Thursday, January 31, 2013

Cheapest ObamaCare plan for family of 5 will be $20,000 per year says IRS

1/31/13, "IRS: Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family," CNS News, Matt Cover

"In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.

Under ObamaCare Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.

The IRS's assumption that the cheapest plan for family will cost $20,000 per year is found in examples the IRS gives to help people understand how to calculate the penalty they will need to pay the government if they do not buy a mandated health plan.

The examples point to families of four and families of five, both of which the IRS expects in its assumptions to pay a minimum of $20,000 per year for a bronze plan.

“The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000,” the regulation says.

Bronze will be the lowest tier health-insurance plan available under Obamacare--after Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Under the law, the penalty for not buying health insurance is supposed to be capped at either the annual average Bronze premium, 2.5 percent of taxable income, or $2,085.00 per family in 2016.

In the new final rules published Wednesday, IRS set in law the rules for implementing the penalty Americans must pay if they fail to obey Obamacare's mandate to buy insurance. To help illustrate these rules, the IRS presented examples of different situations families might find themselves in.

In the examples, the IRS assumes that families of five who are uninsured would need to pay an average of $20,000 per year to purchase a Bronze plan in 2016.

Using the conditions laid out in the regulations the IRS calculates that a family earning $120,000 per year that did not buy insurance would need to pay a "penalty" (a word the IRS still uses despite the Supreme Court ruling that it is in fact a "tax") of $2,400 in 2016.

For those wondering how clear the IRS's clarifications of this new "penalty" rule are, here is one of the actual examples the IRS gives:

Example 3. Family without minimum essential coverage.

"(i) In 2016, Taxpayers H and J are married and file a joint return. H and J have three children: K, age 21, L, age 15, and M, age 10. No member of the family has minimum essential coverage for any month in 2016. H and J’s household income is $120,000. H and J’s applicable filing threshold is $24,000. The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000.

"(ii) For each month in 2016, under paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the applicable dollar amount is $2,780 (($695 x 3 adults) + (($695/2) x 2 children)). Under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, the flat dollar amount is $2,085 (the lesser of $2,780 and $2,085 ($695 x 3)). Under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the excess income amount is $2,400 (($120,000 - $24,000) x 0.025). Therefore, under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the monthly penalty amount is $200 (the greater of $173.75 ($2,085/12) or $200 ($2,400/12)).

"(iii) The sum of the monthly penalty amounts is $2,400 ($200 x 12). The sum of the monthly national average bronze plan premiums is $20,000 ($20,000/12 x 12). Therefore, under paragraph (a) of this section, the shared responsibility payment imposed on H and J for 2016 is $2,400 (the lesser of $2,400 or $20,000).”" via Free Republic

adam fooler 5 hours ago

"I don't need any "estimates" from the IRS to know that the Obamacare legislation's main goal is to drive up the cost of private insurance premiums, drive hospitals to bankruptcy, so that after 10 or 15 years, single-payer government run healthcare will be the only option.

The media and the liberals will do a good job spreading that propaganda once that time comes."


Geraldo Rivera contemplating US Senate run as NJ Republican

1/31/13, "Geraldo Rivera ‘Truly Contemplating’ Run For U.S. Senate," MediaIte

"Fox News anchor Geraldo Rivera says that he is “truly contemplating” running for a U.S. Senate seat in his native New Jersey. The Hill caught the comments made by Rivera on his daily syndicated radio program.

I mention this only briefly, fasten your seatbelt,” Rivera said. “I am and I’ve been in touch with some people in the Republican Party in New Jersey. I am truly contemplating running for Senate against Frank Lautenberg or Cory Booker in New Jersey.”

He did note that he has contractual obligations to FNC and his radio syndicator, but that a run was worth looking into:

“I’m not going to drill this out, because obviously I’ve got commitments to Fox and to here at the radio program and I’m really having a great time,” he said. “But I figure at my age, if I’m going to do it I’ve got to do it.

Rivera anchors a weekend program on Fox News, and is also a correspondent for the network. He joined the channel in 2001.

