Saturday, October 30, 2010

The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy - Yahoo group

Following, for your consideration, is the banner statement of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy at Yahoo Groups (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheVastRightWingConspiracy)

This is a forum for the free exchange of ideas, an information source, and a rallying point for free-thinking American Patriots.

All Citizens of the United States are welcome here.

Who are The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?

We are Constitutionalists.

We believe in the Freedoms guaranteed us by the Bill of Rights - ALL of them.

We remember the Boston Tea Party.

We enjoy commentary, analysis, and opinion, from Beck, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly.

We believe the Obama administration is undermining the very foundations of our republic.

Members of Congress are not representing us - We, The People, that hired them. The voice of the people is not being heard. Taxation without representation must not continue.

The words of the Federal Convention of 1787 are clear and concise. The Constitution of the United States need not be interpreted, it need only be read. It is written in common language, by common men of uncommon wisdom and intelligence. The Bill of Rights is our Ten Commandments. The Constitution and it's Bill of Rights protect We, The People from tyrants and government run amok.

The enemies of our country were neither vanquished in World War II, nor in the Cold War, but have been laying in wait - working diligently behind the scenes - laying the ground work that has allowed the socialists to come to power, seemingly over night. Obama and his minions are merely dim-witted tools of a very clever enemy. This sinister adversary has been gaining power and influence over our dull, inattentive and lazy countrymen for many years.

We, and our fellow Americans, have a duty to awaken the sleeping giant that defeated the Socialists, Fascists, and Communists of the last century. Our government is running amok and must be reigned-in. The tyrants must be expelled. Elitist politicians must be humbled and replaced with common people having the love of Freedom and Liberty in their hearts.

We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it any more!

Voter Fraud...

Friday, October 29, 2010

Washington State Income Tax Initiative 1098

Defeat 1098 Facts


Five Reasons to Defeat 1098

I Voted

Bill O'Reilly: Why is NPR Getting Our Money?

National Public Radio is taking our money while silencing our voice.

Bill O'Reilly: Bill's Column - Why is NPR Getting Our Money?

By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com
Thursday, Oct 28, 2010
One of the big reasons the Democrats may get hammered next Tuesday is that under that party's Congressional leadership, the nation has run up an astounding $5 trillion in new debt over the past three years. And what do we have to show for all that deficit spending? Nancy Pelosi flying home to San Francisco in a private jet?

As part of the federal gravy train, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is set to receive $420 million this year alone. No wonder Elmo is smiling. This is free money for a group of people who should be competing in the private marketplace.

And what are the taxpayers getting for their money? Well, this much is beyond dispute: The news-based programming on PBS and NPR is heavily tilted to the left. In fact, as far as news analysts are concerned, there are 18 liberal-leaning individuals on the air and one moderate, David Brooks. There are no conservative voices heard in the national public broadcasting precincts.

The incredible firing last week of the 19th liberal analyst, Juan Williams, has unmasked the NPR operation, which is deeply invested in liberal causes. A few days before Juan was sacked, far-left billionaire George Soros donated $1.8 million to NPR so they could hire some reporters. NPR snatched up the Soros money faster than a raccoon could down a cupcake. So I am asking myself: Did Soros get the Bill Haley and the Comets oldies package, or the Disco Explosion CD set for his largesse?

The fact that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting denies it is an ideological operation is pretty stunning. There are plenty of conservatives who would like to bloviate on a weekly TV program like Bill Moyers did for twenty years. And old Bill was canny. Not only did he draw a salary from PBS, but his production company had the right to market videotapes of his programs. Wow. Nice perk from the taxpayers, right, Bill? But PBS simply can't find any right-wingers worthy of the Moyers treatment. I know they are looking very hard.

This dishonest shell game has got to stop. We live in a time where cable TV rules and satellite radio is all over the place. If PBS and NPR have good product, there are plenty of places for it in the private sector. Let these people compete for their dollars. I will miss seeing the Drifters performing on fundraisers every two months, but I'll bite the bullet. No more public funding, please.

A number of Republicans on Capitol Hill say they will introduce legislation to defund public broadcasting. That will probably pass. But President Obama will, I believe, veto the attempt. After all, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a liberal cathedral, and the president will not want to disturb the service

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Tuesday is Just the Beginning...

Bob - God Bless you!

Putting the Power Back in Your Hands

My Representative in Congress, Cathy McMorris Rogers, just sent this video to me.

Cathy has my vote to return her to Congress, and return America to We, The People.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

"Marxism in America" Lt. Gen. (Ret.) W.G. Boykin Video |

"Marxism in America" Lt. Gen. (Ret.) W.G. Boykin Video |

Washington state's pork barrel senator in fight of her career

Here is a story by the L.A. Times   Interesting, but shallow as usual for the MSM.

In describing Senator Murray's efficacy at bagging the largest of stimulus earmarks, the Times fails to mention that the billions being spent at Hanford are largely dollars going up in smoke. 

True, there have been several thousand new jobs created, however, for the most part the new workers are spending the majority of their time eating donuts, sitting in training clasees, and leaning on shovel handles ala FDR's WPA of the 1930's.

I personally have seen hundreds of completely unqualified and inept losers hired to ostensibly perform highly technical and demanding tasks.  The only thing the majority if them are accomplishing is obliterating tax dollars faster than a dead voter can cast a ballot for Patty Murray.

I quit my job in disgust last July and permanently departed  Hanford after 35 years as a Nuclear Control Systems Engineer. 

Here is the LA Times' story:

Patty Murray brings home lots of federal cash, but challenger Dino Rossi has turned that against her.

By Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times
October 27, 2010
Reporting from Richland, Wash.
Advertisement
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray has been one of the nation's biggest advocates of federal spending to boost the foundering economy. Here at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, the country's worst atomic weapons contamination site, Murray scored $1.9 billion in stimulus funds to speed cleanup and add 1,500 high-paying jobs in south-central Washington.

