|
Some pretty good tunes, too.Mann’s ‘Hockey Stick’ called ‘the most completely discredited artifacts in the history of science’ – September 21, 2008Excerpt: “There was no hint that the ‘hockey stick’ is among the most completely discredited artifacts in the history of science, not least thanks to the devastating critique by Steve McIntyre, which showed that the graph’s creators had an algorithm in their program which could produce a hockey-stick shape whatever data were fed into it.
Ah... Sorry to bother you Mr. Obama, SirExcuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir. uhm... know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . . ah... I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute okay, sir?
See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.
Hey, you have a nice place here! The wife sees houses like this on TV all the time and says boy she wishes she had digs like this you know? Is that painting real? Really? Wow. I saw something like that in a museum once!
Oh, sorry sir. I didn't mean to get off the track. So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been toConey Island? No, I didn't think so...
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be 'locked' or 'not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are... ... ...have them written down here somewhere... oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. OccidentalCollege records -- Not released
2. ColumbiaCollege records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13.Your Record of baptism -- Not released or 'not available'
14. Your Illinois State Senate records -- 'not available'
Oh hey... listen! I know you are busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you are busy, so I will just let myself out. I will be back tomorrow. And the day after...
'Who wants to know these things?' asks Senator Obama.
The American People, answers Columbo.
Physical evidence (the actual IL General Assembly vote tally [below]) shows that on March 13, 2003, Barack Obama voted for an amendment making the IL Born Alive Infants Protection Act identical to the federal Born Alive bill.
Obama then voted against the amended bill, making him more pro-abortion that any other U.S. senator, who all voted unanimously for Born Alive. It makes Obama more pro-abortion than [even] NARAL... which went neutral on the federal Bill.
Yet after the Saddleback Showdown on August 16, 2008, Obama stood by his lie when asked about it by CBN's David Brody, as shown on CNN.
Sen. Obama is currently misleading people about what he voted against, specifically claiming that the bill he voted against in his committee lacked “neutrality” language on Roe v. Wade. The bill did contain this language. He even participated in the unanimous vote to put it in.
On March 12-13, 2003, the Illinois state senate committee chaired by Senator Barack Obama amended the proposed state Born-Alive Infants Protection bill (SB 1082) to exactly track the language of the already-enacted federal BAIPA, by adopting Senate Amendment No. 1, 10-0. The committee then voted to kill the amended bill, 6-4, with Obama and the other Democrats on the committee voting against it. The bill that Obama and his colleges voted to kill, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law. The entirely non-substantive points at which the state bill language still differed from the federal law are shown in brackets below (except we have ignored differences in capitalizing).
---------------------------------------------------------Public Law 107–207 [Illinois SB 1082]
107th Congress
An Act
To protect [Illinois: concerning] infants who are
born alive.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, [Illinois: Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly: Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended by adding Section 1.36 as follows:]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Born-Alive Infants Protection
Act of 2002’’. [Illinois: no formal title]
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF BORN-ALIVE INFANT. [Illinois: Section 1.36. Born-alive infant.]
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘§ 8. ‘Person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’ as
including born-alive infant [Illinois: lacks this section heading]
‘‘(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, [Illinois: statute] or
of any ruling [Illinois: rule], regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States [Illinois: this State], the words ‘person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’, shall include
[Illinois: include] every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
‘‘(b) As used in this section, the term ‘born alive’, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her [Illinois: its] mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such
[Illinois: that] expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut,, Illinois: no comma] and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
‘‘(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny,
expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ [Illinois: no quotes] as defined in this section.’’.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning
of chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:
‘‘8. ‘Person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’ as including born-alive infant.’’. [Illinois: Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon becoming law.]
Barack Obama opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois. The law was pushed after State Senator Patrick O'Malley heard the horrific story about an infant born alive after an abortion from Jill Stanek, a nurse... David Brody can play it as straight as he wants to play it. But, Barack Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. He said it was because the state statute lacked federal protections for abortion. Once the National Right to Life Committee proved that excuse a lie, Obama called NRLC liars until the campaign admitted that, regardless of the facts, abortion laws would have still been hindered by the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.