Rivera is not the first cable news host to contemplate a run for Senate. Back in 2008 MSNBC host Chris Matthews also had preliminary conversations about running for a seat in Pennsylvania. There is even some precedent: Al Franken, once a comedian on “Saturday Night Live,” is now a Senator from Minnesota." via Howie Carr


Boston Globe political editor Johnson becomes senior adviser to Sec. of State John Kerry. 'Yet another journalist rewarded for favorable coverage of the admin. and congress,' commenter

1/31/13, "Boston Globe journalist joins John Kerry’s staff,", Andrew Beaujon

The Boston Globe

" politics editor Glen Johnson will become a senior adviser to incoming U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. “All I’ve ever wanted to do — since junior high school — and have done professionally – is be a news reporter. But this chance to serve the country and Secretary Kerry at such a tumultuous time, as well as work in foreign affairs and travel the world, was too compelling an opportunity to pass up,” Johnson told the Globe.

The Globe says that since Johnson told his editors about the possible gig, he “has been taking vacation time he had accrued and has not been involved with political coverage at the Globe or”

In Kerry’s farewell speech to the U.S. Senate, he saluted reporters."...





"And yet another journalist is rewarded for their favorable coverage of the Administration and its Congress."



"Will somebody please tell him that it's too late for any real ethical moves?

"The Globe says that since Johnson told his editors about the possible gig, he “has been taking vacation time he had accrued and has not been involved with political coverage at the Globe or”'"


New GAO report says US border security not yet in place

Dec. 2012, "BORDER PATROL: Key Elements of New Strategic Plan Not Yet in Place to Inform Border Security Status and Resource Needs," GAO report

(I can't tell you an exact page to turn to in the report because I only got through the first few pages of introduction and ran out of time. ed). via Mark Levin twitter


Tammany Hall media shocked, shocked, over US 4Q 2012 GDP shrink. Parasitic Washington Post & Teamster pres. stamp feet but fed. gov. spending actually increased in 4Q. Collapse is only possible result from strangling a private sector.

 1/30/13, "Fact Check: Lack of Federal Spending Did Not Cause GDP Plunge," John Nolte, Breitbart

"The White House and its media didn't even stop to take a breath. Before news of U.S. GDP shrinking 0.1 last quarter had even hit the cable airwaves, we were being told by both that this collapse was mostly due to the fact that the federal government didn’t spend enough during the last quarter of last year. 

Translation: Don't blame Obama for this. Had we just grown the size and power of The State like he wants, we'd all be sitting in clover.
Except that simply isn't true.  
There was no decrease in government spending during the fourth quarter of last year. In fact, the government spent more money between October and December of 2012 than it did during the previous two quarters. So federal spending actually increased during the 4th quarter.
Would you like some facts to go with your media propaganda?
1st: 966,188
2nd: 884,957
3rd: 809,969
4th: 907,912
Now we're being told the economic slide wasn't due to an overall decrease in State spending, but that it was due to a specific decrease in federal spending, and, naturally, Hurricane Sandy:
A likely explanation for the sharp decline in Federal defense spending is uncertainty concerning the automatic spending cuts that were scheduled to take effect in January, and are currently scheduled to take effect on March 1st,” explains Alan B. Krueger, the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in a statement. “The decline in government spending across all levels reduced real GDP by 1.33 percentage points in the quarter.”
Here's Ezra Klein, who the Washington Post still sells as an objective journalist:
Less spending from the Pentagon, for one. Government defense expenditures plunged by a staggering 22.2 percent between October and December. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Pentagon spent significantly less on just about everything except military pay. Had the Pentagon not cut back on spending, the economy would have grown at a weak but positive 1.27 percent pace.
If a cut in federal defense spending was the problem, there still wasn't an overall decrease in federal spending. It should've been a wash.
Are Klein and his White House trying to tell us that the only government spending that helps economic growth is defense spending? Apparently, the dreaded Military Industrial Complex is more powerful than we thought.
As far as blaming Sandy for this, that's utter nonsense. Katrina was much worse, and affected the entire country due to disrupted oil production.  Furthermore, the GDP only dropped from 3.8% to 1.3% -- or 2.5% after Katrina. To blame Sandy, which only affected a very specific region, for a plunge of over 3%, is nothing more than propaganda. Moreover, during Sandy, we had two campaigns 
pouring billions into the economy.
It's just a fact that Obama's "recovery" has never been much of one. Obama's trickle-down government policies have failed. Staggering deficits have investors freaked; the constant push to punish the rich has employers freaked; 

crippling regulations have small business freaked; 

and this ongoing uncertainty and the non-stop removing of money from the private economy trickles down to a point where something's got to give. And the victims are who they always are: 

the poor and the jobless. 

