Climategate: Money and the global warming Flat Earthers

Top UN scientists have been forced to admit that natural weather occurrences are having a far greater effect on climate change than CO2 emissions as a continued cooling trend means there has been no global warming since 1998. But despite overwhelming signs of global cooling - China's coldest winter for 100 years and record snow levels across Northeast America - allied with temperature records showing a decline - global warming advocates still cling to the notion that the world is cooling because of global warming! [ctrl-click to launch video of Ed Begley defending AGW with Stuart Varney] Caption Credit: PrisonPlanet.com / Image Credit: blahblahblog

Anthropogenic Global Warming Scientists, the new “Flat Earth” society?

Last week, a hacker revealed that a group of powerful, government-backed European scientists are controlling the results of developing global warming theory, and preventing clear debate or the development of opposing scientific evidence to AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming). It appears that certain more objective scientists run the risk --- if they present solid evidence contrary to the popular global warming theories --- realize they run the risk of being made objects of ridicule and marginalized in efforts to gain monies from Governments for research projects designed to discover facts ... that lead to the truth.

So on one side we have the “flat earther” powerful old-world scientists … and on the other side we have the “world is round” scientific-method based researchers who are continuing to discover facts … and thereby, the truth.

Powerful forces within the scientific community have been purposely shaping information in order to bolster a concept that, at best, is speculative and seems designed to lead to one human activity that these people think is perfectly suitable for their point-of-view ... a one-world Government, based upon a socialist model of CONTROL. This CONTROL is initially focusing on calling us to “Save the Earth From Destruction”, since a fear-based program is the only way to get free people to forsake their rights and their freedoms in the concept of climate stabilization and saving humanity from imminent destruction.

South Park's depiction of Al Gore giving a lecture that will give him greater riches through the selling of "Carbon Credits" based upon a flat Earth, AGW paradigm. [ctrl-click to launch "Al Gore EXPOSED" video]. Image Credit: Malagent

This excerpted and edited National Review Online –

Krauthammer's Take
On the announcement that President Obama will attend the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen
NRO Staff, Friday, November 27, 2009

Comments From Wednesday's Fox News All-Star Panel:

The global warming science is not junk science, but it's speculative. It's based on incomplete data. It's based on computer models that rest on assumptions — that, in turn, rest on an understanding of how the globe’s climate controls itself — that [are] extremely incomplete.

So its projections are speculative. But it pretends that, of course, that it is the hardest of all sciences and anybody who is skeptical is a denier — using a term used normally about the Holocaust, which is of course an event that actually happened as opposed to projections in global warming, which are speculative science.

So what you see in the [leaked global-warming] emails are people that are on somewhat shaky grounds. It is not as if there is no science at all in this, but there is contradictory evidence, such as the flattening of the rise in temperatures, which they cannot explain.

And their response is either suppression or manipulation or, even worse, the delegitimizing of — the personal attacks on — skeptics in an attempt to write them out of the journals, to get them fired, and all kinds of nasty stuff. … It puts a lot of their research in question.

I think what's interesting about Obama is he is going to be at the U.N. [conference in Copenhagen] to announce the [new] policy about climate change on the basis of — nothing. He is going to be proposing what the House has passed — that he knows is not going to pass in the Senate.

And we are actually a constitutional democracy where the president can't announce a policy unilaterally. It actually has to pass the two houses of the Congress, and our allies abroad know that, and they’re going to look at this announcement he is going to make and think it … extremely strange.
Reference Here>>

The United States has established no formal policy, yet our President, if allowed to do so, will gladly sign away our sovereignty in order to achieve the socialist political objectives of control found in the Copenhagen accords.

Further, scientists and Government forces who choose to use or believe in their conclusions that the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a fact, are no better than previous generations of leaders in their insistence that the Earth is flat. These people should be known from this moment forward as ... "Flat-Earthers"!

From The Free Dictionary:

1) flat-earth·er (flatûrther)
n.

One who stubbornly adheres to outmoded or discredited ideas: "If you don't accept the ideas derived from Adam Smith ... then you are [considered] a flat-earther" (James Fallows).
[From the long-discredited belief that the earth is flat.]

2) flat-earther
n.
Informal - a person who does not accept or is out of touch with the realities of modern life.

