Pelosium

Lawrence Liverless Laboratory in California has now identified with certainty the heaviest, densest, freakish, most useless element known to science.

The new element, Pelosium (PL), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called mega-morons, which feed off of the element Moronium, (Mm) & are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.

Pelosium is inert and retarded by the element Intellectium; has no charge and no magnetism. Nevertheless, it can be detected because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Pelosium can impede a reaction, obstructing any action, and increasing rebound by years, instead of hours.

Pelosium has a normal half-life of 2 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a biennial reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places and shift the outward appearance to trick the eye into thinking it sees something younger, when in reality, the Pelosium is ancient and decrepit, lacking substance.

Pelosium mass will increase over time, since each reorganization will promote many morons to become isodopes.

This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Pelosium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Pelosium becomes Senatorium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Pelosium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.

How to combat the effects of Pelosium and Moronium?

Anti-Moron matter charged by accelerated action, channeled through the iron-bound rock-solid elements originating from Constitutium source, which radiate intense light directed at the dense Pelosium matter, causing a chain-reaction of Patriotiums, which congregate enmasse and overrun the inert moronium mass obstructing any positive reaction. The merged effects of Patriotiums with all energey directed towards the dense matter, is a complete annihilation of the offending Pelosium and Moronium elements.

Pelosi Chartering Military Aircraft for Her Family

Doug Ross reports that The Wicked Witch of The West Nancy Pelosi has been commandeering military aircraft for her children and grandchildren, even on flights containing no congressional members.

Ross reports that this is the American taxpayer millions of dollars. It doesn't help that Peloser is only reimbursing the government for the flights at a bare minimum:

Military flights cost between $5-$20 thousand dollars per hour to operate. Pelosi only reimburses the government between $120-$400 per flight. You and I pick up the rest of the tab with our tax dollars.

It's all perfectly legal, of course - or is it? Even if it is, perhaps we should start asking why a politician's children and grandchildren should have their travel subsidized at taxpayer expense?

Here you can find requisition forms and food/beverage receipts that will make you want to puke. We need to get this self important, mad with power, she-witch out of office.

Via

Pelosi Spends $100,000+ Tax Dollars on Booze

Are you freaking kidding me? I can only imagine this expenditure necessary, if her husband was with her, so he could drink enough to make her pretty, or at least, tolerable. This sort of spending should have her run out of town with a pitch fork. This is your money she is spending. Politicians are not royalty, they are public servants, and they should start living that way. Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz sleeps on a cot in his office to save his family money, Pelosi spends six figures on booze. I hope you are as mad as I am.

By Bob Unruh© 2010 WorldNetDaily

It reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker's Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey's Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer. (not even an American beer)

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for "in-flight services" – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That's almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time.

Reid and Pelosi's Plan Ram Obamacare Down Our Throats

Dick Morris' recent article, outlines a backroom deal to pass Obamacare, between Pelosi, Reid and Obama. Did the loss in Mass scare the terrible trio? Nope, it just forced them to play ball a little sleazier. Instead of passing the bill with a little elbow to the ribs, they are going to pass it with a kick to the groin, from behind, real sneaky like. Dirty SOB's.

Highly informed sources on Capitol Hill have revealed to me details of the Democratic plan to sneak Obamacare through Congress, despite collapsing public approval for healthcare "reform" and disintegrating congressional support in the wake of Republican Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts.

President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid all have agreed to the basic framework of the plan.

Their plan is clever but can be stopped if opponents of radical healthcare reform act quickly and focus on a core group of 23 Democratic Congressman. If just a few of these 23 Democrats are "flipped" and decide to oppose the bill, the whole Obama-Pelosi-Reid stratagem falls apart.

Here's what I learned top Democrats are planning to implement.

Senate Democrats will go to the House with a two-part deal.

First, the House will pass the Senate's Obamacare bill that passed the Senate in December. The House leadership will vote on the Senate bill, and Pelosi will allow no amendments or modifications to the Senate bill.

How will Pelosi's deal fly with rambunctious liberal members of her majority who don't like the Senate bill, especially its failure to include a public option, put heavy fines on those who don't get insurance, and offering no income tax surcharge on the "rich"?

That's where the second part of the Pelosi-deal comes in.