Already the media is spinning today's news as a one-time anomaly. This spin allows the White House and the media to pretend that nothing's changed from all the election happy talk that assured us Obama's recovery was some kind of miracle.
The State and the media have aligned, and for the fourth year in a row, prosperity really is around the corner -- you know, because they say so."

Teamster president says more money must be taken from taxpayers and given to him:

1/30/13, "Hoffa Statement On The Decline In U.S. Gross Domestic Product,"

"The following is an official statement from Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa:

"Today we learned that the U.S. economy is shrinking due to a fall in government spending. That should tell us that government austerity is not just wrong, it's bad economic policy. 

The Bureau of Economic Affairs' announcement that GDP fell by 0.1 percent reinforces our message that we need jobs, not cuts – especially to Social Security, Medicare and education. 

Teamsters around the country are participating in actions today to demand that big corporations and the richest 2 percent pay their fair share of taxes. I hope extremists in Congress pay attention to their message that Americans need jobs, not cuts. 

Another reason for the decline in GDP is a fall in U.S. exports, the legacy of NAFTA, CAFTA and PNTR.  I hope Congress finally wakes up to the destruction caused by these job-killing trade deals."" via Free Republic

1/30/13, "GDP Shows Surprise Drop for US in Fourth Quarter," AP via CNBC

"The U.S. economy posted a stunning drop of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter, defying expectations."...


1/30/13, "US economy shrinks a surprise 0.1% in fourth quarter," BBC

"The fourth-quarter shrinkage in economic output comes as a shock to analysts on Wall Street, who had been expecting 1.1% growth according to a poll by news agency Reuters. Not one economist surveyed had predicted an economic contraction."...


1/30/13, "U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Contracts in Fourth Quarter," Wall St. Journal, Morath, Portlock

The nation's gross domestic product shrank for the first time in 3 1/2 years during the fourth quarter, declining at an annual rate of 0.1% between October and December, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. 

It was the first time the broad measure of all goods and services produced by the economy contracted since the recovery from the financial crisis began. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected 1.0% annualized growth."...


Europe says bloggers have too much freedom, need to be monitored. German blogger says US Democrats will drool when they hear of this and write it up in the US

"Today’s totalitarian ideas are always disguised as righteous plans to ensure “fairness” and “social justice” and they often start in Europe. Then the US Democrats drool over them and scheme to sneak them into the US.

The latest in Europe is to take much more control over the media. German flagship daily the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has a piece called: EU Advisers Wish To Monitor Media More Strictly. Hat-tip: To what extent this will impact blogs, I have no idea.

A group of EU Commission advisers say, “Europe’s freedom of the press is in danger” and so Europe has to act. Right!

The advisers are calling for stricter state monitoring of the media. According to the FAZ, the group says, “Some media outlets should be financially supported.” And others not?

Anyone living in Europe following the media to any extent knows that Europe’s traditional mainstream leftist media are in dire straits. A number of center-left dailies have recently bitten the dust, and so we suppose they are now looking for generous handouts. 

The FAZ writes that stricter monitoring by the EU state would “ensure pluralism and quality”. The group of advisors proposes that the “European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights should monitor freedom of the press and free speech in member states”. You see, today there are media outlets out there who feel their rights to free speech are being infringed because citizens are no longer interested in paying for their crap. Now the government should force citizens to pay for crap that nobody wants - through subsidies.

The advisors also say an “independent monitoring agency“ made up of scientists could be set up. The advisers say that 

“more pluralism must be achieved,  

especially in the online media“.

The advisory group is hardly made up of lightweight bureaucrats. It includes former German Justice Minister Herta Däubler-Gmelin (who once compared President George W. Bush to Hitler) and Latvia former President Varia Vike-Freiberga. Däubler-Gmelin for example is calling on Europe to require its member states to have “independent media panels that would impose fines, force counter views, or revoke media licenses”, and to make sure these member-state media panels “abide to European values”. Sounds like free-speech policing to me.

The advisers believe that “freedom of the press is threatened by political powers, excessive commercial power, new business models, changing media landscape and the rise of new media.”

The FAZ writes:
One particularly large problem the advisers find is the creeping loss of quality in reporting, as Ms. Vike-Freiberga showed. Among other things, it arises from the new media like in the Internet where anyone is allowed to disseminate information. “For this reason the group also proposes that it is also essential for the state to support unprofitable media are essential.”
The panels also says that media should comply to a code of conduct and guidelines for publishing.
So, will Obama try again to push through the Fairness Act in USA? Don’t be surprised if he does."