All the spin will make you dizzy... After the media ignored the Obama campaign admitting that he lied about a vote he made in 2003... now Obama is accusing others of “attacking” him with “outrageous lies”! ....Don’t count on the media to do any fact checking. If they were interested in doing that, the documents and facts are easily available. I can see why Obama thinks he can get away with this. The media ignored his lies once, they’ll most likely continue to eat them up. Meanwhile, Obama’s arrogance and audacity will continue to reach uncharted levels.
Countrywide Financial Corp., the biggest U.S. mortgage lender, made large, previously undisclosed home loans to two additional executives of Fannie Mae, the government-chartered firm at the center of the U.S. credit crisis.
One of Countrywide's previously undisclosed customers at Fannie was Jamie Gorelick, an influential Democratic Party figure whose $960,000 mortgage refinancing in 2003 was handled through a program reserved for influential figures and friends of Countrywide's chief executive at the time, Angelo Mozilo. Ms. Gorelick was Fannie Mae's vice chairman at the time.
Another Countrywide client was recently ousted Fannie Mae Chief Executive Daniel Mudd, though it isn't clear whether he received special treatment on two $3 million mortgage refinancings he made when he was the company's chief operating officer.
...In June, a Fannie Mae spokesman said the company's conflict-of-interest policy "requires the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and prohibits acceptance of substantial gifts, including loans with preferential terms, from an organization seeking to do business with the company without prior review and approval by the company."Countrywide was the nation's biggest mortgage firm and was the biggest supplier of mortgage securities to Fannie Mae under an exclusive "strategic agreement" reached by the two firms in July 1999. Under the deal, Countywide agreed to deliver a large portion of Fannie's annual loan volume in exchange for special financing terms.
Together, the two firms took a series of steps in recent years that loosened their underwriting standards, including several reductions in requirements for documentation of borrower incomes that critics say led to a wave of fraud. The U.S. financial system buckled this month under the weight of hundreds of billions in mortgage loans to borrowers who can't pay them back.
While Countrywide was developing a closer working relationship with Fannie Mae, the company also had created a special path to handle loan applications from influential figures. The "Friends of Angelo" program channeled loan applications from celebrities, public figures and sports stars -- often singled out by Mr. Mozilo -- to a department where the borrowers received special treatment, sometimes including lower interest rates and a reduction in fees... Real estate records show that Ms. Gorelick received nearly the same interest rate that Countrywide provided to then-Fannie chief Franklin Raines, who received a similar loan about 40 days before Ms. Gorelick in the spring of 2003.
...Ms. Gorelick is part of a small group of Democratic Party insiders who received "Friends of Angelo" loans. Another previously undisclosed recipient was lobbyist Charles Campion of the firm Dewey Square, which represented Fannie Mae at the time of his June 2003 loan, handled by Mr. Feinberg. Later, in 2006, Mr. Campion became a lobbyist for Countrywide. He declined to be interviewed... ...former Fannie Chief Executive Jim Johnson, who received more than $10 million in preferential loans from Countrywide. The two men managed Walter Mondale's 1984 presidential campaign.
A better name for Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302) might be Revenge of the Community Organizers.
The Global Poverty Act requires that the President craft a U.S. foreign policy aimed at reducing global poverty by one-half the number of people worldwide between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.
To do so, it taxes the entire United States economy (our GDP) at a rate of nearly one percent.
The law refers directly to a United Nations declaration called the Millenium Development Goal, which calls "for a 'redistribution (of) wealth and land,' cancellation of 'the debts of developing countries' and 'a fair distribution of the earth's resources.'"
It effects a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy production - oil, natural gas, coal," "fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."
What it translates to is the surrender of U.S. sovereignty to the U.N., an organization generally quite hostile to our interests.
It seems a tad ironic that Obama would levy such an astoundingly high tax on Americans when CNN reports that his own brother lives on a dollar a day in a Kenyan slum.
And that Obama and William Ayers redistributed $110 million to improve education under the aegis of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) with disastrous results: "CAC's in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement."
