October 5, 2010
California green dreaming
Re: "Big Green Special Reports," Oct. 1
The Examiner should be commended for its series of special reports and extended efforts to expose the Big Green movement that is bent on strangling our economy with extreme propaganda, environmental laws, fees and regulations.
Taken together, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's green dream for California -- which is still the same old radical California agenda -- is the same old toxic formula for economic suicide, slowly being carried out by the blind ambition of extreme environmentalists and over-reaching government.
Indeed, as if it wasn't bad enough that former Gov. Gray Davis threw Californians under the bus with the 2000 energy crisis and tax increases, Gov. Schwarzenegger has added insult to injury with AB32 global warming legislation and more tax increases that will throw us over the economic cliff from which we have been teetering since the economy crashed. Even if Proposition 23 passes, effectively repealing AB32, SB722 is poised to bring it back in another form.
Surely, Arnold betrayed those who elected and re-elected him, yet he still lives in celebrity and political fantasy-land, without financial worry, dreaming about his next job as green energy czar for the Obama administration. Alas, nothing will change in California or the nation until indoctrinated and deceived liberal voters feel enough economic pain to discover where it really came from.
Certainly, there is little or no relief to hope for if either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown is elected governor, and the liberal status quo remains in the Sacramento legislature.
Daniel B. Jeffs
Apple Valley, Calif.
Note: Everyone should read the series of Washington Examiner Special Reports on 'Big Green' -- Environmentalists aren't really about clean air and water.
Time Magazine
July 5, 2010 Issue
Gulf-Spill Blame
Why didn't President Obama waive the Jones Act--which requires that only U.S. vessels engage in commercial activity in U.S. waters--within days of the BP explosion and request all available oil-spill-cleanup boats and equipment from around the world? President Bush waived the Jones Act immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit. Why has the media not pressed Obama to do so?
Daniel Jeffs, APPLE VALLEY, CA.
Original Letter
Sent June 14, 2010
Re: Cover story: Gulf disaster: Who's asses need kicking? - another letter
Calling all clean-up boats and equipment?
The nation's news media has been saturated with non-stop disastrous coverage of the massive uncontrolled BP oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, yet the mainstream media has yet to ask a crucial question or make a strong suggestion for President Obama to make a major decision to lessen the damages.
Why didn't President Obama waive the Jones Act within days of the BP explosion and request all available oil spill clean-up boats and equipment from around the world? President Bush waved the Jones Act immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit. Why has President Obama not done so, and why has the media not pressed him to do so? Why isn't Congress pressing him for it?
I have asked this question in several letters to the editors of major newspapers. No response. Smaller conservative newspapers are asking why. Could it be that the Obama administration, congressional Democrats and complicit media want to take advantage of this crisis, to play itself out against oil drilling and big oil, to advance their green energy climate change legislation? It's on the way. The clean-up boats and equipment are not. How about a brainstorm to plug the hole?
Regarding President Obama's Oval Office address to the nation about the Gulf Coast oil leak
By:Vince Haley
Vice President for Policy
American Solutions
June 16, 2010
Fifty seven days after an oil rig explosion triggered an uncontrolled deep water oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico, President Obama addressed the nation last night about his administration's efforts to address the crisis.
After offering two short paragraphs to explain what is actually being done to stop the oil leak, President Obama devoted most of his speech to explaining why the oil leak means now is the time to dramatically and permanently raise the cost of gas, diesel, and electricity for every American.
Jay Leno gave voice to the widespread puzzlement people have with Obama's misplaced focus last night: "President Obama said today he is going to use the Gulf disaster to immediately push a new energy bill through Congress. I got an idea ... How about first using the Gulf disaster to fix the Gulf disaster?"
Good question, but we think we know why President Obama is not focused on plugging the oil leak and is instead focused on plugging new energy taxes.
President Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said at the start of the Obama presidency that "you never let a crisis go to waste," which we now know means that the Obama team never lets a crisis go without out more borrowing, more taxing, and more spending in support of their political allies. We saw this with the $862 billion stimulus law that didn't create jobs, the ObamaCare law that won't bend the health cost curve down, and now with ObamaEnergy that won't lower energy costs and won't increase energy supplies.
Using the present crisis as pretext, President Obama is now urging the Senate to pass cap and trade energy taxes. Even though this has nothing to do with plugging the hole, Obama and his liberal allies in Congress want the power to spend billions in new tax revenues through a massive redistribution of wealth from taxpayers to green energy company shareholders.
The Senate is reportedly going to take up a cap and trade energy tax bill shortly after it returns on July 12th. If it passes the Senate, the House will vote on and approve that new tax in a lame duck session after the November elections.