UPDATE - From Atlanta Journal Constitution, ajc blog:

The focus on the story has turned from the emails the scientists exchanged to the computer code their center was using to produce its data sets, which have been an integral part of the IPCC’s reports. Declan McCullagh at CBS News reports some of the findings so far:

One programmer highlighted the error of relying on computer code that, if it generates an error message, continues as if nothing untoward ever occurred. Another debugged the code by pointing out why the output of a calculation that should always generate a positive number was incorrectly generating a negative one. A third concluded: “I feel for this guy. He’s obviously spent years trying to get data from undocumented and completely messy sources.”

Programmer-written comments inserted into CRU’s Fortran code have drawn fire as well. The file briffa_sep98_d.pro says: “Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!” and “APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION.” Another, quantify_tsdcal.pro, says: “Low pass filtering at century and longer time scales never gets rid of the trend – so eventually I start to scale down the 120-yr low pass time series to mimic the effect of removing/adding longer time scales!”

At Pajamas Media, which has been producing some of the most in-depth coverage of this story, Charlie Martin examines the code further and concludes:

To put this in the context of what else we know from the CRU data dump:

1. They didn’t want to release their data or code, and they particularly weren’t interested in releasing any intermediate steps that would help someone else

2. They clearly have some history of massaging the data — hell, practically water-boarding the data — to get it to fit their other results. Results they can no longer even replicate on their own systems.

3. They had successfully managed to restrict peer review to what we might call the “RealClimate clique” — the small group of true believers they knew could be trusted to say the right things.

As a result, it looks like they found themselves trapped. They had the big research organizations, the big grants — and when they found themselves challenged, they discovered they’d built their conclusions on fine beach sand.

But the tide was coming in.

Even if the CRU crew are only guilty of promising more than they could deliver, that’s still a hugely important turn of events in the climate-change debate — and reason enough to put the policy debate on pause while this new information is sorted out.

It is time for the Flat Earth global warming scientists who were gaming the system for more and more money, and thereby, more and more prestige and power to get their "A" (for anthropogenic) in the global warming science out of the equation. In fact, they should take their Anthropogenic and pretty much put it where the data don't shine!

Finally, on a more humorous note, check out this video created for Minnesotans for Global Warming by the folks at JibJab.com.

LA Conservative Examiner>>

Science, Facts, Fraud, & "Climategate"

The AGW Myth: An increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere, especially a sustained increase great enough to cause changes in the global climate. The Earth has experienced numerous episodes of global warming through its history, and currently appears to be undergoing such warming. The present warming is generally attributed to an increase in the greenhouse effect, brought about by increased levels of greenhouse gases, largely due to the effects of human industry and agriculture. Expected long-term effects of current global warming are rising sea levels, flooding, melting of polar ice caps and glaciers, fluctuations in temperature and precipitation, more frequent and stronger El Niños and La Niñas, drought, heat waves, and forest fires.Image Credit: The Minority Report

Science, facts, fraud, and "Climategate"

What are we to believe? ... what are we to believe?

Is nothing sacred anymore?

The simple answer was spoken by Ronald Reagan in his negotiations with the USSR during the run-up to the end of the "Cold War" ... "trust, but verify"!

Last week, it was discovered to what lengths the science based community (and economy) would go to protect what it held on to most dearly ... the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW).

The conspiracy that was propping up this expensive world CONTROL (Copenhagen) gimmick --- has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet.
(ht: Watts Up With That)

These exposed hacked emails, exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory, suggest conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change skeptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:

“In an odd way this is cheering news.”

The Gore effect in its full glory: The subject of climate change (formerly known as ‘Global Warming‘ until the planet refused to cooperate) is highly controversial and considered a ‘religion’ in some European circles. This climate change concept has now been exposed as a mass fraud perpetrated to gain money, power, and control over all human activity. Image Credit: CapnBob.us

This excerpted and edited from Pajamas Media -

Climategate: Alarmism Is Underpinned by Fraud (PJM Exclusive)
November 25, 2009 - by Ian Plimer - Pajamas Media

In the geological past, there have been six major ice ages. During five of these six ice ages, the atmospheric carbon dioxide content was higher than at present. It is clear that the colorless, odorless, non-poisonous gas called carbon dioxide did not drive past climates. Carbon dioxide is plant food, not a pollutant.
----
In the 600-year long Roman Warming, it was 4ºC warmer than now. Sea level did not rise and ice sheets did not disappear. The Dark Ages followed, and starvation, disease, and depopulation occurred. The Medieval Warming followed the Dark Ages, and for 400 years it was 5ºC warmer. Sea level did not rise and the ice sheets remained. The Medieval Warming was followed by the Little Ice Age, which finished in 1850. It is absolutely no surprise that temperature increased after a cold period.

