Mike Shedlock

Satellite Data Blows Hole in Gobal Warming

 

Forbes Magazine reports New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds.

Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

Real-world measurements show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

Will this stop the global-warming fear-mongers? Of course not. Worse yet, even if global warming was a genuine threat, the cap-and-trade measures proposed as solutions are downright idiotic.

The Wall Street Journal blasted Obama's cap-and-trade proposal in March of 2009 in Who Pays for Cap and Trade?

Cap and trade is the tax that dare not speak its name, and Democrats are hoping in particular that no one notices who would pay for their climate ambitions. With President Obama depending on vast new carbon revenues in his budget and Congress promising a bill by May, perhaps Americans would like to know the deeply unequal ways that climate costs would be distributed across regions and income groups.

Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget director -- told Congress last year that "Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program."

An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would...

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.

Cap-and-trade confers benefit to existing polluters at the expense of new businesses who will have to buy credits from existing ones. It sets up lucrative trading schemes that will benefit Wall Street derivatives traders and those peddling otherwise economically nonviable clean energy schemes.

Cap-and-trade also benefits China, the largest, most flagrant producer of greenhouse gasses. China will not go along with cap-and-trade so driving up costs elsewhere only serves to drive business to China!

Finally, and as Forbes states, cap-and-trade is a tax on consumers who will have to pay for such nonsense.

If global warming is a problem, the free market (not derivative traders, not nonviable clean-energy schemers), will find a solution.

Fortunately cap-and-trade died in the US senate. Unfortunately, no amount of research is likely to stop GE and other beneficiaries (as well a misguided fools led by Al Gore) from pushing the idea.

Addendum:

Some people have attacked the credibility of the Forbes article. I knew in advance they would. They miss my point in writing.

My point is about the silliness of cap-and-trade as a solution. The Forbes article gave me a chance to reiterate those points and I took it. I side with the Wall Street Journal adding my own reasons as well.

My points are valid whether or not one believes in the merits of the Forbes article as presented.

Addendum II:

My friend "HB" writes ...

I have always said the global warming hysteria was essentially based on a hoax. Yet governments spend nearly $60 billion globally on such dreck every year!

What would you do if you were a climate scientist, employed in a discipline that received a few 100 thousand dollars per year of government research funding to study global warming?

If they admit it's a hoax, they are jumping off a huge gravy train.

Exactly. Money flows to those bound to a set of predetermined answers that dictate 1. global warming exists in a meaningful way and 2. something sensible can be done about it on the slim chance it does exist in a meaningful way.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Marita Noon

Climate Change Alarmist Alarmed They're Wrong

Email Marita Noon | Columnist's Archive

For most of the last decade, alarmists have rung the global warming bell. Back in 2006, when Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, was released, it seemed folks were beginning to wake up to the alarm. Public concern regarding global warming peaked following the release of Gore's movie and is now back down to pre-propaganda levels. Addressing the declining public alarm about global warming, Edward Maibach, director of the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University, said, "The erosion in both public concern and public trust about global warming should be a clarion call for people and organizations trying to educate the public about this important issue."

Ed, Al, et al, should be alarmed, as three different news items in one week add to the public's growing skepticism about global warming.

Most notable is the announcement of an "ongoing internal investigation" into potential scientific misconduct and integrity issues of Charles Monnett—the Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, whose 2004 observation of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the man-made global warming movement. Monnett's paper "Observations of mortality associated with extended open-water swimming by polar bears in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea" was released in 2006. (Interestingly, Al Gore started his for-profit company, Generation Investment Management in 2004 and released his film in 2006.)

