Monthly Archives: July 2016

The More We Know The Worse It Gets

Posted on by

On Tuesday Fred Fleitz posted an article at the Center for Security Policy website about new information concerning side agreements in the Iran nuclear treaty.

The article reports:

Veteran Associated Press IAEA reporter George Jahn made news yesterday by revealing a secret agreement to the July 2015 nuclear deal with Iran(the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA). This agreement says that in January 2027, Tehran will be allowed to replace the primitive 5,060 uranium centrifuges it is allowed to operate while the nuclear agreement is in effect with more-advanced designs, even though other restrictions on Iranian uranium enrichment remain in place for 15 years.

I believe this is a significant development because it represents another secret JCPOA side deal that the Obama administration illegally withheld from Congress.

This agreement means that in only eleven years, Iran will be permitted to substantially increase its capability to produce nuclear fuel faster and in larger amounts. Since Iran is permitted to conduct R&D on advanced centrifuges while the JCPOA is in place — and can expand this effort after eight and a half years — it probably will be able to quickly construct and install these advanced centrifuges.

Jahn reported that although this undisclosed, confidential agreement is “an integral part” of the JCPOA, Iran will not be permitted to accumulate more than 300 kilograms of low-enriched uranium for 15 years. In light of recent reports that the Iranians are already cheating on the nuclear agreement, it is hard to believe that they will continue to abide by this restriction after they install more-advanced centrifuges .

The article explains the significance of this news:

As with the previous secret agreements, withholding this deal from Congress probably violated the Corker-Cardin Act, which required the administration to provide all JCPOA documents — including side deals — to Congress before it voted on the deal last September.

…Jahn did not reveal a previously unknown flaw of the JCPOA. He revealed something more disturbing: another instance of the Obama administration’s deceiving Congress and the American people as part of its effort to ram through Obama’s deeply unpopular nuclear agreement with Iran — an agreement that is a dangerous and growing fraud.

Jahn’s report is more evidence of this and another reason the next president must tear up this agreement on his or her first day in office.

Another reason Hillary Clinton should not ever be President–she won’t tear up the agreement.

People Who Don’t Know Anything About Guns Making Gun Laws…

Posted on by

Maura Healey, the attorney general of Massachusetts, posted an article in the Boston Globe today. Attorney General Healey has declared war on guns.

The article reports:

The Massachusetts assault weapons ban mirrors the federal ban Congress allowed to expire in 2004. It prohibits the sale of specific weapons like the Colt AR-15 and AK-47 and explicitly bans “copies or duplicates” of those weapons. But gun manufacturers have taken it upon themselves to define what a “copy” or “duplicate” weapon is. They market “state compliant” copycat versions of their assault weapons to Massachusetts buyers. They sell guns without a flash suppressor or folding or telescoping stock, for example, small tweaks that do nothing to limit the lethalness of the weapon.

That will end now. On Wednesday, we are sending a directive to all gun manufacturers and dealers that makes clear that the sale of these copycat assault weapons is illegal in Massachusetts. With this directive, we will ensure we get the full protection intended when lawmakers enacted our assault weapons ban, not the watered-down version of those protections offered by gun manufacturers.

The directive specifically outlines two tests to determine what constitutes a “copy” or “duplicate” of a prohibited weapon. If a gun’s operating system is essentially the same as that of a banned weapon, or if the gun has components that are interchangeable with those of a banned weapon, it’s a “copy” or “duplicate,” and it is illegal. Assault weapons prohibited under our laws cannot be altered in any way to make their sale or possession legal in Massachusetts.

I am having trouble understanding why the state wants to ban AR-15’s. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic weapon. It is not an assault rifle. The AR does not stand for assault rifle as some people opposed to gun ownership would have you believe–it stands for “Armalite rifle, design 15.”

Yesterday The Conservative Tribune posted an article that further explains the problem with the Attorney General’s decision.

The article at The Conservative Tribune reports:

She (Maura Healey) ended her piece with the typical liberal huffing and puffing about “if Congress won’t act, we must” because of some “moral obligation” that we have heard far too often over the past seven years.

Furthermore, this woman revealed that she had no idea about the guns she seeks to ban. The rifles she spoke of are “state compliant,” meaning they fully comply with the state ban as it was written and passed and upheld in court. She doesn’t like that, so she is now moving the goalposts, so to speak.

Furthermore, her redefinition of “copy/duplicate” to include firearms that use the same operating system would seem to encompass far more than just the scary AR-15s and AK-47s she is fretting about, as the overwhelming majority of modern firearms, no matter what they look like, have pretty basic operating systems across the board (with some exceptions, of course).

This gun-grabbing attorney general has overstepped her bounds, and will hopefully be put back in her place real quick once the avalanche of lawsuits she has invited with her extra-legal actions begin rolling in.

See you in court, Ms. Healey.

Note to Ms. Healey–guns are not the problem. The terrorist in France used a truck. The terrorist at the French resort used a knife. Another terrorist used an axe. Guns are not the problem.

There are conflicting reports as to whether or not the Congressional Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 actually had any impact. People who want to commit crimes are not generally concerned about weapons that are banned and often have sources of weapons that are not interested in following the law. All a gun ban does is allow the percentage of the population that knows nothing about guns to feel safer (while being unable to defend themselves) and let the criminals know that they will be unlike to meet resistance when they commit their crimes.

The Contrast Is Obvious

Posted on by

There has been some media criticism of the fact that Pat Smith, whose son Sean was killed at Benghazi, spoke at the Republican National Convention. Democrats in particular criticized the fact that she was allowed to speak. Well, the Democrats have upped the ante.

The Washington Times is reporting today that relatives of victims of police shootings have been invited to speak at the Democrat Convention. Wow. Of course the Democrats at the convention expect all the benefits of police protection as they conduct their convention.

The article reports:

John McNesby, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5, said the union was “shocked and saddened” by the planned choice of speakers at the convention, which opens Monday in Philadelphia.

“The Fraternal Order of Police is insulted and will not soon forget that the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton are excluding the widows and other family members of police officers killed in the line of duty who were victims of explicit and not implied racism,” Mr. McNesby said in a statement.

