Obama’s Top Climate Advisers Can’t Get Doomsday Story Straight While Testifying Before Same Committee on Same Day

Obama’s Top Climate Advisers Can’t Get Doomsday Story Straight While Testifying Before Same Committee on Same Day
Thursday, December 10, 2009
By Pete Winn and Christopher Neefus

Government ministers in scuba gear held an underwater meeting of the Maldives’ Cabinet to highlight the threat global warming poses to the lowest-lying nation on earth on Saturday, Oct. 17, 2009. (AP Photo/Mohammed Seeneen)
(CNSNEws.com) – Which is it–6 feet or 3.5 feet?

Last week, White House science czar John Holdren told members of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of 6 feet or more in a century.
But Joan Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told the same committee on the same day that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of up to 3.5 feet in this century. 

Holdren and Lubchenco were the only two witnesses called to testify at the Global Warming committee’s Dec. 2 hearing, which was titled “The State of Climate Science.”
In his written testimony Holdren, whose official title is “Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy,” wrote that changes in temperature from global warming could bring about what he called “tipping points” in the climate system–which he defined as “thresholds beyond which a small additional increase in average temperature or some associated climate variable results in major changes to the affected system.” 

Examples of “tipping points” that he cited include:

–“the complete disappearance of Arctic sea ice in summer, leading to drastic changes in ocean circulation and climate patterns across the whole Northern Hemisphere; 
–“drastic acceleration of the rate of ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, driving rates of sea-level increase that could reach 6 feet per century or more; [emphasis added]
— “ocean acidification from CO2 absorption reaching a level that causes massive disruption in ocean food webs; and a flood of carbon dioxide and methane from warming tundra and thawing permafrost, accelerating the onset of all of the other impacts of concern.”
However, on the same day, Dr. Lubchenco told members of the same House committee that the maximum sea level rise would be 3.5 feet.
“The amount of sea level rise likely to be experienced during this century depends mainly on the expansion of ocean volume due to warming and the melting of glaciers and polar ice sheets,” the NOAA chief said [emphasis added].

“Complex processes control discharges from polar ices sheets and some are already contributing to sea level rise. In addition regional affects from changes in ocean circulation and geological and human processes that affect the elevation of the land above sea-level can either add to or subtract from the global mean sea level rise projected to be as high as 3.5 feet in some scenarios of increasing heat-trapping greenhouse gases.” 
Calls by CNSNews.com to Holdren’s office and to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for explanations of the difference between Hodren’s and Lubchenco’s predictions for the potential increase in sea levels were not answered by press time.
But Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.), a Republican member of the committee, told CNSNews.com that the discrepancy “raises the issue of the credibility of proponents of the argument that the globe is both warming and the cause of that warming is man-made from greenhouse gases.”

Shadegg said the estimates–“if they are to be believed”–differ “by almost 100 percent.” 

“These are the two most prominent–at least from the standpoint of government position–scientists in the nation on this issue, and they can’t agree,” Shadegg said.

“And yet, we’re being told the science is settled, and Mr. Gore is saying there’s no longer a debate. That’s funny, it looks to me like–there may not be a debate, but there certainly is not a consensus and there certainly are discrepancies by the two top scientists within the government supposedly on the entire topic.”
“I don’t think that somebody who is involved in a public policy position can rely on data that is that inherently inconsistent,” he added.
“I’m sure they’ll have an explanation–they always have an explanation,” Shadegg said. “But it seems to me that before . . . policy makers, or quite frankly the White House and its EPA, force on the American people dramatic and even draconian changes in public policy that could – and will –significantly affect the lives of the American people, I would suggest they need to get their act together.”

Calculations to predict a rise in sea level are subject to a great deal of uncertainty, Jonathan H. Sharp, professor of oceanography at the University of Delaware, told CNSNews.com. “Sea level rise is not just a function of the sea, but a function of the land,” said Sharp. “It’s a very complex calculation and there are many other things related to climate change that are much firmer.”

Ultimate ‘stimulus’ hypocrisy

Ultimate ‘stimulus’ hypocrisy

Jack Kemp

While Obama, Al Gore and the EPA pontificate about global warming, a special report released by Sen. Coburn (Stimulus Checkup) on the 100 worst Stimulus projects. Listed near the top of the list is:

“4. Research to Develop Supersonic Corporate Jets ($4.7 Million)
Lockheed Martin will receive a total of more than $21 million in federal money — with $4.7 million funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to advance research for supersonic jet travel.27 High ticket costs, fuel-guzzling and the infamous sonic boom  helped doom commercial supersonic travel in the past; the last Concorde jet flew in 2003.”
I wonder if Al Gore will be so outraged by the carbon footprint that he will order one of these jets for himself? He could do even more to fight global warming that way.
So the Obama Administration has traveled to Copenhagen to denounce global warming at the same time the Stimulus Bill is paying to develop a gas guzzling high speed jet that will cause huge sonic booms, rattling windows and nerves. Just as long as these supersonic jets don’t fly executives to Las Vegas, Pres. Obama doesn’t appear to see any hypocrisy or disconnect in this project to develop more powerful executive jets.
The environmentalists can, if they choose, protest this corporate jet subsidy all they want, but it is now law. One awaits Greenpeace or the Environmental Defense Fund with signs outside the White House. But they really don’t have to involve themselves, because once these jets are developed, there will be plenty of other organizations and individuals to take up the slack.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/12/ultimate_stimulus_hypocrisy.html at December 11, 2009 – 12:59:23 PM EST

Hollywood & Howard Zinn’s Marxist education project

By Michelle Malkin  •  December 11, 2009 09:46 AM

Hollywood & Howard Zinn’s Marxist education project
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

The two most important questions for society, according to the Greek philosopher Plato, are these: What will we teach our children? And who will teach them? Left-wing celebrities have teamed up with one of America’s most radical historians to take control of the classroom in the name of “social justice.” Parents, beware: This Hollywood-backed Marxist education project may be coming to a school near you.

On Sunday, December 13, the History Channel will air “The People Speak” – a documentary based on Marxist academic Howard Zinn’s capitalism-bashing, America-dissing, grievance-mongering history textbook, “A People’s History of the United States.” The film was co-produced/written/bankrolled by Zinn’s Boston neighbor and mentee Matt Damon. An all-star cast of Bush-bashing liberals including Danny Glover, Josh Brolin, Bruce Springsteen, Marisa Tomei, and Eddie Vedder, will appear. Zinn’s work is a self-proclaimed “biased account” of American history that rails against white oppressors, the free market, and the military.

Zinn’s objective is not to impart knowledge, but to instigate “change” and nurture a political “counterforce” (an echo of fellow radical academic and Hugo Chavez admirer Bill Ayers’ proclamation of education as the “motorforce of revolution.”) Teachers are not supposed to teach facts in the school of Zinn. “There is no such thing as pure fact,” Zinn asserts. Educators are not supposed to emphasize individual academic achievement. They are supposed to “empower” student collectivism by emphasizing “the role of working people, women, people of color, and organized social movements.” School officials are not facilitators of intellectual inquiry, but leaders of “social struggle.”

Zinn and company have launched a nationwide education project in conjunction with the documentary. “A people’s history requires a people’s pedagogy to match,” Zinn preaches. The project is a collaboration between two “social justice” activist groups, Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change. Rethinking Schools recently boasted of killing a social studies textbook series in the Milwaukee school system because it “failed to teach social responsibility.” A Rethinking Schools guide on the September 11 jihadi attacks instructs teachers to “nurture student empathy” for our enemies and dissuade students from identifying as Americans. “It’s our job to reach beyond this chauvinism.” And a Rethinking Schools guide to early childhood education written by Ann Pelo disparages “a too-heavy focus on academic skills” in favor of “social justice and ecological teaching” for preschoolers.

Teaching for Change’s objective, in Obama-esque fashion, is to train students not to achieve actual proficiency in core academic subjects, but to inspire them to “become active global citizens.” Today’s non-achieving aspirants are tomorrow’s Nobel Peace Prize winners, after all.

No part of the school curriculum is immune from the social justice makeover crew. Zinn’s partners at Rethinking Schools have even issued teaching guides to “Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice by the Numbers” – which rejects the traditional white male patriarchal methods of teaching computation and statistics in favor of p.c.-ified number-crunching: 

“Rethinking Mathematics is divided into four parts. The first part is devoted to a broad view of mathematics that includes historical and cultural implications. Part Two includes nine classroom narratives in which teachers describe lessons they have used that infuse social justice issues into their mathematics curriculum. Included here…an AP calculus lesson on income distribution. The third part contains three detailed classroom experiences/lessons. These include a physical depiction of the inequitable distribution of the world’s wealth, the results of a student investigation into how many U.S. Presidents owned slaves, and a wonderful classroom game called ‘Transnational Capital Auction’ in which students take on the role of leaders of Third World countries bidding competitively for new factories from a multinational corporation.

Short lessons, provocative cartoons, and snippets of statistics are scattered throughout Rethinking Mathematics. A partial list of topics includes racial profiling, unemployment rate calculation, the war in Iraq, environmental racism, globalization, wealth distribution and poverty, wheelchair ramps, urban density, HIV/AIDS, deconstructing Barbie, junk food advertising to children, and lotteries.”