The scientist who reported on dying polar bears gave the global warming movement its mascot—even though he wasn't studying polar bears. His study was on whales. He saw dead polar bears. While working on the whales, he made some observations based on anecdotal evidence—not science. Monnett's report is filled with words like: speculate, suggest, may, presume, apparent, almost, and could. The basic conclusion found in his polar bear mortality paper is that the dead polar bears were the result of high waves during a storm. On the last page of the report, he states: "Although a number of published papers have discussed implications of climate change on polar bears, to date, mortality due to swimming has not been identified as an associated risk." Despite the statement that the "poster-child" of global warming propaganda isn't drowning due to climate change, and regardless of the fact that there have not been increasing reports of downing polar bears (other than those mistakenly killed by the researchers), alarmists embraced the polar bear as the icon—making it into the star of An Inconvenient Truth.

But now, the integrity of the author of this foundational work of the global warming movement is under investigation—bringing into question the integrity of the entire theory.

On July 28, the Globe and Mail, updated a report that indicates that melting ice—which is supposedly causing the polar-bear drownings—is not caused by global warming. Instead, Canadian scientists found that ice is melting more quickly than the predictions and it is melting due to varied salt levels in the older ice versus the younger ice. Simon Boxall of the Catlin Artic Survey explained that it is a more complicated process than simple warming. "Because fresh meltwater is colder than seawater, that means relatively warm water is being forced upwards. And that may be part of the reason that sea ice is melting so much faster than anyone thought it would."

In the same week that the misconduct investigation was announced and the sea ice report was updated, The University of Alabama issued a press release heralding new findings from NASA's Terra satellite. In short, as reported in Forbes, "The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed." Another assumption bites the dust. Unfortunately, billions of dollars of taxpayer money have already been spent in questionable projects resulting in a campaign to promote expensive ethanol, wind, and solar energy to fix a problem that doesn't appear to exist.

Add these news items—all from just one week—to the climategate scandal, the overall lack of warming, and other predictions from the alarmists that have not been borne out, and one has to wonder how the alarmists can still believe. More and more, the American public is hitting the snooze button, and it is the alarmists who should be alarmed. It looks like they will have to find a new clarion call—a new way to spread fear, and a new way to restrict energy and control freedom.

Marita Noon is the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc.

FW: 72 Years Old

is 72 years old. Today, if Dorothy were to encounter men with no brains, no hearts, and no courage, she wouldn't be in Oz. She'd be in Congress!

Balance the Budget: Now is the Time

ARRA News Service - Tina Korbe, Hot Air said: When “Cut, Cap and Balance” failed the Senate and both chambers of Congress regrouped around new plans, the first to go of the three crucial elements in the House’s original plan was a balanced budget amendment. Neither of the deficit reduction plans presently on the table provides for the passage of a BBA. It’s also the element of CCB most frequently decried as unrealistic. But political lights from Thomas Jefferson to Ronald Reagan have called for such an amendment, as this video from GOP Labs illustrates.

Let President Obama say, “We don’t need more studies; we don’t need a balanced budget amendment.” If ever any unfolding drama proved the need for such an amendment, the drama of the past week has been it. Leave cuts to Congress and what do you get? CBO-certified gimmicks on both sides — even on the side of one sincerely trying to garner savings, one who says he also “wanted more.”

President Reagan Said in a Speech to the Nation on Federal Budget, 4/29/1982:
As former President Ronald Reagan says in this video, “Most Americans understand the need for a balanced budget and most have seen how difficult it is for the Congress to withstand the pressures to spend more. … We tried the carrot and it failed. With the stick of a balanced budget amendment, we can stop government’s squandering and overtaxing ways and save our economy.”

---

Tags: balanced budget amendment, President, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, video, economic recovery, conservative, the Economy, taxes, bankrupt, Balance the Budget, Thomas Jefferson, American people To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the The Blue View From MO Thanks!

Freedom and The Balance of Power

http://youtu.be/e5INFAuM1xI

Treason, Redux

This man, with some eloquence, says what I have been preaching for years. Intentional unconstitutional behaviors and actions are nothing less than treason.