But voters here have been ambivalent at best about all the money flowing in. During the primary, Murray trailed the local "tea party" candidate, who lost the GOP nomination to real estate investor and former legislator Dino Rossi. The Democratic incumbent now is waging the fight of her 18-year career against Rossi, fueled by conservative fears — even in the Hanford boom belt — that all the federal bacon comes with too much fat.

"I'm a business guy, so when someone says, 'Oh, we're going to spend all this money,' we're all rubbing our hands together. But from another perspective, you've got to ask, where's the money coming from?" said Tony Benegas, a Republican activist, West Richland city councilman and owner of an engineering company that got a small contract out of the federal stimulus grant for the Hanford cleanup. "Is there a benefit? Yeah. But at what cost? Somebody's going to have to pay the piper."

Murray, 60, was elected Washington's first female senator in 1992 on a campaign that played up her low-key, "soccer mom in tennis shoes" background as a citizen activist and school board trustee. Since then, she has become an influential member of the Democratic leadership and a mostly reliable supporter of Obama's legislative agenda. Murray has capitalized on her appropriations committee seat to secure funds for dam, museum, ferry and mass transit projects and boost local employers like Boeing.

Rossi, 51, who narrowly lost the last two gubernatorial elections, has challenged Murray on federal earmarks and played up his seven years in the state Senate, when he says he worked with the Democratic governor to fill a $2.6-billion budget shortfall without raising taxes.

Polls show the two neck and neck. The Murray campaign recently has featured a virtual Who's Who of the left: President Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, Vice President Joe Biden (twice) and former President Bill Clinton have headlined rallies for the incumbent.

"Panic is the word that comes to mind," state GOP Chairman Luke Esser told reporters recently. "Obviously, if they didn't think that Patty Murray was in deep, deep trouble, we wouldn't be seeing this parade of celebrities."

Rossi and his allies have accused Murray of expanding spending, stifling small business and being a decisive vote on overhauling healthcare laws and raising taxes. A TV ad sponsored by the conservative American Action Network shows a pair of dirty sports shoes stomping over cringing citizens. "You wore your tennis shoes out on our backs — small business, Washington families and children. It's time you got off our backs," it says.

Rossi has been particularly critical of her liberal sponsorship of earmarks, funds directed by Congress toward groups and projects in their districts outside the normal budget process. Taxpayers for Common Sense listed Murray ninth in the Senate for successful earmarks in the 2010 budget, totaling $219.5 million.

Business owners, he said in an Oct. 17 debate with Murray, "don't need Sen. Murray's stimulus, they don't need her bailouts … they don't need her earmarks. What they need is modest taxation, fair and predictable regulation, and let them go out and chase the American dream."

Murray said she promotes spending projects to build infrastructure and create jobs that are not her ideas, but for which communities have come to her seeking help. The money, she said, helped reopen a major south Seattle bridge and aided constituents.

"I talk to businesses all the time, and they tell me what they need to have in order to be secure here in our state to create jobs. They need the infrastructure in place to allow them to bring goods to their stores or sell their goods overseas," she said in the debate.

In Richland, a Republican stronghold so intertwined with the World War II-era nuclear site that the local Starbucks has a framed "Trilinear Chart of the Nuclides," the Hanford cleanup has been underfunded for years — even as a plume of toxic waste has leached toward the Columbia River.

Murray secured one of the biggest single stimulus appropriations in the country, boosting the $2-billion-a-year cleanup budget to about $2.7 billion over three years.

"The original plan was not to have the river corridor cleaned up till 2015 or later. Now, we're looking at having it cleaned up in 2013 or 2014. So it has moved up the timeframe a considerable amount," said Gary Petersen, vice president of the Tri-City Development Council.

Though the Tri-Cities region has barely hiccupped during the recession, thanks to the massive cleanup project, the first job fair for the 1,500 new cleanup jobs drew applicants from across the country, said the council's president, Carl Adrian.

"There was literally a line four to five people wide for half a mile long," he said. "To me, this is the success story of the nation for Recovery Act funding."

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

The Fat Lady is about to sing. Say Goodnight.

Our Fathers and Grandfathers - those that served with Honor in WWII and built the United States into a veritable paradise are aptly named as the Greatest Generation.


The present generation, "led" by the Obama Administration is turning a blind-eye to Iran and it's frenetic pace toward nuclear annihilation of the West.

This will likely be the Last Generation.

Ahmadinejad's Bushehr nuclear power plant


Iran injects fuel into first nuclear reactor
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran began loading fuel into the core of its first atomic power plant on Tuesday, moving closer to the start up of a facility that leaders have touted as defying of international efforts to curtail the country's nuclear ambitions.

The Russian-built nuclear power plant in Bushehr has international approval and is supervised by the U.N.'s nuclear agency. However, the U.N. security council has slapped four rounds of sanctions against Iran over a separate track of its nuclear program — its efforts to refine uranium, which could eventually be used to create material for a weapon.

"Today, we witnessed an important development in the start up process. After fuel is injected into the heart of the reactor, the reactor door is closed. Then, it will take one or two months to reach a 40 or 50 percent nominal power," Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi told a press conference broadcast on state TV.  He pointed out that the fueling had occurred in spite of the current sanctions.

"The great Iranian nation can manage the sanctions with its resistance, efforts and endeavors and this is its proof," he said, adding that the reactor should start producing electricity "by mid February."  When the 1,000 megawatt plant originally received the nuclear fuel shipment in August, Salehi predicted it would produce electricity by November, but a leak in a storage pool delayed the process for months — the latest setback for a reactor first commissioned in the 1970s.