Behind closed doors, Reid and Pelosi have agreed in principle that changes to the Senate bill will be made to satisfy liberal House members — but only after the Senate bill is passed and signed into law by Obama.

This deal will be secured by a pledge from Reid and the Senate's Democratic caucus that they will make "fixes" to the Senate bill after it becomes law with Obama's John Hancock.

But you may ask what about the fact that, without Republican Scott Brown and independent Democrats such as Joe Lieberman, Reid simply doesn't have the 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a Republican filibuster that typically can stop major legislation?

According to my source, Reid will provide to Pelosi a letter signed by 52 Democratic senators indicating they will pass the major changes, or "fixes," the House Democrats are demanding. Again, these fixes will be approved by the Senate only after Obama signs the Senate bill into law.

Reid also has agreed to bypass Senate cloture and filibuster rules and claim that these modifications fall under "reconciliation" and don't require 60 Senate votes.

To pass the fixes, he won't need one Republican; he won't even need Joe Lieberman or wavering Democrats such as Jim Webb of Virginia.

His 52 pledged senators give him a simple majority to pass any changes they want, which will later be rubberstamped by Pelosi's House and signed by Obama.

Read the rest of Dick Morris' article here.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Political suicide right? The terrible trio are damaging the Democrat brand so badly that it almost seems intentional. What's going on here? It is almost as if they don't want the majority, they don't want reelection, they simply want to push through as much filth as possible before they are run out of DC with pitch forks and torches.

Hat tip to Angry White Dude

Pelosi Concedes - Don't Have the Votes to Pass Health Bill

Pelosi announces that she can’t pass Senate ObamaCare bill. “Brown’s arrival in the capital today carried a message that Democrats finally began to comprehend, after dismissing voter anger at town halls for months as meaningless.”

Dennis Guthrie's Letter to Nancy Pelosi

Click on the image to make it larger, and readable. It's pretty scathing.




Born St. Louis , Missouri , August 21, 1944
Bar Admissions:
North Carolina, 1969
U.S. District Court, Eastern, Middle and Western Districts of North Carolina , 1969
U.S. Tax Court
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
Education: Wofford College , 1966A.B.
Mercer University 1969 J.D.
Phi Alpha Delta
Vice-Justice, District XIV, 1968 - 1969
Professional Associations and Memberships:
North Carolina and American Bar Associations (Member, Sections on: Administrative Law; General Practice; Litigation)
26th Judicial District and North Carolina State Bar
Mecklenburg County Bar Association
American Association of Justice
North Carolina Trial Lawyers Association
Captain, U.S. Army, 1969-1971, Vietnam
National Defense Medal, 1969
Republic of Viet Nam Service Medal, 1970
Bronze Star Medals (2), 1971
Assistant District Attorney, Mecklenburg County , 1971 - 1974
Charlotte Chamber of Commerce
Chairman, Board of Trustees Providence United Methodist Church
Board of Directors, Alexander Children's Home
Board of Directors, Charlotte Culinary Institute
Wofford Alumni Executive Council
Scoutmaster, Boy Scouts of America
Board of Directors, Boy Scouts of America of Mecklenburg County
Board of Directors, Girl Scout Council
Life Member, National Eagle Scout Association
Life Member, Girl Scouts of America

Thanks Stephanie!

Pelosi: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail

Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”

Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:

“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]

- - - - - - - - - -

“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]

- - - - - - - - - -

Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

Thanks Stephanie!

Nancy Pelosi Loves Babies

Limousine Liberal - For Those Who Know What's Best for Everyone!

Letter from Mitt Romney - Nancy Pelosi is Wrong

As anyone who follows history and politics knows, there has always been a very healthy debate on the issues in our country.

Yet, now that conservatives are expressing their disapproval of President Obama's proposed health care plan, liberals are suddenly very critical of dissent and debate. Earlier this week, Speaker Pelosi accused honest citizens expressing their views on health care of being "un-American." And why? Because they disagree with her on the need for a new government insurance program.

Our Founding Fathers would be very surprised by Speaker Pelosi's attempt to clamp down on dissent. This nation was founded by patriots who staged the ultimate protest in declaring their independence from a distant and out-of-touch government. The rights to peacefully assemble and petition our elected officials are guaranteed by the Constitution. What Nancy Pelosi doesn't understand is that our differences and disagreements don't make us weaker; they make us stronger.

