And yet Americans are seriously considering adding more of these #sshats to the ranks of Congress? From Ed Morrissey:
How high will Democrats let the price of gas get before considering the option of drilling for more oil? Ken Salazar (D-CO) has set the bar in today’s action in the Senate. Gas can hit $10 per gallon and the Democrats still won’t act:
[Video clip here]
Republicans should use a very simple message. We have enough oil to satisfy American needs for at least the next 100 years, but Democrats won’t let you have it. They’d rather you pay $10 per gallon at the pump and watch food prices increase 250% rather than agree to drilling. If you don’t want $10 per gallon gas, vote Republican.
If the RNC had any brains and stones (which I seriously doubt), the RNC will run commercials like these until the cows come home. By the way, Ken Salazar ran in 2004 as a “moderate” Dem…my, how his true leftist colors shine through!
Barry O decided to borrow a page from Jimmah Carter’s energy expertise in the 1970’s. Carter felt the best way to overcome the energy crisis was to wear a sweater. The Obamessiah’s take? See for yourself:
Proper Tire Inflation? Great. How About the Other Two out of Every Three Drivers?
The RNC is chuckling over Obama calling for voters to make “sure your tires are properly inflated” because “we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires.”
RNC spokesman Alex Conant responds, “Obama’s solution to America’s energy crisis is inflating tires?! Maybe he’s been out of the country too long.”
I’ll give Obama a smidgen of credit, in that yes, having properly inflated tires can get you a few more miles per gallon.
“Running a tire 20 percent underinflated – only 5 to 7 pounds per square inch (psi) – can increase fuel consumption by 10 percent. That can easily cost motorists two or three miles per gallon. Not only that, but running underinflated also reduces the tire’s tread life,” said Bob Toth, Goodyear’s general manager, auto tires.
However, this doesn’t mean everybody can inflate their tires and get more mpg tomorrow. Survey information from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) shows that about one in every three cars has a significantly under inflated tire. …
Barry thinks this man was an underappreciated pioneer in thoughtful energy policy
Those idiots in our nation’s capital (not Congress, but the D.C. Council and Mayor) are doing their best to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear arms. DC must be spoiling for a fight, since Dick Heller (the winner in the SCOTUS case) applied for his handgun permit in DC after the ruling, and DC denied his application.
DC decided to comply with the SCOTUS ruling by…implementing measures that essentially ignore the ruling. They knew this lawsuit was coming, which means that they are perfectly willing to spend millions of taxpayer dollars in legal fees fighting a battle that they know damned well they aren’t going to win.
Maybe D.C. Councilman and former mayor Marion Barry has sold some of his crack to his colleagues. How else can one explain such lunacy?
We’re used to the brain-dead leeches of the left trotting out the intellectually lazy “if you’re against The Chosen One, it’s only because you’re a bigot” mantra. Well, add yet another brain-dead leech to the list: the Obamessiah himself. From ABC News blog:
“John McCain right now, he’s spending an awful lot of time talking about me,” Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said today in Rolla, Mo. “You notice that? I haven’t seen an ad yet where he talks about what he’s gonna do. And the reason is because those folks know they don’t have any good answers, they know they’ve had their turn over the last eight years and made a mess of things. They know that you’re not real happy with them.”
Obama continued: “And so the only way they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me. So what they’re saying is, ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he’s… doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, you know, he’s got a, he’s got a funny name.’ …
Correct me if I’m wrong, but does it not seem as if Obama just said McCain and his campaign — presumably the “they” in this construct — are saying that Obama shouldn’t be elected because he’s a risk because he’s black and has a foreign-sounding name?
The Obama campaign says no, no, no, certainly not, he was talking about his “opponents” in general, writ large, the talk radio hosts and smear artists and such.
Oh, those “they”! Not McCain “they”, right? Um, well…
Then in Union, Mo., this evening, Obama seemed to specifically accuse McCain and the GOP of peddling racism and xenophobia.
