TUESDAY,  DECEMBER 22,  2009

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IS ERUPTING - AT 7:05 P.M. ET:  There is much fuss this evening over a statement by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo, who commands U.S. forces in northern Iraq, that female soldiers under his command who become pregnant, and those males who get them so, will be punished.  At first he said court-martialed, but he's pulled back on that.

The general's statement was actually contained in a general memo in which he listed causes for punishment.  CNN reports:

The commander who instituted a policy cracking down on pregnancy among soldiers defended it Tuesday as necessary to maintain troop strength, but said no soldier would ever be court-martialed for violating the directive.

The policy -- which would punish soldiers who get pregnant or impregnate another soldier -- was included in Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo's orders to troops regarding conduct while deployed under his command in northern Iraq.

Cucolo, who has 22,000 people under his command, including 1,682 women, said the policy is meant to make his soldiers "think before they act."

"The main reason why I did this was my intense desire to maintain my fighting strength any way possible in a very tough and complex mission that includes a drawdown," he told reporters in a conference call Tuesday. "The consequence of them departing early is they're leaving their team, their unit, shorthanded with their special skills."

Well, I tell you...the mascara hit the fan.  The National Organization for Women, which doesn't lift a finger at the oppression of Muslim women, issued a blistering statement:

"How dare any government say we're going to impose any kind of punishment on women for getting pregnant," NOW President Terry O'Neill said. "This is not the 1800s."

Of course, in the 1800s we didn't have women deployed in a combat zone.  As if O'Neill or NOW care about combat zones, or women therein.

And four senators all but declared war against the monster militarist Cucolo:

"We can think of no greater deterrent to women contemplating a military career than the image of a pregnant woman being severely punished simply for conceiving a child," the senators wrote to Cucolo today. "This defies comprehension. As such, we urge you to immediately rescind this policy."

The letter was signed by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

This is over-the-top stuff.  And it is very insulting to women, who are portrayed by NOW and these four senators as too immature to be trusted to control themselves.  As the father of two daughters, I'm outraged.

The general is correct.  Both men and women, especially in combat deployments, have responsibilities as soldiers.  And the first responsibility is to maintain their ability to be soldiers and remain deployed. 

I suspect most women in the military will back the general.

December 22, 2009   Permalink

STEPS!  THERE ARE STEPS TAKEN! - AT 5:53 P.M. ET:  I post this to assure you that steps are being taken.  From Reuters:

The White House has begun to take steps to confront Iran's unwillingness to "pursue its responsibilities" on the nuclear issue, spokesman Robert Gibbs said on Tuesday.

"We've begun to take those steps, if Iran is unwilling to pursue its responsibilities," Gibbs said.

Steps.  More steps.  I'm so grateful.  Peace in our time.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday dismissed a year-end deadline set by the Obama administration for Tehran to accept a United Nations-drafted deal to swap enriched uranium for nuclear fuel.

The deal aims to diminish Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium, easing the West's fears that the material could be used to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran, which denies it seeks to build a bomb, has balked at the deal's terms.

COMMENT:  I'm glad they're taking steps.  Gibbs also told Iran to take next week's deadline seriously.

No doubt this will have as much impact as previous warnings.  The president will get up on January 1st, maybe still wearing his party hat and tooting his tooter, and realize that he's got to produce something for the Iran account. 

Fox News is reporting comments by unnamed administration officials to the effect that nothing much will happen right after the first of the year, but that something will happen by the end of January.

The steel in that statement is inspiring, isn't it?

December 22, 2009   Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE REAL WORLD - AT 4:42 P.M. ET:  The economic numbers for the third quarter, when looked at with both eyes, aren't quite as encouraging as they first seemed.  From The New York Times:

The nascent economic recovery was weaker than expected in the third quarter, the government said Tuesday, held back by slow business construction and dwindling inventories.

The Commerce Department said the economy expanded at an annual rate of 2.2 percent from July through September, down from the original forecast of 3.5 percent, tempering some of the enthusiasm about the speed of economic renewal. The downward revision was well above average, but analysts still foresee stronger growth in the fourth quarter, as exports rise and an improved jobs market encourages consumer spending.

COMMENT:  Ten and a half months to the election.  The economy will still be the key issue.  Anemic numbers like this will not help the already beleaguered Democrats.  And, being high tax types, they'll probably make things worse.

