In a statement released Wednesday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said estimates relating to the rate of recession of the Himalayan glaciers in its Fourth Assessment Report were “poorly substantiated” adding that “well-established standards of evidence were not applied properly.”

And so, for us global warming “deniers,” the most immediate and obvious question becomes, just how much stock should we really put in the REST of the report? I mean, really. If stuff like this gets bandied about as incontrovertible “fact” because it was in the IPCC report, and must therefore be gospel, only to be soundly and completely debunked as unscientific hyperbole, doesn’t the rest of the report become highly suspect?

To me, at least, it does.

Melting Himalayan Glaciers May Doom Town (ONOZ!)

Himalaya glaciers melting much faster (ONOZ!)

OR….

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown – Times Online

“A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.”

“In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report. “

“It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.”

“Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research.”

UN prediction ‘may be wrong’

“At the weekend, Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper reported that the 2035 claim was taken from an interview given by an Indian glaciologist to New Scientist magazine in 1999.”

“The claim – which was of questionable scientific value and may not have been backed up by research, according to the paper – was used by campaign group WWF before making its way into the IPCC’s research in 2007.”

“The Sunday Times said the IPCC was likely to retract the figure, which would be a humiliation and a further boost for climate sceptics after a scandal in December dubbed ‘climategate’.”

IPCC meltdown (by far the best and most complete evisceration of this thing)

“With Climategate still simmering and the collapse of Copenhagen reverberating, a fresh storm has blown up over the discovery that the IPCC’s claim that Himalayan glaciers were about to disappear is entirely bogus. “

“‘If the present rate [of melting] continues,’ said the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report in 2007, ‘the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high.’”

“There was no significant questioning of this claim until late last year, when the Indian government published a discussion paper that pointed out that there was in fact no sign of any ‘abnormal’ retreat in the Himalayan glaciers. India’s environment minister Jairam Ramesh accused the IPCC of being ‘alarmist.’”

And remember this one?

Al Gore Makes Inconvenient Truth More Convenient By Misquoting Climatologist

Yet another black eye for the “fact” of AGW.

Britain shivers in coldest night with lows of -20C

Temperatures could plummet to -20C (-4F), including in parts of the South, setting new local records.

Frozen Britain As Cold As The South Pole

In the coldest night for 14 years the mercury dropped to -22C (-7.6F) in the Scottish Highlands, with bitterly cold temperatures elsewhere in the UK.

Al Gore is a dumbass.

UPDATE:

Just for you, Stephen R, straight from Moonbattery:

Scientists say man-made climate change does have the potential to cause more frequent and more severe weather extremes, such as heat waves, storms, floods, droughts and even cold spells.

That’s right folks, floods AND droughts, cold spells AND heat waves, ALL caused by man-made global warming.  Or, as some of us like to call it…”weather.”

From the same article:

“It’s part of natural variability,” said Gerald Meehl, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. With global warming, he said, “we’ll still have record cold temperatures. We’ll just have fewer of them.” …

Let’s deconstruct that for a moment, shall we? For the hard of thinking…

If you have a RECORD cold temperature, then that means that it’s NEVER been that cold before, or at least in recorded history.  So if you continue to have RECORD cold temperatures as time goes on, that means that the temperature is continuing to GO DOWN, right?  If a track sprinter keeps breaking records, that means that he’s keeps going FASTER than he ever has before, right?  If a mini-sub sub sets RECORDS for dives, that means that it keeps going DEEPER than it ever has, right?

So, once again, if you keep setting RECORD cold temperatures, then the mean is continuing to get COLDER over time.  According to this joker, that just means that it’s not getting colder all the time as fast, which therefore means that it’s, uh, actually getting warmer?!?

And don’t those two quotes sort of cancel each other out?  In the first one, we’re told that “weather extremes” could get MORE FREQUENT even as record cold temperatures happen LESS OFTEN?

Go it? Good.  There’ll be a quiz later.  But right now, I’ve got to go put on another sweater. We’re supposed to get seven inches of snow this weekend.  Might even be…a RECORD!