Obama said that “John McCain and the Republicans, they don’t have any new ideas, that’s why they’re spending all their time talking about me. I mean, you haven’t heard a positive thing out of that campaign in … in a month. All they do is try to run me down and you know, you know this in your own life. If somebody doesn’t have anything nice to say about anybody, that means they’ve got some problems of their own. So they know they’ve got no new ideas, they know they’re dredging up all the stale old stuff they’ve been peddling for the last eight, 10 years.
“But, since they don’t have any new ideas the only strategy they’ve got in this election is to try to scare you about me. They’re going to try to say that I’m a risky guy, they’re going to try to say, ‘Well, you know, he’s got a funny name and he doesn’t look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five dollar bills and, and they’re going to send out nasty emails. …
There’s a lot of racist xenophobic crap out there. But not only has McCain not peddled any of it, he’s condemned it.
I’ve seen racism in campaigns before — I’ve seen it against Obama in this campaign (more from Democrats than Republicans, at this point, I might add) and I’ve seen it against McCain in South Carolina in 2000, when his adopted Bangladeshi daughter Bridget was alleged, by the charming friends and allies of then-Gov. George W. Bush, to have been a McCain love-child with an African-American woman.
What I have not seen is it come from McCain or his campaign in such a way to merit the language Obama used today. Pretty inflammatory.
Pretty much the only time these days I hear any references to Barry O’s blackness, it’s from Barry O himself (or his sycophants).
“Hope and change” and stuff…or you’re bigoted. Got it?
It’s not here yet. Sorry ’bout that, libs. From al-Reuters:
Expansion accelerated modestly in the second quarter as government stimulus payments helped consumers add more buying punch to the economy, a Commerce Department report on Thursday showed.
Gross Domestic Product or GDP grew at a 1.9 percent annual rate, up from a revised 0.9 percent rate in the first quarter that previously was reported as 1 percent. …
In order for a recession to hit us, we need at least two consecutive quarters of negative growth. We haven’t had that yet. Look, I’d be lying if I said the economy was in great shape, but if you’re going to use the term “recession”, my only request (nay, demand) is that you get the definition right.
Wait…I thought “free” health care was a good thing? Man, I just don’t get these #ssclowns! From The Hill:
Coburn has come under new pressure from the Ethics panel for delivering babies at the Muskogee Regional Medical Center, which changed from a public to a private institution in April last year….
In May, Coburn received a strongly worded “final determination” memo threatening him with a Senate censure if he did not stop delivering babies for free….
Coburn spokesman John Hart… called the Ethics panel’s logic “absurd” and its argument “inane.” …
As Jill Stanek observed:
Were Tom Coburn aborting babies free instead of delivering them free, there would be no investigation; there would be an awards ceremony.
Seriously, is this a battle the left really wants to fight?
Slu and Drew recall an e-mail exchange:
Is it just me or is Obama everything the left thought Bush was and hated but now they love in their Messiah?
Remember how Bush didn’t have enough ‘gravitas’ in 2000? Or how he spent too much time working out? How long did the press hound Bush trying to get him to admit he was wrong about Iraq and WMD and then try to get him to apologize. They hated Bush because he wasn’t very curious about the world and would never change his mind, no matter what the ‘facts’ were.
You could substitute Obama in each of those cases…he’s arrogant, lacks gravitas, works out a lot, never admits a mistake and boasts that his trip didn’t teach him a thing he didn’t already know. Yet the left loves him for it.
If it weren’t so pathetic and dangerous, it would be funny.
Is he trying to imply that the left is a bunch of shameless, two-faced hypocrites? Wherever would he get that idea? For those of you on the left, the prior two sentences were examples of sarcasm.
Ace asks, per McCain’s new ad mocking the Obamessiah’s celeb status, if Barry O is “a skanky blonde bimbo”.
Allah wonders, though, how long it will be before the Obamaliar throws Ludacris under the bus for his new pro-Barry hip-hop moonbatty video (referencing a paralyzed McCain and a “female dog” Hildebeast, the latter reference not exactly endearing her jilted supporters to Osamabama’s camp).