Treason, Redux

By Michael Oberndorf, RPA · Monday, July 25, 2011
I don't know about you, but I always thought that it was an act of treason to intentionally undermine the Constitution. I also thought that intentionally committing acts that economically cripple the country, thus rendering her incapable of defending herself or standing as a sovereign nation was also treason. And doing this at a time when the country is, rightfully or wrongfully, at war, thus, giving aid and comfort to our enemies, in my never humble opinion, leaves no doubt that this is treason.
Since the Democrats gained an unstoppable, lock-step majority in Washington, we have seen nearly a daily occurrence of unconstitutional legislation being passed by Congress and signed by the "president." In the process, they took a deficit of some four-hundred billion dollars, and nearly quadrupled it in two years, by borrowing and "spending" like crack addicts, and leaving the American people, for generations to come, to foot the bill. I put quotation marks around the word spending, because much of what they did with our money was simply cash pay-outs to fat-cat, neo-fascist Democrat bankers, brokers, corporations, and big, corrupt unions, ineptly disguised as "stimulus."
We have also seen a rash of unconstitutional executive orders spewing from the White House, ostensibly giving the president power over everything from fishing in our oceans and rivers, to the lives of millions of Americans living in rural areas. In addition, totally unconstitutional executive branch agencies like the EPA have been let off the leash and set like snarling Rottweilers on the states and the people.
Lately, to add incredible insult to injury, senile, hate-filled Democrat senators have been out before the ever-willing cameras of the Ministry of Propaganda, aka, the "mainstream" media, calling those of us who want no more spending, no more taxes, and a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, who by even their own polls are a significant majority, all sorts of hateful, outrageous names. Despicable behavior that degrades an already severely degraded office.
And as always, the lies just keep on coming.
This whole "crisis" is a fake, a set-up. For two-and-a-half years, the neo-fascist Democrats -- and this includes every single one of them in the House, and especially in the Senate -- have refused to put forth a budget, forcing the government to run on continuing resolutions. In addition, they have passed legislation like Obamacare that has already killed jobs and massively increased the size and cost of government.
The simple truth is that Democrat "spending" has created our financial problems. Period.
America functioned just fine up until 2008. We paid our bills, and took care of the vast majority of our citizens. We had no need for multi-trillion dollar hikes to our borrowing capacity. We are being lied to when neo-fascists like Harry Reid (D-NV) tell us we need to raise taxes, when clearly, what we need is to stop spending and cut government budgets. If Reid wants more taxes, maybe he should look at the 47 percent of Americans who pay no taxes at all, and at corporations like Big Democrat Donor GE, who, in spite of billions in profits, pays no taxes, either.
The neo-fascist Democrats have made absolutely no good faith effort to come to a workable agreement that will not end up destroying the economy, and therefore, the country. They demand huge, damaging tax increases, and the only specific cuts they have named are equally huge ones, while we are involved in three separate wars, to our defense budget. They have no plan, except to follow the totalitarian strategy of Saul Alinsky, to destroy capitalism.
As for those of us still able to think for ourselves, we need to face a very difficult fact: America is on the very brink, just inches away from becoming a full-blown fascist country.
Our elected representatives, particularly in the Senate, no longer listen, much less pay attention, to We the People. Even liberal Democrats want the spending stopped and the deficit seriously and effectively dealt with. Not surprising, since during the hated Bush years, "cut the deficit" was the Democrat mantra. However, it obviously was just a ruse, as far as the neo-fascist Democrat politicians are concerned.
The economic "crisis" has been used to institutionalize the "public-private partnerships" and the government facilitation of select industries and corporate entities, e.g., "green" industries and unions, at the expense of everyone else, which is the classic definition of fascism. Combine it with the collaboration with the U.N. and Agenda 21 (http://www.freedom21.org/), and you have global, and thus, neo-, fascism. Can you say, "Germany and Italy, 1930s?"
Back in 1964, Barry Goldwater referred to the leftist infestation of government, saying "None dare call it treason." Well, that's exactly what I am calling it. If we make it to November, 2012, we REALLY need to clean house

In a recent column, Andrew McCarthy puts (the so-called debt crisis) this in perspective. He says it
took over two centuries (from the adoption of the Constitution in 1787 until 1998) for the
U.S. government to accumulate $5.5 trillion in national debt. In the last five years we
have accumulated the same amount of debt that it took the first 211 years to accumulate. It is still
accelerating.