…one of the most charmingly idiotic posts I’ve ever read! Good lord, man… How about ‘checks and balances?’

Really?  Yeah, how about those checks and balances?  Checks and balances only work when two thirds of the triad aren’t in bed together.  So, without further ado…

“IT DOESN’T TAKE A FELONY”

In response to “The Hidden Costs of ObamaCare,” commentor Kate has asked the most burning question of the day:  If we see so clearly the dangers of the path down which Barack Obama is taking us, what then can we do?  What should we do?

I say, ask instead what  MUST we do?

By way of an answer, I submit this definition: MALFEASANCE

malfeasance is the doing of an act which an officer had no legal right to do at all and that when an officer, through ignorance, inattention, or malice, does that which they have no legal right to do at all, or acts without any authority whatsoever, or exceeds, ignores, or abuses their powers, they are guilty of malfeasance.

If Barak Obama repeatedly and deliberately excedes those authorities specifically granted to the office of President of the United States by the U.S. Contitution, then he is guilty of political malfeasance.  If the Speaker of the House or any other elected official conducts themselves in such a manner contrary to their oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, then they are guilty of both Malfeasance and perjury.

Our system of separation of powers was instituted specifically to prevent to abuse of power of any one man, or group of men.  The powers and limitations of each branch are specifically enumerated.  If a man, especially the President, sees himself as above these restrictions, if he proposes that circumstances require him to set aside the rule of law in order to secure some intangible benefit or prevent some unanmed catastrophe, then he is already well down the road traveled by numerous despots throughout the world’s history.

Barack Obama is our duly elected President.  As such, we own him the courtesy and respect the office demands.  This does NOT mean, however, that we give him our unquestioning obedience.  We owe no fealty to the man.  We honor the office, at most.

Not insignificantly, the oath of office of every military officer and elected official in this country requires that he or she “support and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States, against all enemies, foreign, and domestic.”  It does not mention the President.  Not a General or any other officer or individual. We pledge to uphold and defend an ideal, as set of codified laws and principles, principles which have become the very definition of freedom and liberty throughout the world.

We do not swear an oath to a man, or an office.  We swear to uphold the ideals which founded this Republic, ideals which are codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

If ANY official, regardless of rank or position, undertakes to violate these principles or exceed the legal limits of his power as constrained by law, he will have proven himself to be unfit for office.  One of the foundational principles of our society, one seldom seen elsewhere in the world today or in recorded history, is that NO MAN IS ABOVE THE LAW.  Not even the President of the United States.

What we must do is remain vigilant.  We must remain watchful.  We must read and understand every Exective Order written.  We must hold our President and elected officials to account for every action they take or fail to take.  We must be prepared to act whenever they violate the covenants they swore to uphold.  This is not disloyalty, this is not sedition.

It is a requirement of citizenship.

Do not make the mistake of making some saber-rattling noises about “armed overthrow” or “rising up” against our oppressors.  It only legitimizes those who would seek to paint mere patriots as right-wing extremists or terrorists.  We have a legal recourse available to us.

Short of waiting it out for the next 4 years, the only option we have of stopping the damage being done to our country is to seek articles of impeachment against Barack Obama.  To seek recall elections of officials like Nancy Pelosi or Dick Durbin, and others who have shown themselves to be enemies of our free-market representative republic.

By repeatedly exceeding the authorities of his office, by committing, through either ignorance, neglect, or malice those actions which can be see to not only controvene his oath of office, but which a reasonable man might perceive to cause direct and observable harm to this country, Barack Obama is building the case for his own impeachment.

It doesn’t take a felony.  There need be no Whitewater scandal, missing minutes on a tape, or perjury before a Grand Jury.  It is enough that an individual openly flaunts the Constitutional limits of their elected authority to have grounds for impeachment.

And if we do nothing, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

UPDATE:

Something like THIS for example:

Today’s Czar Count – 32!

Even Democrat Robert Byrd wrote Obama a little note saying that the appointment of all the czars “violate both the constitutional system of checks and balances and the constitutional separation of powers, and is a clear attempt to evade congressional oversight.” This, in his opinion, is unconstitutional at best.