Oh. My. Allah. From the American Spectator (hat tip to Kanaka Girl):
… In wonderfully liberal style that is beyond parody, Rutten uses a book review to endorse the idea of paying money to Osama’s fighters who, in the eyes of liberals, have been denied their “right” of habeas corpus at Guantanamo. The denial of habeas to non-Americans captured on foreign battlefields is, of course, also a major campaign point for Senator Obama. Obama, restating his long-held position about captured al Qaeda fighters having the right of habeas corpus, was prompted by the recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush. The liberals on the Court, with the mind-boggling addition of Reagan appointee Anthony Kennedy, held that contrary to Bush administration and congressional policy, not to mention all of American history, the prisoners of war or “detainees” picked up off the battlefields (in this case Afghanistan and Iraq) are in fact entitled to the same constitutional rights as American citizens.
Within weeks of this Obama-approved decision, his allies in liberalism have now started lobbying not simply for habeas corpus rights for al Qaeda but reparations as well. They believe American taxpayers should pay monetary damages to bin Laden terrorists, with Mr. Rutten of the Times approvingly citing the liberal editors of the Jesuit magazine America: The National Catholic Weekly. In their July 21st issue these presumed Obama supporters say this:
Finally, in the years ahead our country must still come to grips with our national acquiescence to the politics of fear, which has led to the detention and abuse of hundreds of individuals. Among the necessary steps will be restoration of freedom to innocent detainees, accompanied by public apology and some monetary restitution for the years they lost to incarceration. Furthermore, Congress needs to accept responsibility for its complicity with the executive in laws that denied suspects rightful appeal. A national truth commission should be instituted to establish political accountability for the decisions, policies and statutes that placed suspects outside the protection of the law.
In other words, if you have been captured on the field of battle fighting the U.S. military on behalf of the global jihad and, as a result, are now on an extended stay at Gitmo, liberals feel the appropriate policy of the United States government is to 1) apologize for capturing you and 2) pay you some cold American cash to ease your pain and humiliation. …
“Sorry we retaliated against you for slaughtering a few thousand of our countrymen and trying to kill our ‘infidel’ soldiers. Didn’t mean to inconvenience you there. How’s about some free falafel for life and a collective group hug?”
The science is clear, and the debate is over: liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
As Ed Morrissey asks, how many ways can the Obamaliar be wrong in one speech? Oh, quite a few. Here’s just one dropping from a whole steaming pile:
There is no reason to believe that more of the same will achieve these objectives in Iraq. And, while some have proposed escalating this war by adding thousands of more troops, there is little reason to believe that this will achieve these results either. …
As Ed also points out, Barry O wants the same surge tactic in Afghanistan that he predicted would fail in Iraq…yet he refuses to acknowledge what the entire free world is admitting, which is that the surge succeeded. In other words, he wants to use a tactic that…uh…failed? But hey, let’s vote for “Hopenchange” based on his “judgment”, m’kay?
Little wonder why the Old Gray Hag’s profits are down 82%. From NRO:
The NY Times, now famously, did not publish an oped by Senator McCain as it didn’t meet their exacting standards. Today, there’s an item on a subject near and dear to Media Blog readers: homeland security and fighting terrorism.
According to the oped, we need to start taking the threat of U.F.O.s seriously if we are to truly have a safe America:
A healthy skepticism about extraterrestrial space travelers leads people to disregard U.F.O. sightings without a moment’s thought. But in the United States, this translates into overdependence on radar data and indifference to all kinds of unidentified aircraft — a weakness that could be exploited by terrorists or anyone seeking to engage in espionage against the United States. . . .
The United States is no less vulnerable than Britain and France to threats to security and air safety. The United States Air Force or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should reopen investigations of U.F.O. phenomena. It would not imply that the country has suddenly started believing in little green men. It would simply recognize the possibility that radar alone cannot always tell us what’s out there.
Got it? The threat of stealth al-Qaeda U.F.O.s is more important than Senator McCain’s response to Senator Obama.
Nope…no liberal media bias!
Dude. No, seriously…dude!
Climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It’s now an issue of race, according to global warming activists and policy makers.
