Climate Change | | The Daily Caller.

Sixteen scientists took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal Friday to argue that there is “no compelling scientific argument” for “drastic actions on global warming.”

According to the group, made up of scientists from around the world, while there has been a concerted campaign to incite concern and action to stop climate change, the science is not coming together in a fashion that would warrant economy-stifling changes.

“The lack of warming for more than a decade—indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections—suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause,” they wrote. “Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2.”

In these scientists’ opinion, Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant, but rather a key necessity for life — spurring the growth of plant life.

The group further condemned the climate of fear that has acted to trample dissenting view points of the “global warming is a crisis” message.

“Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted—or worse,” they wrote.

So why is the scientific community so intent on stoking fear over global warming, when the science is not jibing with their conclusions? According to the Wall Street Journal Sixteen, it all boils down to money.

“Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow,” they wrote. “Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them.”

The scientists conclude by urging candidates for public office to buck the trend and look at global warming claims with a skeptical eye.

“There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to “decarbonize” the world’s economy,” they wrote. “Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC, aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.”

The article was signed by Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.

Follow Caroline on Twitter

Image via Wikipedia

Mr. and Mrs. Cranky Pants – Michelle Malkin – Townhall Conservative.

So, it turns out that the cool cat billed as “No Drama Obama” by his sycophants is actually quite the drama queen. While the White House publicly pretends to ignore conservative detractors of his administration, Chief Touchy-Touchy seems to be personally consumed by our critiques. Yes, mine included.

On Wednesday, the president had himself a mini-”Toddlers and Tiaras”-style meltdown with Arizona GOP Gov. Jan Brewer after landing in Phoenix for a post-State of the Union dog-and-pony show. As Brewer told pool reporters on the scene, Obama took umbrage at Brewer’s recent memoir. She minced no words on the cover: “Scorpions for Breakfast: My Fight Against Special Interests, Liberal Media, and Cynical Politicos to Secure America’s Border.”

And she minced no words describing her impressions of Obama as they sparred over her state’s tough immigration enforcement law, which is now the subject of a Justice Department witch-hunt. Brewer called Obama “patronizing” and “condescending.” I’d say she was excruciatingly polite.

According to Brewer, “He was a little disturbed about my book. … I said to him that I have all the respect in the world for the office of the president. The book is what the book is. I asked him if he read the book. He said he read (an) excerpt.” In the shadow of Air Force One, Obama complained that Brewer hadn’t “treated him cordially” and then stalked off while she was responding mid-sentence.

Photogs captured the fracas on film. The civility police gasped at Brewer’s “disrespectful” finger-pointing. On cue, one progressive commentator insinuated the gesture was a “racist” jab tantamount to lynching.

The president was singing a more laid-back tune last summer. As debate on Capitol Hill over the debt ceiling and spending sizzled, Obama bragged to reporters: “I’m not trying to poke at you guys. … I generally don’t watch what is said about me on cable. I generally don’t read what’s said about me even in The Hill (newspaper), so part of this job is having a thick skin and understanding that a lot of this stuff is not personal.”

Uh-huh. At least two other Republican governors — Rick Perry of Texas and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana — have recounted similar presidential snit fits on the tarmac. He sulked over a letter Jindal wrote to the administration about food stamps for Gulf oil spill victims; he bolted after a half-minute meeting with Perry at an Austin airport over border security issues.

You know those “petty grievances” of “Washington politics” that Obama has long condemned? Now it can be told: He knows whereof he squawks.

As New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor‘s new book, “The Obamas,” reveals, the president and his inner circle spent even more time carping about conservative influence on public opinion. “He wanted the media to be more of a referee; to put unfair Republican charges to rest,” Kantor discovered. “He could brush off the wildest, most baseless attacks themselves, he told (senior adviser and Chicago pal) Valerie Jarrett, along with (campaign finance bundler and treasurer) Marty Nesbitt and (bundler and finance mogul) John Rogers, at lunch in the little dining room next to the Oval Office.”

But what “galled him,” the book observed, “was when they gained mainstream credibility despite distortions of truth.”

