Barak Hussein Obama made a slip a week or two ago, saying that 10,000 people had been killed in Kansas due to a tornado. (That's 10,000 out of a county population of about 3,000, by the way.) The article uses that as a springboard to talk about Democrats and their love of inflated war casualties. It reminded me of Clinton's war in Kosovo. Do you think Democrats and liberals would get the irony if I got a bumper sticker that read "Clinton Lied, People Died"?
Nah, probably not.
The soi disant "unbiased" New York Times discusses the "clash of hope and fear" as Chavez's jackbooted thugs seize private property under threat of violence and redistribute it to people who are politically correct enough to be poor.
This type of pogrom (and I meant "pogrom", not "program") worked so very well for Zimbabwe under Mugabe, didn't it? Sugar cane production in Venezuela has fallen 40% since this started.
I love how utterly uncritical the NYT is of both Chavez and this "clash of hope and fear". Yes, a government is violently throwing people out of their homes and making them give up property without fair compensation, but it's perfectly all right because, after all, only rich people are losing their stuff. (They're not rich East Coast or West Coast Liberals, so they deserve to lose everything they own.)
Climate researchers realize anthropogenic global warming may not be proven after all. I need only quote this passage from the article:
...the political realm in turn fed money back into the scientific community. By the late 1990's, lots of jobs depended on the idea that carbon emissions caused global warming. Many of them were bureaucratic, but there were a lot of science jobs created too. I was on that gravy train, making a high wage in a science job that would not have existed if we didn't believe carbon emissions caused global warming. And so were lots of people around me; and there were international conferences full of such people. And we had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet! But starting in about 2000, the last three of the four pieces of evidence outlined above fell away or reversed,” Evans wrote. “The pre-2000 ice core data was the central evidence for believing that atmospheric carbon caused temperature increases. The new ice core data shows that past warmings were *not* initially caused by rises in atmospheric carbon, and says nothing about the strength of any amplification. This piece of evidence casts reasonable doubt that atmospheric carbon had any role in past warmings, while still allowing the possibility that it had a supporting role....But the whole article is worth reading carefully.
George Will comments on the perennial Democrat reactions to the perennial gas price increases due to EPA mandates. Also worth reading carefully, because George Will is considered one of the best, and his article is carefully researched.
"While oil companies make about 13 cents on a gallon of gasoline, the federal government makes 18.4 cents (the federal tax) and California's various governments make 40.2 cents (the nation's third-highest gasoline tax). Pelosi's San Francisco collects a local sales tax of 8.5 percent -- higher than the state's average for local sales taxes."
* * *
So there it is.