“It is critical our community be an integral and active part of the debate because African-Americans are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change economically, socially and through our health and well-being,” House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., said July 29.
You peons want lower gas prices because you’re feeling the pinch in your pocketbooks? San Fran Nan will have none of that kind of selfishness! From Politico:
With fewer than 20 legislative days before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1, the entire appropriations process has largely ground to a halt because of the ham-handed fighting that followed Republican attempts to lift the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration. And after promising fairness and open debate, Pelosi has resorted to hard-nosed parliamentary devices that effectively bar any chance for Republicans to offer policy alternatives.
“I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet,” she says impatiently when questioned. “I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy.” (Because Pe-loco’s policy, which doubled the cost of gas, has been a smashing success, right? – Ed.)
She could have just stopped at “I will not have this debate.” It would have been more honest.
Save the planet from what, exactly? The Bay Area Botox Batty Bimbo doesn’t tell us. But presumably, whatever it is that you want them to do in order to alleviate our dependence on foreign oil must be bad for the planet…so get used to $4+ gas.
Who says the left doesn’t have any ideas to deal with the current energy crisis? Rep. Nadler (D-NY) has just the idea. From Red State:
Bless his heart, Rep. Jerry Nadler is trying to understand the woes of Americans facing the high cost of gasoline.
Venturing outside the comfortable confines of his Manhattan and Brooklyn district, the liberal Democrat was spotted Monday in the Upstate New York city of Utica talking about transportation and energy policy.
“We should take a hard look at reviving the canals,” Nadler said. Rail transport is cheaper than truck transport, and canal transport is even cheaper than that, he said.
Yes, you read that correctly. The liberal New York City congressman wants to invest government resources in the nearly 200-year-old New York canal system to solve the “energy crisis.”
As someone who grew up just miles from the canal, it’s safe to say Jerry Nadler has no idea what he’s talking about. I don’t question the facts. I’m sure it would be cheaper to transport goods on the canal. But with a maximum speed of 10 mph and a system of locks to slow down boats, it might be faster to employ a pack of donkeys. …
And they call themselves “progressives”?
Hey, while we’re at it, how about we cut back on carbon emissions from the postal service by utilizing messenger birds and horseback delivery? Maybe we can give the electric grid a break by using smoke signals instead of the telephone. Perhaps go back to horse-drawn carriages in lieu of our automobiles? The possibilities are endless!
It’s a parody site called BarackBook, and it’s awesome! Check out his Friends list. Missing are the Moonbats of the Cloth, Wright and Pfleger.
Yes, indeed. The Big Three follow the Obamessiah to the ends of the Earth (Europe, Iraq, and Afghanistan, anyway), while not a single one of them went with Juanny Mac during his overseas jaunt…but the MSM is in the tank for McCain! Journalists at the UNITY conference are squealing like prepubescent girls at a Jonas Brothers concert, but the old dude is the one getting press love. Just when I think I’ve heard everything. This is rich…as in, Frank Rich of the NY Times:
…The growing Obama clout derives not from national polls, where his lead is modest. Nor is it a gift from the press, which still gives free passes to its old bus mate John McCain…
If, by “free pass”, you mean ran the “heavy on innuendo, light on facts and evidence” hit piece about McCain and his alleged affair with a lobbyist, then yeah…”free pass”! By the way, that hit piece was written by…anyone?…the NYT!
Seriously, does Rich not even read his own employer’s work? I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t, since with drops in revenue of 82%, it’s obvious that fewer people are reading that fishwrap. But Rich must have been out the day his bosses ran the aforementioned tabloid smear job on McCain, prompting their own ombudsman to concede that such a story deficient of sources and facts never should have run (much less on page A-1).
(Sidebar: the NYT seems eager to run with some “less than corroborated” stories like the McCain hit piece, but not as eager to run with other similar stories, such as the John Edwards lovechild story, which actually is more corroborated than the McCain smear job! But I digress.)
