Poll from January 2009.
WILL GUANTANAMO BE CLOSED BY FEB 2010?
YES - 83%, NO - 16% (5-1)
Do you think Obama has broken his promises or just grew with the office?
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
One more sign of the dictatorship of Obama and the far left.
Today (see (1) below) Obama acted as a dictator. It is not up to his administration to decide whether the law is constitutional. What would the left have done if Bush decided that Roe vs. Wade was not constitutional and outlawed abortions. Or the Medicare or Social Security was unconstitutional and stop sending out checks?
Other signs include: Despite a court order, the administration refuses to give drilling rights in the Gulf Coast. With a left wing Congress - establish Obama care that required people to buy a private product. Bailed out the unions by giving the value of the bailed out car companies owed to bond holders to the unions.
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-administration-drops-legal-defense-marriage-act/story?id=12981242
"President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex unions."
Other signs include: Despite a court order, the administration refuses to give drilling rights in the Gulf Coast. With a left wing Congress - establish Obama care that required people to buy a private product. Bailed out the unions by giving the value of the bailed out car companies owed to bond holders to the unions.
(1) http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-administration-drops-legal-defense-marriage-act/story?id=12981242
"President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since 1996 banned federal recognition of same-sex unions."
Why change from Global Warming to Climate Change?
On my iPad I have SkyGrid which searches for articles relating to global warming. It amuses me some to see the greens defend trying to defend their religion.
Why the change to "climate change" to global warming? Has global warming ceased? Mabye, but the real reason is they can explain everything on "climate change". Too wet, too dry, too much snow, lack of snow. A while back they said snow would be in memory only, I wish (see below(1)).
Do these greens not understand that the climate changes constantly? The constant movement of the earth crust changes the mountains which change the flow of air. The sun's energy output is not constant, nor is the Earth's orbit around the sun. Man has not been responsible for the ice ages of the past (see below(2)) nor the subsequent warming periods afterwards.
Climate-gate should that the green movement is a religion, not scientist willing to challenge ideas. They hide data, they supported suppressing dissent, hallmarks of a religion- not science. Science challenges assumptions, acknowledges flaws and mistakes. That the "so-called" models cannot predict the weather a year in advance so give pause to people who think they can predict climate 100 years from now.
(1) http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past
By Charles Onians
"Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries."
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Why the change to "climate change" to global warming? Has global warming ceased? Mabye, but the real reason is they can explain everything on "climate change". Too wet, too dry, too much snow, lack of snow. A while back they said snow would be in memory only, I wish (see below(1)).
Do these greens not understand that the climate changes constantly? The constant movement of the earth crust changes the mountains which change the flow of air. The sun's energy output is not constant, nor is the Earth's orbit around the sun. Man has not been responsible for the ice ages of the past (see below(2)) nor the subsequent warming periods afterwards.
Climate-gate should that the green movement is a religion, not scientist willing to challenge ideas. They hide data, they supported suppressing dissent, hallmarks of a religion- not science. Science challenges assumptions, acknowledges flaws and mistakes. That the "so-called" models cannot predict the weather a year in advance so give pause to people who think they can predict climate 100 years from now.
(1) http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past
By Charles Onians
"Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.
Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries."
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Things to Cut From the Federal Budget
(1) Orphan earmarks - some congressman want to give the money to the states they were originally allocated for, how about we give the money back to to the Treasury to lower to deficit and interest payments!
(2) Planned Parenthood - Caught in an "ACORN" like sting on how to give 14 year old abortions. They earn money giving abortions, the left should fund this operation out of their own pockets.
(3)Charitable deductions over $10,000. If a millionaire wants to give a piece of art to a museum, why should the taxpayers support it?
(4) Tax donations of stocks and liquid assets over $10 million. If Bill Gates gives 3 billion in stock to his foundation, he doesn't pay any tax on it and gets a tax deduction. Eliminate the tax deduction and make sure the government gets their share(about $1 billion).
(5) Eliminate funding for PBS. Let the left fund NPR and Bill Moyer. Let the right fund which ever is the supposedly conservative show their is on PBS. With cable and satellite TV, there is no need to fund PBS. Merchandising rights to Sesame Street characters, etc can fund those programs (along with parents). Or just sell advertising.
(6) Eliminate the subsidy for sugar, allow it to be imported at market rates.
(7) Eliminate the subsidy for ethanol - it is driving up the price of food across the board.
(8) Eliminate all farm/corporate subsidies that are not crucial.
(9) Eliminate all frivolous regulations. Each regulation should be include a reason why implemented, what the expected outcome should be, and a termination date if the expected outcome does not occur. Each regulation should be reviewed every few years to see if it is still needed.
(10) Streamline rules that will allow any person to start a small business.