Unless I have missed something, I am not aware of heavy industry, coal-fired power stations, or SUVs in the 1,000 years of Roman and Medieval Warmings.
----
There was warming from 1860 to 1880, 1910 to 1940, and 1976 to 1998, with intervening periods of cooling. The only time when temperature rise paralleled carbon dioxide emissions was 1976-1998. The other warmings and coolings in the last 150 years were unrelated to carbon dioxide emissions.

Something is seriously wrong. To argue that humans change climate requires abandoning all we know about history, archaeology, geology, astronomy, and solar physics. This is exactly what has been done.

The answer to this enigma was revealed last week. It is fraud.

Files from the UK Climatic Research Unit were hacked. They show that data was massaged, numbers were fudged, diagrams were biased, there was destruction of data after freedom of information requests, and there was refusal to submit taxpayer-funded data for independent examination.

Data was manipulated to show that the Medieval Warming didn’t occur, and that we are not in a period of cooling. Furthermore, the warming of the 20th century was artificially inflated.

This behavior is that of criminals and all the data from the UK Hadley Centre and the US GISS must now be rejected. These crooks perpetrated these crimes at the expense of the British and U.S. taxpayers.

The same crooks control the IPCC and the fraudulent data in IPCC reports. The same crooks meet in Copenhagen next week and want 0.7% of the Western world’s GDP to pass through an unelected UN government, and then on to sticky fingers in the developing world.

You should be angry. Very angry.
Reference Here>>

We, at MAXINE, say Pull The Plug!

Pull the plug on almost every (public and private) expensive, well meaning, based on fraud CO2 reduction "EXCHANGE" (read that as cap & trade) program that exists. Investigate Al Gore and others who have profited greatly on this public money supported science enterprise and SCAM. Pull the plug on all activity envisioned through accords reached and projected through meetings in Kyoto and Copenhagen!

Let us all demand that the Science community gets back to establishing tested scientific FACT ... and thereby, get its truth back ... while we demand a refund on all of our tax money that has been spent (fleeced) on this concept and myth of Anthropogenic Global Warming - let us demand our money back!

Today's vote in the Senate - Slavery?

The U.S. Preventive Service Task Force announced Nov. 16, 2009, that it now recommends against annual mammograms for women 40 to 49 because the potential harms of routine screening in this age group outweigh the benefits. These downsides include radiation exposure, cost and the trauma of false positives. Many doctors agree with the new guidelines. But some breast cancer survivors back the screenings. ABC News asked BreastCancer.org and Breast Cancer Network of Strength for stories from women who believe that mammograms they received before age 50 saved their lives. Here are the experiences of a few of the women who shared their stories with us. Image Credit: Stephanie Scott/Jaclyn Fisher/Joann Long/Susan Lorenz

Today's vote in the Senate - Slavery?

Today, we will see a forced vote in the Senate brought about by the Democrat Political party and the leader in the Senate, Harry Reid (D-NV).

People would like real reform of our healthcare system as it has evolved over these last five decades, but what the Senate is voting on does nothing to reform or correct where our healthcare system has strayed off of the tracks. Instead, this 2,000 plus page monstrosity is designed to make average citizens economic line items of the state while creating a defined ruling class who do not have to subject themselves to the same life determining rules, assistance (or lack thereof), and costs as the rest of us.

The clear signal of what this Administration and Congressional leadership intends for the healthcare management for the rest of us came early this week when a committee working in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Obama Administration’s Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius came out with recommendations to reduce screening for breast cancer in women. The new mammography guidelines, released by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Monday, suggest fewer mammograms for those 50 and older and no routine mammograms at all for those younger than 50. For those opposed to the health care bill going before the Senate today, the guidelines have become a rallying cry against comparative effectiveness -- which, simply put, means the comparison of different medical approaches to determine which one delivers the best balance of benefits with the fewest possible downsides.