6 comments to Mr. Gosselin's post:

"Ed Caryl

For the left, it is always the exact opposite of what they say it is. Remember Orwell."




23. Januar 2013 at 07:01 |
The next step will be to apply the same principle to freedom of speech: “Europe’s freedom of speech is in danger”, we (the EU elite) must define what can be said."



Children in school can be bullied and tormented on line if they dare to question the teacher. Then there are the individuals who are reportedly paid to go on line and rip apart all opposition

American politics has become rule by bullies using whatever tools available."


Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Sierra Club cites 1 year drought on 1.5% of the planet and a scientifically discredited long term drought prediction as proof of imminent global extinction, says urgent ‘action’ must be taken by Obama, will commit civil disobedience to force ‘action’

The scary looking NOAA graph in the article is titled “Extreme drought in the US and Mexico.” It doesn’t give a separate reading for each country. NOAA’s drought predictions using Palmer are invalid to begin with, but combining the US with Mexico isn’t helpful unless you want a scary looking graph to show the Zetas. The Zetas control the coal business and the atmosphere in Northern Mexico. Is the Sierra Club going to march on the Zetas and demand legislation?

1/11/13,  “America, Prepare For A Century Of Drought, Business Insider, Ron Wile

Corn and wheat prices surged today.  The immediate reason appeared to be the year-end USDA report, that showed supplies were lower than projected.

But concurrent with that report was the release of the Commerce Department’s National Climate Assessment Development Advisory Committee National Climate Assessment survey.

One of the findings: we can expect up to a century of drought.

Here’s a chart from the report projecting percent of the country in drought conditions in the coming years.


The red line is based on observed temperature and precipitation. The blue line is from the average of 19 different climate models. The gray lines in the background are individual results from over 70 different simulations from these models.

The projections are derived from the Palmer Drought Severity Index,
one of the most widely used measure of drought, the report says.

These results suggest an increasing probability of drought over this century throughout most of the U.S.,” the committee says. “Droughts have become more frequent and intense in some regions, and confidence is that these trends are projected to continue.“”


Palmer index not reliable for long term predictions:

11/19/12, “Study: Drought Trends, Estimates Possibly Overstated Due To Inaccurate Science,”

An index frequently used by scientists to predict drought trends – trends whose increased frequency and intensity were blamed on global warming – may have been misused, resulting in possibly inaccurate findings.

The Palmer Drought Severity Index is primarily used by scientists to keep track of short-term drought trends. Researchers at Princeton University have now found that the index may not properly reflect what’s to come.

The findings were published Thursday in the journal Nature, whose offices are located in Washington, D.C.

Study co-author Eric Wood, who also serves as a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Princeton University, was quoted as saying that the results make it seem as though “it will never rain again,” according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Wood authored the paper with another Princeton University researcher, Justin Sheffield.

The Christian Science Monitor learned from Wood that the PDSI was not intended to track long-term trends, and that its simplicity may lead to skewed results when applied to future times.

We’ve known for quite a long time that the PDSI calculation is 
prone to problems dealing with climate change,” added Columbia University drought and climate researcher Richard Seager to the website. “Rising temperatures drive it haywire.”

The study noted in Nature that “[m]ore realistic calculations, based on the underlying physical principles that take into account changes in available energy, humidity and wind speed, suggest that there has been little change in drought over the past 60 years.”


Excerpt from Nature stating no change in global drought in past 60 years and that Palmer index isn’t reliable for long term predictions:

11/15/12, Little change in global drought over the past 60 years,” Nature, Justin Sheffield, Eric F. Wood & Michael L. Roderick

Here we show that the previously reported increase in global drought is overestimated because the PDSI uses a simplified model of potential evaporation7 that responds only to changes in temperature and thus responds incorrectly to global warming in recent decades. More realistic calculations, based on the underlying physical principles8 that take into account changes in available energy, humidity and wind speed, suggest that there has been little change in drought over the past 60 years. The results have implications for how we interpret the impact of global warming on the hydrological cycle and its extremes, and may help to explain why palaeoclimate drought reconstructions based on tree-ring data diverge from the PDSI-based drought record in recent years9, 10.”…

The NOAA drought graph cites “US and Mexico together, which along with the fact that Palmer data is invalid makes the graph doubly misleading. No data accompanies the graph breaking down each country separately. Yet the Sierra Club plans a march on Washington to demand federal legislation based in part on this graph. We have no control over Mexico. The Mexican government has no control over Mexico. The entire country including its coal mining operations is run by drug gangs and organized crime. It’s an understatement to say Mexico doesn’t have the same rules regulating coal plants that the US does. Emissions from Northern Mexico’s unregulated coal plants flow into the US. Doesn’t NOAA have enough money to measure the US and Mexico separately? Or is their point just to have a scary graph which will trigger “a march on Washington to demand action from Obama?”