Our opportunity to stop this new energy tax is now, and the next two months will be absolutely critical. These new energy taxes will hurt you and your family with higher gas and electricity costs. They will kill hundreds of thousands of jobs, prevent small business growth, and ship jobs overseas to China and India.
We cannot afford to pass a massive energy tax in this economic recession, but President Obama is more concerned with redistributing wealth than he is in growing new wealth, even if that means destroying jobs in the process. Cutting up a shrinking pie is apparently not a problem if you're the one wielding the knife and giving away the pieces. It's the rest of us that have to worry about the consequences.
Meanwhile, the oil continues to gush under the Gulf waters. Like Jay Leno, Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, summed up well this President's misplaced priorities: "The climate bill isn't going to stop the oil leak...The first thing you have to do is stop the oil leak."
The President should listen to his friend Senator Feinstein and plug holes, not taxes.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/letters/From-Readers-96404484.html
Washington Examiner
June 16, 2010
Why didn't Obama ask for help in BP oil spill?
The nation has been saturated with nonstop coverage of the massive uncontrolled BP oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, yet the mainstream media has yet to ask a crucial question: Why didn't President Obama waive the Jones Act within days of the BP explosion and request help from all available clean-up boats around the world?
President Bush waived the Jones Act immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit. Why has President Obama not done so, and why has Congress and the media not pressed him to do so?
Could it be that the Obama administration, congressional Democrats and complicit media want to take advantage of this crisis to advance their green energy climate change legislation?
That's on the way. The clean-up boats are not.
Daniel B. Jeffs
Apple Valley, Calif.
The Washington Times
January 20, 2010
Kudos for climate-change contrarians
Washington Times - Kudos for Climate Change
Unlike the political left, Denis Ables ("Climate Conspiracies," Letters to
the Editor, Monday) and honest climate scientists not influenced by the
politics of flawed conventional wisdom and research grants are among
millions of common-sense, independent thinkers who refuse to subscribe to
the mass hysteria and indoctrination of extreme environmentalists and
global-warming fanatics.
Of course, the lead actor in the climate-change farce is former Vice
President Al Gore. However, he is merely dancing from the strings of leading
global-warming activist and puppeteer James Hansen, who heads the NASA
Goddard Institute for Space Studies. On the side of truth is the foremost
authority on climate change, Richard S. Lindzen, atmospheric physicist and
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. He was the lead author of "Physical Climate Processes and
Feedbacks," a chapter of the Third Assessment Report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and has long been a critic
of global-warming theories and the political pressures on climate
scientists. Examples of Mr. Lindzen's opinion can be found in the Wall
Street Journal ("Don't believe the hype - Al Gore is wrong. There's no
'consensus' on global warming," July 2, 2006, and "The climate science isn't
settled," Nov. 30, 2009).
It's bad enough when the education establishment, government and courts
reconstruct, compromise, circumvent and revise our Constitution and American
history in the worst possible light or else simply ignore the truth. But
when that erroneous way of thinking means the fundamental transformation of
our health care, energy, finances, free market and economy, it is tantamount
to the tyrannies of socialism in the name of social justice.
Alas, it's more than sad. While in the midst of this transformation, the
ignorant, the foolish and the naive will suffer enough to realize they have
been used and abused, duped and dumped upon by the intellectual elite and
pompous progressives, just like the rest of us. Fortunately, there is now an
awakening and a powerful hope in the wisdom and collective judgment of the
people to survive and reverse the insanity. After all, this is America.