December 22,  2009   Permalink

NEW POLL STUNNER - AT 9:40 A.M. ET:  With daily tracking polls now starting to show reaction to Obama's Copenhagen flop, and the Senate's imminent passage of Obamacare, the news keeps getting worse for the president.  Rasmussen has just published his Tuesday report:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 That’s the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President.

The internals are even worse. 

Fifty-three percent (53%) of men Strongly Disapprove along with 39% of women. Most African-American voters (58%) Strongly Approve while most white voters (53%) Strongly Disapprove.

The racial divide, while understandable, is very troubling for a "post-racial" president.

And overall approval?

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove. 

I believe that gap is also the greatest recorded in the Rasmussen poll.  Again, the internals:

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Democrats approve while 88% of Republicans and 62% of unaffiliated voters disapprove.

That unaffiliated (independent) number, 62%, is staggering.

We always stress that other polls may show a better position for the president, but Rasmussen polls likely voters, which is the best way to do it.  Some polls question registered voters, or even all adults.  In Chicago they poll those alive, or not.

December 22, 2009   Permalink

GET USED TO THIS - AT 9:27 A.M. ET:  States and cities are starting to tally up the damage from the health "reform" bill about to be passed by the Senate.  There are winners and losers, depending on what deals were made at the last minute.  But when most Americans realize what's been done, there's got to be a backlash.  Governor Paterson of New York State, and Mayor Bloomberg of New York City give an assessment of the wreckage.  Expect this in your area soon:

The Senate health reform bill is packed with lumps of coal for New York's Christmas stocking.

Gov. Paterson, Mayor Bloomberg and other officials warned the Senate plan would:

- Force the city to close 100 health clinics.

- Blow a $1 billion hole in the state's budget.

- Threaten struggling hospitals, nursing homes and other facilities.

"It is really a disgrace and we've got to make sure that we fight before the bill is finally passed," Bloomberg fumed.

New York ended up on the short end as Senate brokers showered cash on states whose senators were among the last holdouts before Democratic leaders locked up the 60 needed votes.

New York's best hope now is emergency surgery to undo the shafting before the bill becomes final.

COMMENT:  That closing of 100 clinics will certainly improve health care for the uncovered.  Why didn't they think of that before? 

How are things in your region?  Are you looking forward to Obamacare?

Can't wait to get my card.  I understand it will get you a free roll of Tums.

December 22, 2009   Permalink

CREEPING TOWARD OBLIVION - AT 8:53 A.M. ET:  I heard an interesting definition last night.  It seems that in Britain they have a rather strong "green" movement - you know, the environmental "activists."  But those who are on to them don't call them greens, but "watermelons" - green on the outside, red on the inside.

We saw that in Copenhagen.  The greatest applause at the "climate change" conference didn't greet President Obama, or even Al Green, uh Al Gore.  It greeted Hugo Chavez and his attacks on capitalism.  The climate-change movement, like many movements, has a hidden agenda - a move toward socialism and world government.  And yet, we're told very little about it by the mainstream media, which regards socialism as just another "narrative."

Investors Business Daily, in a fine editorial, discusses our own drift toward socialism, symbolized by the health "reform" package:

Health Care: Democrats on the take and in the dead of night pass an execrable piece of legislation that they haven't read, the public doesn't want and only socialists could love. What has happened to this country?

And...

Let's see if we have this right:

This was a vote on a Democrat-concocted scheme that Americans have rejected every time it's been proposed for 100 years and that is opposed again, by 54% to 41% by the public at large, by 2-to-1 by practicing physicians and by every last member on the Republican side of the aisle.

What could these people possibly know?  Do they live in Manhattan?  Beverly Hills?  Do they have parties and invite African diplomats?

Despite growing public opposition, Democratic members had the nerve to call those who questioned their monstrosity "obstructionists" and worse. Rhode Island's Sheldon Whitehouse called health care bill foes "birthers," "fanatics" and "people running around in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups." Is this what Democrats meant when they said they seek bipartisan solutions to the nation's problems?

By bipartisan they mean that far-left Democrats and liberal Democrats will join together. 

As the nonpartisan Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation put it, "The House and Senate health care bills contain enormous tax hikes to accompany massive increases in government spending."

But, of course, in the eyes of the left, those are wonderful things.  Progress!