Obama's pathological lying continues in debt speech

As Glenn has shown over the past few weeks, President Obama has a real problem with the truth. Whether it's stories about doctors cutting off feet and ripping out tonsils for money or even the story about his mom's battle with health insurance companies -- a growing number of his stories end up being false. Obama's speech on the ongoing debt last night was no exception as he came up with an interesting, yet not true, analysis of the economic situation America finds herself in. Read more at GlennBeck.com.

FW: Constitution Party Responses to President Obama

Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. A Special Report President Obama's Debt Reduction Speech – A Constitution Party Response  by Darrell Castle Vice-Chairman, Constitution Party National Committee   The Federal Reserve in Washington, DC Last night President Obama addressed the nation in primetime concerning what he called "a debate we've been having in Washington over the national debt—a debate that directly affects the lives of all Americans." The president's position as announced in his speech could be summarized by saying that he emphasized compromise and what he called a balanced approach over the position of the Republican House. He said that compromise is a good thing, and he mentioned Ronald Reagan as an example of one who agreed with him about compromise. His balanced approach would trim $4 trillion from the deficit over 10 years. Assuming interest rates do not increase over the next 10 years, that would reduce the rate of increase in the national debt from a projected $10 trillion to about $6 trillion, leaving a national debt of about $21 trillion. The president asserted that the Republican no-tax-increase position is based on narrow ideological grounds and is not a balanced approach. He then attacked the Republican offer of a 6-month temporary increase in the debt ceiling. A six month increase, he said, would simply require that he and Congress have the same debate 6 months from now, and that would be unacceptable. He placed strong emphasis on the critical nature of the debt debate with mentions of possible job loss and cuts in Social Security and Medicare. If the debt ceiling is not raised, he told us, the US could lose its AAA credit rating and that would be a disaster for jobs, businesses, etc. In response, the Republicans said that they will not impose a tax increase on the American people, not even on those "wealthy people" who make at least $250,000 per year. They offer instead a program they call Cut, Cap, and Balance, which is designed to cut the deficit, cap the rate of increase, and start the process toward a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution. The Senate has already rejected the House version of Cut, Cap, and Balance, leaving only the president's insistence on a tax increase as the chief sticking point to prevent the debt ceiling increase from happening. Both the president's balanced position and the Republican position of deficit cuts, with a suggestion of a balanced budget amendment, are misguided at best and disingenuous at worst. Neither solution as proposed will solve the problem long-term. The president's position of labeling people who make at least $250,000 per year as rich and equating them with millionaires and billionaires must be intended to appeal to what he thinks is the desire of his base for the scalps of those people responsible for the financial mess the nation is in. However, a Government Accounting Office (GAO) report that came out last week put the lie to that position. According to the GAO, the Federal Reserve has provided more than 16 trillion dollars to banks, corporations, and other financial institutions all over the world. Employees of the Federal Reserve, including the current chairman of the New York Federal Reserve, were given special exemptions from conflict of interest laws so they could keep their investments in companies being bailed out. The president's refusal to accept a six-month increase also rings hollow, as does the offer itself. It is obvious that the reason for not accepting it is to prevent the debt debate from continuing into the 2012 election campaign, and the Republicans proposed it to make sure that it does. That is what this whole debate is about: power and the desire to keep it. I doubt whether the president or Congress really care how much we owe or what it costs us. What they each care very passionately about is staying in power. Their plan for staying in power appears to involve serious disagreement and debate, but in the end nothing of any substance is ever done and the root of the debt problem is never attacked. What is the root of the debt problem? Borrowing is the problem that makes our entire monetary system unsustainable. You can't solve a problem caused by borrowing by borrowing more; but the attitude seems to be "let's do more of what's not working – perhaps we just haven't done enough of it." The problem then is not just borrowing to pay bills and finance debt but literally borrowing our money into existence. The national government of the United States – "the greatest nation on earth" – as the president described it, has to go to a group of private bankers, hat in hand, to beg for enough money to pay its bills. This situation is intolerable and should be stopped immediately. The Federal Reserve should be disempowered and the trillions of dollars owed to it by the US Treasury should not be repaid. The Federal Reserve created that money from nothing on its computers and it therefore seems appropriate to repay it with nothing. The other thing that would have an immediate effect on United States Treasury debt would be to change our policy of making war to a more Constitutional one. Recently President Obama took the US military to war against Libya without even consulting Congress. That should never be allowed. Coming home, minding our own business, and fighting only truly defensive wars should be our policy. That would save trillions of dollars and countless lives. Our current path, the status quo, leads to bankruptcy, social unrest, and disorder, but if we would do the two things I just mentioned I am certain the most dynamic period in American history would begin. Please listen to Darrell Castle's most recent podcast concerning the debt crisis here: http://cptennessee.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/100725_0057.mp3 .    Note:  As an experienced lawyer practicing primarily in the area of bankruptcy law, Darrell Castle is well qualified to address the destructive nature of unbridled borrowing and spending. Mr. Castle was also the Constitution Party nominee for Vice-President of the United States in 2008.     You are receiving this email because you signed-up at one point for e-news from the Constitution Party of Missouri. Unsubscribe plbooth@centurytel.net from this list | Forward to a friend | Update your profile Our mailing address is: Constitution Party of Missouri 3775 Cindy Court Arnold, Missouri 63010 Add us to your address book Copyright (C) 2011 Constitution Party of Missouri All rights reserved.