The U.S. recently withdrew its long-standing opposition to the plant after Russia satisfied concerns over how it would be fueled and the fate of the spent fuel rods.  Under a deal signed in 2005, Russia will provide nuclear fuel to Iran, then take back the spent fuel, a step meant as a safeguard to ensure it cannot be diverted into a weapons program. Iran has also agreed to allow the U.N.'s nuclear agency to monitor Bushehr and the fuel deliveries.

Worries remain, however, over Iran's program to enrich uranium for nuclear fuel since the process can also be used to create weapons grade material, something Iran says it has no interest in doing.  The United States claims that the fuel deal with Russia shows Tehran does not need to enrich its own uranium, but Iran maintains it will build other nuclear power plants and has to have its own fuel source.

Iran is already producing its own nuclear fuel — uranium enriched to about 3.5 percent. It also has started a pilot program of enriching uranium to 20 percent, which officials say is needed for a medical research reactor.
Weapons grade material has to be enriched to 90 percent.

The Bushehr project dates backs to 1974, when Iran's U.S.-backed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi contracted with the German company Siemens to build the reactor. The company withdrew from the project after the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the shah and brought hardline clerics to power.  In 1992, Iran signed a $1 billion deal with Russia to complete the project and work began in 1995.  Under the contract, the Bushehr nuclear power plant was originally scheduled to come on stream in July 1999 but the start up has been delayed repeatedly by construction and supply glitches.  Moscow has cited technical reasons for the delays, but Iranian officials have sporadically criticized Russia, some calling Moscow an "unreliable partner."
Russians began shipping fuel for the plant in 2007 and carried out a test-run in February 2009.

The Bushehr plant overlooks the Persian Gulf and is visible from several miles (kilometers) away with its cream-colored dome dominating the green landscape.


Soldiers maintain a 24-hour watch on roads leading up to the plant, manning anti-aircraft guns and supported by numerous radar stations.

Occidental College and the Manchurian Collegian

Dr. John Drew was a classmate of President Obama's at Occidental College. He was interviewed last week by Paul Kengor on The Glen Meakem Show, following is a transcription of that portion of the podcast. 


Q: I interviewed you for my book Dupes a year ago and you had contact me a couple of years ago because you read a piece that I wrote for American Thinker and it was called "Dreams from Frank Marshall Davis" and it was on Obama's background and youth. Frank Marshall Davis was an actual Party member and that's something, John, I spent two or three years on investigating, but there's no question about it... the documentation is there, a 1957 Senate report called him "and identified member of the Communist Party", there's an FBI file that's 600 pages, and I took ten or twelve pages from that report and put it in the appendix of my book. It even lists Davis' Communist Party card number, which was 47544, so very clear. Why is all of this relevant? Well, I think it explains, at least to some degree, that -- if he's not a Communist, he's at least very far to the left -- and has some very left-oriented views. But you met Obama when he left Frank Marshall Davis in 1980 coming from Hawaii and went to Occidental College. So tell us about when Obama got there and when you met.

A: I see myself as Barack Obama's missing link from his exposure to Communism through Frank Marshall Davis and his later exposure to Bill Ayers and Alice Palmer in Chicago. So, as far as I can tell, I'm the only one of Obama's extended circle of friends who's spoken out and verified that he was a Marxist-Leninist in his sophomore year of college, from 1980 to 1981.

I met him because I graduated from Occidental College in 1979 and I was back at Occidental visiting a girlfriend. I met him because of the relationship which I'd started my senior year at Occidental --

Q: By the way, tell us where Occidental is. We're way out here in Western Pennsylvania.

A: Sure, Occidental College is in the Eastern Los Angeles area. It's a very prestigious, very beautiful, sort of very garden, rose-garden sort of college, with three- or four-thousand students --

Q: And pretty competitive, I mean Obama would have had to have good grades and been a good student to get accepted there.

A: Yeah, my sense is because of affirmative action, guys like me were going to Occidental instead of even better schools and guys like Obama were going to Occidental instead of, uh, less challenging schools. A lot of very successful people were there, were part of Obama's social circle at the time.

Q: Now, was Occidental known for radical left politics? Would that have been an attraction for Obama?

A: Yeah, I'm certain that it was. It was considered sort of the "Moscow" of southern California. There were a lot of Marxist professors, many of whom I got to know pretty well, not just there but also at Williams College in Massachusetts. Two of the same Marxist-Socialist professors were on the staff with me at Williams.

Q: So, that might have been an attraction for him? I'm trying to think, what would have made him go to Hawaii to Occidental? Do you think Frank Marshall Davis could somehow have been an influence in having him choose Occidental?

A: I don't have any evidence of that...

Q: Because they won't release his records, I called them --

A: Yeah, I think that's odd. I don't know, I got straight A's my first year, it sounds weird, but I don't talk about it, Paul, you'd think that if Obama did well he'd release those transcripts.

Q: Now, this is speculation, but do you think those files might hold a letter of recommendation from Frank Marshall Davis? Right? Why not?

A: Wow.

Q: Davis was a mentor. Davis writes about him in Dreams From My Father very warmly, in fact Obama writes that Davis gave him advice on women, on race, on life, on college. So, he must have recommended Occidental, but it's sad we have to speculate. If they'd just release these records...

A: Well, this is what I know for sure, and this is why I'd sought you out, to be helpful to the historic record, is to verify that Barack Obama was definitely a Marxist and that, it was very unusual for a sophomore to be as radical, or as ideologically attuned as young Barack Obama was. I think people like David Remnick [a biographer], they make it sound like Frank Marshall Davis had no impact on Obama and that his friend Mohammed Shandu somehow converted him to Marxism at Occidental. And my impression is that Obama was the leader of that group and Obama was already very ardent and committed to Marxism. And Shandu struck me as somewhat more passive. So it doesn't fit the story that I read in Remnick's story The Bridge.