What's truly frightening about this bill isn't what it does, but what it sets us on course to do. Democrats have long said they see this bill as a first step toward a total takeover of U.S. health care, regardless of the consequences.

The bill's requirement that Americans buy insurance is a major step toward that takeover. It's the first time in our nation's history the government has made Americans buy something. Get used to it. It's going to become a pattern.

COMMENT:  It already is a pattern.  U.S. Government Wheels & Deals, formerly known as General Motors, is an example.  The 1960s left has come roaring back, a little more careful with its propaganda this time, getting protection from the slick rhetoric of Barack Obama, and supported by much of the media. 

It's pretty clear from the polls that many Americans are in fact aware of what is happening.  But we need that 50% plus one at the polls to reverse it.  And the clear goal of many on the left is to do what political machines in many cities have done so effectively, going back to the 19th century - make the people so dependent on the party in power that they feel they must vote them in year after year.  Tammany did it in New York, the Daley machine does it in Barack Obama's Chicago. 

Now the machine has gone national, and international.

December 22, 2009   Permalink 

LAUGHED AT AGAIN - AT 8:19 A.M. ET:  The extent to which the Obama foreign policy is being laughed at all over the world was brought home to us in Copenhagen, where the attitude toward the president of the United States was, "Write a big check or go away."  Anyone surprised?

Now the president of Iran, facing a deadline from Obama that is little more than a week away, shows more reverence toward the president who was going to change the world with a sweep of his hand.  From Britain's veddy leftist Guardian:

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, today dismissed a year-end deadline set by the US for Iran to accept a UN-brokered deal to swap enriched uranium for nuclear fuel.

As Iran faces a renewed US drive for further sanctions, Ahmadinejad made light of the threat. "If Iran wanted to make a bomb, we would be brave enough to tell you," he told supporters in the southern city of Shiraz. He said the west could give Iran "as many deadlines as they want, we don't care."

In an interview aired on US television yesterday, Ahmadinejad dismissed documents apparently describing Iranian efforts to make a nuclear trigger as "fabricated and distributed by the US."

The president brushed away a report in last week's Times newspaper that cited confidential Iranian technical documents detailing a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the part of a nuclear warhead that triggers detonation.

"No, I don't want to see them at all. I don't," he said. "They are all fabricated bunch of papers continuously being forged and disseminated by the American government," Ahmadinejad told ABC News.

David Axelrod, a top White House adviser, said the charge that the US had forged the documents was "nonsense."

COMMENT:  This will be Obama's greatest foreign-policy challenge of 2010, and so far his approach has been just a bit higher than casual.  There does not seem any great likelihood that he will bring China and Russia on board for serious sanctions against Iran, so he'll have to accept lesser, ineffective sanctions, while calling them "unprecedented," this administration's favorite adjective.

And Iran will play the very effective game of nuclear ambiguity - rolling ahead with its nuke program while denying any interest in weapons.  Remember, engineers today don't actually have to test a nuclear bomb to know that it will work.  Modern computer simulation can replace testing, which is probably why we've never seen an Israeli nuclear test.  So the appeasers can always claim that we have no "proof" that Iran has the bomb.

We live in interesting times, as the Chinese say.  And they mean it as a curse.

December 22, 2009   Permalink

MONDAY,  DECEMBER 21,  2009

THE DISGRACE - AT 8:57 P.M. ET:  It is a wonder that Chris Matthews remains employed.  There was a time when only a fringe news organization would have a staffer with so little self discipline.  But MSNBC apparently has more modern and with-it standards. 

Newsbusters reports Matthews's latest outrage:

On this evening's Hardball, Chris Matthews called Dick Cheney "the bath-tub ring of the Bush administration."

Chris' calumny came in reaction to the news that the estimable Human Events magazine has named the former VP Conservative of the Year.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Those soldiers of the right over at Human Events magazine came out today with their Conservative of the Year Award. They gave it to the bath-tub ring of the Bush administration himself, that residue of eight years that won't leave us, Dick Cheney.

What style, what intellect. 

John Bolton, at Human Events, explained the award in terms that Mr. Matthews apparently can't comprehend:

How is it, therefore, that someone who has no political ambitions can cause so much angst at the White House and in the mainstream news media? The irrefutable answer is that what Cheney is saying, primarily on foreign policy, defense and anti-terrorism, makes sense to more and more American citizens growing increasingly worried by the Obama Administration’s insouciance when U.S. national interests are threatened, both at home and abroad.