FW: SNOPES EXPOSED

 

 

Subject:  SNOPES EXPOSED

Subject: SNOPES EXPOSED - SO IS THE OBAMA/KAGAN CONNECTION! GREAT READ - CHECK OUT THE OBAMA CASE DOCKETS!! Read to the end...

I had gotten the info on Snopes several years ago but did not know about the woman on the Supreme Court having been Obama's lawyer during the questions about his birth. Thought you might not know so am sending on to you!!

---

-------Original Message----- I heard years ago that Snopes was a left-wing operation and found it odd that there was absolutely nothing negative to be found about Obama when he was running for President. I should have known that George Sorros was behind them too. Most of us have gone to Snopes for verify information that we were not sure about. Now, come to find out, Snopes is not the paragon of truth we thought it was. I just eliminated them as a source of honesty and integrity. Please read and pass on to your email friends. Snopes is heavily financed by George Soros, a huge financial supporter of Obama! ������. In our Search for the truth department, we find what I have suspected on many occasions. I went to Snopes to check this out and they said it was false and there were no such dockets so I ���Googled��� the Supreme Court, typed in ���Obama-Kagan,��� and guess what? Yep you got it. Snopes lied. Everyone of those dockets are there. So Here is what I wrote Snopes: Referencing the article about Elena Kagan and Barak Obama dockets: The information you have posted stating that there were no such cases as claimed and the examples you gave are blatantly false. I went directly to the Supreme Court���s website, typed in Obama Kagan and immediately came up with all of the dockets that the article made reference to.. I have long suspected that you really slant things but this revelation is really shocking. You exist behind a veil of half truths and distorted facts. Hoping you will be honest and forthcoming in the future is probably expecting too much. ************* That being said, if you really didn't know THIS then your investigative reporting is a sham; Kagan was representing Obama in all the petitions to prove his citizenship. Now she may help rule on them. Folks, this is really ugly. Chicago Politics; and the beat goes on and on and on... Once again the US Senate sold us out! Well, someone figured out why Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court.... Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docket and search for Obama. Kagan was the Solicitor General for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owed her big time. All of the requests were denied of course. They were never heard! It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesn't it? The American people mean nothing any longer. It all comes down to payback time for those who compromised themselves to elect someone that really has no true right to even be there. Here are some websites of the Supreme Court Docket: When you look up some of these hearings and guess what?? Elana Kagan is the attorney representing Obama!!! Check out these examples: http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-8857.htm http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-8857.htm http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-6790.htm http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-6790.htm http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-724.htm http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-724.htm If you are not interested in justice or in truth delete this. However, if you hold sacred the freedoms granted to you by the U.S. Constitution���By all means, please��� PASS it ON! =