To add even greater insult to injury, for the second time in a week, another group of medical experts has recommended that some women can be tested less frequently for cancer … in general. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists just recommended that young women can hold off until 21 before getting their first Pap smear and get them every two years through the rest of their 20s, instead of annually. Previously, the doctor group had said young women should get a Pap smear three years after first having sex or age 21, whichever came earlier.

I do not understand why this Government is targeting women and showing them “the door” now, just before the Government is poised to vote to take over all decision-making on healthcare issues while exempting themselves from the process … but these recommendations appear to be sexist at best.

The real problem comes when this type of discernment is applied to all of the citizens in the population while the members of Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Supreme Court remain exempt from being forced into Government run healthcare system sets up a structure of slavery.

This excerpted and edited from Pajamas Media –

Congress: Gov’t healthcare for thee but not for me
By Roger L. Simon - November 20th, 2009 4:52 pm

I guess many Members of Congress secretly realize the Dean of Harvard Med was correct when he attacked the proposed healthcare legislation as a virtual anti-health boondoggle in the WSJ last week, because those members aren’t signing onto the legislation for themselves. They are only signing on for you.

Yes, the healthcare legislation still does not require Members of Congress to be part of the public plan, option, call it what you will, only poor sucker citizens. Those Congressmen are no fools. They know government-run medicine hasn’t worked in Canada and the UK. You think they want their wives lining up for a mammogram?

Here are some interesting tidbits that have been pointed out to me on my current brief visit to DC:

Ways and Means Committee – Rep. Heller (R-NV) offered an amendment to require all (”exchange eligible”) Members of Congress and their families to get insurance through the government-run plan. It failed, by a vote of 18-21, with three Democrats supporting the amendment: Berkley, Davis (AL), and Yarmuth. You can read all about it on p. 518 of this interminable document. (Who says PJM isn’t a full-service media company?) When a similar amendment was offered at the Energy and Commerce markup, it was dismissed by chairman Henry Waxman as “nongermane.” That’s my Congressman, of course. No comment necessary.

Over at the Rules Committee several amendments were filed on this subject, but ultimately not permitted under their rules. Rep. Sessions moved to make an order and provide the necessary waivers for amendment #1 offered by Reps. Fleming (R-LA), Wilson (R-SC), Gingrey (R-GA), and Herger (R-CA), which would automatically enroll all Members of Congress and all Senators in the public option. His motion was defeated on a party line vote of 4-6, with the following Members absent: Slaughter, Matsui, Pingree.
----
You won’t read about this nonsense in the MSM, of course, but we’re going to try to deliver more on PJTV and the pages of Pajamas Media.
Reference Here>>

Do your best to end slavery … medical (and life sustaining) slavery now. Call or email your Senator TODAY, before it’s too late!

We need 41 NO votes on cloture!

We need to lean hard on the below Senators, they are our best chance of this getting this stopped in the Senate:

Mark Begich-AK- phone. (202) 224-3004, , toll free. (877) 501 – 6275* fax. (202) 224-2354,
Email: http://begich.senate.gov/contact/contact...

Blanche L. Lincoln –AR-Office: 202-224-4843; Fax: 202-228-1371,
Email: http://lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email....

Mark Pryor-AR Phone: (202) 224-2353, Fax: (202) 228-0908
Email: http://pryor.senate.gov/contact/

Joseph Lieberman- CT-(202) 224-4041 Voice,(202) 224-9750 Fax
Email: http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/

Thomas Carper-DE Phone: (202) 224-2441, Fax: (202) 228-2190
Email: http://carper.senate.gov/contact/

Bill Nelson- FL- Phone: 202-224-5274, Fax: 202-228-2183
Email: http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/ind...

Even Bayh-IN (202) 224-5623, (202) 228-1377 fax
Email: http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/

Mary Landrieu- LA Voice: (202)224-5824,Fax:(202) 224-9735
Email: http://landrieu.senate.gov/contact/index...

Susan Collins –( R ) ME-Phone: (202) 224-2523, Fax: (202) 224-2693
Email(http://collins.senate.gov/public/continu......

Olympia Snowe-( R ) ME – Phone: (202) 224-5344,Toll Free: (800) 432-1599 Fax: (202) 224-1946
Email: http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm.....

John Tester-MT Phone: (202) 224-2644, Fax: (202) 224-8594
Email: http://tester.senate.gov/Contact/index.c...