Kantor then dutifully served as a pro-Obama referee:

“Rogers had just noticed a new book by the conservative columnist Michelle Malkin called ‘Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies.’ Among many other allegations, Malkin wrote that Michelle Obama — the president’s ‘bitter half’ — was secretly running the country in Lady Macbeth-like fashion. Malkin even took a hatchet to long-dead Fraser Robinson (Mrs. Obama‘s father), arguing with no evidence that his job at a water plant made him part of the ‘Chicago political corruptocracy.’ The book debuted at number one on The New York Times nonfiction bestseller list and stayed there for weeks.”

The facts? It was a former alderman in Chicago, Leon Depres, who provided evidence that Robinson’s job in the city water department was a reward for loyalty to the Daley political faction.

It was Washington Post writer Liza Mundy who reported that the department was “a renowned repository of patronage jobs.”

It’s the Illinois press that has long documented Mrs. Obama’s ties to the Chicago machine. It’s Kantor herself who spotlighted the first lady’s internecine warfare with her husband’s Cabinet. And from her meddling in everything from the AmeriCorps inspector general firing case to her aggressive, Big Labor-backed push for a publicly subsidized food police corps, Michelle Obama has been openly expanding her East Wing fiefdom in Marie Antoinette-like fashion.

How long before we see a FLOTUS tarmac tantrum? We did get two divas for the price of one. As longtime observers of the royal Obamas have long observed: Mr. and Mrs. Cranky Pants’ problem has never been the color of their skin. It’s the thinness.

Gun-smuggling scheme another reason to distrust government

By Ted Nugent – The Washington Times

The United States of America has turned into bizarro land. Think of this: Our very own Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), under the direct guidance of the attorney general of the United States – America’s top cop, mind you – not only allowed, but encouraged American gun dealers to sell about 2,000 guns to known punks involved in the drug trade in order to trace the guns to Mexican drug cartels. If you think that’s unbelievably nuts, get a load of this: The suspected goons who bought the guns were not even placed under law enforcement surveillance.

This is analogous to the Drug Enforcement Administration knowingly allowing international dope pushers to sell heroin on American streets without placing the dope dealers under surveillance in hopes that somehow, some way, the dope pushers would enable the DEA to trace the heroin back to some dirty, cave-dwelling Afghan opium poppy farmer so we could then poison the farmer’s poppy fields. Wait a minute, let’s not give this crackpot administration any more loony ideas.

In all of its bureaucratic buffoonery, the ATF lost control of the weapons. Of course it did, as there were no electronic tracing components on the guns. Our less-than-esteemed attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., to whom the ATF reports, claimed not to know a thing about this brain-dead operation.

What kind of inebriated idiot would hatch an evil scheme such as this and then believe that, somehow, the guns could be traced to Mexican drug cartels without an electronic tracing component? This isn’t some low-ranking bureaucratic village idiot but a high-ranking government bureaucratic idiot who is paid by U.S. taxpayers.

It’s not as if the drug cartels needed any more guns. An estimated 35,000 Mexicans have been slaughtered in recent years in drug-related violence. What could an additional 2,000 guns provide the already heavily armed drug cartels, which get all the fully automatic machine guns they could possibly want from their own military and Central American gunrunners? Are you kidding me?

We should be given the names of the bureaucratic idiots at ATF who hatched this criminal idea and the bureaucratic punks who authorized it. They shouldn’t just be fired. They should be prosecuted and put in a cage with other gunrunning thugs. That’s what this was: a U.S. government-sanctioned gun-smuggling scheme.

Meanwhile, because the bureaucratic punks in Washington who hatched and approved this terminally brain-dead gunrunning idea have not been charged with a crime, all across America, law-abiding citizens must comply with onerous gun restrictions that make them victims. Great. Punish the good guys. That seems to be standard operating procedure in Barack Obama’s and Eric Holder’s America.

More guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens ultimately ensures more dead bad guys – not more guns in the hands of violent dope dealers. I want an attorney general who declares open season on the recidivistic, violent punks who victimize law-abiding Americans.

Americans addicted to common sense have always had a healthy disdain for government bureaucrats addicted to power. Our instinctual distrust for government is further fueled by Mr. Holder’s ATF Operation Fast and Furious. At its core it was stupid, sinister, evil and criminal.

The only thing fast and furious that ought to happen is a full-on murder investigation by the FBI of the government goons who hatched, authorized and now are covering up this brain-dead, criminal scheme, which ended up costing the life of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Fast and Furious stinks. It smells just like Watergate did, only worse.