Q: And Remnick did not contact you, did he?

A: No! No! ...Well, Remnick interviewed my girfriend, Carolyn Bosch -- she's on three or four pages -- and they interviewed a guy named Gary Chapman, a guy who was very active in the Democrat Student [Socialists'] Alliance.

Q: I like David Remnick. I use his book in my Compartive Studies class at Grove City College.

A: He's a sharp guy. And he's got some good facts in there, but he didn't want to hear from little Dr. Drew...

Q: ...You said that Obama was introduced to you at Occidental as a Marxist because you were one at that point.

A: Yeah, that's embarrassing, but I had studied Marxist Economics at Sussex College in England. I had a junior year scholarship over there, and did my senior honor's thesis on Marxist Economics when I was at Occidental College. And I actually founded the Democrat Student Socialists' Alliance, under a different name, in 1976... it was as Marxist as you could get, but they come up with a more general name while I was away in England.

Q: ...John, you had told me before, and I'm reading from my book, that "Obama was already an ardent Marxist in the fall of 1980 when I met him. I know it's incendiary to say this, but although he said in Dreams From My Father that he'd 'hung out with Marxist professors', he did not explain in that book or clarify is that he was 100% in total agreement with those professors.

A: Yeah, you've got that exactly right. Obama believed, at the time I met him, this was probably around Christmas time in 1980. I'd flown out on Christmas break from Cornell, where I was in grad school. And Obama was looking forward to an imminent social revolution, literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class and institute a kind of socialist Utopia in the United States. I mean, that's how extreme his views were his sophomore year of college.

...I was a comrade, but I was more... the Frankfort School of Marxism at the time. I was, I felt like I was doing him a favor by pointing out that the Marxist revolution that he and Caroline and Shandu were hoping for was really kind of a pipe-dream. And that there was nothing in European history, or the history of developed nations, that would make that sort of fantasy, that Frank Marshall Davis fantasy of revolution, come true.

Q: So you had a realistic sense that, even though you liked these ideas, that you knew they wouldn't really work?

A: Right... [There were some] who were puzzled why they didn't see Marx's predictions come true, and weren't interested in the role of psychology or false consciousness in preventing a revolution from happening. I was a card-carrying Marxist, but I was more of an east coast, Cornell University Marxist at that time.

Q: But Obama thought it was practical. He thought it could happen in America?

A: Oh, yeah! He thought I was a little reactionary... or insensitive to the coming needs of the revolution! He was full-bore, 100% into that very, kind of simple-minded Marxist revolutionary framework.

Q: And, also at this time, this is 1981, Jimmy Carter was President [?] and Ronald Reagan was yet to call the Soviet Union 'the Evil Empire' when he becomes President. Did you have talk about the election, about Reagan. I mean, that must have really upset Obama?

A: You know, it's so long ago. My clearest recollection was that we were more concerned with more U.S. intervention in Latin America and the repression of Communist and Socialist forces like the Sandanistas and things like that... this sound weird, but there was part of me at the time that was ready to go off and fight with the Sandanistas against the Contras. I was pretty crazy, Paul...

Q: Now this gets to a critical point and I know Obama supporters want me to ask this... to be fair, look where you were then and where you are today...

A: Oh, yeah. Now I'm a Ronald Reagan, church-going, Baptist conservative, so...

Q: So, what about Obama. That's the... trillion dollar question? ...We have to know this stuff about our Presidents, you can't leave this about biographies...

A: Well, I think that he, I've challenged President Obama to explain how he evolved this Marxist-Leninist viewpoint he had in his sophomore year of college. And he's just never articulated how he changed. In fact, he's buried and, I think, lied about his ideological convictions of his youth. And we can trace it all the way to Alice Palmer, I think, in 1995 [the Illinois state senator who he replaced]... who attended the Communist Party "Politburo" event. Or she was part of a big international Communist convention in Moscow!

Q: ...And Palmer was with Obama in the living room of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn when -- and The New York Times even wrote about this -- there was sort of a political blessing, where Palmer identified Obama as his chosen successor...

A: ...Well, I think I can knock down some doors here but stating that he had a very consistent ideology, I think, probably from the time he was in [Hawaii] to the time he was with Palmer and Ayers in Chicago. I think his current behavior demonstrates that he still has some ideological convictions. When ever he talks about taxing the richest two-percent? I think he knows that will harm the economy. To him, the redistribution of wealth is extremely important. And he never took economics or science like I did. He went straight to law school, never had any business experience, never had a payroll to meet. And I think he's locked in a very dangerous mindset, where if he didn't fight to redistribute the wealth that he'd be violating [his] ideology.

...You see people like Van Jones, who's an admitted Communist, you see Anita Dunn, who's praising Mao Tse-Tung, to me, it's like Obama's Marxist-Socialist ideology is hiding in plain sight! It's frustrating to me. It seems to me like people should be up in arms about this!

...I think whenever he talks about people clinging to their guns and religions due to economic stress, that's just the standard Marxist argument... he's still using the standard Marxist architecture, the way he talks about things. I think he's surrounded by people who share that mental architecture!

...I feel like our nation's life is at stake.

  • (Anecdotally, a friend of mine also attended Occidental with Obama.  Her impression of Barry was not as an empathetic and compassionate leader, but as an "aloof jerk".   -  Carl)

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Chilean miner's rescue facts you won't hear from the President or the Media...

Hello All:

Since President Obama and the media have not seen fit to publicly congratulate (let alone even mention) AMERICAN ingenuity and AMERICAN PRIVATE ENTERPRISE for the miracle rescue of the Chilean Miners, here' a few facts every American should know and be extremely proud of:

·  Schramm Inc. of West Chester, Pennsylvania built the drills and equipment used to reach the trapped miners.  