Kent Conrad-ND-Phone: (202) 224-2043, Fax: (202) 224-7776
Email: http://conrad.senate.gov/contact/webform...

Ben Nelson-NE- Tel: 1-202-224-6551, Fax: 1-202-228-0012
Email: http://bennelson.senate.gov/contact-me.c...

Ron Wyden-OR Phone: (202) 224-5244, Fax: (202) 228-2717
Email: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/

Robert Byrd-WV- Telephone: (202) 224-3954,Fax: (202) 228-0002
Email: http://byrd.senate.gov/contacts/

Mark Warner- VA- Phone: 202-224-2023, Fax: 202-224-6295
Email: http://warner.senate.gov/public/index.cf...

Bob Bennett- UT-Phone: (202) 224-5444 (no fax)
Email: http://bennett.senate.gov/...ex.cfm?p=ContactForm

Byron Dorgan- ND Phone (202) 224-2551 , Fax (202) 224-1193
Email: http://dorgan.senate.gov/...tact/contact_form.cfm

Max Baucus-MT (202) 224-2651 (Office),(202) 224-9412 (Fax)
Email: http://baucus.senate.gov/...ilForm.cfm?subj=issue

Today is the day we end the slavery movement … again. This time without guns.

Mr Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Anti-corruption, Public enterprises, Industry, Tourism, Trade and Communications, Fiji (left); and Dr Hamadoun Touré, ITU (International Telecommunications Union) Secretary-General (right). Image Credit: ITU / V. Martin

Media Watch: Hugo Chavez, Barack Obama, Mark Lloyd, and Fiji's Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum

What do Hugo Chavez, Barack Obama, Mark Lloyd, and Fiji's Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have in common?

Almost everything as it relates to their desires to CONTROL what is broadcast and who broadcasts it.

The big difference here is that Venezuela's dictator President, and Fiji's Military Coup Government appointee have actually asserted Government control over their media outlets where as the Obama Administration and its FCC Diversity Czar, Mark Lloyd are still in the planning stages of its strategy to dictate the terms of broadcasting to media outlets (especially those outlets that offer a balanced, counter-point or conservative political view of current events on the ground) here in the United States.

This excerpted and edited from The Australian -

Fiji strips licences from broadcasters
By Rowan Callick, Asia-Pacific editor From: The Australian - November 21, 2009 12:00AM

THE military-installed Fiji government has removed all broadcasting licences and given Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum the absolute power to renew or redistribute them without any compensation to those whose licences are stripped.
Television and radio stations are broadcasting this weekend on a temporary basis, as the owner, managers, staff and audiences await the determinations of Mr Sayed-Khaiyum.

He is the second-most powerful figure in the government after military commander and prime minister Frank Bainimarama.

Mr Sayed-Khaiyum is also Minister for Justice, Anti-Corruption, Public Enterprises, Industry, Investment and Tourism, and Communications.

The action was carried out this week by decree - the chief tool of government since the parliament was scrapped and the constitution abrogated.
----
Anyone broadcasting in contravention to the minister's directions can be jailed for five years.

The dominant television broadcaster, Fiji TV, is owned by Yasana Holdings, which represents the 14 ethnic Fijian provinces, and which also owns the monopoly Papua New Guinea TV broadcaster EMTV.

Fiji TV established a reputation for impartial news coverage, although the military installed two officers on its board following the coup three years ago.

It, like the country's other media, is now subject to stringent military censorship.

All the country's VHF TV frequencies are in the hands of Fiji TV.

It is now expected that at least one of these frequencies will be reallocated to the government-owned Fiji Broadcasting Corporation, which operates a radio service and has expressed an intention to establish a TV network, towards which it has allocated several million dollars.

The corporation's chief executive, appointed earlier this year, is Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, younger brother of the Attorney-General and formerly a TV journalist.

The government broadcasts directly from 7-9pm nightly, except on Sundays, on a frequency it pays to rent from Fiji TV.
Reference Here>>

So, hold on to your freedom of the press because it is about to be challenged, just as every other civic right this country has to offer is under assault and being challenged ... we are all just a short stone's throw from becoming ... Fiji!

You know, all of the Government oppression, however, with little of that island paradise.