Zeta cartel has long been in Mexican coal mining:

11/20/12, “Mexican Drug Cartel Diversifies…to Coal,, Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky

Drug lords in Mexico have discovered a legal way to make money, albeit while still keeping their hands dirty: coal.

The Zetas drug cartel is now selling millions of dollars worth of coal each year in northern Mexico, across the border from Texas. This relatively legitimate business
allows the cartel to launder money gained from drug trafficking.

In Coahuila state, which produces 95% of Mexico’s coal, the cartel produces or buys 10,000 tons of coal a week and sells it to the Mexican government at inflated prices, earning $22 million to $25 million annually.

The Zetas are the first Mexican cartel to diversify from drugs into other areas,” Tomas Borges, author of a book on the cartels, told Agence France-Presse. Raul Vera, bishop of Coahuila’s capital Saltillo, says that

the Zetas have been mining coal illegally for years.”


1/28/13, “Mexico Investigates Mining Ties to Organized Crime,”, Edward Fox

Citing links to organized crime, the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) in Mexico has frozen the accounts of 12 mining companies so far this year, underscoring how criminal groups may be moving to diversify their criminal portfolios.

El Siglo de Torreon reported on January 25 that investigations into the possible drug trafficking ties of mining companies in Coahuila state were underway. The 12 businesses are also 
being investigated for money laundering, tax evasion and breach of federal regulations.
According to Justice in Mexico, Coahuila is Mexico‘s biggest mining state and a key producer of coal; the state supplies Mexico‘s Federal Electricity Commission with over 3 million tons of coal annually.

As Justice in Mexico notes, the allegations of organized crime ties to mining in Coahuila state first emerged in October last year when the state’s former governor, Humberto Moreira, declared that the then recently killed leader of the Zetas, Humberto Lazcano, alias “Z-3,” had run coal mining operations there. Details on the current investigations have not been released, so it is unknown if any of the companies under investigation are suspected of ties to the Zetas.
As well as allegations of running their own mining operations, Mexico‘s criminal groups — among them the Gulf Cartel and Knights Templarhave been accused of extorting mines, charging them up to $37,000 a month for the right to operate in the gang’s territory.”…


5/4/11, “Mexico coal mine explosion: 14 miners trapped,” “A gas explosion in a coal mine in Mexico has trapped 14 miners and injured another in northern Coahuila state near the US border. UK Telegraph


9/11/06, “Mexico’s Mine Crisis: Tiny coal mines escape inspections,” (Pittsburgh), Jerome L. Sherman

Sierra Club and Bloomberg act on bad or non-existent science (alleged drought above) and ignore real science of US stunning CO2 plunge that’s heading even lower, and that the real problem lies outside the US:

6/4/12, “Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006,” Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage

“Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord.

Here is the biggest shocker of all: the average American’s CO2 emissions are down to levels not seen since 1964 --over half a century ago. …Coal is the number two source of CO2 for Americans. 

 Today the average American burns an amount similar to what they did in 1955, and even less than they did in the 1940s.

It is exactly America’s historical role of biggest and dirtiest that  
makes their sharp decline in CO2 pollution so noteworthy and potentially 

game changing at the global level.”...


6/22/12,U.S. cuts greenhouse gases despite do-nothing Congress,” CNN, Steve Hargreaves

  • greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall….
Others take the U.S. success in reducing its energy sector emissions as a sign that its fragmented, state-based, regulatory approach has worked better than Europe’s market-based cap-and-trade approach.”


8/16/12, “AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low,” AP, Kevin Begos
In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful  natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.
Many of the world’s leading climate scientists didn’t see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere.