(2) Planned Parenthood - Caught in an "ACORN" like sting on how to give 14 year old abortions. They earn money giving abortions, the left should fund this operation out of their own pockets.
(3)Charitable deductions over $10,000. If a millionaire wants to give a piece of art to a museum, why should the taxpayers support it?
(4) Tax donations of stocks and liquid assets over $10 million. If Bill Gates gives 3 billion in stock to his foundation, he doesn't pay any tax on it and gets a tax deduction. Eliminate the tax deduction and make sure the government gets their share(about $1 billion).
(5) Eliminate funding for PBS. Let the left fund NPR and Bill Moyer. Let the right fund which ever is the supposedly conservative show their is on PBS. With cable and satellite TV, there is no need to fund PBS. Merchandising rights to Sesame Street characters, etc can fund those programs (along with parents). Or just sell advertising.
(6) Eliminate the subsidy for sugar, allow it to be imported at market rates.
(7) Eliminate the subsidy for ethanol - it is driving up the price of food across the board.
(8) Eliminate all farm/corporate subsidies that are not crucial.
(9) Eliminate all frivolous regulations. Each regulation should be include a reason why implemented, what the expected outcome should be, and a termination date if the expected outcome does not occur. Each regulation should be reviewed every few years to see if it is still needed.
(10) Streamline rules that will allow any person to start a small business.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Obamacare Ruled Unconstitutional
"[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;”
The judge made the commonsense ruling that U.S. government did not have the power to force a person to buy a product. The Progressives who passed this law will try to say the commerce clause gives them the power. But do you really think the people who voted for the Constitution believe it was giving that power to the government? A constitution that LIMITS the power of government, especially noted in the Bill of Rights (i.e. the first ten amendments)!
The leftist say you are force to buy auto insurance - but that is true only if your own and drive a car. I once tried to get auto insurance without owning a car and was rejected (I wanted to avoid the high cost of rental car insurance). The leftist argument can be rejected in two ways: (1) it would force everyone to subsidize mass transit, just in case they might board a bus or train. (2) it would force all those who don't own cars to buy auto insurance. I am sure the Amish would be pleased to do that.
The leftist say that those who don't have insurance and can't pay force others to pay in higher premiums and costs. Well then should everyone buy food insurance and rent insurance? Because we are forced to pay for higher food cost to subsided the poor through food stamps and welfare aid.
If the leftist want to lower hospital emergency room costs, let them change to rule that hospitals are required to give emergency aid. There is no need to totally eliminate it - just change the rules to eliminate those that abuse the system.
The judge made the commonsense ruling that U.S. government did not have the power to force a person to buy a product. The Progressives who passed this law will try to say the commerce clause gives them the power. But do you really think the people who voted for the Constitution believe it was giving that power to the government? A constitution that LIMITS the power of government, especially noted in the Bill of Rights (i.e. the first ten amendments)!
The leftist say you are force to buy auto insurance - but that is true only if your own and drive a car. I once tried to get auto insurance without owning a car and was rejected (I wanted to avoid the high cost of rental car insurance). The leftist argument can be rejected in two ways: (1) it would force everyone to subsidize mass transit, just in case they might board a bus or train. (2) it would force all those who don't own cars to buy auto insurance. I am sure the Amish would be pleased to do that.
The leftist say that those who don't have insurance and can't pay force others to pay in higher premiums and costs. Well then should everyone buy food insurance and rent insurance? Because we are forced to pay for higher food cost to subsided the poor through food stamps and welfare aid.
If the leftist want to lower hospital emergency room costs, let them change to rule that hospitals are required to give emergency aid. There is no need to totally eliminate it - just change the rules to eliminate those that abuse the system.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Sarah Palin: America by Heart
Just started reading it, but if you want an understanding of what the Tea Party movement is about then read her first chapter.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Global Warming Question: Snow Removal
A recent post say the decrease of the Arctic ice will increase global warming due the lack of reflection of light back into space. So my question is: How much is man contributing to global warming by the removal of snow?
I look over my yard and I see the driveway and street may take up 20% of the surface area of our plot. If you include the roof of the house (which accelerates the melting snow) and the planting of trees were once was grass (and thus preventing the light from returning to space), how much more light is absorbed versus return to space? Add in all the extra cities, roads, highways and malls, etc that have been built in the last 200 years, how much has global warming been increased by the removal of snow?
I look over my yard and I see the driveway and street may take up 20% of the surface area of our plot. If you include the roof of the house (which accelerates the melting snow) and the planting of trees were once was grass (and thus preventing the light from returning to space), how much more light is absorbed versus return to space? Add in all the extra cities, roads, highways and malls, etc that have been built in the last 200 years, how much has global warming been increased by the removal of snow?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
