Muslim Islamist Jihad Shariah Cancer Attacking Democracy & Freedom Worldwide!
Sen. Elbert Guillory: “Why I Am a Republican”
Because there is an endless torrent of “environmental” lies, we need to remind ourselves that they exist as propaganda to advance the fortunes of the organizations or government agencies that issue them. One common theme we’re hearing lately is “environmental justice.” The Friends of the Earth have a petition going to ask the President to protect us against it.
By Alan Caruba
I am on the Friends of the Earth (FOE) email list and receive a steady stream of theirs and the Sierra Club’s lies about the environment. A recent FOE mailing stating that “Devastation from climate change has become all too frequent.”
This is simply an outright lie. Inherent in natural events such as hurricanes and typhoons, blizzards, tornadoes, floods, droughts, and forest fires is the damage they cause, but FOE asserted that “People in vulnerable communities are already struggling with dirty air, unsafe housing and increased cancer rates. So when extreme weather hits, its impacts are even more devastating.”
All communities, from small towns to major cities are by definition “vulnerable”, but the air has undergone significant clean-up over the years so this is not a common problem anywhere. As for cancer rates, they too have been in decline thanks to advances in medical care. It is doubtful that most Americans live in allegedly unsafe housing these days. Houses on both coastlines are vulnerable to ocean storms. Houses inland are vulnerable to floods and fires. There is nothing inherently “environmental” about this. It’s about location.
All this is little more than blatant scare mongering and FOE was calling on its members and others who received its email to “Call on President Obama to ensure that all Americans are protected from climate disasters.”
No President has any control over weather events. To FOE, however, this is a call for “critical environmental justice.”
There is no such thing as “environmental justice.” It is an invention of environmental groups that are intent on convincing people that whatever they do or fail to do somehow has an impact on the weather.
Indeed, the entire global warming hoax, now called climate change, was based on the lie that humans were responsible for producing huge amounts of carbon dioxide via industry, driving, or making some toast for breakfast. The environmental enemy was and is the use of energy, but it is energy that has so vastly improved and protected everyone’s life.
In a recent article, Dr. Craig Idso, the founder and former president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, a coeditor of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, and James M. Taylor, a senior fellow of The Heartland Institute and the managing editor of Environmental & Climate News, a monthly publication, examined how “Global Warming Alarmism Denies Sound Science.”
They took note of the way the Fifth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change moved away from its earlier predictions and assertions. “The IPCC report contradicts claims that global warming is causing more extreme weather” and “admits the lack of global warming this century defies nearly all computer models that predict rapid future warming.” The organization devoted to the global warming hoax has been forced to retreat from decades of lies about it.
While FOE tries to scare people with references to “extreme weather disasters”, Idso and Taylor pointed to the fact that “Global hurricane frequency is undergoing a long-term decline, with global hurricane and tropical storm activity at record lows during the past several years…The United States is benefiting from the longest period in recorded history without a major hurricane strike. Tornado activity is in long-term decline, with major tornado strikes (F3 or higher) showing a remarkable decline in recent decades.”
This is not to say that hurricanes like super storm Sandy or tornadoes have not occurred, but it is to say that there have been far less. These weather events affecting the United States have been in decline and that is the reality.
The FOE claim that any President can possibly “protect communities” is absurd. It is a lie.
The most worrisome aspect of environmental lies is that they are used to justify governmental policies.
The new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Gina McCarthy, ahead of a trip to China, told a liberal advocacy group in Washington that she has devoted her life to protecting the environment: “And I really see no greater issue and no more urgent threat to public health than climate change.”
There is NOTHING the EPA can do about CLIMATE CHANGE.
The present global climate is, in fact, in a lengthy cooling cycle, not caused by anything to do with human activity, but by a reduction in solar radiation due to its own diminished cycle of magnetic storms (sunspots).
Cleaning the nation’s air and water is a public health activity, but denying Americans access to the nation’s vast reservoirs of coal, oil, and natural gas is an attack on the nation’s economic growth and a denial of the energy it requires to recover from the 2008 financial crisis, providing jobs and keeping energy costs under control.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth.