He said it’s “sad that to win an election Mrs. Clinton must pander to the interests of people who do not know all the facts, while the men and women they seek to destroy are outside protecting the political institutions of this country. Mrs. Clinton, you should be ashamed of yourself, if that is possible.”

The Clinton campaign has scheduled former President Bill Clinton to speak Tuesday night with members of Mothers of the Movement, a group that includes relatives of black men killed by police such as Eric Garner of New York and Michael Brown of Ferguson, Missouri. Former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, who said the nation is a “powder keg” over the police-involved shootings and assassinations of officers, is also scheduled to speak.

I would like to remind anyone reading the above paragraphs about the details of the death of Michael Brown. Witness who said that he was surrendering have admitted to lying in their original statements.

The New York Daily News posted the following  information from the medical examiner’s report:

Ferguson Police Officer Darren WIlson’s account of the confrontation in which Michael Brown was fatally shot has reportedly been leaked, with an independent medical examiner’s report backing up his version of events.

Brown had marijuana in his system and was shot at close range in the hand, backing up claims by a police officer that that there was a violent struggle between the Ferguson, Mo. teen and the cop, an independent medical examiner told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

The report supports Wilson’s account, given after he shot and killed the 18-year-old on Aug. 9. Witnesses claimed the teen was surrendering when the cop fired. Police maintained Wilson only used his gun after Brown tried to take it – a life-and-death fight inside a police SUV.

The Democrats are continuing their war on police. It will be interesting to see if this wins them support.

A Really Dumb Political Decision

Posted on by

Ted Cruz‘s speech last night was a mistake–his making a speech was not a mistake–what he said was a mistake.

On March 3, 2016, Real Clear Politics posted the following:

Echoing the iconic moment from the first debate of the cycle, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Donald Trump all agree to definitely support the Republican nominee, no matter who it is, at Thursday’s GOP presidential debate on the Fox News Channel.

RUBIO: I’ll support the Republican nominee.

…BAIER: Senator Cruz, yes or no, you will support Donald Trump is he’s the nominee?

CRUZ: Yes, because I gave my word that I would. And what I have endeavored to do every day in the Senate is do what I said I would do. You know, just on Tuesday, we saw an overwhelming victory in the state of Texas where I won Texas by 17 percent.

…BAIER: Governor Kasich, yes or no, would you support Donald Trump as the Republican nominee?

KASICH: Yeah. But — and I kind of think that, before it’s all said and done, I’ll be the nominee.

…WALLACE: Yes, you will support the nominee of the party? TRUMP: Yes, I will. Yes. I will.

There were a few moments during the campaign when it looked as if Donald Trump was going to disavow that pledge, but generally speaking, he stayed with it. Governor Kasich and Senator Cruz simply chose not to keep their pledge. Governor Bush was also conspicuous in his absence from the Republican Convention.

I believe Donald Trump is the only logical choice for President right now. I believe he will support the U.S. Constitution, and he obviously loves America. I was truly disappointed in Ted Cruz’s speech last night. I believe Senator Cruz is a good man who simply made a bad decision in making that speech. As for the other Republicans who are behaving like two-year olds, they need to get over themselves and help elect Donald Trump. The irony here is that there is a strong possibility that Donald Trump will not run for a second term if he is elected. The behavior of some Republican leaders now will determine if the American people are willing to vote for them in the 2020 primary elections.

About That Bathroom (Locker Room) Bill

Posted on by

Lady Liberty 1885 (an amazing blogger) posted an article today about the latest legal actions regarding HB2 (North Carolina‘s bathroom-locker room bill). Twenty-three states are now suing the federal government for its attempt to force schools to allow transgender students to use the bathroom or shower facilities based on ‘gender identity’ instead of biology. One of the problems with this federal overreach is that it can be taken advantage of by non-transgender people who have nefarious intentions.

The article includes the following quote:

Via Alliance Defending Freedom:

“The Obama administration cannot unilaterally redefine federal law to serve its own political ends and lawlessly impose its will on local schools. Twenty-three states have now filed suit to stop this overreach, designed to force students to shower and undress in the same locker rooms and to share rooms on overnight trips with students of the opposite sex—something they shouldn’t ever be forced to do. The administration has exceeded its authority in threatening schools that choose to protect children’s privacy. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and the growing number of states across the country who joined him in this lawsuit are to be commended for exercising common sense and defending the privacy and safety of children.”
– Alliance Defending Freedom Legal Counsel Kellie Fiedorek

The article reports on North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory‘s efforts to defend HB2:

A hearing has been set for August 1st at 10 a.m. in Winston-Salem by U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder, who will hear arguments on whether or not to block provisions of HB 2 while another lawsuit filed by six North Carolinia citizens is still pending in federal court.

Schroeder also indicated that there might be a consolidation of lawsuits at some point.

Transgender in children is a relatively new thing. Transgenders represent a very small number of people. I don’t want to see any group of people mistreated, but I think in this case we need to protect our children from people with evil intentions. There have been a number of incidents of people who are not transgender claiming to be transgender for evil purposes. We need to protect our children. If that means separate bathrooms for transgenders, so be it. At least everyone, including the transgenders, would be safe.

At Least Some Of The Internal Revenue Service Is Being Held Accountable

Posted on by

The Washington Examiner is reporting today that three IRS workers are facing prison time for defrauding the government. The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration detailed the charges today.

The article reports:

Paul G. Hurley, who worked in Seattle, was found guilty of taking bribes from a part owner of a chain of recreational marijuana shops.

“Hurley seemed sympathetic to the taxpayer regarding the [Internal Revenue Code’s] prohibition against deductions and credits for businesses in the marijuana industry and talked about being unhappy at the IRS,” the watchdog said.

Hurley bragged about saving the business owner $1 million, and said he was living “paycheck to paycheck.”

“Initially, Hurley wanted the taxpayer to pay off his student loans in small amounts over time, but when the taxpayer declined, Hurley said he wanted cash,” the watchdog said. “Hurley and the taxpayer scheduled a time to meet several days later. Hurley told the taxpayer not to tell anyone, not even his business partner.”