·  Center Rock Company, also from Pennsylvania , built the drill bits used to reach the miners.  

·  UPS, the US shipping company, delivered the 13-ton drilling equipment from Pennsylvania to Chile in less than 48 hours.  

·  Crews from Layne Christensen Company of Wichita Kansas and its subsidiary Geotec Boyles Bros. worked the drills and machinery to locate and reach the miners and then enlarge the holes to ultimately rescue them.  

·  Jeff Hart of Denver Colorado was called off his job drilling water wells for the U.S. Army's forward operating bases in Afghanistan to lead the drilling crew that reached the miners.  

·  Atlas Copco Construction Mining Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin provided consulting on how to make drilling equipment from different sources work together under differing pressure specifications.  

·  Aries Central California Video of Fresno California designed the special cameras that were lowered nearly a mile into the ground sending back video of the miners.  

·  Zephyr Technologies of Annapolis Maryland, made the remote monitors of vital signs that miners will wear during their ascent.  

·  NASA Engineers designed the " Phoenix " capsule that miners would be brought to the surface in, and provided medical consulting, special diets and spandex suits to maintain miners' blood pressure as they're brought back to the surface.  

·  Drilling Supply Co., Houston also involved.

Oh, and Canadian-based Precision Drilling Corp. and South-African company Murray & Roberts, drilled  backup rescue shafts in case the American rig failed.  

It didn't.

God Bless America!   Pass this around, even your left leaning friends should know this; it will give everyone a good feeling about American ingenuity.  How can they complain about it?  Oh, yeah, the evil capitalists...

Friday, October 22, 2010

Boobies, Ta-Ta’s, Hooters, Bongos.

Boobies, Ta-Ta’s, Hooters, Bongos. You know what I’m talking about. We likely have as many euphemisms for the female breasts as there are nouns in the English language.  They have an amazing ability to send men into a stupor. I know, I’ve seen it happen.  A beautiful woman walks by and she has that hourglass figure, and suddenly the men in the room stop talking and their heads turn in unison like some Busby Berkeley choreographed scene.

Women spend huge amounts of time and money enhancing the effect that their upper torso has on the male of the species. From pushup bras to implants, women will spend thousands of dollars to have a “better rack.”

Songs have been written about the pillowy chests of women. In the musical A Chorus Line, the song ‘Dance 10, Looks 3″ is devoted to how important it is to look good and admonishes one to “keep the best of you, do the rest of you.”

We see billboards throughout the Los Angeles basin for plastic surgeons willing to take a woman from an A cup to a triple D and you can make monthly payments on those implants.

They are by definition sexy. Breasts are a gender marker, they look great on a woman, and terrible on a man. The use of breasts in marketing is legendary. Women in skimpy bikinis, their chest almost bursting from the top are used to sell everything from cars to hamburgers.

Which is why the Susan G. Komen Foundation has such an easy time marketing breast cancer awareness.You can’t miss their awareness campaign. Everything it seems is being painted pink. There are bracelets, soup cans and in the latest fundraising event, Kentucky Fried Chicken. This fundraiser provides 50 cents per bucket for the Susan G. Komen foundation. On the one hand, it’s awesome that they have a corporate sponsor who is doing such a wonderful event and donating money to an organization that is clearly doing much good.

On the other hand, given that obesity is also a cause of cancer, and fried chicken is not exactly known as a diet food (much to my dismay I’d like to point out!) I don’t know that this is the best message to be sending people by the SGK Foundation. But I guess the idea is that exposure is good no matter where or what it takes.

Which brings me to the male side of things.

While 1 in 8 women, my mother included, will face breast cancer, 1 in 6 men will face prostate cancer. That means that a man is 35% more likely to face prostate cancer than a woman is facing breast cancer. Yet no one talks about it.

Tremendous gains have been made in the detection and treatment of prostate cancer. I’ve known several men, some in my neighborhood, who have had to go through the surgery and follow up treatment.

It’s not a sexy cancer, but it can definitely effect your sex life. It’s a hidden cancer, it occurs in an area that most men are squeamish about. The jokes about being tested are many. I remember hearing about one doctor who used to have a giant drill bit right at the level where a man’s eyes would be when getting tested.

These days the test is part of a whole series of screening protocols that are done with a simple blood draw. So while the doctor is having your cholesterol levels checked, they can have a test done to look for a prostate specific antigen.

The problem with prostate cancer awareness is that it’s not an easy sell like breasts. Men are traditionally scared of doctors, they don’t like talking seriously about their bodies, and there has been no poster-child for the condition.

This is a laydown, Blue ribbons for the boys, bumper stickers that read, “Stand UP for Prostate Cancer” or “Go with the flow – Get Tested” and of course, “Real Men Get Tested.”

Prostate cancer is deadly, it can go undetected for years, and men can and do ignore the warning signs. There’s no sizable campaign for men, but we need one. If you have a man in your life that you love, have him get tested, because the only ones who can’t get prostate cancer, are women.

David Pisarra 22. June, 2010

Thursday, October 21, 2010

The Truth Hurts - Liberals

NPR Fires Juan Williams for Muslim Comments on Fox


Juan Williams, a well-known political pundit and author, was fired by National Public Radio late Wednesday after he said on Fox News that he was often nervous when boarding a plane with people who are dressed in "Muslim garb," according to The New York Times. NPR said in a statement it had given Williams notice of his termination Wednesday night.


Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. The show’s host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him whether the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.”

“The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet,” O’Reilly said.

Williams then said he agreed with O’Reilly.

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot,” Williams added. “You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

NPR has long been concerned with appearances by its staffers on Fox News. Williams’s contributions on Fox raised eyebrows at NPR in the past, according to the Times. In February 2009, NPR said it had asked that he stop being identified on “The O’Reilly Factor” as a “senior correspondent for NPR,” even though that title was accurate.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/juan-williams-fired-npr/2010/10/20/id/374353?PROMO_CODE=9BC6-1&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Link&utm_campaign=9BC6-1

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Canadian Prediction on Obama: Eventually he will resign.

