SodaHead - Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!'s Blog

Climate Researchers' Leaked "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.

2009-11-20T20:22:22Z

+18 raves

Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.

The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit(commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.

Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."

In an exclusive interview in Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition, Phil Jones, the head of the Hadley CRU, confirmed that the leaked data is real.

"It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago," he told the magazine, noting that the center has yet to contact the police about the data breach.

TGIF Edition asked Jones about the controversial "hide the decline" comment from an e-mail he wrote in 1999. He told the magazine that there was no intention to mislead, but he had "no idea" what he meant by those words.

"That was an e-mail from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?" he said.

The Telegraph has posted some of the more scathing excerpts from these emails, which the newspaper suggests points to manipulation of evidence and private doubts about the reality of global warming, though the much of the scientific language in the e-mails is esoteric and hard to interpret.

But one notable e-mail clearly describes how to squeeze dissenting scientists from the peer review process:

"I think we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?"

Isn't it strange???

2009-11-19T16:21:48Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+2 raves

One of the largest army bases in the nation had to rely on an armed private police force to take down an assassin? It only took minutes for them to respond... when SECONDS counted! It's the ARMY!!! Where were the arms???

Computers, Hard Drives Seized at ACORN's New Orleans Office

2009-11-06T20:43:00Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+5 raves

http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/system/files/barack-obam... Friday, November 06, 2009 Investigators for the Louisiana Attorney General executed a search warrant Friday at ACORN's New Orleans office in connections to allegations of embezzlement and tax fraud. Spokeswoman Tammi Arender Herring said the search warrant was executed shortly after 9 a.m. and resulted in the seizure of computers, hard drives and documents. "It is quite a bit of stuff," Herring said, adding that ACORN officials were "extremely cooperative." The search warrant follows the removal of computers and other items by two unidentified former ACORN employees when they left the organization, according to ACORN attorneys. Assistant Attorney General David Caldwell said the original allegations of embezzlement were made last year by ACORN board members who were terminated after asking for an examination of the activist group's books. ACORN fired its longtime director of its Louisiana chapter last month, citing a lack of accountability. Calls to Brian Kettenring, a spokesman for ACORN, were not immediately returned. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Health Care Reform Assumes Millions Would Pay Fine

2009-11-05T20:21:23Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+3 raves

Health Care Reform Assumes Millions Would Pay Fine Rather Than Get Coverage by Judson Berger - FOXNews.com - November 04, 2009 The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated in its study last week that the House health care bill would bring in $167 billion over 10 years in penalties from those who don't get coverage. A significant part of the plan to expand coverage relies financially on fines from the uninsured. The health care reform bill awaiting debate in the House assumes millions of workers and employers would rather pay $167 billion in fines than purchase or provide adequate coverage. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated in its study last week that the House bill would bring in $167 billion over 10 years -- $33 billion from fines paid by individuals who decline to buy insurance, and the rest from employers who don't offer insurance to workers or contribute enough toward premiums. Ernest Istook, a former Republican congressman from Oklahoma who is now a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, calculated that anywhere between 8 million and 14 million people would end up paying the fines. This raises a few problems, he said. First, if those millions somehow get covered and don't pay the fine, then the health program is faced with a budget hole. Second, he said, it speaks to a flaw with the insurance packages that are being offered. "If you say people would rather pay $167 billion in penalties rather than buy insurance under your new plan, what's wrong with your new plan?" he asked. The answer, Istook said: "It's expensive." "There's just going to be some people who choose rather to pay (the fine) than to pay for health care," said Stephanie Lundberg, spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "There's going to be some people that just philosophically don't want to buy health care."