Hurley took a $5,000 payment, and then a $15,000 payment from the business owner. He was sentenced to 30 months in prison, plus three years of probation.

Creshika Wise pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft back in May.

Wise was an IRS revenue agent in Atlanta, and developed a scheme to ensure that all or part of a $758,846 payment due to the IRS would go to herself.

Kimberley Brown-English was found guilty of six counts of preparing and filing false tax returns.

She was an IRS worker based in California, and in 2011 and 2012, she filed income tax returns “in which she falsely claimed two dependents, a parent and a nephew.”

“Neither of the individuals claimed as dependents had a familial relationship with Brown-English,” TIGTA said.

The IRS is one of the most powerful federal agencies in the country. They have amassed too much power and have become politicized. It is truly time for them to go.

What Happens When Cultures Do Not Mix

Posted on by

The UK Telegraph reported yesterday that a French women and her two daughters were attacked by a man with a knife in the Alpine resort of Garde-Colombe, near Laragne, in southern France.

The article reports:

Initial reports claimed the man struck because he was angered by the women being “scantily dressed,” but a local prosecutor denied this. 

Raphaël Balland, prosecutor of Gap, said: “I wanted to quash the rumour currently doing the rounds because on no account did this man make such comments about the fact that the attack may have been motivated by the victims’ dress code.”

The attacker, named as Mohamed B, 37, “may have acted out of religious motives”, French television channel TF1 reported.

Despite the prosecutor’s denial, TF1 reported that he was angry that the girls were wearing shorts.

The mother had helped the attacker when he became ill the previous day, TF1 said.

Let’s look at this report. The article mentions later in the piece that the attacker was Moroccan-born and from the Paris area. The prosecutor obviously wants the media to avoid drawing the obvious conclusions about the motives of the attacker. The kindness of the mother on the previous day obviously did not impact the attacker’s intentions. This is what we open ourselves up to when we welcome people to America who have no intention of assimilating into our culture. The difference between today’s refugees and yesteryear’s refugees is that yesteryear’s refugees appreciated their new freedom and were anxious to become Americans. Unfortunately, many of today’s refugees want to turn America into the dysfunctional societies they fled.

Stories You Missed If You Watch CNN For Your News

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article today on how some of the media handled the coverage of the Republican National Convention. As you know, part of the Republican platform includes deporting illegal aliens that commit crimes. As part of the presentation last night, the Republicans included speakers who had been impacted by the crimes of illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, much of America did not get to see that part of the program because CNN cut away from the convention at that point.

The article at Breitbart reports:

Mary Ann Mendoza, Sabine Durden, and Jamiel Shaw, who each lost a child through crimes committed by illegal aliens, spoke from the heart about why they supported Donald Trump’s proposal to enforce immigration law and build a border wall.

Shaw, who is black, told the tearful audience in Cleveland’s Quicken Loans Arena “You’d think Obama cared, and black lives mattered … Only Trump called me on the phone one day to see how I was doing … Trump will put America first.”

But CNN, which lately fought to rebuild its audience by including more conservative perspectives, filtered out those voices, returning to the speeches in time for Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), who gave a good but otherwise unremarkable address.

A purported screenshot spread through social media with CNN’s chyron apparently describing these speakers as “impacted by undocumented immigrants” — a cold whitewash of the fact that their family members were murdered.

The network did carry the live speech of Pat Smith, mother of Benghazi victim Sean Smith. But it bracketed her speech with fact-checking, suggesting that despite her feelings that Hillary Clinton was to blame, there was no direct link to the former Secretary of State. CNN’s fact-checker later labeled the claim that Clinton was responsible for the Benghazi deaths as “false.” (Jake Tapper did push back, pointing out that the argument was that Clinton was responsible for her entire department.)

This sort of media reporting may explain why Hillary is still in the race despite a history of bad decisions, bad judgement, and basic dishonesty.

 

When America Does Not Lead, Strange Things Happen

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Clare Lopez at the Center for Security Policy posted an article about some of the emerging alliances in the Middle East. Unfortunately, some Middle East countries, feeling that America will no longer stand with them against the Muslim Brotherhood are beginning to align with Russia. Other countries are moving toward other options.

The article reports:

At the annual gathering of Iranians outside of Paris, France on 9 July 2016, where some 100,000 showed up to express support for regime change in Tehran, one of the guest speakers dropped a bombshell announcement. Even before he took the podium, Prince Turki bin Faisal Al-Saud, appearing in the distinctive gold-edged dark cloak and white keffiyeh headdress of the Saudi royal family, of which he is a senior member, drew commentary and lots of second looks. The Prince is the founder of the King Faisal Foundation, and chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, and served from 1977-2001 as director general of Al-Mukhabarat Al-A’amah, Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency, resigning the position on 1 September 2001, some ten days before the attacks of 9/11.

He took the podium late in the afternoon program on 9 July and, after a discourse on the shared Islamic history of the Middle East, launched into an attack on Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, whose 1979 revolution changed the course of history not just in Iran, but throughout the world. His next statement sent a shock wave through the assembly: Bin Faisal pledged support to the Iranian NCRI opposition and to its President-elect Maryam Rajavi personally. Given bin Faisal’s senior position in the Saudi royal family and his long career in positions of key responsibility in the Kingdom, it can only be understood that he spoke for the Riyadh government. The hall erupted in cheers and thunderous applause.

The Saudi’s understand the dangers of the Ayatollahs obtaining a nuclear weapon. They have also recently moved closer to Israel in a desire to contain the ambitions of the current Iranian government.