This is a critical time for our nation, and a lot of the issues we're debating now will affect generations to come. All of us have a duty to press on ... a duty to state our case without fear of government reprisal.

That is why I'm writing to you to take two important steps today.

First, I encourage you to make your feelings on the health care bill known by calling the White House at (202) 456-1111 and your congressional representatives at (202) 224-3121. Let them know that dissenting is the most "American" thing one can do and that you have very real concerns about the cost and scope of this legislation.

Second, I hope you will consider making a contribution to my Free and Strong America PAC today. Your generous contribution of $25, $50, $100, $250, $500, $1,000, or even the maximum $5,000 will go a long way toward making sure that we push back when big government liberals like Nancy Pelosi try to stifle debate because they don't like it when ordinary Americans disagree with their far-left agenda.

Thank you again for your support and all that you do to ensure that our country remains free and strong.

Best,

Mitt Romney

Nancy Pelosi Sucks

Nancy Pelosi embodies what is wrong with politics today. She is a liar, a cheat, a bully and takes absolutely zero accountability. Even with George Bush out of office, she still manages to blame him for her mistakes.

But when Bush was in office, it seemed like the only thing she did was bash Bush. On September 29, 2008, she gave a disgustingly partisan speech, during a debate of the the Wall Street crisis. In her speech, she blamed George Bush for the crisis, claiming "reckless economic policies", "fiscal irresponsibility" and an "anything goes economic policy."

A few quotes from the Nancy Pelosi speech of Septmber 29, 2008:

"[W]hen was the last time someone asked you for $700 billion? It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush administration's failed economic policies — policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything-goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system."

"Democrats believe in the free market, which can and does create jobs, wealth, and capital, but left to its own devices it has created chaos."

"Democrats insisted that legislation responding to this crisis must protect the American people and Main Street from the meltdown on Wall Street. The American people did not decide to dangerously weaken our regulatory and oversight policies. They did not make unwise and risky financial deals. They did not jeopardise the economic security of the nation. And they must not pay the cost of this emergency recovery and stabilisation bill."

"Today we will act to avert this crisis, but informed by our experience of the past eight years with the failed economic leadership … We choose a different path. In the new year, with a new Congress and a new president, we will break free with a failed past and take America in a new direction to a better future."

John Boehner, the Republican minority leader, said after the failed vote that "I do believe we could have got there today, had it not been for this partisan speech the Speaker gave. The Speaker had to give a partisan voice that poisoned our conference."

That speech is a prime example of her ineffectiveness as house speaker. Ms. Pelosi has no interest whatsoever in reaching common ground, for the common good. Nancy Pelosi is all about dissension, blaming, and partisan politics. She can't seem to shut that venomous, botox tightened hole she calls a mouth.

Pelosi has come to represent, and lead the modern day liberal movement, full of spite, hate, and greed. In an attempt to gain more power, to twist our fine country into the liberal utopia she envisions, and to please special interest groups, and organizations like moveon.org, Pelosi will stop at nothing.

You Are Un-American, if You Don't Want Socialized Medicine

Dear Supporter,

This week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer published a column in USA Today in which they called those who oppose the Democrats' health care plan "un-American."

We would like to know, what could be MORE American than citizens from across the country voicing concerns about controversial legislation to their elected officials?

Perhaps opposition to the Democrats' plan for health care is so fierce because Americans don't like the idea of socialized medicine. They don't like the thought of the government being so deeply involved in their health care decisions. And they don't like the cost - $1.5 trillion over ten years. And that's on top of the President's failed stimulus plan and a bailout for failing auto companies. There is an economic breaking point, and it seems that the Democrats have found it.

We believe that all Americans have a First Amendment right to challenge their elected officials. I ask you to join me in signing a letter to Speaker Pelosi and Leader Hoyer by clicking here.

If 10,000 Americans sign on to this effort, it will send a strong message to the Democrat leadership in Washington that their strong-arm tactics are unacceptable. Please, sign the letter today, and then send this link to five of your friends: http://www.nrsc.org/un-american

Sincerely,

Rob Jesmer
NRSC Executive Director

How Al Gore was Born

Some of you will recall that on July 8, 1947, a little over 60 years ago, witnesses claim that an unidentified flying object (UFO) with five aliens aboard crashed onto a sheep and mule ranch just outside Roswell , New Mexico .