Revealed! Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls

Click Here to Order Now Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls Secrets of God Revealed By New Liberty Videos As a result of today's endless attacks on Christianity in books and movies like "The Da Vinci Code" and the recent documentary, "Bloodline," the Dead Sea Scrolls are in the news again. So is controversy about how the Bible was preserved, translated and assembled into what we know today. For those wanting to know the answers to many of the questions being posed today by those from author Dan Brown to "scholars" who question the authenticity of the Bible, a new DVD documentary packs a lot of amazing information into an entertaining an enlightening presentation. Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Secrets of God Revealed combines fascinating video footage and up-to-date information to produce a compelling educational experience that reveals a treasure unearthed over 60 years ago. This 3-part DVD is perfect for Sunday school, home school or private study. In Part One, Joel Lampe, a leading expert, shares behind-the-scene details on the 19,000 pieces that make up Dead Sea Scrolls collection. Discover the science, geography and history behind what many have called the greatest archaeological discovery of all time. In Part Two, Dr. Frank Seekins provides fascinating insights into the ancient Hebrew language. Even if you are not familiar with the Hebrew language, you will learn how much of the Bible is composed of simple, powerful and fascinating word pictures that beautifully illustrate the truths found in Scripture. In Part Three, Dr. Craig Lampe recounts the rampant superstition and ignorance that dominated the Dark Ages but then how a few brave men obeyed God and brought the Scriptures to the world. Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls will take you on a fascinating journey and give you a firm grasp of God's sovereign hand behind the preservation of the Bible and the unfolding of history. Click Here to Order Now

FW: Alert: Please Sign Tea Party Petition--To Fix The USPS

: Alert: Please Sign Tea Party Petition--To Fix The USPS
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 21:27:02 +0000

Click to view this email in a browser   Dear Patriot,   The American Postal Workers Union has launched a misleading national ad campaign in direct response to the Postal Reform Act that we have been championing.  The ad campaign claims that the USPS is completely self-sufficient, running solely on revenue generated through stamps.  In fact, the USPA runs an annual deficit of more than $8 billion. The bill is authored by Congressman Darrell Issa, and he issued a blistering response to the blatant lies advanced by the Union political ads. In a letter to the leader of the American Postal Workers Union, Congressman Issa debunks the idea that the United States Postal Service is self-sufficient and concludes by saying:   "While you and I have significant differences of opinion on how the Postal Service should be reformed, I believe we must be clear about the underlying facts. I ask you not to engage in a campaign to mislead the American people."   We are leading the way in support of this critical legislation..  Already, we have sent more than 80,000 letters to leaders in Congress asking that they support this important legislation. This common-sense legislation addresses the more than $8 billion annual deficit by reducing mail delivery days from six days to five days and authorizing the sale of advertising space. Together, we are going to pass this legislation saving the American taxpayer literally billions of dollars every single year.  Please take a couple moments and let your elected representatives know that you expect their support on this legislation (by sending a letter now!(hyperlinked))   The advocates of big government fear this legislation because it is only the beginning.  After we successfully reform the USPS, they know that other government agencies like the EPA and the Department of Education won't be far behind.  We have to start somewhere, and we will only secure a victory if you make your voice heard!  Note: There is NO requirement to contribute in order to use the petition software however your generous contribution will allow us to continue to offer this service to everyone, free-of-charge!  Thank you, Todd Cefaratti Freedom Organizer      To make a contribution by mail, please click here or address to: TheTeaParty.net | 1717 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 1025 | Washington, DC 20006 Toll-free:  866-928-6555   Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Forward this message to a friend Click to view this email in a browser www.TheTeaParty.net 1717 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 1025 Washington, DC  20006 Toll-free:  866-928-6555