Sure, the MSM in the past has been infatuated with McCain, especially when he was a thorn in the side of the evil emperor Bu$hitler McCheneyburton. But now that he has the temerity to challenge the Second Coming, he is Public Enemy #1 in the eyes of the MSM. But no, Frank…no liberal media bias!
In case you haven’t heard, some wingnut went on a shooting rampage in Knoxville. He shot up people because of his contempt for liberalism. I didn’t feel that putting up a post on this wingnut’s act of evil was needed, since I don’t know of anyone with functioning brain cells who would condone what this psycho did.
Well, I was wrong. Apparently, some schmuck decided to equate this vermin’s evil acts with…my blog. Comment here, with my retort afterwards.
I won’t repeat what I already wrote in response to “Against Violence”, since I don’t see the point. Anyone who thinks that me leaving examples of the left’s lunacy on a daily basis is somewhere in the vicinity of shooting up a church barely warrants me dignifying his/her ludicrous remarks. But hey, just in case anyone thinks that my words spawn tinfoil wingnuts like the Knoxville shooter, I’ll condescend to address that moronic linkage just this once.
Have I rejoiced in the deaths of political or ideological opponents? No. Have I danced on the grave (or in the case of Ted Kenndy, impending grave) of dead liberals? No. Have I wanted to pop a moonbat for spitting on a soldier? You bet. But I would LOVE to see AV or anyone else defend the spitting moonbat. No, if you want to see a blog that promotes violence and antipathy, those moonbats over at Daily Kos, HuffPo, and other blogs in the moonbatosphere have been a magnet for such cretins. While they, like this “Against Violence” person, blame us righties for the Knoxville shootings, they are already dancing a jig at the news of Bob Novak’s brain tumor. Sorry, but I will not allow myself to be compared to those vile, despicable wastes of oxygen.
So, just in case you liberals out there were ambiguous as to what I think about the Knoxville shooter, let me type this really S-L-O-W-L-Y for you: I roundly condemn the evil S.O.B. who did this and think there is a pit in Hell with his name written all over it. Combating liberalism is to be done in the realm of ideas (which, when getting into a battle of wits with liberals, is like fighting an unarmed opponent), not in the realm of bullets. There…have I made myself clear?
To quote the modern philosopher Forrest Gump: “That’s all I got to say about that.”
They don’t even pretend to try and appear impartial, and they even try to defend their bias. Michelle Malkin has the details, but here’s a telling excerpt:
In defending the pep-rally atmosphere, one Dateline NBC employee argued that journalists should allowed to be “human beings:”
Said Luz Villarreal, an associate producer for “Dateline NBC”: “I don’t think it’s such a bad thing if for 15 minutes you take off your reporter hat and respond to (Obama) as a human being at an event where you’re surrounded by people of color and you’re here for a united cause.”
Funny how that works. Expressing solidarity for the “united cause” of promoting pride in “people of color” is acceptable American media behavior. But wearing an American flag pin on the air to express solidarity with the united cause of pride in our country is not.
Racial/ethnic pride: Good.
National pride: Bad.
It’s “UNITY” you can’t believe in.
Nope…no liberal media bias!
Funny that the Obamaliar has railed against the “evil” Blackwater…yet he used them for his own security detail in Afghanistan! From US News:
Sen. Barack Obama has not been a fan of private police like Blackwater in war zones, and some news outlets even reported that they were spurned for his trip last week to Afghanistan and Iraq. But Whispers confirms that Blackwater did handle the Democratic presidential candidate’s security in Afghanistan and helped out in Iraq. What’s more, Obama was overheard saying: “Blackwater is getting a bad rap.” Since everything appeared to go swimmingly, maybe he will take firms like Blackwater out of his sights, the company’s supporters hope.
Must not have been “the Blackwater I knew”!
If you moonbats get your tinfoil hats in a tizzie over McLame’s out-of-context “100 years in Iraq” comment, then what say you about your boy Osamabama’s plans to keep 50,000 “residual” troops in Iraq for the foreseeable future? Not exactly that “get out of Iraq” and “hope and change and stuff” you were expecting, huh?