Paint the Obama Administration with Halliburton brush coated with AIG

Officials handling the multibillion dollar bailout of insurance giant American International Group Inc. mismanaged an initial rescue attempt and may have overpaid other banks to wind down AIG's business relationships, a government watchdog says. Image Credit: Mark Lennihan

Paint The Obama Administration With Halliburton Brush Coated With AIG

The facts are surfacing about the activities of Timothy Geithner and his transition into the Obama Administration and the bail-out of AIG.

These facts should have the press take out the Halliburton brush and begin painting the Obama Administration with a healthy coat of AIG.

The reference here is to compare the point of view that the Mainstream Media held with respect to the relationship the Bush Administration had with the exclusive contract bid process they used to engage Halliburton Corporation in providing services on a sub-contract basis in the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With Halliburton, however, the argument can be made that this corporation was unique in being able to provide the services required and the Government did, in fact, receive the services contracted for. The American people got what they paid for.

What did the American people get from the management of its money spent on AIG and how was this effort managed.

For his part, Barack Obama assured us all how the Government would operate in a speech just after the $787 Billion dollar Stimulus Bill was passed by Congress.

With the party-line voting on the stimulus marking a defeat for his push for bipartisanship, Obama shifted focus to something else most un-Washington: making government spending transparent.

"Washington hasn't set a very good example in recent years, and with so much on the line, it's time to begin doing things differently," he said.

"I've tasked my Cabinet and staff to set up the kind of management, oversight, and disclosure that will help ensure that."

Enter (tax-cheat) Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner ... it was revealed today in an article appearing in the Washington Post that he did not negotiate with the AIG corporate primaries, let alone the additional connected web of companies associated with AIG, a discount on the money to be paid to financial institutions to secure their sub-prime portfolio assets in order to save these institutions from collapsing. The taxpayer money committed paid 100% on the value of the assets purchased.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York didn't even try to get a good deal for taxpayers when it caved to demands from AIG's creditors that they should be paid in full. Image Credit: Clusterstock

This excerpted and edited from the Washington Post -

Fed criticized for not negotiating harder with AIG creditors
Inspector general says decisions during bailout 'came with a cost'
By Brady Dennis, Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Federal Reserve officials made only a passing attempt to negotiate discounts from the creditors of American International Group last fall before directing the company to fully pay what it owed on its troubled derivatives contracts, according to a report from the special inspector general overseeing the government's financial rescue program.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who was then the president of the New York Fed, concurred with advisers that it would be impractical to impose losses on AIG's counterparties and that they essentially should be paid at 100 cents on the dollar, the report by special inspector general Neil Barofsky states.
----
The government extended an $85 billion loan to AIG in September 2008 as the company struggled to pay obligations related to derivatives contracts at its Financial Products unit. According to Barofsky, that initial loan came with a high interest rate, which "inadequately addressed AIG's long term liquidity concerns, thus requiring further government support."

Later, New York Fed officials agreed to buy tens of billions of dollars worth of complex securities that would allow Financial Products to cancel its most troublesome contracts, and staff members developed talking points that stressed to AIG's trading partners that they were benefiting from the bailouts and asked them to agree to concessions, according to Barofsky.
----
Ultimately, AIG's trading partners received more than $62 billion, which many critics have branded as "backdoor bailouts."

In a letter commenting on Barofsky's report, Fed officials called the original AIG loan "appropriate in light of the circumstances at the time." In addition, they argued that the Fed had done what it could in trying to negotiate with AIG's trading partners.

"We believe that the Federal Reserve acted appropriately in conducting these negotiations, and that our negotiating strategy, including the decision to treat all counterparties equally, was not flawed or unreasonably limited," the letter said. It said the Fed actively sought concessions from AIG's counterparties, "but was unable to obtain any such agreements." The officials added that they were wary of using their supervisory authority on behalf of AIG to impose losses on other companies.
Reference Here>>

The American taxpayer got what it paid for ... through the tens of billions of dollars to AIG and its network of companies. A 'still ugly' economy with a group of financial executives that will be giving some of the money they received with their intact multi-million dollar pay bonuses, political contributions to this one-party "CONTROL" Government regime we have three more years (hopefully, only one) to endure.

It is high time to start painting!