COMMENT:  That is correct.  The left-wing media hates Cheney because he's so good at what he does, and so articulate in expressing his beliefs.  He is a devoted public servant who never sought personal popularity or aggrandizement in office.  And he doesn't vacation in Aspen.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

RUDY OUT - AT 7:12 P.M. ET:  Fox News is reporting that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani will not run for the U.S. Senate next year.

That's too bad.  The seat that's up is currently held by nondescript Kirsten Gillibrand, appointed to fill out the term of Hillary Clinton.  New York is a Democratic state, but polls have shown Rudy beating Gillibrand handily.  I don't know of any other Republican who can.

I suspect that this may end Rudy's political career.  He ran a poor campaign for president in 2008, and is out of the public eye.  He's already declined to run for governor next year.  No one thinks of him as a presidential candidate in 2012.  After a time, his accomplishments as mayor of New York will be forgotten.  No one who has sat in the New York mayor's chair has ever achieved higher office.

It's just speculation, but I wonder if this is Rudy's wife's decision.  An informed source tells me that Rudy has become a bit, well, henpecked.  More vivid language can be used.  It was hoped, recently, that he'd address a rally to oppose the civilian trial of the 9-11 mastermind in New York.  But he didn't show, reportedly because his wife doesn't like him doing things like that on weekends.  Hey, Judy, that's when a lot of that stuff gets done.

So, unless he gets some appointed office, Rudy Giuliani may soon be a name from the past, which is too bad, given his talents.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

COLLISION COVERAGE - AT 6:08 P.M. ET:  The great Michael Barone writes of the situation that's developed, in the age of Obama, when liberal dreams collide with public opinion.  The result is not pretty, even if you're in good hands:

In the Bella Center on the south side of Copenhagen and in the Senate chamber on the north side of the Capitol, we’re seeing what happens when liberal dreams collide with American public opinion. It’s like what happens when a butterfly collides with the windshield of a speeding sport utility vehicle. Splat...

...Barack Obama, who seemed so confident of his powers as he prepared for his inauguration, evidently believed that he could persuade Americans to support left-of-center policies that they had never favored before.

Yeah, that's the problem, isn't it?  Those nasty citizens out there.   With opinions.  Is that legal?

The Copenhagen conclave seems to be unable to produce the promised binding treaty committing 100-plus nations to reduce carbon emissions. It seems likely to kick the can down the road to 2012.

One reason is that the leaders of China and India are unwilling to slow down the economic growth that has been lifting millions out of poverty in order to avert a disaster predicted by climate scientists who, we now know from the Climategate e-mails, have been busy manipulating data, suppressing evidence and silencing anyone who disagrees.

Another is that American voters have shown a growing skepticism of such predictions. The cap-and-trade bill that Obama hoped to brag about in Copenhagen now clearly has no chance of passage in the Senate.

And that is one of the key pieces of legislation in the Dem library.

There is still some chance that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can corral 60 Democratic votes for whatever health care bill he unveils. But it’s looking increasingly unlikely — and increasingly politically suicidal for some of those 60 Senate Democrats.

Bill Clinton has told those Democrats that they’d be better off politically passing something rather than nothing. But his own job rating swelled only after his health care proposals failed to pass.

Hmm.  A bit of forgotten history.

“What’s really exceptional at this stage of Obama’s presidency,” writes Andrew Kohut, the Pew Research Center’s respected pollster, “is the extent to which the public has moved in a conservative direction on a range of issues. These trends have emanated as much from the middle of the electorate as from the highly energized conservative right. Even more notable, however, is the extent to which liberals appear to be dozing as the country has shifted on both economic and social issues.”

By the way, that last development is actually an old story.  We even saw it in the 1950s.  Once many liberals got over their infatuation with Adlai Stevenson, who lost to Eisenhower in both '52 and '56, they essentially dropped out of politics.  I mean, my dear, what is there left after Adlai?  Working people?  People who don't read The Times?  People who eat hamburgers?

Obama first came to national attention in 2004 by promising to heal partisan, ideological and racial divisions. Like the other two Democratic presidents elected in the last 40 years, he campaigned in the center and started off governing on the left. In Copenhagen and on Capitol Hill we are seeing the results. Splat.

