Weather Channel Founder Says Climate Change Is a Myth

From insider.foxnews.com (Oct. 27):

Many officials in the Obama administration - including Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama himself - have repeatedly hammered home the message that climate change is one of mankind's greatest threats.

According to Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman, however, there is no scientific proof that supports man-made climate change.

Coleman joined Megyn Kelly on The Kelly File tonight to discuss the "myth" of the alleged climate crisis.

"It's very difficult for anybody to be against it because the media has told the nation day after day for 20 years that the oceans are rising, the polar bears are dying, the ice is melting, that storms are going to sweep the Earth and we're all going to die of a heat wave," Coleman said.

He added that he's not alone in doubting the science behind man-made climate change: 9,000 experts with PhD's and 31 scientists have signed a petition stating that carbon dioxide is not a significant greenhouse gas and that much of the research behind climate change is "bad, bad science." [read more]

It’s not just bad, bad science it is pseudoscience. Al Gore and other climate change zealots would call this guy and the other 31 scientists--heretics.

Answer me this: If meteorologists can only predict weather a few days in advance then how can climatologists (meteorologists who get gov’t grants) predict climate change many years off? I mean that’s almost in fortune teller territory. Except using crystal balls the climatologists are using inaccurate computer models. I have nothing against computer models—meteorologists use them all the time—but if they are not calibrated right you will always get garbage coming out.

Just like Obamacare, climate change is just another way of controlling people’s lives—read: their liberty. 

North Korea Now Has Nuclear Warheads for Missiles

From The Daily Signal.com (Oct. 27):

North Korea now has the ability to produce a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can be mounted atop a ballistic missile.

That is the assessment of Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, the senior U.S. commander on the Korean Peninsula, as he talked to reporters Friday. Scaparrotti also concluded that Pyongyang has a functioning long-range mobile missile launcher.

Although North Korea has conducted three nuclear explosion tests and several medium-and long-range missile test firings, it had not been known whether the regime had developed a nuclear warhead sufficiently small to fit on top of a missile with the range to reach the continental United States.

“Personally I think that they certainly have had the expertise in the past. They’ve had the right connections [with Iran and Pakistan],” commented Scaparrotti, “and so I believe have the capability to have miniaturized a [nuclear] device at this point, and they have the technology to potentially actually deliver what they say they have [and] I think they have a launcher that will carry it at this point.” [read more]

Great. A crazy dictator with a nuke. What’s next the leader of Iran getting nuclear weapons?

The “Independent” Candidate

There is an independent party candidate running in my state of Kansas for the Senate name of Greg Orman. He says he is independent of both of the main parties but is he really? He gave money to Harry Reid and President Obama. He was formally a democrat. Just saying you’re independent doesn’t mean you are. It’s like saying you’re for hope and change.

Another reason I distrust the “independent” label is because most senators with that label are actually liberal or progressive. The American Conservative Union rates congress in how conservative a congress person is. Take a look at these so-called independent senators and their lifetime scores for 2013:

Angus King (Maine): 13

Bernie Sanders (Vermont): 6.3

Joseph Lieberman (Connecticut): 15.3

To be fair, Bernie Sanders states that he is a socialist. I like his honesty. Don’t like his politics. The rating for Joseph Lieberman was for 2012 since he retired in January of 2013. If you remember he was initially a democrat but changed to independent because the party bosses attacked him politically.

The reader might say three senators is too small a sample to draw any conclusion. Possibly, but you would think if they were truly independent their scores would be closer to 50%. Not way below 50%.  No matter what your party is you still have to vote your world-view or ideology. My advice is if you really don’t want to vote for the two main parties, don’t vote for an independent. Vote for a true third party like the libertarian party. I am not sure why the Kansas libertarian senate candidate isn’t running ads on TV saying he is the true independent candidate for the senate. Maybe, he doesn’t have enough money.

One other thing. I could not find any independent representatives for some reason.

President Obama Names Ron Klain 'Ebola Czar'

From ABC News.com (Oct. 17):

Amid mounting pressure to name someone to spearhead the administration's response to the Ebola crisis, President Obama announced today that he plans to appoint Ron Klain, Vice President Joe Biden's former chief-of staff, as his Ebola czar, ABC News has confirmed.

Klain, who also served as Chief of Staff for Vice President Al Gore, now works as general counsel at Revolution LLC.

The White House had previously already assigned Homeland Security Advisor Lisa Monaco, a lawyer with a background in federal law enforcement, criminal prosecution and crisis response, to work with the CDC and other government agencies responsible for addressing an outbreak on American soil. [read more]

If you read the five things to know about Klain you will find no medical accreditations of any kind. All he did was work for big shot Dems. And he was a law clerk too. So, why was this guy picked at all? In a word: Politics. That’s my guess anyway. This appointment smacks of cronyism.

Obama didn’t even include the new czar in his gov’t Ebola response meeting for some reason. I guess the new czar had more important plans.

America needs another czar like we need another contagious person on a plane or a contagious person walking across our porous border. But isn’t the HHS Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response,  Dr. Nicole Lurie, kind of like a czar anyway? Plus she has a medical degree. According to the HHS website her mission is: “to lead the nation in preventing, responding to and recovering from the adverse health effects of public health emergencies.” Hmmm. I don’t know, but sounds like what an Ebola czar would do anyway. More stupid bureaucratic duplications.

Chemical Weapons Were Found in Iraq — But the Public Never Knew Until Now

From The New York Times.com (Oct. 14):

Five years after President George W. Bush sent troops into Iraq, these soldiers had entered an expansive but largely secret chapter of America’s long and bitter involvement in Iraq.

From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

Andrew T. Goldman in North Topsail Beach, N.C. In August 2008, Mr. Goldman was part of a team near Taji, Iraq, that was trying to destroy munitions that could be used in makeshift bombs. While holding a cracked shell, he noticed a strange smell.
Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

The New York Times found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to nerve or mustard agents after 2003. American officials said that the actual tally of exposed troops was slightly higher, but that the government’s official count was classified. [read more]

So, Bush was right after all.

The Government Doesn’t Need to Charge You With a Crime to Seize Your Assets and Property

From The Blaze.com (Sept. 30):

Did you know you don’t actually need to be charged with a crime for the government to seize your financial and property assets?

Under U.S. law, it can take only the suspicion of a crime to turn lives upside down and seize the property of innocent citizens.

The civil asset forfeiture law allows government agencies like the IRS or the Department of Justice to confiscate anyone’s property without obtaining criminal charges against them.

Originally intended to seize the assets of money launderers and drug dealers, the law’s low requirement threshold has allowed government agencies to incorrectly identify someone as a possible suspect in a crime take their assets. It can take more than a year for an innocent person who has had their business, property or finances seized to be cleared of wrongdoing, during which time they can lose everything, said Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), who is working to reform the law.  [read more]

Yea, that is kind of unnerving. Almost unlimited power for the gov’t. I hope the representative gets his bill passed through Congress. The question is will Obama sign the bill into law?