A Troubling Turn For Obama

2009-11-04T20:34:41Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+3 raves

FOXNews - WASHINGTON -- Republican gubernatorial wins in New Jersey and Virginia mark a troubling turn for President Obama, whose personal efforts couldn't stop the fall of Democrats facing a voter backlash over the economy and a notable uptick in the government's would-be role in people's lives.The fight in the Garden State was more grueling than usually accompanies Democratic campaigns in the reliably blue state of New Jersey. So the setbacks demonstrate the difficulty of presidential leadership following a campaign built on promises of unity followed by divisive policies and a relentless campaign approach toward big legislative issues like the stimulus and health care bills. "I think what this night does is it completely explodes the mythology of the meaning of the 2008 election," said syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer. "You will remember after the 2008 election people talked ... about a new era, about the Republicans becoming a rump party of the south, even losing parts of the south, how this was the death of conservatism. ... Here we are a year later and we can see how ephemeral and one-shot 2008 was," he added. The president had personally campaigned for Deeds and Corzine, raising the stakes in low-energy off-year elections. Thus, even one Democratic loss, much less two, was a blot on Obama's political standing to a certain degree and signaled potential problems ahead as he seeks to achieve his policy goals, protect Democratic majorities in Congress and expand his party's grip on governors' seats next fall. It was difficult to separate Obama from the outcomes after he devoted much time working to persuade voters to elect Deeds and re-elect Corzine. Obama campaigned in person for both and was featured in their advertisements. He characterized the two as necessary allies in the White House's effort to advance his plans. He also deployed his political campaign arm, Organizing for America, to try to ensure the swarms of party loyalists and new voters he attracted in 2008 would turn out. Exit polls showed that nearly a third of voters in Virginia Tuesday described themselves as independents, and they preferred the Republican to the Democrat by almost a 2-1 margin. The outcome showed that "the Obama movement, the coalition, isn't transferable," said Democratic strategist Kirsten Powers, a Fox News contributor. But the Democratic losses in Virginia and New Jersey could also be a blot on Obama's political standing to some degree. Obama needs all the lawmakers he can get to pass his legislative priorities of health care and climate change. Defeats Tuesday could make it harder for him to persuade moderate Democrats from conservative areas to get on board. They have been hearing from voters worried about his expansion of government at a time of rising deficits. As if on cue, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid also indicated Tuesday that Congress may not complete health care legislation this year, missing Obama's deadline on his signature issue and pushing debate into a congressional election year. The vote is "more about the policies of the president more than the personalities," said Washington Times columnist Tony Blankely. "The public is getting really scared of his policies and I think that's what we're seeing in all of these elections. ... Obama has moved the policy so far to the left that now you're seeing this big movement back and I think we're only seeing the beginning of it." Defeats could point to future problems for Democrats, particularly in moderate districts and in swing states like Ohio, Colorado and Nevada. In 2010, most governors, a third of the Senate and all members of the House of Representatives will be on ballots.

The Black Hole of Heath Care Reform-call to action

2009-11-02T20:50:59Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+28 raves

Make a House Call on Congress on November 5th and Stop the Government Take Over of Health Care! November 5th, 2009 Democrat leadership in the House wants to pass a government run health care bill before Veteran's Day, and it's up to us to make sure this prescription for socialized medicine doesn't pass. If you can come to Washington to look your Member straight in the eye and tell them to keep their hands off your heatlh care, do it. If you can't make it to Washington, go to your Member's district office. And, if you can't do that at least call and email. Also, Americans for Prosperity is organizing a House Call to legislators district offices on Thursday at noon, and I encourage you to check out their website at www.americansforprosperity.org to see how you can take part in their efforts if you can't make it to D.C.

Where's the Stimulus Money????

2009-10-30T18:18:42Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+16 raves

Am I the only person in the US to figure out that the reason so little has been spent to stimulate the economy is because O'Bummer plans to flood the economy with all that money in the fall of 2011 thru 2012 in order to show how wonderful he is - for RE-ELECTION??? People awash in OTHER people's money will vote for whoever GAVE them that money!!!!

How much will YOU save with the Healthcare Plan?