Our students will continue to come in dead last in international testing. But no worries. With Howard Zinn and Hollywood leftists in charge, empty-headed young global citizens will have heavier guilt, wider social consciences, and more hatred for America than any other students in the world.

Baucus gave girlfriend $14K raise

Baucus gave girlfriend $14K raise
By: Manu Raju and John Bresnahan
December 11, 2009 04:40 AM EST
Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, gave a nearly $14,000 pay raise to a female staffer in 2008, at the time he was becoming romantically involved with her, and later that year took her on a taxpayer-funded trip to Southeast Asia and the Middle East, though foreign policy was not her specialty.

Late last Friday, Baucus acknowledged his relationship with Melodee Hanes, whom he nominated for the job of U.S. attorney in Montana, after it was first reported on the website MainJustice.com. But he said that Hanes withdrew from consideration for the job when the relationship became more serious. The next day, he dismissed calls for an ethics investigation, saying, “I went out of my way to be up and up.”

Since his announcement, more details of the relationship have emerged, raising questions about a workplace romance between a boss and employee that Baucus tried to keep quiet and also contradicting his explanation for why Hanes’s nomination was withdrawn.

Jodi Ravi, a former reporter for the Missoulian revealed over the weekend that the paper informed Baucus in March that it was poised to publish a story about Hanes’s relationship with the senator and the fact that he had nominated her for the U.S. attorney job.

The next day, Hanes withdrew from consideration. According to the Missoulian, Baucus’s office never acknowledged a relationship between the two, and the paper did not run a story.

Baucus’s office said yesterday that while Baucus was aware of Ravi’s questions, “there were a number of factors that went into Ms. Hanes’s decision to withdraw” from consideration for the U.S. attorney post, including that the couple’s relationship was “changing.”

“These discussions took place before, though around the same time as, the reporter’s inquiry,” Baucus’ office said in a statement. “This, coupled with the fact that they wanted to live together in Washington, led to her withdrawal.

Baucus separated from his now-ex-wife, Wanda, in March 2008 and moved out of their home. Hanes separated from her husband in April 2008 and moved out in early June. Hanes was divorced from her husband last December, and Baucus was divorced in April 2009. They are now living together on Capitol Hill and began dating in the summer of 2008. Hanes and other staff received their raises in this time period, according to public documents that show payroll breakdowns in six-month increments.

Baucus insists that Hanes was well-qualified for the prosecutor position, and his office released a lengthy résumé detailing her expertise as a prosecutor and in private practice.

Unlike many private corporations, there are no congressional rules barring a lawmaker from having a romantic liaison with an employee. In several cases, members have married staffers. For instance, Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio) became involved with his wife when she was still his chief of staff. Former Rep. David Bonior (D-Mich.) first hired his wife, Judy, as a staffer and later married her.


Former Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) became involved with a House staffer when he was speaker of the House. He later divorced his second wife and married the staffer.

Baucus himself was sued by his former chief of staff, Christine Niedermeyer, after he fired her, but the case was thrown out on a technicality. She claimed the senator made unwanted sexual advances, but Baucus vehemently denied the allegation.

Hanes, who worked on Baucus’s staff as his state director and senior counsel, accompanied him on a taxpayer-funded congressional delegation in late 2008 with other members of the senator’s staff, a trip first reported by The Hill.

The Baucus group traveled to Vietnam and the United Arab Emirates, at a cost to taxpayers of more than $14,000 per person. It was the only overseas trip taken by Hanes during her nearly six years on Baucus’s payroll. Baucus’s office said the trip resulted in increased collaboration between universities in Montana and Vietnam.

Baucus’s office said it was appropriate for Hanes to accompany the senator and other aides to the Montana Democrat during a late 2008 trip to Vietnam and the United Arab Emirates, even though the couple had begun a romantic relationship. The office said previous state directors had also gone on official overseas trips.

Baucus’s office also denies giving Hanes any preferential treatment while she was a paid member of his Senate staff. A Baucus spokesman downplayed the salary hike Hanes received, saying it was in line with what other aides to the senator received during the same period.

Around the time when her relationship with Baucus reportedly “intensified” in the summer of 2008, Hanes’s salary jumped $13,687, according to public documents covering the April 1-Sept. 30, 2008, period, to among the highest on the senator’s payroll.

In a statement to POLITICO, Baucus’s office argued that “virtually our entire staff” saw their salaries rise during the period, saying the raise was on a par with the legislative director’s and less than the chief of staff’s.

“In fact, during that period, Ms. Hanes’s salary increased by the exact same amount as our legislative director and less than our chief of staff,” said a statement from a Baucus spokesman.