LETTER DEBATE ON GLOBAL WARMING Daily Press December 27, 2009 Climate change junk science Re: Lies and global warming - editorial The fears imposed on us by global cooling and global warming alarmists, backed by junk science, lies and statistical deceit have imposed environmental laws, rules and regulations by reactionary government and legislation and activist court decisions that have increased the cost of living for all Americans, particularly in California. The fraud created and perpetuated by climate scientists, knee-jerk activists and politicians like former vice president Al Gore for personal power and financial gain has been challenged by a growing number of credible climate scientists regardless of the hateful pressure brought to bear against them, including the irresponsible news media. Now that the grand scheme is being exposed by their own documents and e-mail communications made public by computer hackers, corrective actions should take place. Environmental laws and all that have been unnecessarily imposed upon us and the economy should be reviewed and reversed. Dan Jeffs Apple Valley *** Daily Press January 12, 2010 Who says so? Re: “Climate change junk science” (Dan Jeffs, Letters, Dec. 27). Week after week I see letters and commentaries claiming that the evidence of global climate change is “junk science” and a “fraud.” According to whom? Those warning us of the threat of global warming tend to be individuals and organizations with legitimate qualifications to speak on the issue. These would include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the United Nations, the National Academy of Sciences of 32 countries including the United States, and the vast majority of the world’s scientists and leaders. Those claiming otherwise tend to be far right individuals and organizations whose qualifications to speak on the issue are questionable at best. For example, why should I believe Rush Limbaugh over NASA? Why should I believe Fox News over the Union of Concerned Scientists? Why should I believe the Heartland Institute over the National Academy of Sciences? All of these people have known ulterior and financial motives to say what they are saying. This on top of all of the physical evidence of global warming that those not in denial can see for themselves. These people are asking us to believe that all the world’s scientists and leaders are lying to us and faking all the evidence of global warming as part of some sinister unspecified plot to ruin the economy. Don’t they realize how silly this makes them look? David E. Savage Jr. Hesperia **** Daily Press January 13, 2010 (Three letters) Garbage in, garbage out Re: “Who says so?” (David E. Savage Jr., Letters, Jan, 12).\ Mr. Savage made a valid point about the prestigious scientific groups supporting the global warming theories. However, if they’re all working from the same doctored data, and not performing their own historical temperature analyses, they’re all going to reach the same invalid conclusions. Jim Foy Victorville **** I wonder where objectivity has gone? It appears David Savage questions why he should not believe one news source because they have conservative roots, while blindly following another news source because it has liberal roots. May I suggest that one follow the money and power? I offer the following differences. The conservative Rush Limbaugh owns his own broadcasting company. Therefore he is his own boss and gains nothing personally from offering differing views on global climate change and asks that you think for yourself. General Electric owns the liberal leaning NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, etc., which all declare with hysteria that global climate change is absolutely man made. GE has positioned itself to cash in on green energy and cap and trade. Therefore GE has an interest in not reporting contrary evidence disputing man made global climate change. So the question is, who is being objective? Those who wish to inform or those who wish to gain money, power, or both? Perhaps the real question to everyone is, can you think for yourself? An unquestioned belief is not worth possessing. Thomas Whittington Apple Valley **** David Savage seems to believe that truth and honesty rest solely on the side of those who claim that the earth is warming. After citing several institutions who tell us that global warming is real, he concludes that the physical evidence is there for all to see. He isn’t telling the whole story. Once evidence for world-wide cooling emerged, it became difficult to support a theory of global warming, and the operative phrase was changed to climate change. But climate was undergoing change long before any human activity could have been the cause. The real issue, then, is to what extent does human activity influence climate change? On that, the evidence is less clear, and the effectiveness of attempts to mitigate human influence is similarly unclear. Moreover, the consequences of mitigation efforts may be worse than doing nothing at all. Mr. Savage should not be so ready to accept the pronouncements of those who believe in global warming. There is a lot of grant money available to fund research on climate change, and if that research could not support doomsday scenarios, the funds might very well go elsewhere. Thus, the temptation to publish only articles that seem to validate theories of global warming is likely to be strong. Scientists are human and not immune to such temptation as the recently released “climategate” e-mails have shown. The “deniers” are not the only players that may have ulterior and financial motives to say what they are saying. To suggest that they are only makes one look silly. William S. LaSor Apple Valley **** Daily Press January 15, 2010 Facts and decisions Re: "Who says so" (Letters, David Savage, Jan. 12). If Mr. Savage is looking for a credible source of Climate expertise to gain information on the junk science of so-called global warming, he should simply surf the Internet. There, he would find a most timely and pertinent video that is presented by John Coleman that completely destroys all of the myths, lies and misconceptions of Al Gore and his global warming power seekers. Mr. Coleman is not only the founder of the weather channel, but has also been a meteorologist for over 50 years. The charts and grafts offered by Mr. Coleman on the video are clear and precise. There is no room for argument. I don’t know why David Savage would go to Fox News or Rush Limbaugh for information