Obama As Commander-In-Chief ... From A Law Professor Perspective

President tells Jake Tapper it was important to let the investigation play itself out so the details as to how and why the rampage happened are known before he comments further [ctrl-click to launch video]. Image Credit: ABC News

Obama As Commander-In-Chief ... From A Law Professor Perspective

Yesterday, Jake Tapper of ABC News had a sit down interview with President Barack Obama at the White House that covered many of the pressing issues of the day from the economy (unemployment at 10.2%), the Congress passing its version of a Health Care system overhaul (that included a ban on Federal funding of abortion procedures), Afghanistan and a slow-paced troop build-up, and a small discussion on the mass murder rampage by Major Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood and its meaning in the face of 9/11, jihad, and acts of terrorism.

One would expect that President Obama, as Commander-In-Chief over all of our American military, would have a profound and decisive response to almost any act that would be damaging to the moral, unity of purpose, and overall readiness of our armed forces. Sadly, Barack Hussein Obam(Mmmm, Mmmmm, Mmmmmm)a's response, and this in light that this Nov. 5 shooting rampage happened 4 days ago, was anything but one that had the steely resolve of a Commander-In-Chief.

No, the response from Barack Obama was one of a Chicago university law professor, ending a discussion where he wanted the students to think of the professor as one burdened with so much knowledge, that a direct and resolved answer would give away too much and spur the students to want to study more.

ABC News is out front on the Fort Hood massacre story. Correspondent Brian Ross is reporting that U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Hasan was attempting to contact associates of Al Qaeda [ctrl-click to launch video]. Image Credit: ABC News

This excerpted and edited from ABC News -

Obama: All Necessary Steps Will Be Taken to Prevent Another Tragedy Like Fort Hood
By JAKE TAPPER, KAREN TRAVERS, SUNLEN MILLER and DEVIN DWYER - Nov. 9, 2009

On Tuesday, Obama will attend a memorial service at Fort Hood for the 13 killed in last week's shooting. Today he reiterated that the nation is "heartbroken" by what happened there Thursday, but said there are many questions to be answered.

The president was asked about an ABC News report that intelligence officials learned months ago that Maj. Malik Nidal Hasan had reached out via the Internet to al Qaeda affiliates, and had passed it into military intelligence, though no official actions seem to have been taken. But he wouldn't say directly whether he was concerned that the U.S. government failed to communicate with itself as was seen in the investigation into 9/11.
----
Asked what philosophically separates an act of violence from an act of terrorism, the president said, "I think the questions that we're asking now and we don't have yet complete answers to is, is this an individual who's acting in this way or is it some larger set of actors? You know, what are the motivations? Those are all questions that I think we have to ask ourselves. Until we have these answers buttoned down, I'd rather not comment on it.
Reference Here>>

Obama's statement on May 31, 2009, just hours after George Tiller's death (the assassination of a renowned abortion doctor at the hands of another): "I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

Why couldn't have Obama issued a statement similar just hours as opposed to days after the murderous act to the statement he issued for the Tiller murder like ... "However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as religious freedom and jihad, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

As Commander-In-Chief over all of our American military, President Barack Obama has an obligation to lead and protect - not to philosophize over what type of mass murder this act represents ... but to make sure it does not happen again beyond any considerations of Political Correctness.

Obama Administration: Horse Trading For Healthcare Control

Nancy Pelosi couldn’t have announced the new House healthcare reform bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), with any more pomp and circumstance. It was certainly more impressive than the Senate’s mouse-like rollout, apparently intended to avoid rubbing salt in the Baucus “bipartisanship” wound. H.R. 3962 is definitely a major milestone in attempting to reform our broken system-less healthcare; it’s historic, certainly. But no, it’s not the best our legislators could do. Image Credit: Wikipedia

Obama Administration: Horse Trading For Healthcare Control

Many have said it over these last several months ... "It's the Chicago way." What pundits have been reacting to is the way Barack Obama and the Administration around him negotiate in bad faith in order to get what they want, politically, even when the outcome will create more damage to our Constitutional country than fix the problems they say they are trying to address.

Just this last week, President Obama was able to come to the microphones Friday and tout the fact that he has received the endorsements of some pretty recognizable health care and special interest advocacy groups in the run up to the close approval of the House of Representatives Bill for the radical overhaul of America's health care insurance industry - HR-3962.

This excerpted and edited from The Doc Is In -

Health Care Reform 2009: Why Did the AMA & AARP Back Obamacare?
by Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

Here are the deals:

* The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians’ reimbursements under the current law.

Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors and as of this point in time, they have risen to 21 percent. With this leverage as blackmail, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill … or else!