Ted Nugent is an American rock ‘n’ roll, sporting and political activist icon. He is the author of “Ted, White, and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto” and “God, Guns & Rock ‘N’ Roll” (Regnery Publishing).

Related articles

• KUHNER: Obama’s Watergate – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• First convictions from Fast and Furious probe (cbsnews.com)
• Arizona Moves To Prosecute Those Responsible For The Fast & Furious Scheme! (agirlwhoknowsherownmind.wordpress.com)
• PERRY: Eric Holder must go – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Gunwalker: Another ATF weapons operation comes under scrutiny (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• Another ATF weapons operation comes under scrutiny (usamericanfreedom.com)

Image via Wikipedia

CARDENAS: Obama embraces default amnesty – Washington Times.

Americans are disgusted with immigration policy for good reason

By Al Cardenas – The Washington Times

President Obama’s State of the Union address – coupled with recent troubling decisions by his administration to expand a pattern of de facto amnesty for illegal immigrants – cemented the unfortunate reality that this president continues intentionally to abdicate a responsibility to advance serious immigration reform. Empty rhetoric, repetitive platitudes and continued support for the already-rejected Dream Act do not make up a comprehensive proposal to this complex policy issue.

These remarks follow the administration’s decision to ease certain regulations on the visa program and move to release some deportation cases by focusing solely on whether a person poses “a national security threat,” only the latest addition to a list of blatant unilateral White House orders intended to curry favor with Hispanics.

The politics is conniving: Portray reform-minded Republicans and conservatives as unsympathetic to this fastest-growing demographic sector and bolster the president’s re-election chances in swing states with significant Hispanic votes, such as Florida, New Mexico, Virginia, Colorado and Arizona.

This scheme is not only misguided, but to someone who legally entered this great nation as a youth, it’s appalling.

I join most Americans, especially fellow Hispanics, across the political and ideological spectrum who understand the importance of legal immigration as vital to sustaining the greatness of America’s economic and cultural fabric.

It’s an absurd idea – fronted by liberals and often a complicit media – that legal immigrants, including Hispanics, who chose to follow the rule of law and contribute to the American community would be willing to give a subservient pass – let alone their vote – to politicians who embrace and promote the politics of illegal immigration and leave nearly 12 million undocumented aliens in limbo.

With a broken system, illegal immigration makes a mockery of the promise of legal immigration, and the American people are rightfully fed up.

According to a Gallup poll released last week, liberals were the only ideological or party segment to express greater satisfaction than dissatisfaction with current levels of immigration. All others, including Democrats, supported a decrease in immigration levels.

Gallup also found that “Americans’ dissatisfaction with immigration ranks third highest among 17 issues Gallup asked about.”

It’s little wonder that immigration is gaining as a critical election-year issue, with voters questioning inaction on reform.

Republicans in their presidential primary are taking note and debating immigration proposals – as they should. As Florida, my home state, takes center stage in the primary cycle, expect voters to demand more answers on immigration. Today, the leading Republican candidates will address the Hispanic Leadership Network’s annual conference in Miami, hosted by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. It’s the perfect opportunity for them to outline their specific proposals.

There is little chance that Congress will address significant immigration reform this year. However, the issue must be a top priority in the first 100 days of 2013, and any serious reform legislation must embrace these key principles: vastly improved border security; visa reform for highly skilled workers, investors and agricultural workers; and the documenting of the millions of illegal immigrants already here.

The first priority must be to develop a comprehensive border-security-and-surveillance strategy to include increased border manpower, strengthened border barriers, expanded surveillance capabilities, enhanced investigative personnel and enforced border detention.

We cannot afford porous borders and unknown people – potential security risks – living in our country and taxing our state and local communities’ safety-net budgets.

Then, Congress must implement a nationwide mandatory employment verification program with enhanced employer penalties. This will require all illegal immigrants to register, and those who state a desire to leave voluntarily will have the right to apply subsequently for admission without prejudice.

They must admit to their unlawful presence in the United States and waive any claim for asylum. Work-permit opportunities would be available to those without criminal records who can demonstrate proof of employment when filing an application. In such cases, there is no direct path to citizenship, and recipients of work permits must have paid income taxes, have health insurance and must pay fines and penalties.

Special rules will be developed for the elderly, disabled individuals, students and those in military service, longtime agricultural workers and aliens brought to the United States as innocent children younger than 12.

Thereafter, the Department of Commerce would determine the number of temporary work permits to be made available annually to fulfill the needs of America’s employers.

With regard to high-skilled immigration, master’s and doctoral-degree graduates from U.S. universities in science, technology, engineering and math areas will receive visas as long as they have job offers.

No law will be perfect and please every constituency, but the time is urgent; action must be taken, and every congressional leader who abhors dealing with the topic should bite the political bullet and agree to a comprehensive reform package in early 2013 for the good of the nation.

I’m confident that this election cycle will elevate the debate on immigration reform because the American people have realized what the administration and liberals in Congress have not: The current attitude of sanctioning illegal immigration as a blatant political ploy places our economy and communities at risk and is simply unacceptable.

Al Cardenas is the chairman of the American Conservative Union. He is a former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida.

Reblogged from My Blog:

How far we have come in three years, from where we started when Barack Obama was elected. The promise that he offered to renew and restore America to the position of glory that she held, has turned into a nightmare of lawlessness and willful disobedience to the very Constitution that he swore an oath to protect. Far from ending the wars that we were involved it, he has instead involved us in continuing conflict with no end in sight, with a promise of more at hand. We are now facing a future of uncertainty …

Related articles

• One FIFTH of young Germans have never heard of Auschwitz, survey reveals (dailymail.co.uk)

Reblogged from Boudica BPI Weblog:

This is straight forward country thinking… Jeff Foxworthy on Muslims: 1. You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to liquor. You may be a Muslim 2. You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can’t afford shoes. You may be a Muslim 3. You have more wives than teeth. You may be a Muslim 4. You wipe your butt with your bare hand, but consider bacon unclean. You may be a Muslim 5. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide. You may be a Muslim 6. …

Image via Wikipedia

UAW, Occupy and Obama Hang Themselves Together – John Ransom – Townhall Finance.

I’m going to skip the nonsensical projections regarding what the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. would think about today’s topical issues like Occupy Wall Street, so-called income inequality and Tim Tebow.

I can afford to do this because another man named King has already instructed me on his views.

Bob King, head of the United Auto Worker’s Union, got together with 500 of his fellow travelers over the weekend in a vanity-channeling of Dr. King by praising Occupy Wall Street and the UAW’s largest shareholder, Barrack Obama. 

In this, King (Bob) seems to be operating out of a liberal playbook that looks to associate Occupy with King (Martin Luther).

It’s called “Occupy the Dream.”

I’m not sure if the irony is intentional or just accidental.

“So much of what he says is the same today, is about the world today,” said King on King “We’re at very difficult times in the United States of America right now. We’re at a time of great injustice and growing injustices. Thank God for the occupy movement and the young kids that are out there.”

Bob King has seen the past and tells us that the past is our future.

Our future is one where inequality is everywhere more relentless; where progress on issues, like racial equality is just a chimera, even as an African American sits in the White House.

He has to tell us that, this King named Bob does.

Even more, he needs for us to believe it, because without that belief, he’s a man without a job, as even he admits.

King (V.2.0) has placed a big bet that Americans not as familiar with him as the people he represents have bought into his rhetoric about inequality, especially as it pertains to income. His organization, the UAW, has been losing members, dollars and assets for decades as workers and consumers have repeatedly rejected the union label.

According to Reuters, the UAW has already had to “sell assets and dip into its strike fund to pay for its activities.”

In fact King (Bob) thinks that if he can’t win converts soon, there is no future for his union. “I have said that repeatedly, and I believe it.”

It’s a measure of the UAW’s desperation that King has pinned his hopes on Occupy and Obama, two movements that, like the UAW, seem to be tracking in the wrong direction from Main Street American thought.

“While Occupy Wall Street isn’t necessarily affiliated with a particular party, its anti-big business message may not be resonating with majorities in any party,” wrote Gallup’s Elizabeth Mendes as reported in the Washington Post. “Republicans, independents, and now close to half of Democrats are more concerned about the threat of big government than that coming from big business.”

According to Gallup 64 percent think big government is a bigger threat, and 26 percent think the bigger threat comes from big business.

And why shouldn’t they? Occupy Wall Street is mostly an extension of the extra-legal Big-Government-knows-best philosophy that ignores individual rights, private property rights and redistributes according to its own ideas of who is a have and who is a have-not.

From the New York Post:

Occupy Wall Street protesters announced with great fanfare last month that they moved a homeless family into a “foreclosed” Brooklyn home — even though they knew the house belonged to a struggling single father desperately trying to renegotiate his mortgage, The Post has learned.

Even though the single father is still the rightful owner, that didn’t stop the Occupiers from placing one of their own people into the house: 

Meanwhile, the family that OWS claimed to be putting into the vacant house has not yet permanently moved in. And it turns out the family is not a random victim of the foreclosure crisis, but cast for the part, thanks to their connection to the OWS movement.

OWS last week said it has spent $9,500 breaking into the house and setting it up for the homeless Carrasquillo family. A photo of the smiling family covers a window, under the slogan, “A place to call home.”

The head of the family, Alfredo Carrasquillo, 28, is an organizer for VOCAL- NY, a group that works with OWS. His Facebook page shows him in a “99 Percent” T-shirt at an OWS protest in November.

Like King’s UAW, which hasn’t been able to force folks to give them what they aren’t entitled to legally, Occupy is a last-gasp movement that has failed to convince us of either the justice or logic of their cause.     

Into this two-ringed circus now steps Ringmaster Obama, who has promised us all a campaign that will pit the UAW and Occupy have-nots against the rest of the country. Presumably, just as he’s done with the UAW, the domestic auto industry, student loans and green company investments, Obama will campaign that government eventually gets to pick the winners and the losers with a kind of group bailout for unions, Occupiers, Democrats and donors.

That’s how the GOP will campaign too. 

And if I were a Democrat, here’s where I’d be concerned:

If Obama doesn’t hang you all separately with this strategy he most certainly will hang you all together.

And if Democrats don’t win this campaign, they might never win another.

I say it and I believe it.

Image via Wikipedia

OWENS: Keystone Kops energy policy – Washington Times.

Obama oil-pipeline rejection undermines State of the Union promises

By Mackubin Thomas Owens – The Washington Times

In his State of the Union speech, President Obama had barely cleared his throat when he outlined his vision for an American “future where we’re in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world.” Just days before, he had delivered a crippling blow to his own plan.

Mr. Obama’s decision to kill the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry oil from Alberta, Canada, to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, is one more example of his administration’s ongoing war on fossil fuels – and the most recent example of how the president promises the exact opposite of what he is delivering. What better way to sever our dependence on those “unstable parts of the world” than to switch a major portion of our oil imports from dictatorships to a stable democratic neighbor, starting now?

Instead, the administration continues to squander taxpayer funds on “green energy” debacles such as Solyndra and the entire renewables/electric-car agenda – which, even in Mr. Obama’s plan, will only yield significant benefits in the far future.

Of course, when he made the pipe-line decision, the president blamed congressional Republicans for forcing a snap decision. But the fact is that he has had three years to make a decision. It’s not as though the project was not vetted by the usual bureaucratic suspects. In a letter to the president on Oct. 19, 22 House Democrats observed that “the Department of State’s Final Environmental-Impact Statement reaffirmed the findings of the two previous environmental-impact statements; namely, that the Keystone XL Pipeline will have no significant impact on the environment.”

Indeed, some of the sharpest criticism of the Keystone decision has come from congressional Democrats. For instance, Sen. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia said that “President Obama’s decision on the Keystone XL pipeline is a major setback for the American economy, American workers and America’s energy independence.” One of the Democratic Party’s key constituencies, organized labor, is not happy, either.

Just a day before the decision, the president’s own jobs council argued in favor of not only more oil, natural gas and coal production, but also energy-infrastructure projects such as the Keystone XL. Once completed, the pipeline would carry more than 700,000 barrels of oil per day and directly create 20,000 truly “shovel-ready” jobs. The least that can be said is that the Keystone decision flies in the face of Mr. Obama’s rhetoric about creating jobs.

Astoundingly, on its website, the White House argues that the loan-guarantee program of the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards will create more jobs than construction of the Keystone XL. But the loans provide government subsidies to inefficient companies that are unable to compete in the market, e.g. Solyndra. The EPA rule will contribute to the shutting down of a large percentage of domestic coal-fired power plants, America’s largest source of electricity. How will that reduce unemployment among any groups other than lawyers and government bureaucrats?

Unsurprisingly, the main resistance to the Keystone XL has come from environmentalists, who claim that the pipeline endangers water resources and the like. However, the State Department, which had jurisdiction since the pipeline crosses an international border, conducted a three-year study addressing risk to soil, wetlands, water resources, vegetation, fish, wildlife and endangered species, concluding that building the pipeline would pose minimal environmental risk. In addition, the area the Keystone XL would traverse is already a web of pipelines.

Ironically, not constructing the Keystone pipeline has the potential to increase environmental risk. The Keystone XL route foreclosed, the Canadians will build a pipeline to their Pacific coast and ship crude oil to China by tanker. Tanker spills are more frequent and destructive than pipeline leaks. Indeed, although the long-term trend in spills from all sources is sharply down, the spill rate from shipping oil by tanker is about six times higher than spills from offshore oil rigs or pipelines.

At a time when unemployment remains high in the United States and unrest in the Middle East threatens Western access to oil in that region, the president’s decision is absurd. It is only part of an energy policy worthy of the Keystone Kops.

Mackubin Thomas Owens is professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College and editor of Orbis, the journal of the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Related articles

• Hump Day Report: Obama Plays Keystone Kop (humpdayreport.wordpress.com)
• NORTON: Obama chooses American decline – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Obama Cronies Big Winners In Blocking Keystone XL Pipeline (5440fight.com)
• Must watch video: Politics, pandering and killing the Keystone XL Pipeline! (politicsandfinance.blogspot.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Dr. Tim’s Walker Rally Speech – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Tim Nerenz

Note: a grass-roots rally in support of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker was held today in Wauwatosa, where thousands of Walker supporters stood outside for 3 hours to listen to a virtual who’s who of GOP speakers…and me. If you were not there, here is what you missed.)

Well, Wisconsin, they did it; they got enough signatures to force a recall election for Governor Scott Walker.

Did anyone really doubt you could find 540,000 graduates of Wisconsin public schools who would demand a sticker and a hug and a do-over when they lose? That’s how they roll nowadays.

So now $20 million will have to be cut from state and local budgets for education, the environment, the elderly, cancer research, day care, special needs children, bike paths, and bridge repairs to pay for their little tantrum. Own that, Madison.

It also means that more than 3.3 million eligible voters in Wisconsin said no. We listened to the protests for a year, we thought about our options for 60 days, and we decided not to waste $20 million and to just stick with the guy who was elected fair and square.

So what do I think of the recall? Two words: BRING IT!

Now, all these other speakers here today are Republicans, and they all came to say “I stand with Scott Walker.”

Well, not me. I’m not a Republican and I don’t stand with Scott Walker. I’m a Libertarian – and Scott Walker stands with me.

I stand for jobs.

I stand for job-creators.

I stand for free markets, open competition, lower taxes, and sensible regulation.

I stand for developing our natural resources responsibly.

I stand for rewarding hard work, and not punishing success.

I don’t stand with Scott Walker. Scott Walker stands with me.

I believe in less government and more liberty.

I believe in fiscal responsibility.

I believe in school choice.

I believe in the right to carry.

I believe in the right to work.

I believe in the right to vote…once…residents only…with ID.

I don’t believe in Scott Walker. Scott Walker believes in me.

In the past three years, 132,000 teachers have been laid off in the other 49 states.

Why? Because their Governor is NOT Scott Walker. There is only one. And as everyone knows, one Walker beats 14 runners.

The tens of thousands of teachers and government workers in Wisconsin who did NOT get laid off have Scott Walker to thank for it.

And those few hundred who DID get laid off – in Madison and Milwaukee – can thank their unions.

You guys with the signs and cowbells over there are drumming for the wrong team.

If we Libertarians got a mulligan every time we lost an election, we would need a full time department of voter nullification. Oh, wait – we already have that, it’s called the Government Accountability Board.

And in a few days they will rule that all those millions of votes we cast in November 2010 didn’t count. They will hope for better luck this time. They are wrong.

I write a blog called Moment of Clarity, and if there ever was ever a time for clarity, this is it. So here’s your moment: this has nothing do with Walker, or rights or any high-minded principle at all – this is the last tug of war between the taxpayers versus the taxeaters.

There is no fence to sit on; there is no rock to hide under. It is the State versus you. Pick your side.

I’ve picked mine; I’m going to stand on the side of liberty, and Scott Walker stands with me.

Related articles

• Recall Your Mom – Tea Party Nation (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Bring It – Tea Party Nation (gds44.wordpress.com)