There’s really only two possibilities here: 1) The people in charge don’t know what they are doing, or 2) They know EXACTLY what they are doing.

The simple reality of this, to me, is that nobody can be THAT stupid. So something else has to be going on. When “environmentalism” trumps basic quality of life, and no one seems to care, I suggest that we’ve got a problem on our hands. We are seeing the symptoms all around us of something akin to letting the inmates run the asylum.  Obama’s policies and politics are causing more and more people to scratch their collective heads, wondering just what exactly is going on with this man?

His actions show either a fundamental ignorance of, or a fundamental disregard for the simple realities of our economic system. I propose the latter is at play, much more than the former. His approach chooses to ignore the reality that consumer confidence is a core element of economic health and success in this country. It shows a willingness to overlook the fact that ever-higher and broader taxes are anathema to generating the kind of disposable income that allows people to buy the goods and services which keep our industry and economy running.

For example, when you set out to “bankrupt” the coal industry (as Obama so openly advocated), you aren’t just shutting down the coal plants. You are shutting down the mines, putting the miners and their families out of business. You are shutting down the coal processing plants. You are shutting down the trucking companies that move the coal from the mines to the processing plant, and from there to the plants that burn it for energy. You are gut-punching the industries that support these efforts, and the towns that house the people that do these jobs. Not only that, but you are forcing increases in the cost of basic services like electricity down onto people that can least afford it…the poor and (now) unemployed!

This is part of the conceit you see in Obama’s approach to things. There is a certain ideological arrogance behind all these moves towards a more socialist state; the idea that such suffering is inevitable, and simply must be born in the pursuit of this brave new world.

At it’s core, though, is a belief running so deep, something so much a part of the core personality that it cannot even be called arrogance; perhaps something more like blind delusion? It’s the elitist belief in the superiority of “your betters.” It is this very elitism which puts the lie to all the grandiose dreams of “equality” and “fairness” under socialism. Socialism requires a ruling class, those exalted and educated political elites who see themselves as burdened not with a sacred trust and stewardship of those who elected them, but rather, with a noble obligation, a calling even, to lead the suffering and under-informed masses into a new era of enlightened Progress.

Sadly, far too few of those teeming masses really understand what is good for them, so few truly comprehend what they SHOULD be willing to sacrifice for the greater good…and so those sacrifices will have to be made for them. It is simply “unavoidable” that heavier and heavier taxes will be taken from them, those rights and privileges deemed unnecessary or inconvenient will be swept aside to clear the way for Progress, and those individuals or groups who continue to resist will be marginalized, ostracized, or even imprisoned. History has shown this to be incontrovertibly true.

Sacrifices will be necessary of course. There will be some “discomfort” with this “transition.” And even if YOU don’t see the rhyme or reason behind any of it, trust that “your betters” do, and have the situation well in hand.

This is the conceit of Obama and his administration. They see themselves as better equipped and informed than “the people” to make those hard decisions. So if it seems like Washington isn’t listening, it’s because they aren’t. If it seems like our voices are being tuned out, or worse suppressed, it’s because they are. Why? Because our betters know better. Our leaders have taken this mandate for “change” and moved beyond the need for anything like accountability to the masses.

As you watch him make his speeches, as you watch him make his choices of friends and allies, as you see what decisions he makes quickly, and which ones he seems to delay or “consider” for quite a while, you should come to understand that Obama seems himself not as the leader of a group, but as the captain of a ship. One that does not ask the passengers where they wish to go, but instead “knows best” where to steer the ship, and the masses below decks are just along for the ride.

The problem is, he’s heading us right for an iceberg, but keeps calling down to the engine room for more steam!

It’s not just that Pres. Obama is a poor leader, but that he’s leading us in the wrong direction. The ideological conceit that is so bound up in all socialist leaders’ “visions” of the future, has taken such a hold of Pres. Obama that he genuinely seems to see himself as above such mundane concerns as doing what’s best for the country (say, perhaps, economically) but rather, what MUST happen in order to bring about HIS concepts of ideological change.