This is a well known incident that many say has long been covered up by the U.S. Air Force and other federal agencies and organizations.

However, what you may NOT know is that on March 31st 1948, nine months after that historic day, guess who was born: Albert A. Gore, Jr..

See what happens when aliens breed with sheep and jackasses?

I certainly hope this bit of information clears up a lot of things for you. It did for me.

Now You Know!

Via

Finally, a Judge with Ethics and Guts

Now maybe we are getting somewhere! We yet may be saved from the shameful idiocy of the brainwashed idiots, the complacent, and the bigots who voted for Obama and those in Congress of the same ilk who let the election of an illegal candidate stand.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider may be the only judge in the nation with the ethical responsibility and courage to allow the the biggest and most shameful hoax ever perpetuated on the nation to be examined and revealed. Let's hope there are enough patriots willing and able to support him and see this through. This may be our last chance to save our nation and ourselves.

World Net Daily: A judge hearing one of the cases challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has taken the unusual step of describing the dispute as a serious constitutional issue and further has begun adding letters of comment from the public to the court record.

Word of the action by U.S. Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider in Camden, N.J., comes from attorney Mario Apuzzo, who is handling the Kerchner vs. Obama case.

Apuzzo filed his lawsuit in January on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. Named as defendants are Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The case focuses on the alleged failure in Congress to follow the Constitution. That document, the lawsuit states, "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

The Constitution provides, the lawsuit said, "If the president-elect shall have failed to qualify, then the vice president elect shall act as president until a president shall have qualified."

"There existed significant public doubt and grievances from plaintiffs and other concerned Americans regarding Obama's eligibility to be president and defendants had the sworn duty to protect and preserve the Constitution and specifically under the 20th Amendment, Section 3, a Constitutional obligation to confirm whether Obama, once the electors elected him, was qualified," the case explained.

"Congress is the elected representative of the American people and the people speak and act through them," the lawsuit said.

The defendants "violated" the 20th Amendment by failing to assure that Obama meets the eligibility requirements," the lawsuit said.

Apuzzo told WND that while the judge recently granted the government extra time to line up defense counsel for the named defendants, his ruling described the issue as a serious constitutional question.

"Plaintiffs' complaint raises significant issues necessitating that the named defendants engage competent counsel to represent their interests. Given the high ranking positions of the defendants, the decision as to who will represent them in this case is not simple and straightforward," the judge said.

But as soon as attorneys are lined up, "the case will proceed expeditiously," he said.

The case has attracted numerous public comments directed at and delivered to the judge, who has started adding them to the case file, Apuzzo noted.

"It's unbelievable," he said. "The court put the letters on Pacer." Pacer is a fee-based court website through which interested parties can research cases and their documentation.

"This is really strange," said the attorney, noting that judges typically do not accept or even acknowledge public commentary on cases that are pending before them.

"The point is the letters are there in the docket," he said. WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen."

The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama's persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers and the appointment of myriad lawyers to defend against all requests for his documentation. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii as his birth verification, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

The ultimate questions remain unaddressed to date: Is Obama a natural born citizen, and, if so, why hasn't documentation been provided? And, of course, if he is not, what does it mean to the 2008 election or the U.S. Constitution if it is revealed that there has been a violation?

And the answer could take only minutes: authorization from the president to Hawaiian officials to release his documentation.

Apuzzo, on his website, says the issue "is of utmost national importance."

A state official, Hawaiian Health Director Chiyome Fukino, said, "I, and Dr. Alvin Onaka have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." But officials have rejected requests for access, saying Obama would have to authorize any access, and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a foreign birth in Hawaii?

Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born.

While an Obama spokesman one time called the allegations "garbage," the president and his team have withheld other comments. But here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support. * Chicago lawyer Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

* Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff. * In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters. She also has brought forward several other cases and has conducted several public campaigns to generate awareness of the issue. In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include: * In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

* In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed. * In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

* In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama. * In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

Posted by Seaspook

Number of Man Made Global Warming Skeptics is Swelling

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon.(...)