In a little-noticed technical report, the U.S. Energy Information Agency, a part of the Energy Department, said this month that energy related U.S. CO2 emissions for the first four months of this year fell to about 1992 levels. Energy emissions make up about 98 percent of the total.The Associated Press contacted environmental experts, scientists and utility companies and learned thatvirtually everyone believes the shift could have major long-term implications for U.S. energy policy.”…

4/21/12, “Why [CO2] Emissions Are Declining in the U.S.  But Not in Europe,” by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus,
As we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are  expected to decline further over the next decade.”
  • =============================
1/15/11, “Recession Special: Cleaner Air, NY Times, Matthew Wald

“What the government has not mandated, the economy is doing on its own: emissions of global warming gases in the United States are down.

According to the Energy Department, carbon dioxide emissions peaked in this country in 2005 and will not reach that level again until the early 2020s.”…


News of US CO2 plunge has been described as:

1/11/11, “Big Money in Climate Change: Who Gives, Who Gets,” Al Fin


In 2011 alone the US spent “$10.6 million (taxpayer dollars) a day to study, combat, and educate about climate change.” 1/5/11


Cap and Trade is a massive failure:

11/23/11, “Europe’s $287 billion carbon ‘waste’: UBS report, The Australian, by Sid Maher

SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union’s emissions trading scheme has cost the continent’s consumers $287 billion for “almost zero impact” on cutting carbon emissions.“…EU CO2 trading provided windfall profits” to participants paid for by “electricity customers.”


11/19/12, “More than 1,000 New Coal Plants Planned Worldwide,” Damian Carrington, UK Guardian

India is planning 455 new plants compared to 363 in China.”


NASA climate scientist Hansen says ’5 yr. mean global temp. flat for past decade,’ climate predictions hampered by lack of scientific data, notes 2011 NASA satellite to measure aerosols crashed on take-off, no plans to re-start mission:

Page 1 notes lack of scientific data on aerosols makes it impossible to accurately interpret global climate.

Jan. 15, 2013, “Global Temperature Update Through 2012, 15 January 2013,” Columbia University, J. Hansen, M. Sato, R. Rudy

(page 1): “Summary. …”The 5-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing….

(page 1, parag. 3): “The approximate stand-still of global temperature during 1940-1975 is generally attributed to an approximate balance of aerosol cooling and greenhouse gas warming during a period of rapid growth of fossil fuel use with little control on particulate air pollution, but 
satisfactory quantitative interpretation has been impossible because of the absence of adequate aerosol measurements 3,4.”…


Global Warming ‘action’ was institutionalized in US government in 1990 by George Bush the 1st in the “U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990.”  CO2 is mentioned near the end.

Trillions have been taken from US taxpayers for climate endeavors via agency budget allocations, tax subsidies, diversion of US military to climate or green projects, countless federal regulations, vast sums shipped out in no strings foreign aid for ‘climate’ capacity building, etc.

Other countries’ CO2 hasn’t dropped despite hundreds of billions spent on cap and trade and extra taxes. This isn’t to say the US government hasn’t become business partners with the ‘climate’ industry.


The US has spent “$2.5 billion on GCCI since 2010 on overseas anti-global warming efforts in Latin America, Asia, and Africa.”…

3/26/12, “Obama Requests $770 Million to Fight Global Warming Overseas,” CNS News, Matt Cover

“The Obama administration has requested $770 million in federal funds to combat the effects of global warming in developing countries, a new congressional report details, continuing its policy of using foreign aid to combat the effects of global warming in the developing world.

The figure, from a recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), shows that despite another year of $1 trillion deficits, the Obama administration continues to pursue its policy of using foreign aid funds for anti-global warming measures – known as the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI).

According to CRS, the government has spent a total of $2.5 billion on GCCI since 2010 on overseas anti-global warming efforts in Latin America, Asia, and Africa.”…


7/7/09, “(Lisa) Jackson Confirms EPA Chart Showing No Effect on Climate Without China, India,” US Senate, EPW
“EPA Administrator Jackson confirmed an EPA analysis showing that unilateral U.S. action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on climate….“I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels,” Administrator Jackson said.”…
Obama climate action’ in November 2012 included giving $6 billion US taxpayer dollars for ‘clean energy’ to the Sultan of Brunei who owns 5000+ cars and to the Pres. of Indonesia, a country so corrupt even the World Bank says crime adds 20% to costs. Below, one of the Sultan of Brunei’s cars:

7/24/12, “The Sultan’s Cars,” wheel to wheel blog.