The article further explains:

The NCRI and its key affiliate, the Mujahedeen-e Kahlq (MEK), were on the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) list until 2012, having been placed there at the express request of Iranian president Khatami. Iranian university students formed the MEK in the 1960s to oppose the Shah’s rule. The MEK participated in the Khomeini Revolution but then was forced into exile when Khomeini turned on his own allies and obliterated any hopes for democratic reform. Granted protection by the U.S. under the 4th Geneva Convention in 2004, remnants of the MEK opposition have been stranded in Iraq, first at Camp Ashraf and now in Camp Liberty near Baghdad since U.S. forces left Iraq. Completely disarmed and defenseless, the 2,000 or so remaining residents of Camp Liberty, who are desperately seeking resettlement, come under periodic deadly attack by Iraqi forces under Iranian Qods Force direction. The most recent rocket attack on July 4th, 2016 set much of the camp ablaze and devastated the Iranians’ unprotected mobile homes. The MEK/NCRI fought their terrorist designations in the courts in both Europe and the U.S., finally winning removal in 2012. The NCRI’s national headquarters are now located in downtown Washington, DC, from where they work intensively with Congress, the media, and U.S. society to urge regime change and a genuinely liberal democratic platform for Iran.

Unfortunately, in 2009 when Iran had a genuine opportunity for a democratic government, President Obama chose to ignore the green revolution. The President was more interested in reaching a nuclear deal with a government that routinely preaches, “Death to America” than helping the Iranian people find freedom. America has become an enemy of freedom rather than a beacon of light in a dark world.

Headed Our Way?

Posted on by

The UK Express posted a story today about the problems Germany is facing in attempting to deport thousands of migrants scheduled to be flown to their homelands.

The article reports:

A secret report by interior ministers of all of Germany’s 16 states says tens of thousands of migrants scheduled to be flown to their homelands in the past few months are still in the country being cared for by taxpayers.

The problem centres on incomplete paperwork, migrants lying about where they come from and the country’s own medical profession.

It is reported that hundreds of doctors are refusing to sign certificates stating that those intended for expulsion are fit to fly.

Germany’s Spiegel magazine highlighted the problem this week as the overburdened local authorities call on Berlin to bring in tougher laws to reinforce Angela Merkel‘s pledge that illegal asylum seekers would be sent home.

…The report of the interior ministers says the refugees earmarked for returning home often display a “brazen denial of full and correct information on their person and origin. We must question whether the rule of law had not completely failed.”

The ministers are calling for Berlin to make identity concealment a specific crime and for public prosecutors to be empowered to impose stiffer penalties.

As reported here, Germany has faced some challenges with its immigrant population. Young women have been attacked by Muslim gangs on the streets, young Muslim men have engaged in inappropriate behavior in public swimming pools, and the immigrant population has shown no interest in assimilation. We need to learn from the experience of Germany. A better solution for Middle Eastern refugees would be to create a safe space in the Middle East somewhere near their homeland. This would avoid the cultural shock on the part of both the immigrants and the populations of the western countries they have immigrated to. It would also allow them to rebuild their nations when peace is declared.

Who Gets The Job?

Posted on by

This is not an article–it is just a question. Does anyone else see the problem with Donna Brazile and George Stephanopoulos doing the coverage of the Republican convention on one of the major networks? If you don’t see a problem with this, are you willing to let Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh do the network coverage on the Democratic convention?

The Face Of Sharia Law

Posted on by

The Los Angeles Times is reporting today that Waseem Azeem, brother of slain Pakistani model Qandeel Baloch, has confessed to killing his sister for the sake of the family’s honor.

The article reports:

Baloch, who had become a social media celebrity in recent months, stirred controversy by posting pictures online taken with a prominent Muslim cleric. She was found dead Saturday at her family home in the central city of Multan.

Police arrested her brother, Waseem Azeem, and presented him before the media in Multan, where he confessed to killing her. He said that people had taunted him over the photos and that he found the social embarrassment unbearable. 

“I was determined either to kill myself or kill her,” Azeem told the Associated Press as he was being led away. 

He said that even though Baloch was the main breadwinner for the family, he slipped her sedatives the night before and then strangled her in her sleep. 

According to the tenets of Islam, what he did was perfectly acceptable.

The article further reports:

Nearly 1,000 women are killed in Pakistan each year for violating conservative norms on love and marriage. The so-called “honor killings” often are carried out by family members. 

Such killings are considered murder. But Islamic law in Pakistan allows a murder victim’s family to pardon the killer, which often allows those convicted of honor killings to escape punishment. 

Islamic law is Sharia Law. This is what many Muslims want to introduce into our courts to supersede the U.S. Constitution. Sharia Law and the U.S. Constitution are totally incompatible–the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech and freedom of religion, neither of which are acceptable in Sharia Law. In Sharia Law, freedom of speech is defined as the right to express any opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah. It is also defined as the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari’ah. Free speech is allowed as long as it agrees with Shariah. Anything negative about Mohammad or any picture of Mohammad are not allowed. We need to make sure that anyone who comes to America is willing to live under the U.S. Constitution. If they are not, we need to send them home.

Another Reason Your Votes Matter

Posted on by

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article about ObamaCare explaining where we are and where President Obama would like to go next in American healthcare. It really isn’t good news.

The article reports:

President Obama recently published an overview of the results of ObamaCare in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

It’s a pretty extraordinary article, because in important ways it acknowledges that ObamaCare has basically failed—and it lays the cards on the table for what we always knew was going to be his next step.

…Forcing insurers to cover people who are already sick and to charge them the same rates as healthy people has jacked up insurance premiums for everyone else. So because the law didn’t make insurance affordable, Congress has to make it affordable by heavily subsidizing it with even more of the taxpayers’ money.

Obama also somewhat vaguely acknowledges the problem of rising deductibles. One way of staunching the rise in premiums has been to offer plans with very high deductibles—the amount a person has to pay upfront before his insurance kicks in to cover the rest. This keeps the premiums affordable at the cost of making the actual care less affordable by whacking you with huge payments if you actually get sick. Last year, the New York Times acknowledged that under ObamaCare, “sky-high deductibles…are leaving some newly insured feeling nearly as vulnerable as they were before they had coverage…. ‘We have insurance, but can’t afford to use it.’”

Obviously ObamaCare is not working in a way that is helpful to the American people. So what happens next? Don’t say you weren’t warned–you were.

The article explains the next step:

Like I said, this was predictable and predicted from the very beginning, but now it’s all out in the open. ObamaCare was always just an exercise in planned obsolescence, cobbling together a system nobody really thought was going to work, just so they could exploit its failures to push for the socialized medicine they really wanted all along. It’s telling that in this article, Obama boasts that the Affordable Care Act has increased the number of people who are insured, but his own data shows that the biggest driver of that is an expansion of Medicaid, which is not insurance but welfare—the system he wants for everyone.

