Archive for the ‘Global Warming’ Category

« Older Entries

Progressives causing dark times for America

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Goodmorning Blogmocracy Netizens! I hope everyone slept well and will have a healthy day today! I came across a dark post by the great Victor Davis Hanson I must post on.

The Progressive Tyrannical Regime in Washington D.C., is selling a fantasy to the American people. They keep increasing our debt, due to low interest rates. They are selling out our allies on the hopes that our enemies will like us. The Cap-N-Trade scheme’s true costs are down played and the hyped “green” economy is emphasized. The Obamacare plan is being promoted as consumer choice, when in reality it’s a form of Eugenics based control. These are dark times for America and one wonders whether the Progressives are naive, or if this is all by design?

Obama’s mega-borrowing is predicated on a rather thin margin of safety. We can service nearly $2 trillion in additional debt this year—on top the of the existing $11 trillion—only because interest rates are so low.

But as a veteran of the near usury of the 1970s and early 1980s, I see no reason why interest rates won’t shoot up to 10% once the economy recovers and the U.S. has to convince lenders to buy our paper in an inflationary spiral. In other words, we could fork out each year about $150-200 billion in interest costs on our annual red ink, in addition to paying annually another trillion dollars to service the existing debt. (We forget that many of us young people in the 1970s and 1980s simply never bought anything new due to high interest: my first new car was not purchased until 1989 when interest was only 7.2% on it; my parents bought a small condo in 1980 for the unbelievably low rate of 8.8%, due only to redevelopment incentives in a bad neighborhood of Fresno. Inflation will be back, even in this quite different age of globalized competition and low wages.)

When Obama talks of a trillion here for health care, a trillion there for cap-and-trade, it has a chilling effect. Does he include the cost of interest? Where will the money came from? Who will pay the interest? Has he ever experienced the wages of such borrowing in his own life? Did he cut-back and save for his college or law school tuition, with part-time jobs? Did he ever run a business and see how hard it was to be $200 ahead at day’s end?

What destroys individuals, ruins families, and fells nations is debt—or rather the inability to service debt, and the cultural ramifications that follow. When farming, I used to seen the futility in haggling over diesel prices, trying to buy fertilizer in bulk, or using used vineyard wire—when each day we were paying hundreds in dollars in interest on a “cut-rate” 14% crop loan.

Read the rest.

Victor Davis Hanson, who is a historian, does a great analysis here. This has happened before and this is how a great society falls. Progressives are leading America down a dark road and they need to be called out on it. They are on purpose destroying the fabric of this nation. It is their agenda to create a Neo-Feudal Totalitarian dark age system here. They want pure power and will stop at nothing to achieve this evil agenda. The Conservative-Libertarian Coalition must ignore the RINOs and take on these fascist thugs. It is our liberty and way of life at stake!

If we lose, an American Dark Age will set in.

Tags:
Posted in Barack Obama, Communism, Democratic Party, Economy, Free Speech, Global Warming, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Leftists, Liberal Fascism, Multiculturalism, Patriotism, Political Correctness, Progressives, Tranzis | 173 Comments »

What Happened to Global Warming?

Sunday, October 11th, 2009

That’s sort of like asking, “What happened to the tooth fairy?”

What is really interesting at the moment is what is happening to our oceans. They are the Earth’s great heat stores.

According to research conducted by Professor Don Easterbrook from Western Washington University last November, the oceans and global temperatures are correlated.

The oceans, he says, have a cycle in which they warm and cool cyclically. The most important one is the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO).

For much of the 1980s and 1990s, it was in a positive cycle, that means warmer than average. And observations have revealed that global temperatures were warm too.

But in the last few years it has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

These cycles in the past have lasted for nearly 30 years.

So could global temperatures follow? The global cooling from 1945 to 1977 coincided with one of these cold Pacific cycles.

Professor Easterbrook says: “The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling.”

Pacific decadal oscillation.   Yeah, baby.

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Science | 117 Comments »

Dendrochronological Data – Again – Refutes the Global Warming “Hockey Stick”

Monday, October 5th, 2009

What happens when you approach the anthropogenic global warming issue using ALL the data, instead of just a few handpicked points that can be made to appear to support AGW? The “evidence” for AGW does a disappearing act, that’s what,

A[s] WUWT readers know, the Briffa tree ring data that purports to show a “hockey stick” of warming in the late 20th century has now become highly suspect, and appears to have been the result of hand selected trees as opposed to using the larger data set available for the region.