Republicans in the U.S. have, in recent years, turned ever more to the cost arguments against climate legislation. That's made sense in light of the economic crisis. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi fails to push through her bill, it will be because rural and Blue Dog Democrats fret about the economic ramifications. Yet if the rest of the world is any indication, now might be the time for U.S. politicians to re-engage on the science. One thing for sure: They won't be alone.

-Wall Street Journal

-NC

Is Pelosi Really Skeletor?

-NC

The DemDebt Card

-NC

Deficit Grows; polls down; Apparently size matters.

I found this article on MSNBC recently. The poll numbers it reported left me feeling a bit conflicted. It seems that there are glimmers of hope that the American public have begun to awaken but other signs that they are still a bit groggy.

Decide for yourself. The article is included below and excerpts are in bold:

Poll: Public increasingly concerned about deficit

NBC/WSJ survey also shows concern over intervention in private sector

WASHINGTON - As the young Obama administration spends trillions of dollars in its effort to turn around the nation’s economy and revive the U.S. auto industry, the American public is growing concerned about the size of the budget deficit and the government’s intervention into the private sector, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds.

Could it be that the general populace recognizes the insanity of spending your way out of a deficit? Thus far there has been little sign that the stimulus has stimulated anything beyond a huge national debt. I hope that there is an awakening of the populace and a return of commons sense.

Nearly seven in 10 have serious reservations about the federal government’s ownership stake in General Motors. Almost 60 percent say that President Obama and Congress should worry more about keeping the deficit down — even if that means it will take longer for the economy to recover. And fewer than half of Americans have confidence in the president’s policies to improve the economy.

This gives me a least a glimmer of hope. It seems that people are not as ready for socialism as out administration had hoped. Government run businesses still have a certain stigma attached that people are not willing to let go. It also seems that the honeymoon is over and people are starting to look past the rhetoric for results and finding little substance behind the man.

Obama remains a popular figure in the poll. But these numbers on the deficit and the government’s intervention seem to mark a new period for the administration, as the public moves from welcoming his inauguration and first days in office to examining his initial actions as president.

Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican Bill McInturff, says Obama is still receiving a bouquet from Americans. “But there are a lot more thorns in the bouquet.”

And looking ahead to the items Obama wants to tackle — like reforming health care and curbing greenhouse gases — Hart observes that the bar has been raised.

“There is no more smooth sailing for the administration. They are going to have to navigate in pretty choppy waters.”

The smooth sailing has ended at least in the arena of public opinion, not so much in the halls of Washington as Republican leaders are still offering no resistance to Obama’s march to socialism. Hopefully once they realize that standing around impotent is akin to career suicide they will be spurred into action.

McInturff agrees, although he adds that the president’s continued personal popularity gives him “the latitude to ask for major action and major change.”

Personal popularity aside what Obama is asking for is the total destruction of this nation as we have come to know and love it. I hope his popularity isn’t the only requirement the American public deem necessary for such a destructive course.

Independents now split on Obama

According to the poll, 60 percent view Obama favorably, versus just 29 percent who see him in a negative light. Also, three-quarters of the public say they like him personally, and that number includes 27 percent who don’t like his policies.

But the president’s overall approval rating is at 56 percent, which is down five percentage points from April.

The drop mainly comes from independents, who backed Obama by 60 percent to 31 percent in April, but approve of him now by a 46-44 clip.

Maybe the “independants” have finally moved past the messiah complex thing and started looking at the man and his policies. Obama has spewed lofty rhetoric since the beginning but platitudes like “hope and change” only carry you so far when your policies reflect “socialism and tyranny”.

I say to the recent independent converts “welcome aboard; about damn time”.

Yet perhaps the most troubling numbers in the poll for Obama come on questions about the administration’s intervention in the private sector, especially to help save troubled General Motors.

Public sours on GM intervention, deficit

Fifty-six percent oppose Obama’s action to provide financial aid to GM, in return for a majority stock in the company. Additionally, a whopping 69 percent say they’re concerned “a great deal” or “quite a bit” about the government’s ownership of the automaker.

I am encouraged by this ray of sunshine. 69 percent is an impressive number. It should be a lot higher but given the current state of the American electorate I’ll take it. It should give Obama reason to rethink any additional government take-overs of private sector businesses. The people seem to understand that there is something fundamentally Un-American about the idea.

In an interview Tuesday with CNBC’s John Harwood, Obama maintained that these interventions didn’t begin on his watch. “When I came in … the previous administration had already put in $10 billion to shore up the auto companies and asked nothing in return,” he said.

“Now, I had three choices. I could continue giving them money without asking anything in return, I could let them liquidate in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression, or we could say, ‘We don't want to run your company. Would you show us a plan that allows you to stand on your own two feet, so that what we're providing is a meaningful bridge for you to get to a better future?’”

Obama concluded, “We chose option three. That's not something that we welcomed, and the sooner we can get out the better.”

As the “hope and change” platitudes wear thin so does the “Bush did it” refrain coming from our esteemed and most holy leader Lord Obama. Obama threw additional billions into the abyss knowing that these companies were going belly-up anyway. He did this with the intent of making these companies wards of the state and repaying the union cronies that helped elect him.

Also in the poll, 58 percent say the president and Congress should worry more about keeping the deficit down, even if that means that it would take longer for the economy to recover.

By comparison, only 35 percent say the bigger worry should be boosting the economy, even if that adds to the size of the deficit.

Well at least some portion of the population understands that our economy cannot recover when straddled with suffocating debt. We have the specter of inflation looming on the horizon that will effectively crush any burgeoning recovery. We have a president that seems to think everything will be alright as long as we all “believe”.

But not blaming Obama

Despite their concerns, the American public isn’t blaming Obama for some of the current problems he’s facing. Asked who was more responsible for the size of the deficit, 46 percent cited the Bush administration, 21 percent said the Democrats in Congress, 7 percent said the Republicans in Congress and just 6 percent said the Obama administration.

In addition, 72 percent believe that the current state of the economy is something Obama inherited rather than created.

We at least the main stream state run media have been effective.

Even though the public remains pessimistic about the economy — just 12 percent say they are satisfied with it — the poll does show a bit of optimism with 46 percent expecting the economy to improve in the next year.

That’s up eight points since April, and it’s the highest percentage on that particular question since January 2004.

If only optimism were enough to conquer ignorance.

Health care, Sotomayor

On the topic of health care, the poll shows that more than three-quarters believe it’s important for Americans to have a choice between a public/government insurance plan and a private one. But if a government-run option is established, 47 percent of those who hold private insurance say it’s “very” or “somewhat” likely their employer would drop their plans.

This is where I lose a little faith in the American people. 47 percent understand that they would lose choice and yet close to 75 percent want to do it anyway. I am at a loss here to explain the understanding gap.

As McInturff, the GOP pollster, puts it: “It’s hard to change the status quo when you have people who have been well served by the status quo.”

This is particularly germane in as much as I currently have adequate health care provided by my employer at no cost to me. If this were to remain the case I would be less than concerned with what the government was doing about the uninsured.

Odds are however that I will see a significant reduction in my level of care and an increase in cost. How is this equitable? How is this American?

Also, when asked how they would prefer to finance health-care reform, 59 percent oppose taxing those with generous health benefits, while 70 percent oppose taxing everyone’s health benefits.

I agree let’s not penalize those of us who have adequate health care to provide it to those who do not. What surprises me about this number is that there are 30 percent out there how think taxing my health care is a good idea. I’m going to guess they are the same ones who still think Obama can walk on water.

Click for related content

Read the full NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (.pdf)
New York Times Politics
Newsvine Politics

Regarding Obama Supreme Court pick Sonia Sotomayor, the poll finds that her numbers compare favorably to — or even exceed — John Roberts’ and Samuel Alito’s. By a 43-20 percent margin, Americans support her nomination, and 50 percent believe she’s qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.

“Her numbers … are very strong,” McInturff says.

Other odds and ends

The poll — which was taken of 1,008 adults from June 12-15, and which has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points — also contains these findings:

26 percent view Dick Cheney favorably, which is up eight points from April

Interesting – Thought the left said he was the anti-Christ.

24 percent view Nancy Pelosi favorably, which is down seven points from April

Disappointing – why does anyone view this nut bag favorably?

25 percent hold a favorable view of the Republican Party, which is an all-time low for it in the poll

Appropriate – since they have not done their job as of late.

45 percent hold a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

Scary – as they are the architects of the destruction of America.

The Pelosi Premium

Prices are down now, but they are rising.

Pelosi the Joker