As I noted back in 2009, a decade-long exercise in deliberately wrecking private health insurance is the most callous and destructive way to pursue that goal.

If that surprises you, look at Venezuela. When has the Left ever shied away from smashing everything to pieces in pursuit of government power? So we shouldn’t expect anything different here.

If we are going to stop this runaway train, and it is not assured that we can, the only possible solution is to elect people in November who do not support socialized medicine. How do you find this people? You look at the voting records of anyone who was in Congress when ObamaCare was passed. You listen to the statements of the candidates.

I have one final note. ObamaCare was passed through a budget reconciliation process rather than as a standard bill. This was because that type of bill could not be filibustered in the Senate. No Republicans voted for HB3590, the predecessor to ObamaCare, or the reconciliation. Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts (who was voted in after Ted Kennedy’s death) never got a chance to vote on ObamaCare because the Attorney General of Massachusetts delayed the certification of the election until after any Senate vote would be taken. The shenanigans involved in passing ObamaCare in the first place were disgraceful. It is also disgraceful that the Republican House of Representatives has not made a serious effort to defund ObamaCare. We need to elect people who will end ObamaCare and bring the free market into healthcare. Then America will have a strong healthcare system that serves all Americans.

Failed Coup In Turkey May Not Have Been As It Appeared

Posted on by

PJ Media posted a story this morning about the military coup in Turkey last night. As I have previously stated, I was hoping that the military would oust President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and move the country back toward a secular democracy. Unfortunately, that did not happen. It should also be noted that President Obama supported President Erdogan rather than the military who were attempting to undo President Erdogan’s move toward becoming an Islamic state. However, there may be another aspect to this story that is not being widely reported.

The article at PJ Media reports:

…Both Prime Minister Binali Yildirim and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called into news programs and told their supporters to go out on the streets and fight back against the soldiers. A short while later, streets in the big cities (Ankara and Izmir) were flooded with Erdogan-supporters, who even climbed on top of tanks. Fast forward a few hours and it was officially announced that the coup had failed, and that Erdogan and his AK Party remained in power. About 1500 soldiers were arrested.

As I wrote on Twitter yesterday, there were three options:

  1. The coup was staged by a small group within the military, which would severely limit their ability to strike.
  2. The coup was staged by the entire military, which meant Erdogan’s chances of surviving politically were extremely small.
  3. The coup was a set-up. Think the Reichstag fire.

The main argument against option number three is that there was some very serious fighting taking place, including massive explosions. Dozens of people have been killed. If this was a fake coup, it probably was the bloodiest one ever. That’s why many people are skeptical about this option, and believe it was just an incompetent attempt at a military takeover.

The article also mentions the possible result of the coup. President Erdogan will undoubtedly move against those who were (or who he decides were) involved in the coup. He will consolidate his power and move Turkey closer to an Islamic state. It will be interesting to see what impact this coup will have on the recent agreement signed with Israel.

Turkey is a member of NATO.  At best, that is awkward for the west–as Turkey moves closer to being an Islamic state, that alliance is going to be severely strained.

The article at PJ Media concludes:

Of course we now have to see what Erdogan’s government will do. More than 100 soldiers involved in the coup have been killed, military commanders were taken hostage, and Erdogan has vowed revenge. As anyone with even a bit of knowledge of history knows, the crackdowns after a failed coup can be as bad as the crackdown after a successful military takeover. Erdogan already wanted to change Turkey’s constitution and change the system into a so-called presidential system, meaning most if not all power would reside in his office. Nobody doubts that this is exactly what’ll happen now: he’ll draw all power to himself and ignite a major cleansing, possibly not only of the military and police forces, but also in politics itself.

The only possibly conclusion, then, is: no matter what, democracy will suffer a major setback in Turkey. We can only hope and pray that the consequences will be less severe than I fear.

I don’t know if it would have made a difference if President Obama had supported the coup. It is interesting to me that he was ready to depose dictators when the Muslim Brotherhood was in the wings, but not when a coup might have resulted in freedom for the people of Turkey.

Even If You Disagree–The Voters Voted

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart reported that the ‘never Trump’ delegates did not prevail in the rules committee of the national Republican Convention. Whether you support Trump or not, he won the votes in the primary election and deserves to be the candidate.

The article reports:

A last-minute plot to push a “conscience” voting provision through the RNC Rules Committee failed, virtually eliminating any options for the “Free the Delegates” movement to go forward and stop Donald Trump from getting the nomination on the convention floor next week. The rebels were trying to unbind pledged delegates for Trump to allow them to vote their “conscience” in defiance of state party rules.

“The Rules Committee has been going all day long,” Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes told Breitbart News just moments after the Committee adjourned before midnight in Ohio. “They all got along and we are going to wake up in the morning to a unified Republican Party.”

…But the conscience exemption failed to such a degree that the rebels are left with seemingly no options to go forward.

“That actually failed 87 to 12,” Hughes said. “So people are still going to be bound by their state party laws.”

#NeverTrump could still try to get 28 signatures from Rules Committee members to force the “conscience” provision onto the floor for a full vote by delegates — where it would need 1,237 votes or more to pass — but that seems unlikely. Only 12 committee members voted for it, so why would 28 suddenly sign a petition?

That should end the matter. I think Donald Trump has shown good judgement in his choice of Vice-President.

Mike Pence has been governor of Indiana since 2013. He also served on Congress for 12 years. He has a reputation of supporting the Tea Party movement. Think about this for a moment–the Tea Party movement has been the bane of the Republican establishment’s existence since the Tea Party movement began. The Republican party has been very willing to take advantage of the energy and volunteers of the Tea Party, but has not wanted their politics. When the Tea Party formed and was heard, it became obvious that the Republican establishment was not interested in reducing the size of government or government spending–they were simply interested in changing who controlled the government and the spending. I think one of the reasons the establishment Republicans do not like the Tea Party is that the Tea Party exposed the hypocrisy of the Republican party. If Washington is to be cleaned up, the Trump-Pence ticket may be the one to do it.