The Global Poverty Act tax also seems odd given the egregious record of charitable giving by both Obama and Biden. The Democratic VP candidate gave a total of $3,690 on earnings of $2,450,042 over ten years. Barack Obama gave about $8,000 on earnings of over $1,000,000 over the four years prior to his run for presidency. (And I thought I was tight.)
Now consider that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the largest charitable foundations in the world, with current assets of around $35 billion and anticipated assets over the next several decades of at least $60 billion (based upon a huge donation by Warren Buffett).
How did Gates and Buffett make their billions for charity? Well, it didn't involve "community organizing." It was free enterprise. Capitalism. The pursuit of value creation.
Pssst. Someone needs to whisper that breaking news to the Anointed One.
Consider the Global Poverty Act an impending failure equivalent to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Only it will cost $1 trillion rather than just the $110 million that Ayers and Obama burned. And it will prevent the creation of great new companies and suppress charitable giving by the most generous country on the face of the Earth."I have 3 demands or I'll kill the boy!"
Negotiators assess the situation from next door.
Head Negotiator dispatched.
Negotiations begin.
Negotiations concluded.
In this country, we would block off the street, take 12 hours to talk him out of it, spend $1.25 million giving him a fair trial, and then pay his food and lodging for life!
No wonder their products are cheaper than ours!
In 1977 President Jimmy Carter signed the Community Redevelopment Act (or CRA) into law. As a result of "national grassroots pressure for affordable housing", it forced banks to underwrite risky mortgage loans in order to meet the needs of "the entire community."
In 1995 the Clinton administration strengthened the regulations of the Community Redevelopment Act. The CRA enabled consumers to secure mortgages with "no verification of income or assets; little consideration of the applicant's ability to make payments; [and] no down payment."
As the mortgage industry grew, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (government-sponsored entities, or GSEs) became a kind of "jobs program for out-of-work Democrats".
Clinton administration friends and staffers managed the GSEs including Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelick and Rahm Emmanual. This small group of executives paid themselves nearly $200 million in only six years' time.
The Democratic executives kept journalists and Republicans at bay by spending "close to $150 million on lobbying" in ten years.
Chris Dodd (head of the Senate Banking Committee), Barack Obama and John Kerry were the top three recipients of Fannie's money, together collecting around $360,000.
Over this same time-frame during President Clinton's tenure, the U.S. suffered through a seemingly endless series of terrorist attacks that were treated as "law enforcement" issues.
The attack on the USS Cole was the eighth consecutive unanswered terrorist attack on American interests during the Clinton administration.
The attacks culminated in 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in history. It smashed a United States blinded by the Clinton administration's artificially erected "wall" between the military and intelligence communities.
After the 1996 election, the Clinton administration also came under fire for accepting campaign donations from operatives of the People's Republic of China.
Persons who appeared to be agents of the Chinese government funneled contributions to the Democratic National Committee in direct violation of US election law.
The resulting investigation was hampered significantly because nearly 100 witnesses either refused to be questioned, pled the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination, or left the country altogether. Even so, 22 people were convicted for fraud or for funneling Asian funds into the U.S. elections.
Operative Johnny Chung, allegedly using money from the Chinese army, gave more than $500,000 to Democrats at the same time Clinton was approving a controversial transfer of satellite launch technology to China.
Let's not forget Clinton's 1994 veto of a bill that would have opened up a small segment of Alaska's ANWR region to oil exploration. At the time, Sen. Chuck Schumer said, "If we started drilling in ANWR today we wouldn't have a drop of oil for ten years." That was fourteen years ago.Say, that's quite a legacy. But can America really afford another Clinton or Carter presidency?
McCain-Palin 2008.
...Though it didn't quantify the effect of what it called pervasive misapplication of accounting rules on the company's books, the report by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight cited one instance in 1998 where the company inappropriately deferred $200 million of estimated expenses, which enabled management to receive full annual bonuses. Had Fannie recorded the expenses in 1998, no bonus would have been paid, the report said.
  |
  |
Democrats have blocked the development of new sources of petroleum.
Democrats have blocked drilling in ANWR.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the coast of Florida.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the east coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the west coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the Alaskan coast.
Democrats have blocked building oil refineries.
Democrats have blocked clean nuclear energy production.
Democrats have blocked clean coal production.