2009-10-20T19:39:08Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+3 raves

(CBS) Lower Premiums by $2,500 for a Family of Four ?????? "If you've got health insurance through your employer, you can keep your health insurance, keep your choice of doctor, keep your plan," Mr. Obama said in his Oct. 15, 2008 debate against Sen. McCain. "The only thing we're going to try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed onto you. And we estimate we can cut the average family's premium by about $2,500 per year." This campaign promise is the trickiest to explain and to evaluate. Mr. Obama gave this figure repeatedly, but he was not being completely forthright about what he meant. His administration never expected families to see savings of $2,500 in premiums; instead, his advisers calculated the total cost savings for both individuals and the government. "The original arithmetic was somewhat basic," the Times reported in July 2008. "In May 2007, three Harvard professors who are unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign... produced a memorandum offering their 'best guess' that a menu of changes would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year... That would amount to about 8 percent of the $2.5 trillion in health care spending projected for 2009, when the next president takes office...The total savings were then divided by the country's population, multiplied for a family of four, and rounded down slightly to a number that was easy to grasp: $2,500." The changes expected to produce the savings included reduced administrative costs ($46 billion), improving preventive medicine and chronic disease management ($81 billion), and investments in digitizing medical records ($77 billion). Yet whether those changes would produce those savings is suspect. The Times explained then that the costs were drawn from recent studies -- for instance the figure of $77 billion in savings achieved through health IT came from a RAND study. That study, however, says that such savings would take 15 years to reach. Moreover, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), under the leadership of then-director Peter Orzag (now Mr. Obama's Director of the Office of Management and Budget), decided that RAND appeared to "significantly overstate the savings for the health care system" from health IT, the Wall Street Journal reported. The study in Health Affairs is backed up by the CBO's own recent findings. "Although different types of preventive care have different effects on spending, the evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall," CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote on the Director's Blog last month. In defense of preventive medicine, he at least added, "Of course, just because a preventive service adds to total spending does not mean that it is a bad investment." In spite of all this, it looked in May as if Mr. Obama might have been able to keep his promise, when the health care industry appeared to offer $2 trillion in spending reductions over 10 years to help pay for the president's reforms. The administration enthusiastically said this was enough to reduce costs by an average of $2,500 for a family of four. However, health care leaders either did not clearly spell out their intent to the White House or reneged on their offer, claiming days later that they never agreed to such large cost reductions, the New York Times reported. In addition, the health care legislation coming out of the Senate Finance Committee could even actually result in higher premiums for customers -- the insurance industry is threatening that the $6 billion industry-wide fee and other taxes Sen. Baucus has proposed will be passed on to consumers. What this all means is that it may be years or decades before any overall savings from Mr. Obama's plans materialize -- if they do at all. How much will YOU save with the Healthcare Plan?

Promises!! Promises!!

2009-10-20T19:32:33Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+4 raves

During the 2008 Democratic primary, Mr. Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton both shared the goal of health care reform. By Mr. Obama's own admission, the biggest difference between the two candidates was that Clinton supported a mandate for all Americans to acquire health care. "Now, under any mandate, you are going to have problems with people who don't end up having health coverage," Mr. Obama said during a debate with Clinton on Jan. 31, 2008. "I think we can anticipate that there would also be people potentially who are not covered and are actually hurt if they have a mandate imposed on them." Under the leadership of the late-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), however, Congress wrote bills that called for an individual mandate. In June, the president indicated in a letter to Kennedy and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) that he was changing his tune to accommodate their legislation. "I understand the committees are moving towards a principle of shared responsibility -- making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage," he wrote. "I share the goal of ending lapses and gaps in coverage that make us less healthy and drive up everyone's costs, and I am open to your ideas on shared responsibility." The president now fully supports an individual mandate. "The only way this plan works is if everybody fulfills their responsibility," he said at a rally Thursday. Flip... Flop... Flip... Flop....

Healthcare Debate Now On C-Span!!!

2009-10-20T19:29:55Z

Rover™ ♂ - Standing TALL for America!!

+4 raves

Candidate Obama promised that health care deliberations with Congress and special interests would be transparent to the extreme. "That's what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are," Mr. Obama said during his Jan. 31, 2008 debate with Sen. Clinton. "Because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process. And overcoming the special interests and the lobbyists who -- Senator Clinton is right. They will resist anything that we try to do." The president, members of Congress from both parties and special interest groups have indeed all participated in negotiations, but those conversations have not been broadcast. Instead, the president has announced deals with groups like the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry after they were worked out in backroom deals. Meanwhile, Baucus, one of the most influential senators in the health care debate, not only shut out the public but shut out most of his own committee from his "bipartisan negotiations." "We spent virtually an entire year with most of the Finance Committee being excluded," Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) reportedly said after Baucus released his health care bill. "You don't run a committee that way." Tune in and watch it now!!!