I doubt there will be any major fireworks inside the Republican Convention. I am not so sure about outside.

Why There Is A Coup In Turkey

Posted on by

The news tonight is that there is a military coup happening in Turkey. The plan is to remove President Erdogan from office. So how did we get here?

On 29 October 1923, the Republic of Turkey was proclaimed. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, a Turkish Army officer, was the first President of Turkey. His goal was to set up a secular state rather than an Islamic state. The Ottoman Empire, which Turkey had been part of, was an Islamic Caliphate. Ataturk was looking toward the future and felt that it was in Turkey’s best interests to become a secular state aligned with the West. Ataturk banned the growing of beards by men and the wearing of headscarves by women. He banned the call to prayer by muezzins, abolished the Turkish script and replaced it with the Latin alphabet. In response to the secularization of Turkey, Hassan al Banna founded the Ikhwan al-Muslimin, the Muslim Brotherhood, in Egypt with the goal of forming a new Islamic caliphate.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been in office since 2014. From 2003 to 2014 he was the Prime Minister of Turkey. During his time as Prime Minister and during his time as President, he has attempted to move the country back to an Islamic state. He has purged military leaders that opposed him, and moved his diplomatic ties away from Israel and toward the Arab countries in the region. In June 2015, the election in Turkey undermined his control of the nation and the direction in which he was going. The Justice and Development Party (AKP) lost its majority in parliament.

When Ataturk set up the secular state in Turkey, he regarded the military as the safety valve in case the democracy was in danger. In recent years, President Erdogan has removed military leaders that he believed would be a threat. Evidently he missed a few.

The latest story I have is from the UK Daily Mail Online. The UK Daily Mail reports:

The Turkish military has announced it has taken control and overthrown the government of Recep Erdogan as troops round up police and attack the capital Ankara. 

Eyewitnesses have reported attack helicopters firing machine guns in the capital Ankara in a bid to depose the Islamic government.

The military said they have taken control in order to protect human rights, however, prime minister Binali Yildirim said only a ‘faction’ was involved. 

Fast attack jets and helicopters were heard above Ankara and Istanbul after the military confirmed they had seized control of the country,.  

Istanbul’s Bosphorus Bridge and Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge were both closed after the military deployed roadblocks. 

Tracer fire from Turkish military helicopters was spotted over Ankara with fast attack jets flying combat air patrols over the city.

President Erdogan is reported ‘as safe’. A spokesman for the Turkish government claimed the coup has been unsuccessful and they are still in power. 

Erdogan used FaceTime to talk to a journalist on a privately run TV station to stress he was still in control of the country and warned of retaliation.  

If this coup is successful, it changes the balance of power in the Middle East. Before President Erdogan, Turkey was aligned with Israel in fighting terrorism. Turkey is a member of NATO, but as Turkey moved toward an Islamic State, that became an uneasy alliance. There have been reports that military aid given to Turkey under President Erdogan has been used to fight the Kurds–not to help in the battle against ISIS. A successful coup would be good news for the war against terror and good news for the freedom of the Turkish people.

 

This Might Be Nothing…

Posted on by

On Monday, The New York Daily News reported that Seth Conrad Rich was shot to death a block from his Washington, D.C. home. Mr. Rich was a Democratic National Committee staffer.

The article reports:

Seth Conrad Rich, 27, died early Sunday from multiple gunshot wounds sustained in an attack in Washington’s Bloomingdale neighborhood. D.C. police have found little information to explain his death. At this time, there are no suspects, no motive and no witnesses in Rich’s murder.

There is no immediate indication that robbery was a motive in the attack, police said, but it has not been ruled out as a possibility.

So why am I reporting this? A website called anonymous has a little more information. The website reports:

Seth Conrad Rich was the Voter Expansion Data Director at the DNC and had been working on exposing the recent cases of election fraud and voter suppression during the recent primaries around the country.

This killing could simply be a robbery gone bad or it could be another person added to the list of people associated in some way with the Clintons who have died under mysterious circumstances.

This Might Be Part Of The Problem

Posted on by

The Washington Examiner posted an article today about a statement made by Senator Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., during a Thursday appearance on MSNBC‘s “Morning Joe.”

Senator McCaskill stated, “Part of the problem is that our framers were a little maniacal in that if you look at other democracies around the world, when one party wins the congressional branch, they take the executive branch. Not in our country.”

The Senator might want to take a look at the statement of James Madison in Federalist Papers, No. 47, p. 301. He states, “The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tryanny.” The separation of powers did not mean that the branches always had to work together, the separation was to provide checks and balances on each branch from the other branches. It wasn’t maniacal–it was brilliant in its understanding of human nature.

The article further reports:

The senator, who has endorsed fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, said that if “Donald Trump would bother to read the Constitution he would understand that that means there is a special obligation to try to unite.”

“Hey listen, I think the Founding Fathers were geniuses. And that’s why I’m somebody who likes to preach the gospel of compromise. That’s what they wanted. They wanted us to compromise.”

They didn’t want us to compromise–they wanted us to follow the Constitution and limit the power of government. We have not done a very good job of either!

It Depends On What You Mean By Free Speech

Posted on by

I am about to get into the weeds here, but I want to explain what is happening to our freedom of speech in America and where the threat to the First Amendment is coming from.

In his book Catastrophic Failure, Stephen Coughlin explains, “In the United States, the initial amendment of the Constitution indicates the primacy of free expression. The framers of the Universal Declaration of Human RIghts–understanding that free expression is linked with freedom of though and conscience–mirrored the First Amendment’s intent in Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

“The Cairo Declaration addresses free expression in its Article 22, using language that parallels that of the Universal Declaration:

(a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah.

(b) Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari’ah.”

The Cairo Declaration embodies the Islamic definition of free speech. As you can see, it differs from the American definition of free speech. Unfortunately, there are those in America (some of whom have a great influence on public opinion) who are moving toward the Islamic definition of free speech.

The American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) has released a press release stating the the AFLC has filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.

The press release states:

Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch.