The Hollywood nightclub is dark and the music so loud that conversation means leaning into an ear and shouting. But the drinks are free until midnight, and anyway most in the upstairs room of Passion nightclub are dancing, not talking.
Still, Chris Chiari, a Democratic candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, mingles in the crowd, drink in hand, campaigning.
He shouts, by way of conversation: “This is real political action.”
This, to be exact, is Party Politics Inc. — the latest, but not the first or only effort to engage 20-somethings in politics by appealing to their inner party animal. …
Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life. Unless you’re Ted Kennedy, in which case those traits serve you quite well.
Sure, he supports the troops…so long as he doesn’t have to condescend to visit them sans photographers. Retired Lt. Col. Joe Repya nails the Obamessiah on his Europandering:
The most solemn duty of a commander in chief is to fulfill his responsibility to the men and women who serve this country in uniform. Barack Obama had scheduled a visit with wounded American troops who have served with honor and distinction in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he broke that commitment, instead flitting from one European capital to the next. Several explanations were offered, none was convincing and each was at odds with the statements of American military leaders in Germany and Washington. For a young man so apt at playing president, Barack Obama badly misjudged the important demands of the office he seeks. Visits with world leaders and speeches to cheering Europeans shouldn’t be a substitute for comforting injured American heroes.
Ouch! That ought to leave a mark!
Hey, at least the Obamessiah graced the troops with a phone call. No word as to whether he had photographers present for the call.
Story here. In related news, Hell freezes over.
Oh. My. God. Or, if you prefer, “WTF?” From Fausta’s blog:
During today’s press conference in Paris, Christiane Amanpour asked Sarkozy “if he feelt awkward praising black Obama when, only a few years ago, he was calling black French rioters “scum.”
I kid you not.
[Video clip here]
This woman equates French rioting delinquents with an American presidential candidate… because of race. And we’re supposed to respect her as a journalist?
Sarkozy seized the opportunity to pour scorn and sarcasm, praising her “exceptional knowledge of French political life.” And then he let it rip.
Good for him.
Check out the video clip at Fausta’s.
Exit question: Would a white American male journalist still have a job for making such a horrible, racist faux pas (hey, check it , Barry O…I know more French than you do, pal!)?
From the LA Times blog:
The president of the College Republicans at the University of Southern California is charging that CNN used a “fake College Republican” in its broadcast report today, claiming there was a lack of enthusiasm for the GOP candidate, Sen. John McCain.
A CNN spokeswoman now says it was an inadvertent error.
In its Thursday morning report, according to a news release from the student organization, CNN interviewed someone identified as Eric Pearlmutter, who was said to be a USC student and College Republican.
“We try to get people out to our College Republican meetings, but we can’t seem to get the same amount of support,” he said.
Ben Myers, the president of USC College Republicans, said, “I have never met Eric Pearlmutter. I have never seen him at a College Republican meeting. He is not on our membership roster. I don’t know why someone would think he speaks for us. As far as I know, he could be a Democrat.”
A CNN spokeswoman admitted the error this evening in an e-mailed response: ““Eric Perlmutter appeared on today’s ‘American Morning’ segment about young Republicans on college campuses. While he attends USC and says that he is a registered Republican, he was inadvertently identified on-screen as a member of the USC College Republicans organization. …
Man, it sure is a good thing that the MSM has all of those fact-checkers at its disposal, unlike us pajama-clad unaccountable bloggers. Otherwise, we might conclude (erroneously, right?) that they are a collective bunch of lazy, sloppy, agenda-driven leftist hacks.
Gee, go figure. From Rasmussen:
Voters who have served in the U.S. military favor John McCain over Barack Obama by a 56% to 37% margin.
This data, from a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, is based upon interviews with 3,000 Likely Voters, including 588 voters who have served in the military. Voters with no military service favor Obama 50% to 43%.
In the new survey, 61% of military veterans have a favorable opinion of McCain while 46% say the same about Obama. Thirty-seven percent (37%) have an unfavorable opinion of McCain while 51% offer an unfavorable opinion of Obama.