Barack Hussein Obama:
I Told You So - Yes I Did
By Howard Galganov   http://www.galganov.com/
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

When Obama won the Presidency with the help of the LEFTIST Media, Hollywood

And Entertainment Liberals, Ethnic Socialists (ACORN), Stupid Non-Business
Professionals and Bush Haters, I wrote: It won't take six months until the People figure this guy out and realize how horrible a mistake they've made.  And when they come to that realization, the damage to the United States of America will be so great it will take a generation or more to repair – IF EVER.

The IDIOTS who not only voted for the Messiah, but also worked [hard] to promote his Lordship, are now left holding the bag.

Here are two things they will NEVER do: They will NEVER admit to making a Blunder out of all proportion by electing a snake-oil salesman with no Positive social history or management experience of any kind. They will NEVER take responsibility for the curse they've imposed upon the immediate and long-term future of their country.

In essence, the people responsible for putting this horror show in power are themselves responsible for every cataclysmic decision he makes and the Consequences thereof.

In just six months, the Messiah's polls are showing the following:

1. On healthcare reform - He's going under for the third time with polling well under 50 percent, even within his own party. Even though he might be able to muscle a Healthcare Reform Bill by using Chicago BULLY tactics against his Fellow Democrats, it will just make things worse.

2. On Cap and Trade (Cap and Tax) - The Fat-Lady is already singing.

3. On the Stimulus Package (Tax and Spend) - His popularity is in FREE-FALL.

4. On the TARP package he took and ran with from President Bush - It's all but Good-Night Irene.

5. On the closing of GITMO and "HIS" war on what he no longer wants called the War on Terrorism - He's standing in quicksand with his head just about to go under.

6. On a Comparison between himself and George W. Bush at the same six months into their respective first term Presidencies - Bush is ahead of him in the Polls.

7. On a comparison between He Who Walks On Water and the 12 preceding Presidents between WW II and now - Obama ranks 10th.

8. On a Poll just Conducted, that asks who would you vote for today between Obama and Mitt Romney - It's a dead heat. Between Obama and Palin - Obama's ONLY ahead by 8 points and she hasn't even begun to campaign. It seems to me that Obama wants to be everywhere where he shouldn't be.

He's personally invested in 'totally insulting' America's ONLY REAL Middle Eastern ally (Israel) in favor of Palestinian Despots and Murderers. He's traveling the world apologizing for the USA while lecturing others on how to do it right, when in fact and truth he has no experience at doing anything other than getting elected.

He went to the Muslim world in Egypt to declare that America IS NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION while he heaped praises on Islam, where he compared the "plight" of the Palestinians to the Holocaust.

The Russians think he's a putz, the French think he's rude.

The Germans want him to stop spending.

The Indians want him to mix his nose out of their environmental business.

The North Koreans think he's a joke, the Iranians won't acknowledge his calls.

And the British can't even come up with a comprehensive opinion of him.

As for the Chinese, he's too frightened to even glance their way.  [After all, China now owns a large portion of the United States.]

Maybe if America 's first Emperor would stay home more, travel less, and work a little bit instead of being on television just about everyday or stop running to "papered" Town Hall Meetings, perhaps he would have a little bit of time to do the work of the nation.

In all fairness, it wasn't HARD to be RIGHT in my prediction concerning Obama's presidency, even in its first six months, so I'm going to make yet another prediction:

OBAMA WILL PROBABLY NOT FINISH HIS 4-YEAR TERM, at least not in a conventional way.

He is such a political HORROR SHOW, and so detrimental to the USA and his Own Democratic Party, that the Democrats themselves will either  FORCE him to Resign or figure out a way to have him thrown out. (I sure HOPE so!!)

Who knows, maybe he really isn't a BORN US Citizen and that's a way the Democrats will be able to get rid of him. [He is a citizen, but not a naturalized citizen with both other and father being US citizens.] Or - MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, the Democrats will make Obama THEIR OWN LAME DUCK PRESIDENT.

I don't believe the Democrats have nearly as much love for their country as they do for their own political fortunes. And with Obama, their fortunes are rapidly becoming toast.

Public Enemy #1: GOP donors

The White House attack on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce isn't about "disclosure." It's about disarmament. While posing as campaign finance champions, the ultimate goal of the Democratic offensive is to intimidate conservative donors, chill political free speech and drain Republican coffers.

Chamber of Commerce official Bruce Josten tried to educate the public. "(W)e know what the purpose here is," he told ABC News. "It's to harass and intimidate." Josten cited protests and threats against chamber members as retribution for ads the organization ran opposing the federal health care takeover.

But this isn't the first time liberal bullyboys have targeted right-leaning contributors. Far from it.

In August 2008, a former Washington director of MoveOn.org -- the smear merchant group that branded Gen. David Petraeus a traitor for overseeing the successful troop surge in Iraq -- announced a brazen witch hunt against Republican donors. Left-wing political operative Tom Matzzie told The New York Times he would send "warning" letters to 10,000 top GOP givers "hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions." Matzzie bragged of "going for the jugular" and said the warning letter would be just the first step, "alerting donors who might be considering giving to right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives."

Defenders of this brown-shirt initiative played the disclosure card -- hey, they were just providing "information" -- to rationalize the public humiliation of GOP donors.