COMMENT:  And may the splat continue to splatter through next year's elections.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 5:50 P.M. ET:  From the Republican governor of Nebraska, Dave Heineman, on the switcheroo pulled by his fellow Nebraskan, Democratic Senator Ben Nelson:

"Nebraskans did not ask for a special deal, only a fair deal. Under no circumstances did I have anything to do with Senator (Ben) Nelson's compromise. I, along with governors all across America, have expressed concern about the unfunded Medicaid mandate. I have said all along that this bill is bad news for Nebraska and bad news for America. Additionally, I criticized Senator (Harry) Reid when he got a special deal for Nevada that didn't apply uniformly to all states. Senator Nelson negotiated this special deal, rather than a fair deal for both Nebraska and America. The responsibility for this special deal lies solely on the shoulders of Senator Ben Nelson."

COMMENT:  Some people in Hollywood or Manhattan reading that statement would probably express wonderment that those people out there - the flyover people - can actually write English.  When did this happen?  My gawd.

It's a fine statement.  Republicans are asking a simple and devastating question:  If this health "reform" bill is so good, why have so many private deals with individual senators been needed to pass it?  So far, there's been no answer.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

AND THE POLLS KEEP HEADING SOUTH - AT 10:20 A.M. ET:  Another milestone in Rasmussen's Barack Obama saga:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 26% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 (see trends).

Today’s update shows the highest level of Strong Disapproval yet recorded for this President. It comes as the Senate is preparing to pass health care reform legislation initiated by the President and opposed by most voters. That latest Rasmussen Reports tracking, released earlier today, shows that 41% support the health care legislation and 55% are opposed.

COMMENT:  Wait 'til they get to cap-and-trade.  And let's see if Obama fails on Iran.  And then of course there's "immigration reform."  From today's vantage point, it appears that it would take an economic boom next year to get the Democrats out of trouble.  Of course, then they'd tax it and jump right back into the doghouse. 

By the way, there are actually suggestions floating around Washington political circles that President Obama offer a guaranteed job to any Democratic member of Congress who volunteers to run next year in a difficult district, and is defeated.   But...isn't that the way the system works already?

You'll know the president is really in trouble when the kids come home from school with biographies of Dick Cheney.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

HARRY'S HOORAH - AT 10:05 A.M. ET:  Senator Harry Reid got his 60 votes last night, in a test vote on health-care "reform."  Not a single Republican went along:

WASHINGTON — After a long day of acid, partisan debate, Senate Democrats held ranks early Monday in a dead-of-night procedural vote that proved they had locked in the decisive margin needed to pass a far-reaching overhaul of the nation’s health care system.

The roll was called shortly after 1 a.m., with Washington still snowbound after a weekend blizzard, and the Senate voted on party lines to cut off a Republican filibuster of a package of changes to the health care bill by the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada.

The vote was 60 to 40 - a tally that is expected to be repeated four times as further procedural hurdles are cleared in the days ahead, and then once more in a dramatic, if predictable, finale tentatively scheduled for 7 p.m. on Christmas Eve.

Probably the only time in history when a Christmas gift is delivered, and the recipient doesn't know what he's got even when it's unwrapped.

Robert Samuelson, in today's Washington Post, sums up the damage:

Obama's plan amounts to this: partial coverage of the uninsured; modest improvements (possibly) in their health; sizable budgetary costs worsening a bleak outlook; significant, unpredictable changes in insurance markets; weak spending control. This is a bad bargain. Health benefits are overstated, long-term economic costs understated. The country would be the worse for this legislation's passage. What it's become is an exercise in political symbolism: Obama's self-indulgent crusade to seize the liberal holy grail of "universal coverage." What it's not is leadership.

COMMENT:  Elect amateurs, get amateurish results.

December 21,  2009   Permalink

A FUNERAL IN IRAN - AT 9:10 A.M. ET:  Major demonstrations in Iran, following the death of dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, who opposed the hard liners and advocated greater political freedom and rights for women. 

Some experts on Iran are predicting that the regime could actually be overthrown by popular action in 2010.  Today's demonstrations have got to frighten the boys in the Tehran government offices.  From The New York Times:

One Iranian Web site, Jaras, said that hundreds of thousands of people had come to Qum for the funeral, according to Reuters. The report could not be independently confirmed because foreign journalists have been barred from traveling to the holy city of Qum.