NY Gov. Cuomo job approval drops from 74 to 59 after his portrayal of 2nd amendment as just for deer hunting. Drops across the board, I, D, R-Quinnipiac

Poll taken Jan. 23-28

1/30/13, "Cuomo's approval rating plummets after NY passes gun control law: poll," NY Post, E. Kriss

"Gov. Cuomo’s job approval rating dropped faster than a speeding bullet this month as Republicans and gun owners started turning against him after he rammed through the nation’s first post-Newtown gun control law, a new poll has found.

Democrat Cuomo’s approval marks slid from 74-13 percent last month to 59-28 in the Quinnipiac poll out today — a day after the New York-affiliate of the National Rifle Association filed a notice of claim to sue to stop enforcement of the law, arguing it unconstitutionally deprives New Yorkers of their rights....

Though the poll asked respondents about controversial 2013 issues Cuomo outlined in his State of the State speech earlier this month - results are expected tomorrow - Cuomo said he thought the gun law was solely responsible for his popularity drop.

While Republicans gave Cuomo a 68-18 percent approval mark in a Quinnipiac survey Dec. 12 — two days before a crazed gunman killed 20 first-graders and six adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. — the GOP is virtually evenly split on the governor now.

Support for Cuomo dropped across the board. His approval rating among independents fell from 70-12 to 54-32, among Democrats from 82-9 to 74-14, among women from 73-12 to 64-23 and among men from 74-14 to 54-33.

Some 34 percent of voters – and 59 percent of Republicans – said Cuomo’s law goes “too far” in restricting gun owners’ rights, while 30 percent of all voters said it doesn’t go far enough in protecting public safety....

Cuomo shouldn’t necessarily worry, according to Quinnipiac’s poll director.

With approval ratings that consistently topped 70 percent, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo had the political capital to spend when he set out to pass the toughest gun control laws in the nation,” Maurice Carroll said. “It is possible that the gun law cost him some of that political capital, but a 2-1 job approval rating still makes him the envy of most governors.”...

While voters in non-gun homes still gave Cuomo thumbs up by a whopping 68-19, those who live in households with guns turned against him by 50-40, the Jan. 23-28 telephone survey of 1,127 state voters found.

Cuomo himself had predicted the slide during a radio interview yesterday with Post columnist Fredric U. Dicker on Albany’s Talk 1300 AM radio....

The poll also found a slight dip in job approval ratings for President Obama (57-39 percent, from 62-35 last month) and US Sens. Chuck Schumer (60-30, down from 63-23) and Kirsten Gillibrand (57-21, down from 61-18).

The poll has a a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points."


1/9/13, "Gov. Cuomo Thunders On Gun Control During Passionate State Of The State Address,"

"No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer and too many people have died already,” Cuomo said."...


Obama tied for most unpopular re-elected president since Gallup began measuring pres. approval in 1945. Even Nixon was 7 pts. ahead of Tammany Wannabe Obama

1/29/13, "Obama Job Approval Rating Lower than Nixon's," Breitbart, Hawkins

"According to Gallup, President Obama is tied with George W. Bush for most unpopular re-elected president since Gallup began measuring presidential job-approval in 1945.

In fact, Gallup found that apart from Bush, "every president...has had a higher job-approval rating in the January following his reelection than Obama has."

Obama's approval rating is at 52.

Think about it this way--following reelection, President Reagan's approval numbers beat Obama's by 11 points, President Eisenhower's beat Obama's by 21, and a much-derided Republican President named Richard Nixon beat Obama's numbers by 7.

Hardly representative of a mandate and certainly a long way from supporting the misconception that Obama is lauded by the public while Republicans are despised."


Ed. note: It's much worse than this. Obama is a media creation, or whatever Obama appears to be is a media creation. They're quite invested in keeping that fake persona going. If most people knew or cared about the job he's doing, he'd have a zero rating.



US gov. paid $10.3 billion in unemployment ins. benefits in 2012 to people who shoudn't have received them

1/29/13, "Gov't Doles Out $10.3 Billion in Improper Unemployment Payments – In 1Year," CNS News, Penny Starr

"The Federal-State Unemployment Insurance program paid out $10.3 billion in benefits in 2012 to people who should not have received the money, according to the Department of Labor (DOL).

The data provided on the government website,, shows those payments amount to 11.42 percent of all the unemployment insurance checks handed out – an increase from 11.36 percent in 2011 and in excess of the government’s “target” for overpayments of 9.66 percent.

The DOL states that most of the data reported on its paymentaccuracy website was for the federal government’s fiscal year, which runs from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1, but that some data may have come from calendar year tabulations, which is why the department “used the term fiscal reporting year to best describe the time period in which the most current information was reported.”