OK, first the obligatory Briffa (Hadley Climate Research Unit) tree ring data versus Steve McIntyre’s plot of the recently available Schweingruber data from the same region.

 

Red = Briffa’s 12 hand picked trees Black = the other dataset NOT used

The Hantemirov- Shiyatov (HS) tree ring data that I downloaded from the NCDC is available from their FTP server here. I simply downloaded it and plotted it from the present back to the year 0AD (even though it extends much further back to the year 2067 BC) so that it would have a similar x scale to the Briffa data plot above for easy comparison. I also plotted a polynomial curve fit to the data to illustrate trend slope, plus a 30 year running average since 30 years is our currently accepted period for climate analysis.

Compare it to the Briffa (CRU) data above.

When I first saw this plot, I thought I had done something wrong. It was, well, just too flat. But I double checked my data import, the plot, the tools used to plot, and the output by running it 2 more times from scratch. Then I had Jeff Id over at the air vent take a look at it. He concurs that I’ve plotted the data correctly.

The trend is flat as road kill for the past 2000 years, though it does show an ever so slight cooling.

The first thing to note is that these data are not directly indexable to the set which Steve McIntyre used last week to demonstrate the non-existence of the “global warming hockey stick.” That being said, this data from 2002 is nevertheless relevant in addressing the evidence, if any, for warming from the tree ring data. Over 2000 data points went into this study, unlike the cherry-picked set used by Briffa in preparing his hockey stick graph. As can be seen from a non-cherry-picked data set, the plot of reconstructed temperature per year is essentially flat. What’s sad is that so would Briffa’s, if he had not artificially limited his data set.

Combine this with Steve McIntyre’s original decisive refutation of this latest “hockey stick” that the AGW cult had imagined it had found, and we see the case that can be made for AGW is quickly dissolving.

The second image below is, in my opinion, one of the most disquieting images ever presented at Climate Audit.

The image? The first one that is given above – the one showing how the reconstructed temperature plots differ, with and without all the extra data that Briffa lacked that allowed him to invent the hockey stick that supposedly proves global warming. The AGW collapse is happening so fast, in part, because so many of these proponents of AGW are being caught cooking the data. In other words, they’re being dishonest.

Frankly, it’s nearly to the point that if someone is really serious about arguing for AGW, they are either:

 1) Astoundingly ignorant

2) On somebody’s payroll

3) Dating an environmentalist

Perhaps this is why over 31,000 American scientists have signed a petition stating,

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

And it has come to my attention that pro-AGW fanatics are relying on some “remix” put together by Peter Sinclair. As was demonstrated previously, relying on Sinclair as an authority on matters of climate change is ridiculous. He’s an independent filmmaker, not a scientist, for crying out loud.

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Science | 189 Comments »

World’s Most Important Data PROOOOOOVING Global Warming, Um, Disappeared

Saturday, September 26th, 2009

Sheesh, haven’t these people heard of thumb drives?

Imagine if there were no reliable records of global surface temperature. Raucous policy debates such as cap-and-trade would have no scientific basis, Al Gore would at this point be little more than a historical footnote, and President Obama would not be spending this U.N. session talking up a (likely unattainable) international climate deal in Copenhagen in December.

Steel yourself for the new reality, because the data needed to verify the gloom-and-doom warming forecasts have disappeared.

Or so it seems. Apparently, they were either lost or purged from some discarded computer. Only a very few people know what really happened, and they aren’t talking much. And what little they are saying makes no sense.

In the early 1980s, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists at the United Kingdom’s University of East Anglia established the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) to produce the world’s first comprehensive history of surface temperature. It’s known in the trade as the “Jones and Wigley” record for its authors, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, and it served as the primary reference standard for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until 2007. It was this record that prompted the IPCC to claim a “discernible human influence on global climate.”

Putting together such a record isn’t at all easy. Weather stations weren’t really designed to monitor global climate. Long-standing ones were usually established at points of commerce, which tend to grow into cities that induce spurious warming trends in their records. Trees grow up around thermometers and lower the afternoon temperature. Further, as documented by the University of Colorado’s Roger Pielke Sr., many of the stations themselves are placed in locations, such as in parking lots or near heat vents, where artificially high temperatures are bound to be recorded.