This is a very dangerous attitude for someone with the kind of power the President of the United States can wield…or abuse. Given the historical reluctance of Congress to impeach a sitting president, Obama may be allowed far too much latitude in his efforts before people wake up enough to realize what is happening/has happened to them.

People lived in a stable, prosperous functioning representative republic that has served as a beacon of hope and freedom for the world for over 230 years. And yet they clamored for it to “CHANGE!”

Be careful what you ask for…

What happened was that Obama accepted the recommendation of his Secretary of Defense to adopt a different method of strategic missile defense based around Aegis guided missile cruisers using enhanced surface-to-air missiles rather than the more static and easier to target ground-based PAC-IIIs.  Which, by the way, Poland is still getting based on the Bush-era agreements.

Obama hasn’t betrayed Poland.  The US military has devised a better, more capable and more responsive system to deal with the threat than was available when the original missile defense program was agreed to, and so the agreement was simply modified to take into account the new technology and tactics.  It actually gives BETTER coverage for the European theater than previous system.

So, while there’s plenty of stuff to lay at Obama’s doorstep, let’s make sure that we are fighting the right fights, and not tilting at windmills, and getting ourselves a slapped with a well-deserved ODS label.

Also, I have to agree, at least in principle, with Obama’s decision not to arbitrarily throw more troops at a bad situation without a solid, comprehensive, ground-up review of the overall strategy and operational goals in Afghanistan.  That said, I do readily fault Obama for spending more time with late-night talk show hosts and the Olympic committee than with his strategic commanders on the ground.

I mean, if Obama can drop everything and spend millions in taxpayers dollars hauling him and his wife on an ultimately fruitless junket to Europe to try and get the Olympics for Chicago, you’d think he could fly a few more hours into the CENTCOM AOR and actually sit-down face-to-face with the man on the ground of what is currently our most contentious conflict, and the one most fraught with the potential for failure. Wouldn’t you?  Wouldn’t you think a Commander in Chief might be convinced to do that sometime within the first YEAR of his presidency?

David Letterman? Sure. Jay Leno?  All the time in the world?  General, uh, whats-is-name, yeah, have your people call my people, we’ll do a VTC.

Grrr.

Wilson’s “emotional outburst” has now being branded as “heckling” in the media.  Now, I ain’t no rocket scientist er nuthin, but to me, “heckling” is the drunk guy in the front row at open mike night who just has to have something uproariously “funny” to say about every performer, or the college kids who shout down Ann Coulter or some other “right-wing” speaker when they dare to speak on campus.  “Heckling” is NOT one, two-word phrase uttered in a moment of disbelief.  But, no, according to the MSM, Sen. Wilson might as well have been giving the Prez rasberries and rude hand gestures throughout the entirety of his speech.

What ALSO seems to have escaped the notice of most lefty pundits and the MSM (or is that redundant?) is that Pres. Obama IS and HAS BEEN LYING for quite some time on the subject of his health care proposals.

To whit, his schtick for the longest time has been the great tragedy that 47 MILLION AMERICANS ARE WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE, and something MUST BE DONE !!!11!!eventy! {{froth, gasp, choke, hyperventilate}}

EXCEPT.  By the White House’s own admission, nearly 17 million of that number are ILLEGAL ALIENS, which, by definition ARE. NOT. AMERICANS!!

So, for the President to foment a “crisis” by suggesting that 47 million Americans are without health insurance, while knowingly including 17 million NON-AMERICANS…IS. A. LIE.  Joe was RIGHT.

The other tragedy of this whole situation is how it so glaringly reveals the depths to which our discourses about race have sunk in this country.  For all the talk about being “color blind,” nearly EVERY criticism, protest, or resistance to a Presidential policy suddenly has “hints of racism.”  This “smacks of racism.”  There are “racist undertones” to the Anti-Tax protests. Ad nauseum.

Again, we are letting the Progs control the narrative, and in doing so, we are allowing them to build this untouchable persona of blackness around Obama.  No longer is mere equality the goal, but rather, it’s leave the poor black man alone.  Yes; the single most powerful political leader in the world, a black man who survived a grueling campaing to become the first black president, and by a comfortable margin at that, and yet, somehow, he must be protected against any who would question him by the frequent and arbitrary applications of the “racism” whip.