Matzzie also put up a $100,000 bounty for dirt on conservative political groups "to create a sense of scandal around the groups" and dissuade donors from giving money. The effort was cheered by Accountable America adviser Judd Legum, founder of Think Progress -- the same group leading the attack today on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Yet, Matzzie's group, Accountable America, is itself a 501(c)(4) nonprofit entity that shields the identity of its donors. (The group is required by law to remain nonpartisan, but has described itself as "dedicated to electing Democrats to the state legislature across America.") By targeting direct, hard-money contributors who are required to disclose their occupations, addresses and employers, Matzzie's assault simply created a sunshine-evading incentive to steer campaign donations to soft-money groups that protect donor identities. You know, like Accountable America does.

Piggybacking on the Accountable America foray, Obama's presidential campaign lawyers demanded that the Justice Department block TV stations from airing a documented, factual independent ad spotlighting Obama's longtime working relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Obama summoned his followers to bombard stations, many of them owned by conservative-leaning Sinclair Communications, with 93,000 e-mails to squelch the commercial. Team Obama then tried -- and failed -- to convince the DOJ to investigate and prosecute the American Issues Project, the group that produced the Ayers ad, as well as Dallas billionaire and GOP donor Harold Simmons, who funded it.

Two Obama supporters -- Democratic St. Louis County (Mo.) Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce -- took the next step and threatened to bring criminal libel charges against anyone who sponsored objectionable criticisms of Obama.

In California, gay rights mau-mau-ers compiled black lists and harassment lists of citizens who contributed to the Proposition 8 initiative in defense of traditional marriage. A Los Angeles restaurant whose manager made a small donation to the Prop. 8 campaign was besieged nightly by hordes of protesters who disrupted the business, intimidated patrons and brought employees to tears. Terrified workers at El Coyote Mexican Cafe pooled together $500 to pay off the protesters. A theater director who donated $1,000 to Prop. 8 was forced to resign over the donation.

Anonymous mischief-makers created "Eight Maps," a detailed directory of Prop. 8 donors using Google Maps to pinpoint their residences and businesses. Death threats, enveloped with powdery substances, and boycotts ensued. "When I see those maps," admitted California Voter Foundation President Kim Alexander, "it does leave me with a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach."

It's the same feeling every American should be left with after witnessing the liberal thug-tested, White House-approved donor suppression campaign against fiscal and social conservatives. In the hands of leftist vigilantes, "disclosure" is a deadly bludgeon; political free speech is the casualty.

Michelle Malkin

Michelle Malkin

Down a hole without a shovel

Thursday, October 14, 2010

So, Barack, What Happened?



By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com
Thursday, Oct 14, 2010


Two years ago, Barack Obama was the political equivalent of Elvis Presley, rolling into towns across America, performing before adoring crowds. Like the King, then-Senator Obama relished the adoration and gave the crowd a great show. I saw it myself in New Hampshire.

But now everything has changed. President Obama is not welcome in many parts of the country. Even some members of his own party don't want to be seen with him. It's so bad that Joe Manchin, the Democratic Governor of West Virginia who is now running for the Senate, actually put out a TV commercial where he takes a rifle and shoots a hole into paper explaining "cap-and-trade" legislation.

Mr. Obama, a deeply sensitive individual, must be asking himself what the deuce is going on. How could things change so quickly in 24 months? Of course, the bad economy is the major reason for his fall, but that doesn't fully explain the extent of the president's problems.

The New York Times, a flea market of liberal activism, is chalking Mr. Obama's decline up to the stupidity of the American people. A recent Times editorial put forth, "Insurgent Republicans don't need details when they can play on the furious emotions of voters who have been misled into believing that positive changes like the health care law are catastrophic failures."

Yeah, that's it, the majority of Americans are being "misled" by some mysterious force that comes in the night, planting anti-health care thoughts in their brains.

In case the New York Times hasn't noticed, the American media remains solidly liberal and continues to give President Obama the benefit of many, many doubts. If you don't believe me, just compare the coverage of Hurricane Katrina to the BP oil spill. Both were handled poorly by the feds. But the media hysteria over Katrina dwarfed any coverage of the greatest environmental disaster America has ever experienced. President Bush was vilified beyond belief for Katrina. President Obama was mildly criticized over BP.

The Times did get one thing right, though; many voters are furious. That's because their health care premiums have gone through the roof, and they feel insecure in the work place. My own health insurance premium went up $2,100 this year. Why? Because the insurance company is gouging customers to stockpile cash in order to pay the increased costs of Obama-care. Did the Democrats mention that would happen? I do not believe they did.

Thus, the perception right now is that the unintended consequences of Mr. Obama's big spending, big government agenda are not good. That is not a misleading indicator; it is the truth. That's how most Americans are genuinely feeling.

It should be noted that Elvis had a fallow period as well, after the Beatles stormed America and changed the pop culture. But the E-man made a big comeback based upon his talent and charisma.

No doubt President Obama believes that comeback formula will work for him as well. I'm not counting him out in the long run, but for now he is living in the Heartbreak Hotel.

Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs - Updated 2010

Tell The Truth 2010

Cost of Cap and Trade: Your Home!

I received this in my mailbox today with the intro: Carl, Please tell me this is not true!!
Yes, this not only CAN be true , it IS TRUE.

The cap and trade bill does indeed contain all of the horrible stuff described in this e-mail. The Obama administration, with the assistance of every brain-dead congressman and American voter that supports "Cap and Tax" should be tarred, feathered, drawn and quartered. I predict that when enforcement of these draconian measures begins that violent overthrow of the government is right around the corner.



 Something every home owner should be made aware of!

Don't want to be bothered with "Political stuff?"   You'd better read this one. It will come as a huge shock to you if you aren't informed as to what Obama is up to, and apparently it has already passed one hurdle. It will take very little now to put it into actual law!!  YOU'D BETTER WAKE UP AMERICA !!!! So you think you live in a free country, boy have you got a surprise coming.

A License Required for your HOUSE?

If you own your home you really need to check this out. At the end of this email is the Google link to verify.  If the country thinks the housing market is depressed now, wait until everyone sees this; no one will be buying homes in the future.

