Imagine how much colder it would have been if Al Gore had kept his mouth shut?
South America
South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since the year 1918. Dozens of homeless people died from exposure. In Peru, 200 people died from the cold and thousands more became infected with respiratory diseases. Crops failed, livestock perished, and the Peruvian government declared a state of emergency.
Southern Hemisphere
Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever. In northeastern Australia, the city of Townsville underwent the longest period of continuously cold weather since 1941. In New Zealand, the weather turned so cold that vineyards were endangered.
United States
Last January, $1.42 billion worth of California produce was lost to a devastating five-day freeze. Thousands of agricultural employees were thrown out of work. At the supermarket, citrus prices soared.
In April, a killing freeze destroyed 95 percent of South Carolina’s peach crop, and 90 percent of North Carolina’s apple harvest. At Charlotte, N.C., a record low temperature of 21 degrees Fahrenheit on April 8 was the coldest ever recorded for April, breaking a record set in 1923. On June 8, Denver recorded a new low of 31 degrees Fahrenheit. Denver’s temperature records extend back to 1872.
On Dec. 7, St. Cloud, Minn., set a new record low of minus 15 degrees Fahrenheit. On the same date, record low temperatures were also recorded in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Korea
On Dec. 4, in Seoul, Korea, the temperature was a record minus 5 degrees Celsius.
Canada
The Canadian government warns that this winter is likely to be the coldest in 15 years.
Bottom Line
Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo.
The author of this column is David Deming, a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.
The media in Iraq has taken on a new strategy, rather than simply ignore good news, they are now making up bad news.
Gateway Pundit has all the details,
Media Quagmire Continues… 7 Bogus Slaughter Stories in 7 Weeks!
Jim has done an incredible job tracking all these bogus stories, and his post has the complete rundown on each one. Say what you will about some elements within the media, they sure do get style points for consistency and persistence, if not accuracy.
You would think some enterprising professionally trained journalist, or maybe someone within the layers of editors might be interested in investigating this reporting fiasco from the war zone. But no, a blogger in St. Louis is doing it for them.
If you aren’t making Gateway Pundit part of your daily reading habits, you are really missing out.
The Congressional Budget Office just released a report titled “Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates: 1979 to 2005“. The difference in how this report was covered by the New York Times and Wall Street Journal clearly shows that as news consumers we need to read multiple sources of information. It is incredible that these two pieces are written about the same report.
Report Says That the Rich Are Getting Richer Faster, Much Faster
The increase in incomes of the top 1 percent of Americans from 2003 to 2005 exceeded the total income of the poorest 20 percent of Americans, data in a new report by the Congressional Budget Office shows.
The poorest fifth of households had total income of $383.4 billion in 2005, while just the increase in income for the top 1 percent came to $524.8 billion, a figure 37 percent higher.
The Wall Street Journal,
Taxes and Income
Every Democrat running for President wants to raise taxes on “the rich,” but they will have to do something miraculous to outtax President Bush. Based on the latest available tax data, no Administration in modern history has done more to pry tax revenue from the wealthy.
Last week the Congressional Budget Office joined the IRS in releasing tax numbers for 2005, and part of the news is that the richest 1% paid about 39% of all income taxes that year. The richest 5% paid a tad less than 60%, and the richest 10% paid 70%. These tax shares are all up substantially since 1990, and even somewhat since 2000.
It’s about time. I and many others have been citing the same evidence for months.
Romney Fact Check on Preserving the Sanctity of Life
Romney’s Claim : “…every piece of legislation which came to my desk in the coming years as a Governor, I came down on the side of preserving the sanctity of life.”