---

Click to view this email in a browser If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe

---

TheTeaParty.net 1717 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Suite 1025 Washington, DC, District of Columbia 20006 US Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy.

old paths

Such are the wishes of most Americans (unless they be Dem Progressive Socialists) for we do have a collective memory of better times. The America I grew up in shared the values expressed herein; today's does not but should. When America allowed itself the idea the God could not be in the schools, classrooms, offices, and boardrooms then America became something different. The ideas of freedom were turned on their heads and we've allowed the leftists to frame the debates in their terms, Godless, valueless, immoral, with a political correctness they defined taking the place of moral behaviors.

This is a time when a return to the conservative values of our past would most greatly bebfit us. BO and his minions would destroy the USA through their own spendthrift excesses which they now define as fiscal freedom but which in reality is nothing but vote buying; paying people to vote for them for their own cynical purposes of power. The Democrat party must be defeated and its adherents exposed for what they are.

 

 

 

I wish the old paths were before us instead of behind us.   THE OLD PATHS  I liked the old paths, when Moms were at home. Dads were at work. Brothers went into the army. And sisters got married BEFORE having children! Crime did not pay; Hard work did; And people knew the difference. Moms could cook; Dads would work; Children would behave. Husbands were loving; Wives were supportive; And children were polite.. Women wore the jewelry; And Men wore the pants. Women looked like ladies; Men looked like gentlemen; And children looked decent. People loved the truth, And hated a lie. They came to church to get IN, Not to get OUT! Hymns sounded Godly; Sermons sounded helpful; Rejoicing sounded normal; And crying sounded sincere. Cursing was wicked; Drugs were for illness. The flag was honored; America was beautiful; And God was welcome! We read the Bible in public; Prayed in school; And preached from house to house. To be called an American was worth dying for; To be called an American was worth living for; To be called a traitor was a shame! I still like the old path the best!

The Last Word

The Last Word

"We have often heard that the devil is in the details. But these days, I'm afraid he's in the Oval Office. Who else would have run on the promise to radically transform America? Who else would have thought that America, of all places, required a radical transformation? If a normal human being were asked which countries could use an overhaul, he wouldn't be thinking of the United States. Would he mention Russia and Venezuela? No doubt. Would he have China, Yemen and North Korea, on the short list? Absolutely. How about Saudi Arabia, Syria, Cuba and Iran? Indubitably. On the other hand, it's actually the one promise Obama has kept. But, who else but he and Satan would even suggest that a nation created by such giants as Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison and Adams, had to wait 232 years for a leftwing community organizer to fix what wasn't broken? And when this arrogant pipsqueak chastises the Republicans in Congress for doing nothing about the debt crisis when they're the ones who presented and voted for Paul Ryan's budget plan months ago while this schmuck has been off golfing and fund-raising, does he really believe we take his words seriously? Great men, it's said, speak truth to power; Obama speaks power to truth." --columnist Burt Prelutsky
 
If Obama said it, you can know immediately it was a lie, a leftist lie, colored in red socialism, and had little to do with reality. This GasBag emits nothing except toots smelly with the stink of progressive democrat socialism and anti-americanisms.

