But the leaked DHS report is not the only problem that conservatives are facing from the fascist left. The tolerant left, champions of diversity and tolerance, doesn’t like the idea of hearing things that might hurt their feelings. Every word you say has the potential to incite violence against them!
So, they’ve proposed this new Hate Crimes bill so that they don’t have to listen to people they disagree with anymore.
Committee members allowed that, yes, the law could result in the imprisonment of religious leaders. Conceivably then, a threat might be perceived in the preaching from a Bible (the weapon), perceived as inciting “radicals” to do bodily harm to non-believers or gays or whoever. Thus the perception allegedly received by the alleged victim holds total sway over the actual occurrence, which in actuality might have been completely benign.
If the validity of the actual occurrence is not the basis for justice, then there is no justice under this proposed law; it is an invitation for persecution by allegation of personal offendedness, a legalization of internal outrage as the definition of a crime regardless of whether the outrage is legitimate.
Protection from outrage is not possible; so persecution of the hated must substitute. Justice misapplied can become persecution, and it undoubtedly will if H.R. 1913 becomes law.
We elected Obama, and now the whole country will look like the university campuses, where leftist fascism is the rule, and conservatives need bodyguards and police escorts in order to be able to speak.
BONUS:
Michele Bachmann talks with Neil Cavuto about cap and trade, and the recession: (H/T The Maritime Sentry)
Sensible science, sensible energy policy and sensible pollution reduction. Why won’t the socialists just listen to her? Just do whatever she says to do and we’ll get out of this mess that the Democrats put us into.
ICE is expanding in much of Antarctica, contrary to the widespread public belief that global warming is melting the continental ice cap.
The results of ice-core drilling and sea ice monitoring indicate there is no large-scale melting of ice over most of Antarctica, although experts are concerned at ice losses on the continent’s western coast.
Antarctica has 90 per cent of the Earth’s ice and 80 per cent of its fresh water. Extensive melting of Antarctic ice sheets would be required to raise sea levels substantially, and ice is melting in parts of west Antarctica. The destabilisation of the Wilkins ice shelf generated international headlines this month.
However, the picture is very different in east Antarctica, which includes the territory claimed by Australia.
East Antarctica is four times the size of west Antarctica and parts of it are cooling. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research report prepared for last week’s meeting of Antarctic Treaty nations in Washington noted the South Pole had shown “significant cooling in recent decades”.
And here’s the graph that goes with the findings:
Source: Cryosphere Today
Why are global warming alarmists wrong?
Now we know that they’re wrong. Why are they wrong? Well, maybe I should start by showing that the media is cherry-picking data in order to delude the public. This post by Anthony Watts which explains how the media deliberately recycles the images and stories about imminent climate catastrophes. This time, it’s about a vast antarctic shelf that’s about to collapse.
Only one problem. It was just about to collapse last year, but the media is re-using the the same scary stock photo and story again this year and telling us again that it’s just about to collapse.
Excerpt:
Those masters of disaster are at it again, and it appears our friendly scientists at that National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) help this story along each year.
…It seems that not only is the photography recycled, so is the storyline. It seems to happen every year, about this time. Note the photos show shear failure and cracks, not melted ice. Shear failure is mostly mechanical-stress related, though ice does tend to be more brittle at colder temperatures.
National Geographic reported this story headline last year, March 25th 2008.
“[It’s] an event we don’t get to see very often,” Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, said in a press statement.
Now, how is it that an ice shelf breaks up in the spring of 2008 and again in the spring of 2009 and it’s “not very often”? Hmmm.
Watts goes on in his post to take a look at how much the ice shelf has really changed over the years (it hasn’t) and whether the air temperatures have gotten warmer (theyhaven’t) such that the air would be causing cracks. So all we really have is a scary re-used photo and a lot of propaganda.
What are the economic effects of policies based on global warming alarmism
Michele Bachmann has a post on her blog about a new study by a Spanish economist regarding the cost of green job initiatives.
Excerpt:
A study directed by Dr. Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor at Juan Carlos University in Madrid, concluded that every “green job” created in Spain resulted in 2.2 other jobs being destroyed.
The study emphasized that only 10% of the “green jobs” created could be considered permanent – such as maintenance of renewable power systems. The remaining jobs consisted of temporary jobs in construction, fabrication and installation jobs; along with administrative positions, marketing, and engineering projects.
Spain has been providing subsidies to create green jobs, and this is viewed by some as a model for future US energy policy.
Bachmann continues:
“If U.S. subsidies to renewable producers achieve the same result — and President Obama has held Spain up as a model for how to subsidize renewables — the U.S. could lose 6.6 million to 11 million jobs while it creates three million largely temporary ‘green jobs.'”
Furthermore, Dr. Calzada stated that “the loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices.”
Thomas J. Pyle of the Institute for Energy Research adds:
“As this study makes clear, Spain has spent billions in taxpayer resources to subsidize renewable energy programs in an effort to jumpstart its ailing economy – and what they’ve gotten in return are fewer jobs, skyrocketing debt and some of the highest and most regressive energy prices in the developed world. Now, as U.S. policy-makers prepare to embark Americans upon a similar course, this report offers our first realistic glimpse into what we should expect in return for that unprecedented sacrifice of public resources and personal autonomy.”
The IER has a list of the key findings from the study in that post.
Why did the jobs disappear? In part because of the higher capital confiscation of the government, and in part because the green policies pushed industry out of Spain. Actually, the study didn’t count jobs lost through “industrial relocation”, which in this case amounts to capital flight. The largest stainless-steel producer in Spain directly linked its decision to move operations to South America to the higher energy costs imposed by the government.
In the US, we could see a massive flight, and not just in manufacturing. High-tech industries that rely on cheap energy could be forced to find less expensive environments. Bloomberg’s economist notes that Microsoft and Google have already relocated their servers once to get cheaper energy. The Internet is flexible enough to allow employers to go almost anywhere in the world to host their servers, and in this economy, there will be plenty of competition for them.
In a related post, Gateway Pundit notes that the cap and trade policies of the Democrats will also cause consumer electricity prices to soar.
Excerpt:
Democrats know that their cap and trade energy policies will devastate the economy.
…Cap and trade policies would likely cost American families $700 to $1,400 dollars per family per year according to the video above. The Department of Energy estimated GDP losses would be between $444 billion and $1.308 trillion over the 21-year period. Cap and trade also could cost the US 4 million jobs. In Missouri and the Midwest where energy is “cheap” it would cause electricity rates to double.
And GP also links to this video showing what we can expect from the Democrats on this issue:
Further study
I posted a list a while back of the expected increases in electricity prices, broken down by state, here. More about the impact on consumers from John Boehner is here.
More about the rise in unemployment we can expect from green jobs initiatives is here. Info about Obama’s tax hikes on energy producers is here. Information about possible carbon tariffs is here.
Information about the recent Cato statement of 700 scientists who dissent from man-made global warming is here.
WINTERY KNIGHT 