Democrat Supervisor Doesn’t Know That Arizona Is A Border State

America, meet the Obama voter. Willing to believe anything desite the facts against it.

(Yes, Arizona really is a border state. Go look at a map of the Southwestern United States.)

“If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border.”

Of course, the Dems will ignore this comment and replay the old news of Rep. Barton’s apology.

“The level of non-disclosure of adverse data we saw was perhaps perfectly acceptable.”

The quote in the title came from Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit. It clearly shows how the AGW alarmist crowd is perfectly willing to unethically manipulte data and information to prove their cause.

No true scientist would ever accept any level of “non-disclosure” for anything. Non-disclosure is simply another way of saying “hiding the truth.”

From the American Thinker:

After Apollo 17 moonwalker Dr. Harrison Schmitt, gave a wonderful presentation on climate policy from a constitutional standpoint, Climate Audit’s Steve McIntyre took the podium to discuss Climategate and the valuable role he played in uncovering the scandal. But after walking us through the Briffa and Mann reconstructions, Mike’s Nature Trick, the conspiratorial emails and other unscrupulous goings on at CRU, Steve stopped quite a bit short of passing judgment on the co-conspirators. In fact, referring to those who have obstructed the truth about the “hockey stick” and thereby climate sensitivity itself, Steve – who admitted he had no problem with governments dictating energy policy — suggested only that their “tricks” be disavowed and “such practices be avoided in the future.”

During the Q&A segment that followed, Bass let us in on something McIntyre told him upon ending his presentation – that the rousing standing ovation from the audience Steve received before his talk began and decidedly less enthusiastic and predominately seated reaction afterwards didn’t go unnoticed.

When questioned why Mann, Jones, and company shouldn’t be thrown in jail, Steve surprised and, no doubt, disappointed many in attendance. He approached CRU’s trickery as “academic misconduct,” stating that in academic circles the level of non-disclosure of adverse data we saw was perhaps perfectly acceptable.

No. What they’ve have done and are doing is completely reprehensible and will only serve to undermine the public’s trust of real science.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

ICCC 4 Opens With A Climategate Surprise
Marc Sheppard
American Thinker
May 18, 2010

Obama’s Leftist Propaganda Video: Inappropriate For Public Schools

At Eagle Bay Elementary School in Farmington, Utah, students were shown a short video called I Pledge. The video is essentially a conglomeration of Barack Obama making a plea to school children and then celebrities “pledging” certain things. The problem is that it is a leftist-leaning propaganda video and has no place in an elementary school or any public school at all.

From Lisa Schencker of the Salt Lake Tribune:

[P]ledges, such as “to never give anyone the finger when I’m driving again,” “to sell my obnoxious car and buy a hybrid” and to advance stem cell research cross the line, some say.

But it gets even worse than that.

Chris Williams, Davis School District spokesman, said school principal Ofelia Wade and school PTA leaders decided to show the video as part of an assembly about the school’s theme for the year, service. He said the PTA board chose the video and Wade did not see it before it was shown in the assembly.

“It got to a point where she turned to her assistant and said, ‘Oops, I wish I would have seen this before. I don’t think I would have shown it,’ ” Williams said. He said Wade could see how some adults might find the video political.

Like maybe here:

Gayle Ruzicka, president of conservative Utah Eagle Forum, said the video was blatantly political. She said other offensive pledges included, “I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama,” “I pledge allegiance to the funk, to the united funk of funkadelica,” and pledges to not use plastic grocery bags and not flush the toilet after urinating.

“Pledge to be of service to Barack Obama?” The last time someone made a pledge to a national leader like that, the Nazis marched all over Europe. Yes, officers in the German military back then were required to make a pledge to Adolph Hitler.

But even further:

Ruzicka said she contacted local media about the video after receiving complaints from several parents. Ruzicka said she worried the video’s messages would confuse children whose parents might choose to use plastic bags when shopping or who want their children to flush the toilet after every use. Also she said she didn’t like a pledge “to be of service to Barack Obama” as he is here to serve Americans, not the other way around.

That’s right. When the Democrats try to hide behind the argument that they “won” the election, they don’t understand that what they won was the right to represent the American people, not to rule them.

Anybody here still want Obama addressing school children on September 8, 2009?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Parents Upset Over ‘Leftist Propaganda’ Video
Lisa Schencker
Salt Lake Tribune
September 2, 2009

Holy War In Virginia: Islamic School Wants To Expand

Right in our backyard in Fairfax County. A Saudi-owned Islamic school is trying to expand its campus and a group of local residents are trying to stop it.

From Fox News:

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing Monday night to consider a proposal to expand the campus of the Islamic Saudi Academy, a Saudi-owned college preparatory school.