As alleged in the lawsuit, Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims.

Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.  However, because of the immunity granted by the federal government, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to engage in their otherwise unlawful, discriminatory practices.

As set forth in the lawsuit, Section 230 of the CDA immunizes businesses such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they “consider[] to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

…David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:

“Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government.”

Yerushalmi concluded:

“It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.  Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”

Unfortunately, there is an implied threat to those speaking out against Islam. Islam in its end game is about political control. One part of gaining political control is to silence any opposition. Although I can understand the reasons for censoring speech critical of Islam (protecting assets, employees, avoiding terrorist attacks), it is folly to believe that anyone benefits from being ignorant of the goals of Islam. Some Americans have done their own research into the Muslim Brotherhood Plan for America (laid out in government exhibit 3-85 from the Holy Land Foundation Trial– the first part is in a language other than English, the second part is in English) and realized what civilization jihad is. If this is a new concept for you, please check out the centerforsecuritypolicy.org for more information. There is a move to take away Americans First Amendment rights. We need to stop that move.

 

What Did You Learn In School Today?

Posted on by

The following essay is taken from The East Carolinian, the student newspaper of East Carolina University:

Posted on Jul 6, 2016

by Kai Jones

Ahhh, the Fourth of July. A day where most of us get a day off to celebrate how our country violently rebelled against our mother country Britain, so that wealthy white American men could carry out genocide against the indigenous, build a country on black people’s backs, and force women to be eye candy and servants. Gotta love America!

On Monday, America celebrated its 240th blood drenched birthday. And most of us celebrated with fireworks and consuming all sorts of meat products. We celebrate a day when America proclaimed it’s freedom, as it called an entire group of people “property.” And not much has changed. Muslims are terrorist, Mexicans are “wetbacks”, illegals, blacks are criminals, women are equal yet paid less, and if you have sex with anyone that’s not conventional you don’t deserve rights.

 But “Land of the Free, Home of the Brave” right? Wrong. The only people free are wealthy white men, because everyone else faces some sort of oppression. Hardly anyone in America is actually brave, because they don’t want to fight for what’s right. Everyone in America is perfectly fine with what happens, and when someone calls for change, people get afraid and call for them to be knocked off their podium.

Take Jesse Williams for instance. He stands up, calls for equality and accountability, and then someone feels the need to make a petition to call for him to be fired. A half-African-American man calls out the bigoted racist system that oppresses so many black people and he’s the racist. But as Jesse Williams said, ”If you have a critique for the resistance, for our resistance, then you better have an established record of critique of our oppression.”

Moving forward, my beef is not with the Fourth of July, as I enjoy the day off and spending time with my family, and fireworks and food. But plain and simple I have a problem with the attitude of the people who celebrate the Fourth with this patriotic, fake “I love America” attitude.

I understand that this attitude is mainly contributed by the people with white privilege, but celebrating a country that oppresses multiple sections of people is wrong. It’s like celebrating a serial rapist’s birthday. Because America did rape the Native Americans and the African continent and it’s people.

America is a great country…for some. But for people like me, it is a failing country that could use vast improvements.

I was made aware of this essay by the Editorial Team at the Beaufort Observer. The editors made a few very good comments on the essay:


This dude is entitled to his opinion. But he is not entitled to use our tax dollars, nor student fees, to express it. And make no mistake about it, the East Carolinian would not exist without our tax dollars and the authority given by the General Assembly and UNC Board of Governors to confiscate student fees from students at ECU. And don’t try to convince us of this nonsense that the tax payers and students with no choice have an obligation to provide the dude with a platform to spew his hatred.

…The real problem we have with this opinion piece is what it signifies about what this dude has been taught. He did not originate these ideas. He got them from a classroom or library and from professors paid by the hard earned tax dollars of the people of this state. And it is there that the new Chancellor should begin.

The article in the Beaufort Observer makes a few suggestions about how the new Chancellor at ECU might begin to change the culture at the college that produces this sort of thinking.

I, as usual, have a few comments of my own. If this student truly believes that the only people in America that are free and able to get ahead are those with ‘white privilege’, why is he bothering to go to college? If he is so oppressed, how is he able to go to college? How has his free speech been limited if he is able to publish this trash in the college newspaper? There will be no consequences for his horrid essay except that many people who truly love America will disagree with his point of view. No one will disagree with his right to state his opinion (except that it is sad that he is using a forum paid for by the government of the country he so despises). Just a side note, Jesse Williams doesn’t seem to be struggling too much under the yoke of ‘white privilege.’

Students tend to listen to and respect their teachers. They are blank slates, believing what they are told. Teachers have an opportunity to build positive, motivated future citizens who will be assets to society. Instead, many of our teachers are building whiny little self-righteous victims with an entitlement mentality. Maybe we need to clean out our teaching profession along with our government.

This Is The Text Of George W. Bush’s Speech In Dallas Yesterday

Posted on by

This is the text of George W. Bush’s speech in Dallas yesterday. The transcript is from Time Magazine:

Thank you all. Thank you, Senator. I, too, am really pleased that President Obama and Mrs. Obama have come down to Dallas. I also want to welcome vice president, Mrs. Biden, Mr. Mayor, Chief Brown, elected officials, members of the law enforcement community. Today, the nation grieves, but those of us who love Dallas and call it home have had five deaths in the family. Laura and I see members of law enforcement every day. We count them as our friends. And we know, like for every other American, that their courage is our protection and shield.

We’re proud [of] the men we mourn and the community that has rallied to honor them and support the wounded. Our mayor, and police chief and our police departments have been mighty inspirations for the rest of the nation.

These slain officers were the best among us. Lorne Ahrens, beloved husband to detective Katrina Ahrens and father of two. Michael Krol, caring son, brother, uncle, nephew and friend. Michael Smith, U.S. Army veteran, devoted husband and father of two.

Brent Thompson, Marine Corps vet, recently married. Patrick Zamarippa, U.S. Navy Reserve combat veteran, proud father and loyal Texas Rangers fan.

With their deaths, we have lost so much. We are grief stricken, heartbroken and forever grateful. Every officer has accepted a calling that sets them apart.