on climate change, because both of these sources, though informative and mostly accurate I think, are mainly offering their best opinions on such topics. It would be beneficial for Mr. Savage to follow the advice of Gen. George S. Patton, who once said, “No decision is difficult to make if you get all of the facts.” Richard E. Behmer Victorville *** Of Mr. Savage’s statement “all the world’s scientists” he must not remember that a couple of years ago, upwards of 30,000 fully qualified United States scientists signed off on the premise that global warming was not — repeat, not — man made. He apparently has also forgotten (probably because the general media isn’t pounding on it) the recent expose of people like Professors Phil Jones, East Anglia CRU, and Michael Mann, Pennsylvania State University, for hiding the evidence of global cooling over the past 11 years. If Mr. Savage would like some more truth, John Coleman, Meteorologist and founder of “The Weather Channel,” has a brief video describing the earth’s “climate changes” over the last 300 million years. Constant cycles from hot to cold, from ice ages to warmth, all in accordance with sun spot and magnetic storm activity on the sun, with today’s conditions right in cycle. And as Mr. Coleman says, mankind certainly did not cause the ice to melt 300 million years ago. Anyone who wants to see that video can go to www.kusi.com. Robert D. Doggett Victorville *** Money and motivation Re: “Garbage in, garbage out” (Letters, Jim Foy, Jan. 13). Let me see if I understand this correctly. We cannot trust climate scientists to tell the truth about global warming because they are motivated only by money and power (and we all know how wealthy and powerful climate scientists are) but we can trust the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who makes more than $30 million a year, is seen as the de facto leader of the Republican party, harangues anyone who dares disagree with him and whose followers believe everything he says without question no matter what the actual facts show? And it’s those of us who notice that all the garbage we are pumping into our atmosphere and environment is damaging our planet that are “silly”? Richard Boyd Victorville *** Daily Press (Sent January 17, 2010) Re: "Who says so?" - (David Savage Jr., letters, Jan. 12) Re: "Money and motivation" - (Richard Boyd, letters, Jan. 15) Re: "Garbage in, garbage out" - (Foy, Whittington & LaSor, letters, Jan. 13) Re: "Facts and decisions" -(Behmer & Doggett, letters, Jan. 15) Re: "Let the truth emerge" - (Foy, David Hansen, letters, Jan. 17) Unlike David Savage and Richard Boyd -- Jim Foy, David Hansen, Thomas Whittington, William LaSor, Richard Behmer and Robert Doggett are among millions of common sense, independent thinkers apart from the mass indoctrination imposed by extreme environmentalists and global warming fanatics infecting our institutions, schools, government and the left stream news media. Of course, the lead actor in the climate change farce is former vice president Al Gore. However, he is merely dancing to the strings of leading global warming activist and puppeteer, James Hansen, who heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. On the side of truth is the foremost authority on climate change, Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist and Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T. He was the lead author of Chapter 7, 'Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,' of the IPPC Third Assessment Report on climate change, and has been a critic of global warming theories and the political pressures on climate scientists. Examples of Lindzen's opinion can be found in the Wall Street Journal, 'Don't Believe the hype - Al Gore is wrong. There's no "consensus" on global warming (July 2, 2006), and 'The Climate Science isn't settled" (November 30, 2009). Indeed, it's bad enough when the education establishment, government and the courts reconstruct, compromise, circumvent and revise our Constitution and American history in the worst possible light, or simply ignore the truth. But when that way of thinking the unthinkable translates to the fundamental transformation of our liberties by regulating our lives, our education, our healthcare, our energy, our finances, our once free market and our economy, it is simply unacceptable, and clearly tantamount to the tyrannies of socialism in the name of social justice Alas, it's not silly. It's simply sad. While in the midst of this transformation, the ignorant, foolish and the naïve will suffer enough to realize they have been used and abused, duped and dumped upon by the intellectual elite and pompous progressives, just like the rest of us. Fortunately, there is now an awakening and a powerful hope in the wisdom and collective judgment of the people to survive and reverse the insanity. After all, this is America. Dan Jeffs Apple Valley
GREEN HELL:
How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can
Do to Stop Them
Author: Steven Milloy http://www.junkscience.com
Publisher: Regnery Publishing - March 2009
Big Brother Has Turned Green
On this Earth Day, April 22, 2009, Americans ought to consider this parallel: While our Constitution still exists, and the sovereignty of this nation is still vested in its people, our government should be reminded that this is a republic, not a monarchy such as the one from which we separated in 1776. Lest we forget, we lose a bit of our freedom with every law passed against us, and a bit of our future and that of our posterity, with every dollar of tax levied and debt incurred against the public trust. Indeed, scorching our liberty is no less final than scorching our Earth.
Synopsis
Liars-Al Gore, the United Nations, the New York Times. The global warming lobby, relentless in its push for bigger government, more spending, and more regulation, will use any means necessary to scare you out of your wits-as well as your tax dollars and your liberties-with threats of rising oceans
I recently served on a grand jury that investigated the water crisis, and the impact on our county's water supplies, which depends on contracted water from the California State Water Project.
It's not surprising that environmental extremist groups Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council filed a lawsuit to protect the endangered delta smelt fish, or that an activist federal judge issued a judgment in favor of it, which was agreed to by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service.