We encourage you to read the provisions of the Cap and Trade Bill that has passed the House of Representatives and being considered by the Senate. We are ready to join the next march on Washington ! This Congress and whoever on their staffs that write this junk are truly out to destroy the middle class of the U.S.A ....

A License will be required for your house...no longer just for cars and mobile homes....Thinking about selling your house.  Take a look at H.R.
2454  (Cap and Trade bill).  This is unbelievable!  Only the beginning from this administration! Home owners take note & tell your friends and relatives who are home owners!

Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade" bill passed by the House of Representatives, if it is also passed by the Senate, will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.
                                                                                            
The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year. No one is excluded.  However, once the lower classes feel the pinch in their wallets, you can be sure these voters get a tax refund (even if they pay no taxes at all) to offset this new cost. Thus, you Mr. And Mrs. Middle Class have to pay even more since additional tax dollars will be needed to bail out everyone else..

But wait. This awful bill (that no one in Congress has actually read) has many more surprises in it. Probably the worst one is this: A year from now you won't be able to sell your house. Yes, you read that right.

The caveat is (there always is a caveat) that if you have enough money to make required major upgrades to your home, then you can sell it. But, if not, then forget it. Even pre-fabricated homes ("mobile homes") are included. In effect, this bill prevents you from selling your home without the permission of the EPA administrator.

To get this permission,you will have to have the energy efficiency of your home measured. Then the government will tell you what your new energy efficiency requirement is and you will be forced to make modifications to your home under the retrofit provisions of this Act to comply with the new energy and water efficiency requirements.

Then you will have to get your home measured again and get a license
(called a "label" in the Act) that must be posted on your property to show what your efficiency rating is; sort of like the Energy Star efficiency rating label on your refrigerator or air conditioner. If you don't get a high enough rating, you can't sell.

And, the EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every year, even above the automatic energy efficiency increases built into the Act. The EPA administrator, appointed by the President, will run the Cap & Trade program  (AKA the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of
2009") and is authorized to make any future changes to the regulations and standards he/she alone determines to be in the government's best interest. Requirements are set low initially so the bill will pass Congress; then the Administrator can set much tougher new standards every year.

The Act itself contains annual required increases in energy efficiency for private and commercial residences and buildings. However, the EPA administrator can set higher standards at any time. Sect. 202 Building Retrofit Program mandates a national retrofit program to increase the energy efficiency of all existing homes across America.

Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this Act. You had better sell soon, because the standards will be raised each year and will be really hard (Ie., ex$pen$ive) to meet in a few years. Oh, goody!

The Act allows the government to give you a grant of several thousand dollars to comply with the retrofit program requirements IF you meet certain energy efficiency levels. But, wait, the State can set additional requirements on who qualifies to receive the grants. You should expect requirements such as "can't have an income of more than $50K per year", "home selling price can't be more than $125K", or anything else to target the upper middle class (and that's YOU) and prevent them from qualifying for the grants.

Most of us won't get a dime and will have to pay the entire cost of the retrofit out of our own pockets. More transfer of wealth, more "change you can believe in." Sect. 204 Building Energy Performance Labeling Program establishes a labeling program that for each individual residence will identify the achieved energy efficiency performance for "at least 90 percent of the residential market within 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act."

This means that within 5 years 90% of all residential homes in the U.S. must be measured and labeled. The EPA administrator will get $50M each year to enforce the labeling program. The Secretary of the Department of Energy will get an additional $20M each year to help enforce the labeling program. Some of this money will, of course, be spent on coming up with tougher standards each year...

Oh, the label will be like a license for your car. You will be required to post the label in a conspicuous location in your home and will not be allowed to sell your home without having this label. And, just like your car license, you will probably be required to get a new label every so often - maybe every year.

But, the government estimates the cost of measuring the energy efficiency of your home should only cost about $200 each time. Remember what they said about the auto smog inspections when they first started: that in California it would only cost $15.

That was when the program started. Now the cost is about $50 for the inspection and certificate; a 333% increase. Expect the same from the home labeling program. Sect. 304 Greater Energy Efficiency in Building Codes establishes new energy efficiency guidelines for the National Building Code and mandates at 304(d) that 1 year after enactment of this Act, all state and local jurisdictions must adopt the National Building Code energy efficiency provisions or must obtain a certification from the federal government that their state and/or local codes have been brought into full compliance with the National Building Code energy efficiency standards.

CHECK OUT Just a few of the sites;
 

 
 
HR2454 American Clean Energy & Security Act: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454
 
 
 
Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2393940/posts
 
 
 



Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Global Warming Scam is a symptom of a sick society

Harold Lewis’ Scathing Resignation Letter From The  American Physical Society

“I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question. I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation.”


Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’ĂȘtre of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.

Hal
==========================================================


FYI, The American Physical Society was founded on May 20, 1899, when 36 physicists gathered at Columbia University for that purpose. They proclaimed the mission of the new Society to be "to advance and diffuse the knowledge of physics", and in one way or another the APS has been at that task ever since. In the early years, virtually the sole activity of the APS was to hold scientific meetings, initially four per year. In 1913, the APS took over the operation of the Physical Review, which had been founded in 1893 at Cornell, and journal publication became its second major activity.  Physical Review was followed by Reviews of Modern Physics in 1929, and by Physical Review Letters in 1958. Over the years, Physical Review has subdivided into five separate sections as the fields of physics have proliferated and the number of submissions grew.


Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
To Michael Mann, Phil Jones, James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, Keith Briffa: This is what scientific integrity looks like. Fuck you, your greed and your agenda.
It’s an outrage that someone of this man’s stature has to resign because science–as I’ve been saying on these intertubes since before this blog started–has been corrupted.  Fare thee well, Dr. Lewis.