Iranian opposition Web sites said there had been clashes outside Mr. Montazeri’s home between security forces and mourners, who threw stones, The Associated Press reported. Another report said members of the Basij militia had torn down funeral banners at Mr. Montazeri’s home. The Iranian authorities had been bracing for a showdown: there were reports on Sunday of riot police gathering there, and Iranian news sites said the government was planning to close the main highway between Tehran and Qum.

And from the indispensable new website, Planet Iran, which is live-blogging events in Iran:

Buses filled with mourners heading to Qom have been blocked and returned. People have begun to chant: “This month is the month of blood, Yazid is going to be overthrown“, “Compassionate Montazeri, your path will continue, even if the dictator rains bullets on us“, “Honorable spiritual man, felicitations on your liberation“, “Death to the Dictator“….and the green slogans continue.

Not only has Ahmadinejad not sent a message of condolences to the Montazeri family but Sadegh Larijani, the head of the judiciary, Ali Larijani, the head of the Majles (Islamic parliament) and members of the Majles have also refrained from conveying their sympathies to Montazeris.

We have not yet recorded any reaction by the Obama administration to the huge outpouring of support for human rights. 

I guess our new messiah isn't too high on freedom.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

EINSTEIN - THE GUY AND GLOBAL WARMING - AT 8:37 A.M. ET:  Last night I watched a pre-recorded History Channel program, "Einstein."  I strongly recommend that all readers see this program when it's rebroadcast. 

I'm no longer a great enthusiast of the History Channel.  Shows like "Ice Road Truckers" and "Pawn Stars," while very entertaining, don't strike me as great history.  But "Einstein" is superb...because it's so relevant to the debate over global warming.  The program examines Einstein's efforts to get his general theory of relativity accepted, and shows us how real science proceeds.  It isn't a "consensus."  It isn't a bunch of idealogues meeting in Copenhagen.  It isn't a new American president waving his Chicago-trained hand and rolling back the oceans.  It's proof and observation.

Einstein, after all, was trying to overturn part of the work of Sir Isaac Newton.  He was trying to reverse hundreds of years of accepted physics. 

The program takes us through Einstein's struggle, and demonstrates how the theory was finally proved, by a scientific experiment using a camera directed at a solar eclipse. 

I felt a sense of anger while watching this program - noting how real scientists, almost a century ago, went about proving or disproving Einstein's theory, and comparing it to today's publicity machines surrounding global warming. 

The program also teaches what is perhaps the most valuable lesson in examining global warming, or any other theory - that science is often wrong, that an inaccurate idea can be accepted for centuries, and that only real science, subjected to the most scrupulous examination, is worthy.

December 21, 2009   Permalink

FOLLOW THE MONEY - AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  That's one of the first rules of journalism.  Good journalists always look at the money trail in any issue.  Lazy journalists don't.  Biased journalists refuse to, fearing where the trail may lead - like the trail that goes from Mideast treasuries to Jimmah Carter's house.

As the magnifier is applied, day by day, to "global warming," we are amazed at what the money trail tells us we follow the yellow-brick-of-gold road.  From London's Telegraph:

No one in the world exercised more influence on the events leading up to the Copenhagen conference on global warming than Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and mastermind of its latest report in 2007.

Although Dr Pachauri is often presented as a scientist (he was even once described by the BBC as “the world’s top climate scientist”), as a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics he has no qualifications in climate science at all.

What has also almost entirely escaped attention, however, is how Dr Pachauri has established an astonishing worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCC’s policy recommendations.
These outfits include banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds heavily involved in ‘carbon trading’ and ‘sustainable technologies’, which together make up the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.

What?  Are we questioning the integrity of this brave, international public servant?

Yeah.

Today, in addition to his role as chairman of the IPCC, Dr Pachauri occupies more than a score of such posts, acting as director or adviser to many of the bodies which play a leading role in what has become known as the international ‘climate industry’.

Ditto Al Gore.  Ditto a lot of other people who have suddenly discovered that the sky is falling, but will stay in place if only we allow them to cash in.

The money behind "global warming" is worth a major journalistic investigation.  Will we get one?  Fox News did an investigative report on the global warming issue last night, and it was solid.  But Fox seems a deer in the wilderness.  What we need is something massive. 

There is something very ugly going on, and the public has a right to know.

December 21,  2009   Permalink