© Alan Caruba, 2013
Article submitted by: Veronica Coffin
By Tony Perkins
The weather may be chilly, but it’s nothing compared to people’s reactions to ObamaCare. This month, the only thing falling faster than the temperature is the number of the new law’s supporters. Making matters worse, the policy’s biggest defectors seem to be the ones most crucial to it: the medical community.
Thousands of doctors are walking away from the exchange in a large-scale mutiny over the government’s reimbursement rates. In California, where 70% of the 104,000 physicians are refusing to participate in ObamaCare, practices stand to lose millions of dollars under the state’s bargain basement insurance rates. The Washington Examiner‘s Richard Pollack broke it down this way. “In other states, doctors receive between $500 to $700 to perform a tonsillectomy. In California [under the state exchange], they get $160.”
If you’re wondering what’s worse than a dysfunctional website, try a health care exchange without doctors! Or hospitals. With the government trying to drive down coverage costs, insurance companies have no choice but to exclude some of the more expensive facilities from their plans — including some of the top-ranked hospitals and cancer centers. In Ohio, for example, only one policy on the exchange gives patients access to the Cleveland Clinic. Other facilities are opting out for the same reasons doctors are — lower reimbursement rates.
The new revelations put the White House back on familiar ground: the defensive. “The President never said you were going to have unlimited choice of any doctor in the country you want to go to,” said former White House aide Ezekiel Emanuel and one of the architects of ObamaCare. In the latest twist on the President’s infamous promise, Emanuel insisted, “If you want to pay more for an insurance company that covers your doctor, you can do that.”
But after this week’s news on prescription drugs, who knows if patients will be able to afford it? According to health analysts, Americans will only be able to keep their medicine — if they have the money to pay for it. “Health plans are cheapening their drug formularies — just like they cheapened their networks of doctors,” explained policy expert Scott Gottlieb. “That’s how they’re paying for the benefits that President Obama promised — [like] leveling of premiums between older (and typically costlier) beneficiaries, and younger consumers.” For now, if a drug doesn’t appear on these new “formulary lists,” patients could be paying for it entirely out of pocket.
On the bright side, there’s still free birth control, right? Wrong. Congresswoman Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.) blew that myth to bits in an interview about the Left’s insulting outreach to women. “When they’re talking about free preventive care for women, I’m having a hard time understanding where the ‘free’ part is,” Ellmers told reporters. “What Democrats fail to mention is now the cost of insurance is… many times quadrupling, in cost, and deductibles are going up by thousands of dollars.” After all, men aren’t the only ones losing their health insurance and watching their premiums skyrocket. “[Democrats'] mindset is that the only issues women care about have to do with their bodies… [as if] the only thing women care about are free contraception and whether or not they have a right to abortion. As Republicans, we know women in this country are concerned with the path that we’re on right now and so many other issues, health being one of them…”
Like us, she finds it offensive that liberals try to reduce her concerns — and those of millions of other women — to sexual politics. The media likes to paint the GOP as a bunch of knuckle-dragging Neanderthals, but Republicans aren’t the ones dragging women by the hair and treating them as single-dimension voters.
Meanwhile, one area of “reproductive care” that men and women equally despise is the HHS mandate, which forces employers — whether or not it violates their beliefs– to pay for drugs that can destroy a human embryo. In surveys across the spectrum, this continues to be one of the most unpopular aspects of ObamaCare. FRC’s nationwide poll shows that a whopping 59% of voters — including 61% of independents — object to HHS’s coercion. Rasmussen’s results were just as unflattering — 51% opposition on the birth control coverage alone. Now that the Supreme Court has agreed to decide the debate, faithful Americans hope the justices will grant what the White House won’t: freedom. For more on this most important of ObamaCare exemptions, check out Emily Minick’s Washington Times column for FRC here.
Article submitted by: Veronica Coffin