* The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill.

Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP — which supposedly represents them — will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact sbarton@americanseniors.org. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it).

* The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs.

This represents chump-change to HR-3962's almost $3 trillion projected costs over the next decade. They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

* Insurance companies get access to 36-40 million potential new customers.

When the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don’t buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and opposed the bill, albeit for the worst of motives - so the fine stood.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the Medical Device Makers (MDM). They stood on principle and wouldn’t go along with Obama’s blackmail strategy for an endorsement. The Senate Finance Committee reacted to this stance by imposing a tax on the MDM marketplace targeting medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accouterments and consumables of healthcare.
Reference Here>>

So, these endorsements were not freely given, but were bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its "Control of Healthcare" program at any cost. This is not the American way, you know, for the good of the country ...

... It's the Chicago way!

Bachmann "House Call" Delivers Viral Response To A Sick Government

Image Credit: anthropocon03

Bachmann "House Call" Delivers Viral Response To A Sick Government

Rep. Michele Bachmann's message for conservatives traveling to Washington to attend her Capitol Hill House Call event today is simple: "Go into the Capitol and find members of Congress," she told activists Wednesday night. "Don't bring your pitchforks, bring your video cameras. And get them on record saying how they're going to vote and why. And tell them, 'Take your hands off my health care!' "

Image Credit: anthropocon03

Bachmann (R-Minn.) gave the marching orders on a conference call of top activists, many of whom planned to board buses in New Jersey and North Carolina Thursday morning to attend the event that the congresswoman thought up last week. "Nothing is more influential than an eyeball-to-eyeball meeting between a freedom-loving constituent and a member of Congress," she explained. "Nothing scares a member of Congress more than freedom-loving Americans."

Image Credit: anthropocon03

Bachmann said the idea came to her as she lamented the speed with which the Democrats' health care reform bills were moving through Congress. "I was near despair," she said. "I was thinking, 'It looks like this bill is going to go through.' But then I thought, 'This is it. This is the Super Bowl of Freedom.' "

Image Credit: anthropocon03

Initial reports of THOUSANDS of people are flooding in ... it may well be over 20,000 by the time Google turns back on its cameras that cover the streets of the Capital Mall! (confirmed on the Sean Hannity radio program)

One hour into the gathering, #housecall just made a "TRENDING TOPIC" on Twitter!

10:30am PT - Twitter is reporting that Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO.) had his constituents arrested when they showed up at his office and asked to meet with him!

The Speaker at the podium has just announced to have the gathered crowd to locate their representative and ask them where they stand on Socialized Health Care.

POTUS just made a "quick-hit" update speech on Obama-Care at the WH press briefing then turned and left without taking any questions.

Representative Greg Wilson (R-OR.) is reported on Twitter to have said "The Pelosi anthem is -'Leave No Child A Dime'"

10:57am PT - On Breitbart TV, Michelle Bachmann tells the gathering that they have two copies of the bill and that each attendee take a page ... or a half-a-page and ask their representative to read and explain what he just read.

This from FOX News - Republican Rep. Joe Wilson proposed an amendment Wednesday that would force all members of Congress to receive health insurance coverage through the government-run plan proposed in the House's reform bill.

Though Republicans oppose the so-called "public option," the South Carolina gadfly -- who gained notoriety for shouting "you lie" at President Obama during his address to Congress two months ago -- is proposing the requirement to draw attention to what he sees as the plan's flaws.

"They know the government-run option will not be in the interest of the American people, either individually or for the American citizens at large," Wilson said Wednesday, arguing that's the reason Congress does not require its members to sign up.

The current House health care legislation states that members of Congress "may enroll" in the public plan. Wilson wants that changed to "must enroll."

Activist organization, "Flip This House" located HERE>>

11:32am PT - Protesters roaming the halls of Congress were heard chanting in unison - "KILL THE BILL"!

House Republicans offer alternative healthcare proposal - Their modest, incremental approach focuses on controlling costs through market-oriented measures. But its larger purpose is to show that they're not just the 'party of no.'It is about time and only 219 pages, compared to the 1,990 pages that the Pelosi plan is. Plus this one addresses TORT Reform and breaking the red tape that would allow us to purchase insurance across state lines.

TOP 10 REASONS TO OPPOSE NANCY PELOSI’S TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE.

Additional Photo & Video Assets HERE>>