Critics of the plan point to former students of the school who have been convicted in a plot to assassinate former President Bush, and more recently, arrested for trying to board an airplane with a seven-inch kitchen knife.

That is the end result of Wahabbism: young terrorists. And this is a Wahabbi school.

Don’t forget to brush up on terrorist training camps right here in America.

But, there are other issues here as well:

“We’re opposed to the operation of the Islamic Saudi Academy because it teaches and practices Shariah law,” said James Lafferty, chairman of the Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST).

Lafferty said his organization is a coalition with roughly 10 other groups that oppose the land-use expansion. By teaching Shariah law, Lafferty says, the school replaces the U.S. Constitution with a “very backward and barbaric” rule of law.

“Shariah law advocates rights via gender and religion,” Lafferty told “They allocate rights by gender and religion. If you are a male who is Islamic, you have rights. If you’re not, you have no rights.”

That alone is reason enough for this school to lose any accreditation at the very least.

But, I wonder how the government would respond if this were a Catholic School, or a Protestant Christian Academy, or a Jewish School. Would there even have been a debate? Or would the government simply have told the school “No” and be done with it?

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Coalition Fights Expansion Of Islamic Saudi Academy In Virginia
Joshua Rhett Miller
Fox News
July 13, 2009

Obama Takes Away Students’ Scholarships; Parents Ask ‘Why?’

Far from being a courageous leader, in many instances, Barack Obama has shown himself to be a coward and his administration just as cowardly.

Take for example the D.C. Scholarship Program which allows low-income students, who would otherwise have to attend woefully failing public schools that the D.C. School Board absolutely refuses to fix, to attend private schools that improve their chances for making a better life for themselves. Obama stopped this program even though he chose to use his own upper-class privilege to send his daughters to the prestigeous and private Sidwell Friends.

Reason has the story and video about this:

The program is wildly popular with parents and children—there are four applicants for every available slot—and a recent Department of Education study found that participants do significantly better than their public school peers. Indeed, after three years in private schools, students who entered the program at its inception were 19 months ahead in reading of applicants unlucky enough to still be trapped in D.C.’s public schools.

But, Obama and other Democrats killed the scholarships despite successes of the program:

Yet working with congressional Democrats and despite his pledge to put politics and ideology aside in education, the Obama administration has effectively killed the program through a backdoor legislative move. “[Education] Secretary [Arne] Duncan will use only one test in what ideas to support with your precious tax dollars,” says the president. “It’s not whether it’s liberal or conservative, but whether it works.”

And now the parents want to know why. I can guarantee you that Obama will never have the courage or integrity to answer that question. In his world it is okay for him to send his own children to a private school to get a superior education, but others must have their children recieve an abysmally lower quality education at the hands of failing public schools.

A mother asks of Obama:

“We voted for you, we walked, we went to the parade, we stood freezing. Why?…Can you get this tape over to Obama and have him answer our questions? Why, sir, why?”

Obama will never show any real courage until he looks that mother and her daughter in the eyes and answers their questions directly.

You can access the article and video on-line here:

Barack Obama & The DC School Voucher Program
May 4, 2009

Democrats Terrified Of Scientific Debate Over Global Warming Issues

Well, so much for “diversity” and trying to bring multiple points of view to the issues. And so much for any post-partisanship the Dems claimed would be their hallmark after the 2006 and 2008 elections. It is all straight-line partisanship now.

It all went out the window when the Dems chose ideology over science and refused to allowed an Anthroprogenic Global Warming (AGW) skeptic to testify before Congress concurrent with Al Gore. The UK’s Lord Christopher Monckton had been invited to testify before Congress at the same time as former VP Al Gore, but when the Dems learned that Lord Monckton was an AGW skeptic and was prepared to offer evidence that Al Gore and other Global Warming alramists were wrong in their analysis of climate change, they refused to allow him to testify.

What are the Dems afraid of? That a true scientific debate would make Al Gore look like a fool? If they are so convinced that Al Gore is right, wouldn’t they welcome such a public debate to further prove it? Why hide from such a forum?

From Climate Depot:

Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.

“The House Democrats don’t want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”

According to Monckton, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), Ranking Member on the Energy & Commerce Committee, had invited him to go head to head with Gore and testify at the hearing on Capitol Hill Friday. But Monckton now says that when his airplane from London landed in the U.S. on Thursday, he was informed that the former Vice-President had “chickened out” and there would be no joint appearance.

Why would Al Gore be afraid of going head-to-head with anybody? Maybe because he has been found to be mistaken about a great many things:

35 Inconvenient Truths; The Errors In Al Gore’s Movie
Christopher Monckton
October 18, 2007

For example: Al Gore’s hysterical claim after Hurricane Katrina that global warming would make subsequent hurricane seasons even worse. The truth is that each hurricane season since 2005 has been much less intense.