For the Record

For the Record

He has a plan without details

"Obama ... claimed to have a $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. The court eunuchs of the press corps were impressed, and went off to file pieces hailing the president as 'the grown-up in the room.' There is, in fact, no plan. No plan at all. No plan whatsoever, either for a deficit reduction of $4 trillion or $4.73. As is the way in Washington, merely announcing that he had a plan absolved him of the need to have one. So the president's staff got out the extra-wide teleprompter and wrote a really large number on it, and simply by reading out the really large number the president was deemed to have produced a serious blueprint for trillions of dollars in savings. ... The only 'plan' Barack Obama has put on paper is his February budget. (Which was voted against by every Democrat in Congress so pretty obviously was defunct from the beginning. President GasBag seems only to be able to talk about things but never seems to be able to actually put any proposals down or make them public.) Were there trillions and trillions of savings in that? Er, no.  It increased spending and doubled the federal debt. (Hence rejected by everyone.) How about Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader? Has he got a plan? No. The Democratic Senate has shown no interest in producing a budget for two-and-a-half years. Unlike the president, Sen. Reid can't even be bothered pretending he's interested in spending reductions. But he is interested in spending, and, if that's your bag, boring things like budgets only get in the way. It seems reasonable to conclude from the planlessness and budgetlessness of the Obama/Reid Democrats that their only plan is to carry on spending without limit. Otherwise, someone somewhere would surely have written something down on a piece of paper by now. But no, apparently the Department of Writing Down Plans is the only federal expense the president is willing to cut." --columnist Mark Steyn

Conversation with Patrick L. Booth

 Conversation with Patrick L. Booth

------------

Michael Youssef  

A Liberal Is a Liberal Is a Liberal

For a long time, I have resisted using the terms “liberal” or “conservative” when it comes to both theology and politics. My experience has proven that those who identify themselves as theological liberals tend to also identify themselves as politically liberal and vice versa. My reasoning for skepticism in using the term “liberal” with theology is a deep conviction that either you are a true believer in the central doctrine that defines the Christian faith, or you are not.

I have now lived long enough to observe two generations of so-called “theological liberals”.

In the 1950s & 60s, those in mainline denominations who claimed to be theological liberals began preaching liberally from certain biblical texts. They used Jesus' words to support their departure from the fundamental foundations of biblical Christianity.

"Love your enemies"(Matthew 5:44) is one of their favorite hobby-horses. They use it to water-down the clear exclusivity of salvation for those who acknowledge Jesus alone as their Savior. This wrenching of Jesus’ words out of their context led to full-blown universalism—the inevitable outcome of the misuse of these words of Jesus.

Today, the successors of the mainline liberals of the 50s and 60s are the liberal evangelicals. You would think that they would try an original attempt at departing from biblical truth, but alas, they have not. Modern day liberal evangelical preachers continue to pull Jesus’ words like “love your enemies” out of context, to justify turning their pulpits over to Socialists, Muslim Imams, and all sorts of non-Christians under the guise of "loving [their] enemies."

When Jesus said, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,” He was speaking to and exhorting persecuted Christians. He was urging them to love rather than resent their persecutors, even pitying them for the blindness that led them to persecute people who believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation.

Jesus never intimated to the persecuted Christians that they should give their persecutors platforms in Christian pulpits to mislead the flock of God. Never did He mean that Christian leaders should exploit their positions to encourage followers of Christ to water-down or hide the truth, all for the sake of making the enemies of the Cross happy. Never did He intend for us to find common ground with the enemies of Christ so that we would be liked or accepted by them.

The opposite is true! Loving them can only be genuine when the truth is not compromised and the invitation is given to them to come and receive full and free salvation, thereby assuring them that they, too, can become our brothers and sisters in Christ. Far from hating them, we invite them to be transformed by the same power that transformed us.

Christians know, by virtue of their faith, they are admitting that they are no better than anyone else. Indeed, we saw ourselves as wretches, and that is precisely what drove us to Christ as the only One who can forgive and transform us. It is the knowledge that there is nothing in us that we can hold up to others and say, "See what wonderful people we are. You need to be as good as we are.” Rather, we say, "We love you enough to share with you the greatest gift we have ever received."

I deeply long for these liberal evangelicals to admit that deep down they want to please those who hate the truth. I want them to admit that they want to make people feel good about their falsehoods because they want to be accepted so badly and that is why they have abandoned the truth themselves. I want them to repent of their desire to please man rather than be a servant of Christ and so be restored to the true joy and freedom of their salvation.