Most of us imagine if the moment called for, that we would risk our lives to protect a spouse or a child. Those wearing the uniform assume that risk for the safety of strangers. They and their families share the unspoken knowledge that each new day can bring new dangers.

But none of us were prepared, or could be prepared, for an ambush by hatred and malice. The shock of this evil still has not faded. At times, it seems like the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together. Argument turns too easily into animosity. Disagreement escalates too quickly into de-humanization.

Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions. And this is…

And this has strained our bonds of understanding and common purpose. But Americans, I think, have a great advantage. To renew our unity, we only need to remember our values.

We have never been held together by blood or background. We are bound by things of the spirit, by shared commitments to common ideals.

At our best, we practice empathy, imagining ourselves in the lives and circumstances of others. This is the bridge across our nation’s deepest divisions.

And it is not merely a matter of tolerance, but of learning from the struggles and stories of our fellow citizens and finding our better selves in the process.

At our best, we honor the image of God we see in one another. We recognize that we are brothers and sisters, sharing the same brief moment on Earth and owing each other the loyalty of our shared humanity.

At our best, we know we have one country, one future, one destiny. We do not want the unity of grief, nor do we want the unity of fear. We want the unity of hope, affection and high purpose.

We know that the kind of just, humane country we want to build, that we have seen in our best dreams, is made possible when men and women in uniform stand guard. At their best, when they’re trained and trusted and accountable, they free us from fear.

The Apostle Paul said, “For God gave us a spirit not of fear, but of strength and love and self-control.” Those are the best responses to fear in the life of our country and they’re the code of the peace officer.

Today, all of us feel a sense of loss, but not equally. I’d like to conclude with the word of the families, the spouses, and especially the children of the fallen. Your loved one’s time with you was too short. They did not get a chance to properly say goodbye. But they went where duty called. They defended us, even to the end. They finished well. We will not forget what they did for us.

Your loss is unfair. We cannot explain it. We can stand beside you and share your grief. And we can pray that God will comfort you with a hope deeper than sorrow and stronger than death.

May God bless you.

This is what leadership looks like.

A Little Honesty Would Have Been Appropriate

Posted on by

The beginning of President Obama’s speech in Dallas yesterday was wonderful. Unfortunately, it went downhill after that. There are two major lies that the President has been telling in relation to the shooting that need to be exposed.

My source on this article is a post at The Federalist website.

The first lie is the statement, “I think it’s very hard to untangle the motives of this shooter.” That’s an interesting statement when you consider that the shooter himself told the police that he “wanted to kill white people, especially white officers,” Actually I think that makes his motive pretty clear.

The second lie, which President Obama’s stated in his speech yesterday, was, “It’s easier for a teenager to get his hands on a Glock than a computer…or even a book!” That is simply not true.

The article at The Federalist reports:

For starters, it’s against federal law for anyone under the age of 18 to legally purchase or possess a handgun or handgun ammunition (Glock is the manufacturer of a popular line of handguns, not a synonym for handgun). It’s also against federal law for anyone to sell or deliver a handgun to anyone the seller reasonably believes is under the age of 18. As far as I know, neither computers nor books are illegal. And judging by the number of teenagers I see walking around with their faces glued to their smartphones, they don’t seem to have a particularly difficult time getting hold of a computer.

In 2015, Pew Research Center conducted a survey of teens to gauge their access to technology. According to the Pew study, 87 percent of U.S. teenagers had access to either a desktop or laptop computer. Eighty-one percent had access to a gaming console. The Pew study found that 73 percent had access to a smartphone (for black teens, that number was 85 percent).

At a time when the nation needs healing, neither lie told by President Obama moved us closer to that healing. It is unfortunate that at this critical time in America, we don’t have a leader who is adequate for the task ahead.

 

The Pseudo-Science Of Global Warming

Posted on by

Global temperatures are measured by surface stations. You can learn more about these surface stations here. But the picture below illustrates the problem with relying on the surface stations for exact information:

SurfaceStationsI post this pictures to illustrate the points made in an article recently posted at Investor’s Business Daily. The headline of the story reads, “June Hottest Month On Record? It’s Just One More Overheated Claim.”

The article states:

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said last week that “above-average temperatures spanned the nation from coast to coast, and 17 states across the West, Great Plains and parts of the Southeast experienced temperatures much above average.”

Well, OK. But what about those places where June was cooler than usual, or was at least nowhere near a record warm month. Real Climate Science points out a few spots where it didn’t get so hot in June and asks “where was this record heat located?”

…Real Climate Science also points out that, “averaged over the whole country, only 3.2% of June days were over 100 F, compared to 11% during June 1933.” Only 17.4% of weather stations reached 100 degrees this June “compared to 57.6% during June 1933.”

One of the points that has to be taken from this is the foolishness of trying to determine an average temperature for a country, let alone an entire planet.

The article cites statements by Bjarne Andresen, a professor at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen, who explains that because of the complexity of the climate of the earth, “the concept of a global temperature is thermodynamically as well as mathematically impossible to establish.”

As I have previously stated, the global warming hoax is simply designed to take money away from working people and give it to people who would like to increase their own money and power. This was very evident when the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) announced on Oct. 21, 2010, that it would be ending carbon trading. The CCX went out of business because Congress failed to pass cap and trade legislation. A lot of the leading Democrats in Congress were heavily invested in the CCX and lost large amounts of money when it went out of business. This was clearly a situation where Congress had a major conflict of interest. (See story here). On a global scale, one of the goals of the global climate alarmists is to force industrialized countries to pay a carbon tax to less developed countries. Oddly enough, most of the money paid would go to dictatorships where the people live in poverty and the leaders live in luxury. Clearly, global warming is a scam. Conservation and working toward a cleaner environment is not a scam–it is a worthwhile goal. However, we need to be informed and make sure we are supporting a worthwhile goal rather than a scam.

The article concludes:

NOAA would have more credibility if it simply reported that summer had arrived in the Northern Hemisphere in June and reminded Americans, particularly those in regions where June was cooler than usual, that, yes, summer is hot.

As I have previously stated, the best place on the internet for good information on climate change is wattsupwiththat.