– Mitt Romney, Meet the Press 12/16/07
Fact Check
Romney’s health care legislation provides taxpayer-funded abortions for a co-pay of just $50. Romney vetoed EIGHT provisions in his health care bill that he deemed objectionable, including the expansion of dental benefits to Medicaid recipients. He did not veto Planned Parenthoods’ guaranteed position on the Advisory Board or ensure that abortions were covered only in medically necessary situations (as required by MA court ruling). All abortions are covered in the Commonwealth Care program with no medically necessary limitation. Under the program, abortions are available for a copay of $50. (Menu of Health Care Services: http://www.mass. gov/Qhic/docs/cc_benefits1220_pt234.pdf; “Romney’s Health Care Vetoes,” Associated Press, 4/12/06)
Romney included in his health care legislation a guarantee that Planned Parenthood would have a representative on his MassHealth Payment Policy Advisory Board. No such provision was included for a pro-life representative . “You cannot be personally opposed to abortion and then contribute money to an organization whose purpose is to provide abortions,” said Jerry Zandstra. “Given the Romney family’s support of Planned Parenthood, it now makes sense why he mandated that a member of the RomneyCare Policy board be appointed by the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts.” (RepealRomneyCare.com, “Pro-Life Leaders Denounce Romney’s Planned Parenthood Connections,” Press Release, 5/10/07)
Romney forced private Catholic hospitals to provide the morning-after-pill, a position applauded by Democrats and pro-abortions groups . “Governor Mitt Romney reversed course on the state’s new emergency contraception law yesterday, saying that all hospitals in the state will be obligated to provide the morning-after pill to rape victims. The decision overturns a ruling made public this week by the state Department of Public Health that privately run hospitals could opt out of the requirement if they objected on moral or religious grounds. Romney had initially supported that interpretation, but he said yesterday that he had changed direction after his legal counsel, Mark D. Nielsen, concluded Wednesday that the new law supersedes a preexisting statute that says private hospitals cannot be forced to provide abortions or contraception. ‘And on that basis, I have instructed the Department of Public Health to follow the conclusion of my own legal counsel and to adopt that sounder view,’ Romney said…” (Scott Helman, “Romney Says No Hospitals Are Exempt From Pill Law,” Boston Globe, 12/9/05)
· Catholic leaders urged hospitals to reject Romney’s mandate or risk “compromising their religious integrity and Catholic identity.” “C.J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, a conservative Catholic organization, said Catholic hospitals should refuse to abide by the law. ‘T he appropriate response for Catholic hospitals is noncompliance. Otherwise, they would be compromising their religious integrity and Catholic identity,’ he said.” (Steve LeBlanc, “Confusion Over New Emergency Contraception Law Deepens,” Associated Press, 12/9/05)
All of these things transpired after Romney’s “pro-life conversion.”
Tom Blumer of BizzyBlog debunks another frequently cited myth by Romney that his puported “pro-life conversion” was similar to Reagan’s in a post entitled: “Myth Romney: On Reagan, Hyde and Abortion, His History Rewrites Are Virtually Smears.” (posted on Hot Air.com) Romney has taken so many different sides of so many issues that I don’t think even he can keep track of them all. Lies have a limited shelf life.
Says Tom:
Thus, Reagan’s folklore “conversion†to being prolife was, in reality and in essence, nothing more than an admission that he had been thoroughly deceived, as this quote in the February 8, 1976 New York Times shows (link is to a picture of the article that opens in a new window or tab, provided for fair use and discussion purposes):
Mr. Reagan, returning to the Florida campaign trail after three days in New Hampshire and North Carolina, said that the California abortion law had been subverted by medical professionals, particularly those in the mental health field, who, in practice, assisted any woman who sought to abort a pregnancy.
….. “I placed too much faith in those who were entrusted with insuring that the patient met the terms of the bill.â€
For Mitt Romney to characterize the Ronald Reagan just described as “effectively pro-choice†or “adamantly pro-choice,†and Reagan’s “experience†as being “the same†as his, borders on slander.
And with regard to Romney’s claim that Henry Hyde (author of the Hyde Amendment that barred federal funding for abortion):
The legendary prolife congressman, who died in November, is responsible for ensuring that no federal funds have paid for abortions since his Hyde Amendment passed in 1975. The New York Times’s obituary of November 30 quotes a veteran prolifer telling us what this meant in human terms:
Dr. Wanda Franz, president of the National Right to Life Committee, said, “By conservative estimate, well over one million Americans are alive today because of the Hyde Amendment — more likely two million.â€
Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, the Washington Post’s November 29 obit seems to contradict his claim that Hyde was once “effectively pro-choiceâ€:
Elected to the Illinois House in 1967, he encountered what would become his signature issue when a colleague asked him to cosponsor an abortion rights law in 1968. Despite his Irish-Catholic upbringing, he told The Post he had never given much thought to the issue. Once he began reading on the matter, he realized he had to oppose it.
As noted above with Reagan, very few people had “given much thought†to abortion before the mid-late 1960s because it was (and of course still is, despite Roe) so obviously repugnant.
There are no hints that Henry Hyde was at any time pro-choice — effective, adamant, or otherwise — in the Chicago Tribune’s article on the day of his death, Jonathan Turley’s tribute, the New York Times’s obit noted earlier, or Hyde’s Wiki entry
Video courtesy of The Nose on Your Face
If you are unaware of the Islamic Rage Boy story, click here.
Hat Tip to the always outstanding Gateway Pundit