President Obama led us to believe that he would be a post-racial president who would bring the races together, but it's gotten to where you can't criticize this most leftist administration in American history without someone accusing you of racism.
The most recent example involves criticism of Attorney General Eric Holder over Fast and Furious, an operation conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which was overseen by the Justice Department. It involved the indirect sale of weapons to Mexican drug cartels, which resulted in some 300 killings in Mexico, including the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Throughout, despite having received detailed memos from DOJ officials about it, Holder has denied he was aware of it.
The scandal and Holder's stonewalling have led to some 60 congressmen demanding his resignation, and 75 cosponsoring a House resolution calling for a "no-confidence" vote on his performance as attorney general.
Holder has defiantly denied culpability, and President Obama, without betraying the slightest concern, has proclaimed his complete confidence in Holder. In a New York Times interview, Holder suggested race was partially driving a "more extreme segment" against him and Obama.
Holder said, "This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him, both due to the nature of our relationship, and, you know, the fact that we're both African-American." When pressed for some proof to support Holder's allegation, the Justice Department did not respond. Nor has the White House distanced itself from Holder's comments.
Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson had earlier played the race card regarding Fast and Furious, calling it "another manufactured controversy by the Second Amendment, NRA Republican tea party movement." He said, "Now, how many firearms are sold to al-Qaida terrorists, to other convicted felons, to domestic violence perpetrators, to convicted felons, to white supremacists?"
Nor was this the first time Holder had invoked the issue of race. During a speech commemorating Black History Month shortly after he became attorney general, Holder said the American people are "essentially a nation of cowards when it comes to racial matters."
This seemed to many a curious way to celebrate the election of an African-American president, not to mention reflecting Holder's sizable preoccupation with race and his apparent perception of societal problems through a racial lens. It could also help to explain his Justice Department's indefensible dismissal of an already won voter intimidation case against New Black Panther Party members using the specious excuse that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute.
None of this comes as any surprise, however, because President Obama had telegraphed his race-oriented mindset in his book, in his church association and in his projecting statement that small-town people "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." He has worn race on his sleeve numerous times as president.
When a white police officer in Cambridge, Mass., arrested Harvard professor Henry Gates, an African-American, Obama, without having heard both sides of the case, publicly injected himself into the local matter and gratuitously smeared the entire police department as having "acted stupidly." In addition, Obama told guests at a private dinner at the White House that race was probably a key component in the rising opposition to his presidency, especially among tea party members.
Not only has Obama made these viscerally charged racial statements, he has also consciously appealed to minority groups with specific reference to their race. In a Democratic National Committee video in April 2010, he urged "young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women ... to stand together once again." Shortly before the November 2010 congressional elections, he told an audience that Republicans "are counting on black folks staying home." Separately, he appealed to Latino voters not to stay home at election time but to "punish our enemies" and not go along with the Republicans' "cynical attempt to discourage Latinos from voting."
These developments are most disturbing and discouraging. There exists a great ideological divide in this nation over which of two primary sets of policy prescriptions ought to be adopted to rescue America from its economic malaise, its bankrupting debt and a host of other major issues.
Conservative opposition to Obama isn't about race, and I'm confident this administration is well aware of that but is using the race card anyway, out of political desperation, to the destruction of the nation, and to racial relations. It's disgraceful and unconscionable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)