Maybe it’s just that the vets like Juanny Mac better because he’s a vet, too. Um…no, that can’t be it. After all, Jean-Francois Heinz-Kerry (who is rumored to have served in Vietnam) is a vet, and he was roundly rejected by vets 2-to-1 in 2004. Perhaps there’s just something about anti-American anti-soldier leftists that rub veterans the wrong way?
But hey, don’t call it “political”, m’kay? Thanks in advance. From ABC News blog:
Shortly after 6 pm Central time — just a few hours after Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, gave his speech in Berlin, which his campaign insisted was not political — his campaign manager, David Plouffe, sent out a fundraising solicitation using the speech to raise campaign cash. …
Are you somehow implying that Captain Bullsh!t says one thing and does another?
I won’t stand for that kind of loose talk, Sir. Why, it has a subterranean twinge of racism to it.
“Hope” and “change” and yada-yada-yada.
Let’s pretend for a moment that you are an irrational believer of that junk science fad known during the warm months as “global warming” and the cold months as “climate change”…come on, just for a moment. Work with me, people!
Anywho, picture this: You have your autographed Al Gore “Earth in the Balance” book that you keep beside your biodegradable beanbag chair in your studio apartment. You’re relaxing in the beanbag, kicking off your Birkenstocks, donning your Che t-shirt, lighting your zero-carbon incense, and debating with yourself as to whether or not to get your weekly shower tonight or put it off until tomorrow. You turn on CNN or Al Jazeera to see that a device has been created that would allegedly remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. Details:
It has long been the holy grail for those who believe that technology can save us from catastrophic climate change: a device that can “suck” carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air, reducing the warming effect of the billions of tonnes of greenhouse gas produced each year.
Now a group of US scientists say they have made a breakthrough towards creating such a machine. Led by Klaus Lackner, a physicist at Columbia University in New York, they plan to build and demonstrate a prototype within two years that could economically capture a tonne of CO2 a day from the air, about the same per passenger as a flight from London to New York.
The prototype so-called scrubber will be small enough to fit inside a shipping container. Lackner estimates it will initially cost around £100,000 to build, but the carbon cost of making each device would be “small potatoes” compared with the amount each would capture, he said.
Sweet Mother Gaia, the “climate crisis” has been solved! If you were an environmentalist, you’d be happier than Barney Frank at a “Boston Firemen 2009 Calendar” photo shoot…right? I mean, environmentalists really care about the planet and aren’t just a bunch of anti-capitalists who get off on restricting Americans’ way of life, right? Yeah, right:
Scientists at Columbia University are developing a carbon dioxide (CO2) scrubber device that removes one ton of CO2 from the air every day, says the Heartland Institute.
While some see the scrubber as an efficient and economical way to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide, many environmentalists oppose the technology because it allows people to use fossil fuels and emit carbon in the first place.
According to Columbia University physicist Klaus Lackner, who is leading the research team:
- Producing a large number of CO2 scrubbers can keep to a minimum any rise in atmospheric CO2 without the economically painful elimination of inexpensive energy sources.
- This technology would allow people to use fossil fuels, which they will be using anyway, without destroying the planet.
Environmental activist groups such as Greenpeace have consistently opposed similar technologies, such as carbon capture and sequestration, because they do not address what they see as the root of the problem, says the Heartland Institute.
“This is just one more piece of evidence that environmentalists aren’t concerned about solving a problem,” said Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis. “Every problem, as they see it, is one way to restrict people’s lifestyles, and if you come up with a technological fix that can solve a problem but doesn’t require sacrifice and lets us go about our business the way we were before, they’re not happy about it, even if it solves the problem.”
The science is settled: the environMENTALists don’t give a wet fart on a dry January Monday about the environment, as much as they do about preventing the perceived evils of capitalism and the American way of life.
If you are not humor-impaired, you absolutely must read this column by Gerard Baker of the UK Times. It mocks the whole “Obamessiah” complex that the left swears doesn’t exist (but normal people know otherwise). Here’s the opening excerpt:
And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.
The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.