Dissent no longer equals patriotism;  now it equals racism.  Obama has become this sacrosanct icon of immutable veracity, a paragon of unquestionable truth — an aura carefully nurtured and perpetuated by his faithful media and partisan Democrats.  Dissent is handily quelled and discredited by marginalizing any who dare oppose him as haters, racists, and bigots.

Because, of course, the only possible reason we would ever disagree with Obama is because of our deep-seeded, inbred hatred of blackies. Y’all.

It started back during the election, when the “The Only Reason You Won’t Vote For Obama Is Because You’re Racist” meme got its legs.  Now it lives on, delightfully re-purposed as “The Only Reason You Won’t Give Obama Your Blind, Unreasoning Fealty Is Because You’re Racist.”

So pipe down all you right-wing, pale-skinned haters.  Don’t be so mean to the poor ol’ black man.

So, in review. Disagreeing with the likes of Clarence Thomas…not racism.  Disagreeing with Barack Obama…racism.  Any questions?

There’s been much ado lately about the posters with the Obamanation dressed out to look like the Joker from Batman.  I think they chose the wrong villian.  It should have been Two-Face.

Today via Patterico, I read about the Obama Adminstration stance which is threatening that it will not recognize the next lawful and democratic elections in Honduras, because they didn’t bow down before the O and do as he bid.  That’s right.  Our current administration is threatening to make Honduras country-non-grata because they refused to allow our Executive Branch to dictate who should govern their country.  And yet, I found myself musing over several remembered statements by The One which stated, in no uncertain terms, how reprehensible he felt such actions to be:

In Germany:

“Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq’s democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.”

Except in Honduras.

“I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.”

Except in Honduras.

“America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people.”

Except in Honduras.

“you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.”

Except in Honduras

And from His speech in Cairo:

“It’s not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling … in Iranian elections,” Obama said.

Except in Honduras

I simply do not understand how this man, who would claim the title of President of our republic, would spend so much time and energy spooning with the likes of Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad and Saudi Kings, yet seem to spare no opportunity to shit all over our strongest allies.  Strong, functioning representative republics modeled after our own.

This man was raised, steeped and shaped in a culture, in a fringe pocket of society that was bred to frear and distrust American power and autonomy.  He is a globalist, and a spiritual universalist, and they only way to do that is to disavow the concepts of truth, of right vs. wrong, and to denounce any hint of nationalist pride as dangerous jingoism.

How this man got to be our President, I cannot fathom.  Oh, yeah, wait.  Because it was racist to NOT vote for him.

Glenn Beck is currently is deep doo-doo with the frothing Progs over his comments that Obama is a racist and “has a problem with” white people.

Again, I find myself hearkening back to an entire, highly vocal demographic which seemed to have no qualms about suggesting that then-President Bush delayed responding to the disaster in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina because…yes, come on, you remember it too…because he hated black people.  That’s right, say that “Bush Hates Blacks,” and it’s social commentary.  Suggest that Obama hates whites, and it’s racist hate speech and BOYCOTT GLENN BECK!

Is it too much to expect the loonie left to show even a shred of consistency?  Yes, that was a rhetorical question.

I say, ask instead what  MUST we do?

By way of an answer, I submit this definition: MALFEASANCE

malfeasance is the doing of an act which an officer had no legal right to do at all and that when an officer, through ignorance, inattention, or malice, does that which they have no legal right to do at all, or acts without any authority whatsoever, or exceeds, ignores, or abuses their powers, they are guilty of malfeasance.

If Barak Obama repeatedly and deliberately excedes those authorities specifically granted to the office of President of the United States by the U.S. Contitution, then he is guilty of political malfeasance.  If the Speaker of the House or any other elected official conducts themselves in such a manner contrary to their oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, then they are guilty of both Malfeasance and perjury.