So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.

Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”

Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.” The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong.

Then the story changed. In June 2009, Georgia Tech’s Peter Webster told Canadian researcher Stephen McIntyre that he had requested raw data, and Jones freely gave it to him. So McIntyre promptly filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the same data. Despite having been invited by the National Academy of Sciences to present his analyses of millennial temperatures, McIntyre was told that he couldn’t have the data because he wasn’t an “academic.” So his colleague Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph, asked for the data. He was turned down, too.

Faced with a growing number of such requests, Jones refused them all, saying that there were “confidentiality” agreements regarding the data between CRU and nations that supplied the data. McIntyre’s blog readers then requested those agreements, country by country, but only a handful turned out to exist, mainly from Third World countries and written in very vague language.

It’s worth noting that McKitrick and I had published papers demonstrating that the quality of land-based records is so poor that the warming trend estimated since 1979 (the first year for which we could compare those records to independent data from satellites) may have been overestimated by 50 percent. Webster, who received the CRU data, published studies linking changes in hurricane patterns to warming (while others have found otherwise).

Back when I was in college and grad school obtaining degrees in chemistry, we of course all learned some basics about what qualifies something as “science.”  Science is supposed to be observable, reproducible, transparent and all that other good stuff.  This global warming nonsense has never really met any of those standards, and this latest set of hijinx really takes the cake.

Essentially, Jones is hiding the data.  Or he lost them.  Or he lost them while hiding them.  Or he’s hiding them by losing them.  Or maybe he just made the whole durn thing up out of whole cloth.  Who knows? 

Let’s see if we can piece this together.  The data Jones and Wigley used to construct the theory that is presently being used by the UN IPCC to push for the destruction of the industrialised world is based on shoddy data to begin with.  Temperature sensors places on asphalt parking lots and near exhaust vents will not produce reliable data.  Even a child should be able to recognise that.  Yet, Ph.Ds all over the world seem blissfully unaware of this fact.  Nevertheless, the data is tainted – which calls into question whether it truly meets the criterion of observability.

Then, the shoddy data for 25 years is kept under lock and key and the gatekeepers refuse to release it to fellow scientists whom they fear might use it to “try and find something wrong with it.”  There goes reproducibility out the window.

THEN, the data IS released to one scientist who subsequently used it to “prove” that global warming will cause more hurricanes (which, by the way, has proven to be false, per my post from a few days ago).  At the same time, the data is NOT released to other scientists – who presumably were not felt to be sufficiently pro-AGW enough to merit seeing the data – using the lie that there were all these vitally important confidentiality agreements blocking release of the data.  I can understand confidentiality if we’re talking about secret projects by the Defence Department, but civilian meteorological research that supposedly will have an impact on us all?  Wow.  That, along with the lying, means that transparency just left the building. 

Then the data disappears.  Obvious question of the day: What was in the data that Jones didn’t want people finding out at last, knowing that eventually the stonewalling was going to have to end?

Folks, it’s time that we cut to the chase.  Anthropogenic global warming is complete, utter, bilious nonsense.  It’s nothing more than a cover story for the radical left and its radical, anti-human environmentalist agenda.  There’s nothing to it.  What’s more, people, when you see somebody seriously stumping for the global warming religion, you can be almost assuredly guaranteed that there is a money trail.  Somebody is getting some coin for trying to scaremonger us into believing this rubbish.   And most likely, that coin is courtesy of the American taxpayer.

 

 

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Politics, Science | 345 Comments »

Global Warming is Failing as Science

Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009

One of the standards used to determine whether something is “science” by the strict definition of the word is whether a theory can be used to make accurate predictions.  In light of the President’s ill-advised cheerleading at the UN yesterday, we should ask ourselves whether global warming actually meets this definition of science.  Global warming fanatics have proposed that as carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere increases, we will see proportional increases in temperature coupled with other climatological effects.  As Tony Watt at Watts Up With That points out, one of the key arguments  for global warming – that sea ice coverage continues to decrease (which in GreenSpeak translates into “RISING SEA LEVELS WIPING OUT COASTAL CITIES AND KILLING MILLIONS!!!!!”) is failing the prediction test,

2009 Arctic Sea Ice Extent exceeds 2005 for this date

Those that have been watching the IARC-JAXA Arctic sea ice plot, and noting the slope of gain, rather expected this to happen. Today it did.
Here’s the current IARC-JAXA Sea Ice Extent plot:

 

While 2009 minimum on 09/13 of 5,249, 844 was just  65, 312 sq km below 2005 in minimum extent, which occurred on 9/22/2005  with 5,315,156 sq km, it has now rebounded quickly and is higher by 38,438 sq km, just 2 days before the 9/22/05 minimum. On 9/22/2009 it may very well be close to 60-80,000 sq km higher than the minimum on the same date in 2005.
While by itself this event isn’t all that significant, it does illustrate the continued rebound for the second year. The fact that we only missed the 2005 minimum by 65, 312, which is about one days worth of melt during many days of the melt season is also noteworthy.
What this all means is that the extent of the surface of the Arctic Ocean which is (as of 9-22-2009) covered in ice has reached the level seen in 2005.  As you can see from the graph, Arctic Sea ice coverage reached a minimum in 2007, and has been increasing over the past couple of years.  The trend from 2002 to 2007 was for less coverage, but the past two years show more.  What this means in laymen’s terms is that over the past couple of years, the summertime peak in Arctic ocean temperature (which, of course, affects how much ice is floating around in that ocean) has been been lower than it was in 2007.  In fact, it’s cooled to 2005 levels, and the trend suggests a cooling process is in action.  In short, the Arctic Ocean appears to be cooling down again, despite the predictions from global warming fanatics that it should continue to get warmer and warmer. 

Of course, Dr. Watt has pointed out that other predictions made by the AGW Truthers are not panning out, either.  More and more dangerous hurricanes?  Isn’t happening.  Tornadoes becoming more frequent and energetic?  Nope, that’s not happening either. 
No wonder the American people aren’t buying this AGW scaremongering – only 2% of us think the issue is a matter of priority, showing once again how out of touch our President really is. 

And, as the Czech President Vaclav Klaus (who’s probably a Ron Paulian, a creationist, a Birther, and a Glenn Beck fan) notes, the whole UN “global warming” pageant this week has a definite weird streak to it,

“It was sad and it was frustrating,” said Klaus, one of the world’s most vocal skeptics on the topic of global warming.

 

“It’s a propagandistic exercise where 13-year-old girls from some far-away country perform a pre-rehearsed poem,” he said. “It’s simply not dignified.”

 

At the opening of the summit attended by nearly 100 world leaders, 13-year-old Yugratna Srivastava of India told the audience that governments were not doing enough to combat the threat of climate change.

 

Klaus said there were increasing doubts in the scientific community about whether humans are causing changes in the climate or whether the changes are simply naturally occurring phenomena.

 

Am I the only one who thinks it’s not healthy that our President is taking advice on the “need” for climate change legislation from a 13-year old kid?

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Science | 170 Comments »

The Cap and Trade Scam will cost Americans $1,761 a year

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

The Radical Progressive plan of Cap and Trade is nothing but a stealth tax increase. For months, critics have pointed out that it will raise the cost of living on Average Americans. The Obama Administration along with their Progressive minions have denied this was the case. However, now they are admitting that it will cost the average American $1,761 a year.

The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent.

A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration’s estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year.

A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama’s transition team after the November election, says this about climate change policies: “Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP, making them equal in scale to all existing environmental regulation.”

Read the rest.

Obama caught in another lie, this is not surprising. What is shocking is the admission of  the Administration, that it will raise the cost of living.  This does nothing to benefit the environment, all it does is enrich Traitor organizations like GE and Elites like Al Gore.

Cap and Trade is just another example of the Neo-Feudalist mindset of Progressives. They could care less about the effects of their plans, it’s all about imposing their vision on society. Cap and Trade must be defeated!

Tags: , ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Communism, Economy, Global Warming, Leftists, Liberal Fascism, Progressives | 198 Comments »

More Germans Turn Apostate from the Global Warming Cult

Friday, August 28th, 2009

At the rate this is going, Al Gore’s tithe check is going to start getting mighty small.  This time, the German Helmhotz Association of National Research Centres  has left the flock, issuing a short position statement about the correlation between solar activity and climate change - Small fluctuations in solar activity, large influence on the climate,

Sun spot frequency has an unexpectedly strong influence on cloud formation and precipitation

Our sun does not radiate evenly. The best known example of radiation fluctuations is the famous 11-year cycle of sun spots. Nobody denies its influence on the natural climate variability, but climate models have, to-date, not been able to satisfactorily reconstruct its impact on climate activity.

Researchers from the USA and from Germany have now, for the first time, successfully simulated, in detail, the complex interaction between solar radiation, atmosphere, and the ocean. As the scientific journal Science reports in its latest issue, Gerald Meehl of the US-National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and his team have been able to calculate how the extremely small variations in radiation brings about a comparatively significant change in the System “Atmosphere-Ocean”.

Katja Matthes of the GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, and co-author of the study, states: „Taking into consideration the complete radiation spectrum of the sun, the radiation intensity within one sun spot cycle varies by just 0.1 per cent. Complex interplay mechanisms in the stratosphere and the troposphere, however, create measurable changes in the water temperature of the Pacific and in precipitation”.

Top Down – Bottom up

In order for such reinforcement to take place many small wheels have to interdigitate. The initial process runs from the top downwards: increased solar radiation leads to more ozone and higher temperatures in the stratosphere. “The ultraviolet radiation share varies much more strongly than the other shares in the spectrum, i.e. by five to eight per cent, and that forms more ozone” explains Katja Matthes. As a result, especially the tropical stratosphere becomes warmer, which in turn leads to changed atmospheric circulation. Thus, the interrelated typical precipitation patterns in the tropics are also displaced.

The second process takes place in the opposite way: the higher solar activity leads to more evaporation in the cloud free areas. With the trade winds the increased amounts of moisture are transported to the equator, where they lead to stronger precipitation, lower water temperatures in the East Pacific and reduced cloud formation, which in turn allows for increased evaporation. Katja Matthes: “It is this positive back coupling that strengthens the process”. With this it is possible to explain the respective measurements and observations on the Earth’s surface.

Professor Reinhard Huettl, Chairman of the Scientific Executive Board of the GFZ (Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres) adds: “The study is important for comprehending the natural climatic variability, which – on different time scales – is significantly influenced by the sun. In order to better understand the anthropogenically induced climate change and to make more reliable future climate scenarios, it is very important to understand the underlying natural climatic variability. This investigation shows again that we still have substantial research needs to understand the climate system”. Together with the Alfred Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research and the Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum the GFZ is, therefore, organising a conference “Climate in the System Earth” scheduled for 2./3. November 2009 in Berlin.

What a novel idea….the sun has an impact on the earth’s climate???  It’s so crazy it can’t be true!

Besides, this report is easily dismissable.  The “Helmholtz Association” is probably just a creationist front group funded by Mark Sanford, Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck.

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Science | 46 Comments »

Temperature and Carbon Dioxide – Feedback or Equilibrium?

Tuesday, August 25th, 2009

Great by a guest climatologist over at Watts Up With That discussing the relationship between temperature and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere based upon some historical data obtained from ice cores.   Read the whole thing to get the nitty gritty of the science.  His conclusions are below, post

The last 5,000 years are trivial compared to the 420,000 years of the Vostok record; of even less significance are the last 1,200 years. However, climate science has put great emphasis on the features of this interval, even though they fit within the noise-envelope. The “medieval warm period” spanned 800 CE to 1,200 CE; Vostok shows it wasn’t really warm, but wasn’t really cold either. The “little ice age” followed (although average T was barely lower), and ended after the low of -1.84 °C around 1,770 CE. By the early 1800s, T was higher than it is at present, and it has fluctuated within levels typical of the last 11,000 years since then. It is remarkable that climate hysteria should be based on noise-level changes in T over the last 200 years, which is an eye-blink in the Vostok record. It seems to be the superstition of our time.
 
In summary, the Vostok record indicates that CO2 is in lagged equilibrium with T and that, for the range of T in Vostok, the dependency of CO2 on T is essentially linear. Unnaturally high CO2 for the last 5,000 years has had no apparent effect on T. This empirical evidence supports a conclusion that there cannot be any significant feedback between CO2 and T. Such feedback would cause predicted T and CO2 to show fundamental disagreement with the lag, spectrum and amplitudes evident in the Vostok record.
 
It is impossible to say how enduring the feedback fallacy will be. However, any such model proposed in the future can be regarded as qualitative if it does not specify lag, characteristic amplitude and period, and as speculative if it cannot be compared to the Vostok record. Accordingly, any such model can be ignored.
 
If we may depart for a moment from objectivity, any such model should be ignored if its proponents declare that it shows polar bears are in peril, and you can save them by painting your roof white and burning nuts and corn in your car.
Again, read the whole thing to get it all in context.  Essentially, what he is saying is that the relationship between temperature and CO2 level in the atmosphere is not based upon a direct feedback correspondence.  In other words, temperature is not responding to atmospheric CO2 concentration.  Instead, the empirical evidence from the Vostok cores seems to suggest that as temperature changes, CO2 levels follow as a lagging indicator seeking to restablish an equilibrium between the two variables.   Our present rise in CO2 levels follows a well-established pattern of CO2 response to previous temperature increases.  Thus, the AGW fanatics have it backwards.  Instead of increased CO2 contributing to temperature increase, it seems as if it may be the other way around.

Tags: ,
Posted in Global Warming, Science | 130 Comments »

Obama: The Salesman of the Radical Left’s Agenda

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

President Barack Hussein Obama is more of a salesman than a President. He has no original ideas and instead is trying to promote, the Transnational Totalitarian Progressive agenda. This agenda is about control over people. No matter how slick his talk is, his product sucks and the people are rejecting it.

Amid the hot town halls of August, one’s mind keeps stumbling back to the astonishing presidential campaign of Barack Obama. Hadn’t finished one term in the Senate, 47 years old, former community organizer, and he had the mighty Clinton political machine against the ropes.

The contest was electrifying. At one point the election got wilder than a night at the World Wrestling Federation. Obama had flattened Hillary in the South Carolina primary. Hillary’s husband, unable to stand the hammering his wife was taking from the rookie, jumped over the turnbuckle and went upside Obama’s head with the charge that his South Carolina primary victory resembled Jesse Jackson’s wins in 1984 and 1988.

A political riot ensued. When order was restored, Ted Kennedy and JFK’s daughter had gone over to sit in Kid Obama’s corner.

He was so good in so many ways—poised and confident, radiating judgment and leadership—that enough independent voters transferred their allegiance to his candidacy to give him a 53-46 win over John McCain. Seven points. If he ever loses these voters, he’s toast. One has to wonder what they think of him now. Is Barack Obama still the wunderkind of limitless possibilities, or something else?

Read the rest.

The Progressive agenda is Totalitarian in nature. It is Fascism with a smile, Feudalism without the castles.  Americans hate tyranny, that is why our ancestors came here. No matter how much Obama sugar coats it, Americans don’t like to be serfs.

It is really tough being a  salesman when your product sucks. Obama, The Progressive ideology sucks!


Tags: ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Communism, Democratic Party, Economy, Global Warming, Healthcare, Leftists, Liberal Fascism | 56 Comments »

Majority of Americans reject Obama’s progressive agenda

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

The new Rasmussen poll has good news. Only 47% of Americans support Obama’s policies. 52% reject his Transnational Totalitarian Progressive Policies. This is good news and hopefully more Americans will begin to oppose this tyrant and his gang of fascists thugs.

Overall, 47% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That’s the lowest level of total approval yet recorded. The President’s ratings first fell below 50% just a few weeks ago on July 25. Fifty-two percent (52%) now disapprove.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans disapprove along with 65% of those not affiliated with either party. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of Democrats offer their approval. Most women (51%) offer their approval while most men (56%) disapprove. For more measures of the President’s performance, see Obama By the Numbers and recent demographic highlights from the tracking polls.

Read the rest.

The Progressives will dismiss this poll and claim it is a rightwing conspiracy. In reality, the progressives don’t care what people think. In their minds they know what is good for us. Their Neo-Feudal outlook on life will be more exposed as their agenda becomes unpopular.

Keep up the protests. Their agenda must be stopped!

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Communism, Democratic Party, Economy, Global Warming, Leftists, Liberal Fascism | 187 Comments »

« Older Entries