And this is the testimony of one who speaks the truth and bears witness to the truth so that you might believe. And he knows it is the truth for he saw it all on CNN and the BBC and in the pages of The New York Times. …
Seriously, this will bring a smile to your face!
One thing that annoys me about many (not most, but many) gay people is their childish accusations that if you oppose any aspect of the gay agenda (be it marriage, openly serving in the military, adoption of children, subsidized #ssless chaps and Village People posters, etc.), that your motivation is your own latent homosexuality. “Tee-hee…you’re really gay, neener neener!”
In this instance, though, I have to throw them a bone. OK, bad choice of words! How about “They may have a point”? Yeah, that’s more like it! Anywho, from Weasel Zippers:
Only in the Muslim would homosexual rape be the punishment for homosexuality…..
Kamal was just 16 when gunmen snatched him off the streets of Baghdad, stuffed him in the trunk of a car and whisked him away to a house. But the real terror was about to begin.
The men realized he was gay, Kamal said, when he took his shirt off and they saw his chest was shaved. (That tripped their gaydar? Dude, every wrestler in the WWE, plus every one of the male American Gladiators, would apparently qualify as homos with this low threshold of proof! – Ed.)
“They told me to take off my clothes to rape me or they would kill me immediately. This moment was the worst moment in my life,” he told CNN, weeping as he spoke of the 2005 ordeal.
I was watching them taking off their clothes, preparing to rape me. I did not know what to do, so I started shouting loudly, ‘Please do not do that! I will ask my family to give you whatever you want.'”
A U.N. report on human rights in Iraq reinforces the accusations of violence. Although gays are supposed to be protected by law in Iraq, it says, they face extreme brutality.
“Armed Islamic groups and militias have been known to be particularly hostile toward homosexuals, frequently and openly engaging in violent campaigns against them,” the report said, adding that homosexuals have been murdered.
Islamic weirdbeards punish gay Iraqi by performing an act of gay rape. After all, nothing says “I can’t stand queers!” quite like…uh, sodomizing one.
Methinks Ibrahaim and Abdul were repressed young jihadis.
- "hate crimes"
- 9/11 Commission
- affirmative action
- Air America
- al franken
- Al Sharpton
- ambulance chasers
- Andrew Sullivan
- animal rights wackos
- Ann Coulter
- Anthony Weiner
- Arizona shooting
- Arlen Specter
- Barney Frank
- big government
- Bill Clinton
- Bill Richardson
- Blog Talk Radio
- Bobby Jindal
- capital punishment
- Caroline Kennedy
- Charlie Crist
- Chris Christie
- Chuck Schumer
- Dan Rather
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz
- Duke lacrosse
- economic ignorance
- eminent domain
- Eric Cantor
- Fair Tax
- Fairness Doctrine
- Fort Dix Six
- Fox News
- freaky deaky
- Fred Thompson
- Ft. Hood
- global warming
- Godwin's Law
- gun rights
- health care
- Herman Cain
- Howard Dean
- Hugo Chavez
- illegal immigration
- Janet Napolitano
- Jesse Jackson
- John Boehner
- John Edwards
- Jose Padilla
- Larry Craig
- Lindsey Graham
- Marco Rubio
- Mark Sanford
- media bias
- Mel Martinez
- Michael Moore
- Michael Steele
- Michelle Bachmann
- minimum wage
- New Jersey
- New York
- news bytes
- Newt Gingrich
- Night and Day
- Ninth Circus Court
- North Korea
- Occupy Wall Street
- Operation Fast and Furious
- Osama bin Laden
- Paul Ryan
- political correctness
- property rights
- public education
- public service announcement
- quote of the day
- religion of peace
- Rick Perry
- Rick Santorum
- Rick Scott
- Robert Byrd
- Roman Polanski
- Ron Paul
- San Francisco
- separated at birth
- Social Security
- Supreme Court
- swine flu
- Tea Party
- The Memphis Posse
- Tim Geithner
- Tim Pawlenty
- United Nations
- vote fraud
- Wall Street
- Ward Churchill
- Warren Buffett