Our system of separation of powers was instituted specifically to prevent to abuse of power of any one man, or group of men.  The powers and limitations of each branch are specifically enumerated.  If a man, especially the President, sees himself as above these restrictions, if he proposes that circumstances require him to set aside the rule of law in order to secure some intangible benefit or prevent some unanmed catastrophe, then he is already well down the road traveled by numerous despots throughout the world’s history.

Barack Obama is our duly elected President.  As such, we own him the courtesy and respect the office demands.  This does NOT mean, however, that we give him our unquestioning obedience.  We owe no fealty to the man.  We honor the office, at most.

Not insignificantly, the oath of office of every military officer and elected official in this country requires that he or she “support and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States, against all enemies, foreign, and domestic.”  It does not mention the President.  Not a General or any other officer or individual. We pledge to uphold and defend an ideal, as set of codified laws and principles, principles which have become the very definition of freedom and liberty throughout the world.

We do not swear an oath to a man, or an office.  We swear to uphold the ideals which founded this Republic, ideals which are codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

If ANY official, regardless of rank or position, undertakes to violate these principles or exceed the legal limits of his power as constrained by law, he will have proven himself to be unfit for office.  One of the foundational principles of our society, one seldom seen elsewhere in the world today or in recorded history, is that NO MAN IS ABOVE THE LAW.  Not even the President of the United States.

What we must do is remain vigilant.  We must remain watchful.  We must read and understand every Exective Order written.  We must hold our President and elected officials to account for every action they take or fail to take.  We must be prepared to act whenever they violate the covenants they swore to uphold.  This is not disloyalty, this is not sedition.

It is a requirement of citizenship.

Do not make the mistake of making some saber-rattling noises about “armed overthrow” or “rising up” against our oppressors.  It only legitimizes those who would seek to paint mere patriots as right-wing extremists or terrorists.  We have a legal recourse available to us.

Short of waiting it out for the next 4 years, the only option we have of stopping the damage being done to our country is to seek articles of impeachment against Barack Obama.  To seek recall elections of officials like Nancy Pelosi or Dick Durbin, and others who have shown themselves to be enemies of our free-market representative republic.

By repeatedly exceeding the authorities of his office, by committing, through either ignorance, neglect, or malice those actions which can be see to not only controvene his oath of office, but which a reasonable man might perceive to cause direct and observable harm to this country, Barack Obama is building the case for his own impeachment.

It doesn’t take a felony.  There need be no Whitewater scandal, missing minutes on a tape, or perjury before a Grand Jury.  It is enough that an individual openly flaunts the Constitutional limits of their elected authority to have grounds for impeachment.

And if we do nothing, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

UPDATE:

Something like THIS for example:

Today’s Czar Count – 32!

Even Democrat Robert Byrd wrote Obama a little note saying that the appointment of all the czars “violate both the constitutional system of checks and balances and the constitutional separation of powers, and is a clear attempt to evade congressional oversight.” This, in his opinion, is unconstitutional at best.

I believe we call that “shifting the goal-posts,” a tradtion which the Progs have honed to a fine art.

Here’s a sky-is-falling article stating that “scientists believe” that the sea ice could be gone by SEPTEMBER!  OH NOZE!!  Except that, the article was written LAST summer.  And it didn’t happen. Not even close.  Seriously, you’d think this stuff came from The Onion.

For the record, it was 58 degrees here in Stuttgart this morning.  In July.  So, how much again was it that Al Gore makes it speaking fees?  $175,000 a pop, to say iggerant shit like this:

Mr Gore admitted that it was difficult to persuade the public that the threat from climate change was as urgent as that from Hitler.

Conflict of interest?  Nahhh…nothing to see here.  Move along.

Another thought:  Keep in mind, if the entire polar ice cap melted, sea level would actually DROP.  The polar ice cap is like a giant ice cube in a glass of ice tea.  When the ice melts, does the glass overlfow?  Nope.  But according to Al Gore and Co., entire cities would be flooded, millions homeless, aaaarruuuggghjh!11!1!  Sorry, Al.  The math don’t add up.

In other news…

You KNOW it’s bad when the government actually admits that it’s the government’s fault.

The Fannie and Freddie debacle: An autopsy