The data also show that improper unemployment insurance payments increased steadily between 2009 and 2012, from 10.3 percent to 12 percent, respectively."...via Free Republic


China produced 46% of world supply of coal in 2011, US only 13%. Much China pollution ends up on US west coast. Sierra Club and Bloomberg give cover to China polluters by instead threatening US gov. and demanding US climate 'action' when the problem is China

1/29/13, "China Uses Nearly as Much Coal as Rest of World Combined, EIA Says," Wall St. Journal, Cassandra Sweet

"China's use of coal has grown quickly over the last decade and now rivals the amount of coal consumed by the rest of the world combined, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said Tuesday. 

China consumed 3.8 billion short tons, or 3.45 billion metric tons, of coal in 2011, nearly half the world's total consumption, the EIA said, citing international data. 

A short ton, a measurement used in the U.S., is equal to 0.9 metric ton, a measurement used in most other countries. Electricity generation in China has grown more than threefold since 2000, driving ever greater demand for coal, the EIA said. 

China was also the world's largest coal producer in 2011, producing more than 3.5 billion metric tons, or nearly 46% of global coal production that year, according to data published by the International Energy Agency. China was also the world's largest net importer of coal in 2011, importing about 177 million metric tons of coal, according to the IEA. 

The U.S. produced a little more than one billion metric tons of coal in 2011, or nearly 13% of the world supply, according to the IEA.

Global demand for coal has grown by about 2.9 billion short tons, or 2.6 billion metric tons, since 2000, with 82% of that demand growth in China, the EIA said. 

It was unclear how much coal in China is used for electricity generation and how much is used for making steel.
About 13% of global coal produced, or about 717 million metric tons, is used by the steel industry, according to the World Coal Association, an industry group. 

China has relied on coal to fuel nearly 80% of its power plants, the coal association said, citing data from 2009. 

In the U.S., coal-fired power plants generate about 40% of the nation's electricity, according to the EIA. 

Coal use has declined in the U.S. since 2007, as the electricity sector has increasingly used natural gas, which is cheaper and more abundant, due thanks to a shale-gas production boom." via Climate Depot


1/29/13, "Cleaner air will require tougher diplomacy," Washington Times, opinion, Gray

"The U.S. has in the last year reduced greenhouse gases by a much wider margin than any other developed country. It has also essentially met the target set at Copenhagen — the site of the last major international climate change meeting — for CO2 reductions by developed countries....

Unfortunately, the massive traditional pollution problems faced by China — witness the horrific recent PM inversion in Beijing — don’t hurt just China’s people. Pollutants such as PM travel long distances across the Pacific; 25 percent of the West Coast’s PM comes from China, according to some accounts. 
PM is hugely expensive to clean up, and thus poses unacceptably high costs on California which has no way to distinguish in clean programs between tons that come from Californians and those that come from China.

If the White House wants to make any real contribution to the environment, it would not impose more unilateral CO2 controls in the U.S., forcing even more jobs abroad. It would instead negotiate a treaty with China over traditional pollutants that currently cost American lives and treasure. This would, of course, bring enormous immediate relief to both Chinese and Californians. But it would also produce in China massive CO2 reduction co-benefits for the future, as traditional pollution reduction is already demonstrating in the US."


Big banks financing coal:

11/19/12, "More than 1,000 New Coal Plants Planned Worldwide," Damian Carrington, UK Guardian

"Most new coal-fired plants will be built by Chinese or Indian companies. But new plants have largely been financed by both commercial banks and development banks.

JP Morgan Chase has provided more than $16.5bn (£10.3bn) for new coal plants over the past six years, followed by

Citi ($13.8bn).

Barclays ($11.5bn) comes in as the fifth biggest coal backer and

the Royal Bank of Scotland ($10.9bn) as the seventh.

The Japan Bank for International Co-operation was the biggest development bank ($8.1bn), with

India is planning 455 new plants compared to 363 in China"...


6/4/12, Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006,” Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage

“Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord.… 

Here is the biggest shocker of all: the average American’s CO2 emissions are down to levels not seen since 1964 --over half a century ago. …Coal is the number two source of CO2 for Americans. Today the average American burns an amount similar to what they did in 1955, and even less than they did in the 1940s. 

It is exactly America’s historical role

of biggest and dirtiest that makes their sharp decline in CO2 pollution so noteworthy and potentially 

 game changing at the global level.”...