Or another example: Gore hysterically claims that severe tornadoes are becoming more frequent. But, information gathered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) since 1950 shows a downward trend of severe tornadoes, not upward and Gore claims:


Apparently, the Dems don’t have the stomach to actually look through all the evidence and only want to allow such information that would further their own political agenda rather than actually provide good, complete information to the people. And they also don’t have the stomach to see Al Gore ripped to pieces for pushing junk science instead of real science.

It is embarrassing that the Dems refused to allow this debate. It clearly shows exactly how scared they are that the truth about climate change will actually come out and expose AGW as a huge hoax.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Democrats Refuse To Allow Skeptic To Testify Alongside Gore At Congressional Hearing
Marc Morano
Climate Depot
April 23, 2009

Global Warming Reality Check: The Predictions Are Not Coming True

More and more evidence mounts that the idea of man-made global warming is nothing more than hype for the sake of hype. Not only that, but there are political implications here where governments (particularly those controlled by leftist socialists) are using the fear-mongering angle of the issue as an excuse for grabbing more power.

Writing for the Houston Chronicle, Robert L. Bradley shines some light on the issue and looks at the temperature trends of the past 100 years, the prediciations that pseudo-scientists have made concerning global warming and how those predictions fared against reality.

From his column:

The new century has cooled the case for climate alarmism. Global warming has stalled — not accelerated as expected. Greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere have increased, but temperatures have been flat for the last eight years and have slightly fallen since 1998’s El Nino-driven temperature spike.

If the cool-off continues until 2015, as could be the case according to a study published in Nature magazine, we will have had a see-saw of global warming (1900-45), global cooling (1945-75), global warming (1975-98), and flatness (1998-2015).

Where does all of this leave us coming out of the Little Ice Age that ended in the mid-18th century — and after a century of greenhouse gas buildup in the atmosphere? Today’s temperature is about 1 degree Fahrenheit warmer, and in a naturally warmer climate cycle. Compare this to Al Gore’s scary talk about an 11-degree man-made temperature rise this century under business as usual.

I remember the predictions from the 1980’s that said Canada and Russia would be the world’s leading food producers by now and the mid-West of the North American continent would be a desert. Instead, we are having record cold temperatures, record snow falls and Artic sea-ice now extends out further than it did in 1979.


Of course the climate is changing — always has and always will — and there may very well be a distinct human influence on climate. Carbon dioxide is a warming agent, as are the other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere from human activities. But the good news is that so far the observed climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases is much less than what some climate models predict.

The recent temperature reversal comes on top of falsified climate mini-scares. One headline-grabber was that ocean circulation patterns disrupted by global warming would freeze over North America and Western Europe. “False alarm,” Science magazine would later declare to little fanfare.

Hurricane Katrina was featured in Al Gore’s book and movie, An Inconvenient Truth, as if man, not nature, were to blame. But subsequent research has painted a very mixed picture about hurricanes in a warmer world. Most research predicts fewer tropical storms will develop, and changed wind patterns might cancel out the effect of warmer waters on hurricane strength. There is more agreement that extra-tropical storms are lessened from warming because of a diminished temperature gradient between the poles.

That’s right. Cold air from the arctic below and warm air from the tropics above. When they meet, they cause storms. The greater the temperature difference between the two, the more violent the storms. The National Oceanic & Atomospheric Administration (NOAA) actually tracked the number of tornadoes in the American mid-West during the past fifty years and found that when the temperature differential was greater (i.e. a cooler arctic region), more tornadoes formed. This runs counter to the global warming theory that warmer weather leads to more storms. The scientific data suggests that a warmer climate means fewer and less severe storms.

Bradley goes on:

Gore’s scenario about a 20-foot sea-level rise in man’s future has also not sat well with science. The modest sea-level rise of recent decades — continuing a trend of the past centuries for reasons that are not well understood — is expected to continue. While Greenland is losing ice, Antarctica is gaining ice. Melting Arctic sea ice, meanwhile, does not affect sea level — nor does the growth of sea ice in the southern ocean — for the same reason that melting ice cubes do not cause a drink to spill. The sea-level debate concerns inches, not feet, for future decades and even centuries.

Rememeber the claims that barrier islands such as the Outer Banks of North Carolina would be underwater by now? Well, the barrier islands are still there.

Evidence continues to mount that global warming alrmists have pulled a huge multi-billion dollar hoax. That money could have been better spent elsewhere.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Climate-Change Alarmism Runs Into A Reality Check
Robert L. Bradley
Houston Chronicle
January 8, 2009