Yet Again...Everything Is Related to Global Warming

I've raised the issue before that no matter what occurs -- hot weather, cold weather, rainy weather, drought...even normal weather -- that some "expert" somewhere will find a way to link every event or situation to global warming.

So, I'm reading the Los Angeles Times today, always an adventure, and there's an article by Anna Gorman titled, "Warming could fuel immigration."  This article quotes a number of scientists (specifically the study's author, Michael Oppenheimer, professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University), each of whom makes loosely-worded concerns about global warming and its likely impact on immigration policy. 

It claims, "Between 1.4 and 6.7 million Mexicans could migrate to the U.S. by 2080 as climate change reduces agricultural production in Mexico."  Why just immigrants from Mexico?  What about other countries?  And why would they all want to immigrate to the U.S.?

Mind you, there are virtually NO specifics about the alleged "study," and there are no specific links, but yet it gets a fairly significant amount of "ink" in the Los Angeles Times.  Oppenheimer says, "Our primary objectives were, No. 1, to give policy-makers something to think about and, No. 2, to give researchers a spur to start answering some of the more complicated questions."  I'm sure that the U.N. will jump all over this one.

I've said it before and it's more true now than ever -- Global warming is the new socialism.  Its most hard-core supporters want to control what you do or say, where you go, what you watch, what you eat...EVERYTHING...and unless you're "enlightened" and adopt their radical, tax and regulate policies lock, stock and barrel, you open up yourself to criticism and ridicule.

Obama is full of it on Campaign Finance Reform

"I've always known Chris Van Hollen and Chuck Schumer were political hacks...but Obama is the worst of the entire bunch.  Post-partisan, pleeeez."

The image is still vibrant in my mind.  Obama, during the state of the union, chastises the Supreme Court for its ruling in the Citizens United case.  He calls for reform to remove corporate influence from politics.

Fast forward to today and Congressional Democrats plan to bring "reform" up for a vote in the Senate in the near future.  Majority Leader Harry Reid spurned hearings and instead wants to take the bill to the floor.  Obama has taken to criticizing Republicans recently for their opposition to the "Disclosure Act."  And, of course, Obama's backers in the mainstream media are falling appropriately into line with his views.

But, in reading an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal, called "The Schumer for Majority Leader Act," it paints a completely different picture of this "reform" legislation.  Among other elements of the legislation -- conveniently overlooked by the biased, left-wing media, are:

• Yet what they've proposed is a blatantly partisan bill sponsored by two Members whose main duty is electing Democrats. The House version, which passed last month on partisan lines, is sponsored by Representative Chris Van Hollen, who runs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The companion bill in the Senate was introduced by Charles Schumer, the two-time head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee who is in a backroom battle with Dick Durbin to succeed Harry Reid as Majority Leader.
• Even provisions that ostensibly apply to both corporations and unions would in practice mostly restrict the ability of corporations to participate in elections. For example, the government contractor restriction applies to those with contracts of $10 million or more, a threshold met by many corporations but few unions. 

So, we learn that the heads of the DCCC and DSCC are the "authors" of this so-called reform that would serve to silence corporate opinion in the political debate but give left-wing supporters -- unions and others -- the ability to aggressively and actively spew their left-wing rhetoric and, ultimately, influence the election.

For a presidential candidate who campaigned on being "post-partisan," Obama has only served to increase and further divide America along political lines.  Shame on Barack. 

But, come November, America will "right" itself -- literally and figuratively.

Me Thinks Thou Doth Protest Too Much

I just love it.  Well-respected but clearly liberal, E.J. Dionne, Jr., writes a scathing op-ed column in the Washington Post today called "Enough of the Right Wing Propaganda."  In this op-ed, he blasts Andrew Breitbart and Fox News for publicizing and then reporting on the Shirley Sherrod "scandal." 

I just love the "mainstream" (note I don't even have to use the word liberal here) media.  Rarely do they talk about the left-ward antics of all the radical groups like MoveOn.org, Code Pink, New America Foundation and others that were so prominent and public when George W. Bush was president -- targeting anything and everything Republican.  In fact, these "mainstream" organizations followed them like sheep to the slaughter.  It even went so far that Nancy Pelosi went to great lengths to praise these groups and the right to protest. 

What's ironic here, though, is that the clip of Sherrod's speech, while aired publicly on multiple news outlets, need not have provoked the rapid and ultimately incorrect response from the Obama Administration.  After all, it wasn't Fox News or Andrew Britebart who fired Sherrod.  It was Obama's Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsach who did the deed (probably under the direction of some White House functionary) -- with incomplete facts at hand.  Ultimately, he had to eat crow...as did the Obama Aministration.

Second, what's always bothered me is that the left has pushes left-of-center content out on all other television channels -- ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, PBS and CNN -- yet Fox News, one little tiny station...with a HUGE following...gets raked over the coals and tarred as biased.  Could it be that the "mainstream" media simply can't understand that Fox News has such a following because they report the news in a way that most people want to hear...yes..."fair and balanced?"  The reporters at the Washington Post, New York Times and other well-established operations are witnessing declining circulation numbers and they, essentially, "preach to the choir" and there are just fewer and fewer in that choir. 

The "mainstream" media's monopoly on the flow of news and information is gone...and it's never coming back.  Mind you, I haven't even gotten started talking about the now well-publicized Journo-List, the left-wing cabal that went over and above to boost the Obama presidential candidacy and torpedo anything from the Republicans.  Or, all the negative publicity over the Tea Party Movement...which is wildly popular with many Americans -- Republican, Democrat and Independent.

I wonder what E.J. Dionne, Jr. would have to say about that?