Hanes’s salary did return to a lower level in the following six-month period, Senate records show. According to Baucus’s office, she left the staff in May and joined the Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, where she currently works as acting deputy administrator for policy.

Obama to GOP: ‘Stop trying to frighten the American people’

Obama to GOP: ‘Stop trying to frighten the American people’

December 10th, 2009

By Sam Youngman, The Hill

Stop frightening the people!”

President Barack Obama told House Republican leaders to “stop trying to frighten the American people” even as he and Democrats said they see a possibility for bipartisan cooperation on job creation legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters that Obama made the admonition during a bipartisan meeting at the White House on Wednesday, producing a chart to show Republicans that “things are a lot better.”

Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said there was broad agreement on their side of the aisle about how to create jobs by aiding small businesses and boosting infrastructure spending. Pelosi said she thinks on those issues, “it’s possible for us to find some common, bipartisan ground.”

But moments later, Republicans made it clear that they want to see a “spending freeze” and a “no-cost” jobs plan that consists largely of tax cuts.

Read More:

Administration Warns of ‘Command-and-Control’ Regulation Over Emissions

Administration Warns of ‘Command-and-Control’ Regulation Over Emissions

December 10th, 2009


 Obama’s EPA director is threatening to take matters into her own hands

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn’t move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a “command-and-control” role over the process in a way that could hurt business.

The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Jackson, however, tried to strike a tone of cooperation in her address Wednesday, explaining that the EPA’s new powers to regulate greenhouse gases will be used to complement legislation pending in Congress, not replace it.

“This is not an ‘either-or’ moment. It’s a ‘both-and’ moment,” she said.

Read More:

Obama’s Whiny Blame Game

Obama’s Whiny Blame Game

December 10th, 2009

By Michael Goodwin, NY Post

It is always someone else’s fault

The other day, I wrote that President Obama has “run out of both charm and ideas.” I was too kind.

To judge from the string of whoppers in his dreary jobs speech yesterday, he’s also run out of facts. And he’s still whining about the problems he inherited and blaming Republicans.

He might as well be barking at the moon. That’s sort of what he is doing, because the American people are tuning him out at a stunning pace.

The latest Gallup Poll gives him a record low 47 percent approval. Only 26 percent in another poll say he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Naturally, his press secretary attacks the pollsters, likening them to children with crayons.

And Obama plunges on with his blame-game act. It’s tired, unpresidential and ineffective, all the more so because he’s banking on a bill of goods to prop himself up.

The most egregious example came when Obama said yesterday the $700 billion bank-bailout fund, or TARP, was “launched hastily under the last administration” and was “flawed.”

Read More:

Marxists, Socialists Launched Obama?

Marxists, Socialists Launched Obama?

December 11th, 2009

By Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily

Obama’s 2002 speech against the war was at a Marxist rally

During President Obama’s West Point address last week in which he committed 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, he referred to his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he first voiced at a 2002 anti-war rally said to have helped launch his political career.

The rally, which drew some 2,000 participants, was planned by socialist and Marxist activists associated with Weatherman Underground founder William Ayers.

“I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions,” Obama declared Tuesday.

The Oct. 2, 2002, rally at Chicago’s Federal Plaza that was widely credited with propelling to Obama to the national stage.

That event, meant to protest the impending invasion of Iraq, was coordinated on behalf of a small group, Chicagoans Against the War & Injustice, run by Marxist Carl Davidson and extremist activists Marilyn Katz and Bettylu Saltzman.

Read More:

Obama’s Jekyll and Hyde Nobel Speech

Obama’s Jekyll and Hyde Nobel Speech

December 11th, 2009

By Tommy De Seno, Fox News

 Obama is attempting to strike a delicate balance

Just prior to President Obama’s arrival in Oslo to accept the Nobel Prize, millions of Norwegians were captivated by an unexplained spiraling halo in the sky. While the president’s most fanatical supporters will herald the light as a messianic celestial event comparable to the star of Bethlehem, his detractors will be equally sure that it is the beginning of the apocalyptic black hole the next three years of Obama’s presidency are sure to bring.

Some scientists are beginning to assure us that the light was generated by a wayward Russian missile — as if wayward Russian missiles are reassuring.

President Obama did not have time for sky-watching. As a wartime President receiving a Peace Prize, The president had, as Ricky used to say to Lucy, “some ‘splainin’ to do.”

He began his speech by admitting his award was not for any achievement toward peace, but his “aspiration” to obtain peace. Upon hearing that, my 12-year-old asked me if he could receive an A on his math test not because he passed it, but because he aspired to pass it.

Having better sense than a Nobel committee member, I told him no.

Read More: