Yes, the "suspected" bomber had been in custody, but was released.  Just out from London. 

"British police have a "crystal clear" picture of the man who drove the bomb-rigged silver Mercedes outside a London nightclub, and officials tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com he bears "a close resemblance" to a man arrested by police in connection with another bomb plot but released for lack of evidence."

A lesson to American FBI and CIA operatives. 

And now most of the liberals want to release the Islamic radicals imprisoned in Guatanamo.   Do they really think that's the best thing to do for the safety and security of Americans, and for that matter, for the safety of the rest of the western world? 

 Amazing, the computer models that have predicted all of the hullabaloo about global climate change are flawed.   The models seem to be nothing more than a bunch of matchsticks arranged in a pattern of some sort, and then the winds came and blew the sticks over.   Huff and puff and blow the house down.   Down it went.    No substance to hold it together.   

Why is it that only conservatives are skeptical of every global initiative to change the world?    Why is that?

“In a paper being presented at the 27th International Symposium on Forecasting in New York this week, Scott Armstrong and Kesten Green audit the relevant chapter in the IPCC's latest report. [snip, snip] overlook scientific evidence on forecasting, the IPCC forecasts of climate change are not scientific". It’s all bunk.

“These various criticisms of climate modelling can be summed up in the following statement – there is no predictive value in the current generation of computer GCMs and therefore the alarmist IPCC statements about human-caused global warming are unjustified. Yet Australia has an Opposition and a Government that profess to set their climate policies on the basis of IPCC advice. Both also seem determined to impose an inefficient, ineffective and costly carbon trading or taxation system on the economy, for the aspirational absurdity of "stopping climate change".   More...

Quick, someone with influence, please grab a phone, and call that Gore fellow and tell him before he self-destructs.   And while you are at it, call the headquarters of the Democratic Party and tell them before this word gets out.    It’s going to ruin them, as so many people have believed this bunk and have already thrown away perfectly good light bulbs. Pass it on.  

Why is it that liberals are fast believers in global initiatives to change the world?  

Why?

 A 200 foot long tunnel with wooden supports, sand bags and lighting was found by the agents Friday, the exit inside a home in Nogales, AZ and the entrance in an apartment in Nogales Mexico. Or could the entrance have been in Arizona? Sure, it was a come and go tunnel for drug smugglers and people smugglers.

“Investigators tipped to the tunnel's existence during its construction have had it under surveillance since April, and no drugs were moved through it before authorities moved in, said Terry Kirkpatrick, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official.”   Read more….
Agents who served a search warrant late Thursday at the tiny, one- story home found the tunnel entrance hidden beneath plywood sheets weighted down with bags of dirt inside a utility room.
The home was largely unfurnished, and searchers found picks, a jackhammer and other excavation equipment."

Using jack hammers and picks?

How long would it take to remove the dirt from a 200 foot tunnel?

Where would they pile the dirt as it’s being removed?

Outside the apartment?

Would that not be a bit suspicious to see a new hill being built outside an apartment?

Mexican cooperation?  Mexican indifference? 

For months the tunnel was under construction, a large amount of dirt was being removed from an apartment, and the police on the Mexican side did not get a bit suspicious to investigate until the tunnel was finished and the American agents were then tipped off. Just a bit suspicious that the officials in Mexico do not care when their people go to such lengths to escape and/or transport their drugs into the US.

Hmmmmm!

It just keeps their economy healthy and vibrant with all of the American dollars flooding back into Mexico.

She was married for 17 years and enjoyed a very healthy relationship with her husband, but then along came an eye opener, and she choose to divorce and embrace a relationship with another woman. The eye opener was the feminist revolution.   “Then I changed, through political activity and feminism, spending time with women’s organisations. It opened my mind to the possibility of a lesbian identity.”

But what is it that we are told. It’s all genetic. People are born that way. But this woman made a choice. Does this put feminism in question?   Does this put homosexual activism in question?

They always have been in question, except for that group of intellectual elites, who would not dare question their own agenda.
 

 Now everyone is talking and writing about the Fairness Doctrine. Talk radio is talking about it. The mainstream media is talking about it. The politicians are taking about it. The newspapers are editorializing about it. So, there is no need for me to add my two cents into the fray for the couple of dozens that stop by here.

It was originally created way back in the yesteryear of 1949 and has been somewhat enforced on a case by case basis until 1987 when the FCC abolished the doctrine, “…the intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of [the Fairness Doctrine] restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters ... (and) actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and the degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists"

All I can add is that the fairness doctrine is that it is not fair. Hey, life is not fair. It’s not fair that some school children have more crayons than others, so then teachers force all of the students to surrender the supply that mommie bought into a big pile that all the students can use. It’s not fair that some pay taxes at a lower rate than others. It’s not fair that some can be accepted in a college over another just to meet some kind of a perceived balance. It’s not fair that some immigrants have to wait in line in order to enter the US while others just walk across. It’s just not fair that a border agent is in jail while a criminal drug smuggler went free.

Add your own to the list.  It’s just not fair. Life is not fair. Congress thinks they are fair, but they are anything but.

But we do have a constitution that says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

And it’s not fair to all the citizens of the US for Congress to forget this First Amendment, or to think that their desires are not covered by the above.   That is what is not fair.

When I first heard that Michael Moore had produced a film and named it Sicko, I was stunned that he would put such an abnormal name on the movie.   But Moore is not normal anyway.   But then, I learned the movie was about the health care industry.   But then, I was also wondering whether he had included a clip in the film about AIDS, but then the film is not about specific health conditions, it’s about how to get those conditions taken care, namely how does the relationship between the patients, the doctors, the insurance companies, and the hospitals all work together for the benefit of the patient.   It’s about sicko patient care and not about homosexuals.

The officials of St. Petersburg Florida were thinking that they were going all out to protect our freedom of speech, even to the point of creating special free speech zones “FSZ,” but the courts have stated that “free speech zones” do not meet the requirement of the First Amendment. The area for FSZ is still located on the map if you want to take pictures of the area, but there are additional rules you must adhere to in order to express your constitutional right.. “…. amplified sound and/or hand held signs and banners that extend beyond the torso of the person holding them," and "signs/banners on sticks, or other rigid objects," will be relegated to a designated area "adjacent" to the actual event area.”  [1]   So, if you’ve made a sign expressing your political opinion, or a concern for their health and security, your sign cannot be any larger than your torso. If you get to the front row, that might work OK, but be careful, because the sign cannot extend beyond your torso. Just don’t sneeze and drop the sign. Put a rope around your neck holding that protest sign.

Atlanta had a similar problem last week and they had FSZ areas marked on their parade maps.

The problem is that some people believe they have the right to do their thing without any criticism or opposition whatsoever from anyone at any time.  Very sensitive people they are.
Easily offended people they are.  And that the behavior they defend is the original cause of AIDS, and a correlating sickness of what has become known as HIV, is what is sicko.

[2] Read the fourth paragraph. 

Second time around means it's really dead............for now anyway. 

"White-House backed legislation to grant legal status to millions of illegal aliens failed to get the 60 Senate votes needed to proceed to a final vote of passage late Thursday morning."

It fell 14 votes short, 46-53.

But, there will be another attempt, later, possibly after the elections, or before the elections, or after things have settled down, or after more closed door strategy sessions, or just before some other clamity, or after that.  You can bet there will be another attempt.  Some adjustments will be needed.  A new name.  A different sponsor.   A different President. 

Could someone from the republican party step up and write a simple bill that will literally force the Department of Homeland Security to build that wall and enforce the current laws. 

Then publicize that bill out to this conservative base so that we can rally behind it. 

The following are the republicans who voted against killing the bill.

Bennett (R-UT)  Craig (R-ID)  Graham (R-SC)  Gregg (R-NH)  Hagel (R-NE)  Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)   Lugar (R-IN)   Martinez (R-FL)   McCain (R-AZ)   Snowe (R-ME)   Specter (R-PA)

Sure enough, that's what an attorney of the watch dog ACLU has said.  

 "Why are they sending out six or seven agents to investigate a paper crime, and are they causing them to run in the first place through intimidation?"  Benjamin Stevenson, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union in Florida, said he finds the tactic troubling. 

Just a paper crime eh?  Hey, Mr. attorney, every law that is on the books of the country is written on just a piece of "paper" making it a law, thus could one then say that every law is just a violation of a "paper" crime.  A violation of a piece of paper.  Remarable way of thinking.  But for the ACLU, it works through intimdation of a possible threatening large expensive time consuming lawsuit against localities, against schools, churches and other groups with small pockets who don't want to be tied up in a court.  "They (the ACLU) are causing them (the small localities, the schools etc) to run (not stand up for what's right) in the first place through intimidation".  Just a piece of your own words Mr. attorney.  And I for one find your tactics troubling.  But who am I?  I don't even have pockets.

 "PANAMA CITY BEACH, Fla. (AP) - The sheriff's department has developed a remarkably effective - and controversial - way of catching illegal immigrants: Deputies in patrol cars pull up to a construction site in force, and watch and see who runs."

 Most of the articles I’ve read on the Wall Street Journal opinion page have been more favorable to conservative issues that the liberals. I could be wrong. But today, the liberal stance was as apparent as a woodpecker on a pecan. It favors the amnesty stance for reasons of votes.

“We've written often about the merits of immigration reform, and we have our own problems with parts of the Senate bill. But it's worth spending some time on the larger politics of the issue, especially for Republicans. They're caught between a passionate minority of their party--who oppose any reform that allows illegals a path to citizenship--and the larger electorate, which is more moderate and wants to solve the problem. Like Democrats on national security, this is a classic case in which pandering to the base will harm the GOP overall.”

The article further explains the importance of the Hispanic vote, and not passing the Bush, Kyl, Kennedy, McCain amnesty bill would hurt the party, not only in the 2008 elections, but for years to come and the republican party would remain the minority for decades.

“By the way, the growth in the Hispanic population will continue regardless of what happens with immigration from now on. The number of Hispanics who already hold green cards guarantees that their share of the electorate will increase over time even if Congress could seal the Southern border tomorrow. The GOP should be competing for these voters rather than driving them away with a barely concealed message of "Mexicans, go home."
Notwithstanding the small but loud segment of the GOP base preoccupied with the issue, hostility to immigration has never been a political winner.”   Read more....

This is the same stance the liberal democrats have. It’s all about votes and the future of the party, and whichever party panders to the Hispanics the best will get their votes and the party will have the power. Come on, whatever happened to virtue, doing the right thing because it’s the right thing. We are supposed to be a nation of laws. Laws that the people can respect and willingly abide by. Doing the right thing is following the laws and not changing them for the purpose of pandering to one group to guarantee their favorable votes.  A group that follows those premises cannot be trusted to honor any promises it may have made to you.

When people intentionally break the law, they need to be punished. The US has had laws on the books that deal with immigration that would have closed the borders, it would have prevented millions of illegals from illegally crossing the borders had the law been enforced. It was not. So now, we are to allow that same government to pass new laws that will enable those millions to enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that all other immigrants have to work for, to stand in line and patiently wait their turn to get those same freedoms and opportunities. Makes a lot of sense, a lot of pig sense, a lot of nonsense.

The conservative base that rose up against the amnesty bill, the base that rose up against their own party President understands that virtue and doing the right thing because it’s the right thing to do, will win the hearts and minds of Americans, when they understand why. People are looking for that kind of a leader. Someone they can trust to defend the Constitution and the country from invasion. That kind of leader we have not had for some time now, but that does not mean the country has forgotten what good moral virtuous leadership would mean. There is a yearning in the hearts of the people for that kind of leadership.

Americans appear at times to be way out of touch with the basics of many issues, but this time the vast majority of Americans, both conservative and liberal understand what is at stake, and it is not the votes of the Hispanics.

WS OpinionJournal, I thought you were better than this.

Yep, it is, and they, the liberal democrats who cannot hold their own, will be trying extra hard to shut down talk radio, and possibly even takefairness into the internet, just to be fair.   John Kerry is getting his two cents in.  Hillary and Barbara have said they think it might be a good idea to look into the Fairness Doctrine again.  Why is it only the liberal politicians who desire to do this?   They can't hold their own in the open media.  Al Franken and Air America tried, even so far as to pay the stations to broadcast their program.   Rush and company and other radio commentators don't pay the stations to put their multi-hour long talk shows on the air.  It's a free market.  Advertisers pay dearly to have their 30 second spot inserted in the middle of a thought that Rush had.   They would not pay for 30 seconds of an Al Franken rant.

Talk radio is a threat as it exposes the lies and hypocrisy of the left.   It is free speech.  The station owners are free to choose who they want to fill a particular time slot.  It's called the free market, and it is open to liberals, if they could make it work economically. 

But if it is revived again, talk radio as we know it today will disappear and neither the conservatives nor the liberals will have radio air time.  The stations will not be able to find a person capable of expressing the liberal point of view to everything that Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, Boortz and company all bring up, and thus could not then put these conservatives on the air for fear of loosing their license and one heck of a large fine.

And that's good enough for the liberals, as that's all they want, and that's all they need.  Shut the opposition up. 

"These are the people that wiped out … one of the most profound changes in the balance of the media is when the conservatives got rid of the equal time requirements and the result is that they have been able to squeeze down and squeeze out opinion of opposing views and I think its been a very important transition in the imbalance of our public eye," Kerry argued. 

Now, if the market has been open to whoever had the talent to draw a large enough audience, and the advertisers would pay, then how is that squeezing out any opposing opinion and competition?    That point goes right by me.  The imbalance in radio has happened naturally by the rules of economics.  Simple as that.  Oh, and, what about the liberals controlling an imbalance in the mainstream news outfits.  That media belongs to liberals.

It's also strange how they get away with calling unfair regulation the Fairness Doctrine.  But here it goes again. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, recently introduced in Congress a plan to revive the Fairness Doctrine. 

Can they get away with it this time?  We'll see, but these liberals are persistent in their unfairness.

Back in the days when I was a kid growing up in south Chicago, freely roaming around the neighborhood was common and just a part of life in the late 40’s and early 50’s. A train track was less than a mile away and a favorite place to walk along the rails. A large city park was a bit closer with areas of dense trees and areas of open grassy picnic grounds. A public golf course was just two blocks away, but the famed 4 lane busy Western avenue had to be crossed to get to it, and we crossed in the middle of the block running between the cars and trucks. In the winters we would climb that fence make our way over to one of their ponds, push and shovel away some snow and play a spontaneous game of hockey, no adults, no special padding, just a group of kids enjoying the contest. Dad was at work, mom was home tending to the washing and preparing the family meal for promptly at 6 pm. Life was good. It was fun.

Today, it’s different, a whole lot different. Today, it has become scary to let the kids roam. Today it has become organized to the hilt. In my present relatively quite neighborhood, I do see kids walking the streets, but there is a difference as the kids seem to be apprehensive and on guard. I remember riding the bike alone through the neighborhood and seeing mothers and grandmothers tending their gardens, picking flowers, or I just happened to catch them returning home from grocery shopping. They would wave and perhaps even say Hi. Not long ago, my wife was noticing daily a young boy about 10 walking home from the bus stop a block away. She began wondering about him, just getting curious, his name, where he lived, what grade he was in, you know just the curious things a curious grandmother may want to know.
She waved at him a couple of times. Then she broke the ice and asked him his name. The boy stopped and told her his name, but not much else could she get out of him as he seemed a bit stand offish. Then one day, my wife gave the boy a cute picture of herself laying in the snow making a snow angel, which she thought the boy might get a kick out of it, and enjoy the fact that a neighborly neighbor wanted him to have an angelic picture. Well, since then the kid seems to have found a different route home.

If you were the boys’ mother, what would you think and say to your son? Exactly. Watch out for strangers, and that woman down the street must be kooky, or some kind of a pervert. Stay away from her, and from that house. Back in the 50’s, that thought would not have entered the minds of mothers. Back in the 50’s, it was common to be given cookies and cool-aid on a hot summer day by a stranger grandmother tending to her garden. Not a thought was given to the gesture. Just a thank you.

We’ve come a long way from those idyllic days of yesterday, the days that inspired the paintings of Norman Rockwell, the days of “singing in the rain,” the days of walking the tracks. I caught many a ride on a slow moving freight train.

Today, all of the above freedoms from the 50’s are suspect and avoided as being dangerous activities. And that is sad. It’s sad that today’s kids do not have that freedom, and it may be having a direct effect on their development. Consider, one fact that is readily apparent today compared to yesterday. The preponderance of overweight and obese kids, even pre-school kids are heavier than they should be, and this has to be affecting the rest of their daily lives. No doubt about it.

What else is so different today than during the 50’s? Cars, we had cars and they were even bigger than today. Semi-trucks, and public transportation, murders, rape, robberies, house fires, sickness and diseases resulting in death, and yes, there were deadly vehicle accidents too. There was even poverty and of all things, homosexuals too. We went to public schools, and the high school was even integrated. This was Chicago. The war to end all wars was over, but the threat of communism was becoming very real. We saw the “Victory at Sea” war clips before the main feature at the theaters. Marilyn Monroe was hot, but not obscene. There were radios and televisions sets also, although the channel selections were slim, and computers were huge room filling devises only the largest corporations were experimenting with. You had to make a concerted effort to see the news broadcasts. There were public libraries, and it was there you went to do research for a school paper. Baseball was still the national pastime. Football, basketball, hockey, tennis, and golf had Ben Hogan and Byron Nelson. If you wanted to see a game, you had to go to the stadium, or read the morning paper to get the results and stats. The morning newspaper edition is where you got the news of far away places like Washington, London, Paris, Rome, or the latest news of the advance of communism coming out of Moscow. It was a cold war. If you really wanted to stay informed you bought the afternoon paper also.

The big difference came with the revolution of electronics and the resulting expanse of the availability of information, both good and bad. It has changed our society from more of a local mentality to a global knowledge of everything happening everywhere anytime. There are still the three main networks that got their television start in the 50’s, ABC, NBC, and CBS and each of these have local affiliates across every state. Then came CNN, FOX and MSNBC broadcasting news 24/7, and you can even see the actual real time events in the House or Senate. We are truly in an information explosion.

What do you want to know? Type a search word or phrase in Google, Dogpile, Yahoo or other search engine and bingo, a list appears just waiting for your click, some helpful and some irrelevant, but it sure is quicker and more convenient than going to the library and searching through volumes of newspaper microfilms. The newspapers go into greater depth on the news than does the TV ½ hour broadcasts, but it’s still lacking in something. The emphasis is on the bad and the ugly, as that seems to something that either we the people are more curious about, or the people running the stations feel we the people are more concerned about. On TV, between the entertainment hours, the various talk and discussion programs, we are given a ½ hour of local and national news, at the evening prime dinnertime and then again a re run at bedtime. And what do we see. A house fire, a car wreck, a murder investigation, a run away teen, a pedophile let out of prison two months ago caught again, a fight at the mall, and of course, the number of American soldiers killed today in Iraq, or Afghanistan, and to cap it all, we are presented with a few second sound bite from a politician or two to be fair.

During the day we are told by experts how to cook a family meal in 10 minutes, how to prevent your child from tipping over the TV set, how to, how to, and then what not to do, the latest scare of a tainted peanut butter, why you should replace those old light bulbs with the new CFL’s, which lakes have the best bass fishing, when is the best time to go fishing and how to navigate the waters and be sure to wear your life vest, and now that summer is here, you should wear that sun screen, and be careful with the sparks flying off that back yard grill. All of them expert advise from experts. Can’t we think on our own anymore?

This is more information that I want. I’m getting scarred of it all. It’s driving me crazy, all this crazy stuff happening all over the world. Leave me alone.

I’m concerned about what is going to happen to the kids in Sudan. I’m scarred that Miami may be under water in just a few years. I’m scarred. The illegal immigrants are taking over. Radical Islamics may blow up the mall. Gasoline may have to be rationed. Fathers are scarred their daughters might get raped. Mothers are scarred the toddlers might get a bruised knee at the supervised playground. Kids are scarred of a neighborly grandmother. It’s just too much. Get out of here.

Let me decide something.

Yes, I think I will. I’m turning off the news, it’s time for a Cubs game.

The thunderstorms woke me up at 3:30 this morning and we got deluged with a downpour, over 2 inches of rain in an hour. My back yard resembles a swamp.

Texas got swamped with up to 18 inches of rain overnight.

Johannesburg Gets 4 Inches of Snow, First Since 1981

And in Australia “LOCAL citrus producers have their fingers crossed waiting to see if their fruit suffered frost damage after the area experienced its coldest June day ever last week.”

And, nothing to do with the weather, but the future forecast is that “some 3.3 billion people—more than half of humanity—will be living in cities by next year, according to a U.N. report released Wednesday. By 2030, cities will be home to close to 5 billion.”

And, to top it all off, Paris Hilton is free.    And the Chicago Cubs have won 5 straight.

What are we going to do?

Why can't the politicians do something to stop all this madness?

 

It got kind of nasty in the congressional hearing room yesterday as Christie Todd Whitman testified about the air quality over ground zero.    But Christie shot back. 

“Whitman drew hisses and guffaws from the crowd when she said, "I think the City of New York did absolutely everything in its power to do right by the citizens of New York."” 

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat whose district includes the World Trade Center site, claimed the Bush administration "has continued to make false, misleading and inaccurate statements, and refused to take remedial actions, even in the face of overwhelming evidence."

“Whitman also had a testy exchange with rookie Rep. Keith Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, telling him, "I have been called a liar, even in this room today. These were not whims, these were not decisions by a politician.  Everything I said was based on what I was hearing from professionals.  My son was in Building 7, congressman, and I almost lost him,"

Whitman, who was peppered by Democrats for three hours, decried the allegations as "misinformation, innuendo and downright falsehoods."

The hearing is about the health issues facing many who responded to the attack in one way or another and were exposed to the fumes, the dust, and the debris, and are now wanting answers of why the government did not do a better job of protecting them.  

Basically her answer was "the terrorists that attacked the United States" were to blame - not the government.   Read more….

 

That’s not exactly what the democrats and the liberals wanted to hear.  Since Whitman is a political appointment of George Bush, and a former republican governor of New Jersey, it was seen by the democrats as another way to get to Bush.   You know, take every opportunity to blame Bush and the evil republicans.

Some of the many claims for ongoing health issues have been bogus.  Just people seeing an opportunity to 'get some cash out of the government'.  It's our culture.  It was the same for some of the Katrina victims(?)   Become a victim and the world is yours, and you'll have all kinds of people feeling sorry for you.  It's getting rather distressing as there are real cases of genuine victims, and then these bogus scam cases spoil the spoils making it difficult for everyone.  These scam cases need to be exposed and jailed.  Send a message. 

Christie sent a message to dems yesterday.  It was the terrorists, stupid.

 

So when you cannot clear out the dead wood in the forests, remove trees for a fire lane or even clear the brush growing at the base of those beautiful trees, what can happen?   The lake Tahoe fire that just kept raging on destroying hundreds of homes and risking lives.  But what is that to environmentalists?  

The residents who have lost their homes and had their lives turned upside down "descended on the South Tahoe Middle School auditorium Monday night, wanting to be heard in the face of their losses."   They are an angry bunch.

And if there was an object of scorn in the crowd, it was the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, a powerful bi-state environmental land use agency charged with managing the resources of the basin.

When a speaker mentioned the agency, the crowd responded with a chorus of boos. "What a joke!" yelled one man.   More....

How many of those environmentalists lost their homes?   It's just homes, that's all.  And memories.  And a dream.  And a huge investment.  And now, a big huge disruption of lives.  And beautiful trees gone forever.  All those trees and nature they wanted to protect.   Gone in the face of extreme ideology.   How many forest fires have there been because of these extreme measures to protect those forests?

Hope you don’t mind that I change the terminology a bit and call the climate change issue by another name, natural weather patterns.  There was an article out just recently by, of all people, a German and a Swiss environmental specialist scientist saying that sun spots and the changing activity of the sun is the cause of the weather patterns we’ve been experiencing. A bit cooler to a bit warmer and back to a bit cooler, back and forth and round about the weather changes. It’s amazing how it does that.  Read more on that.

A new greenhouse gas emitter has been discovered, earthworms. ” … a German study found that worms produce greenhouse gases 290 times more potent than carbon dioxide.” Now guess what all of these worms are doing. They are composting our waste as a measure to combat global warming carbon dioxide emission reductions, but now, worms are contributing to what they are supposed to be eliminating. It’s a mess trying to sort out all of this stuff.

Poison ivy is now more potent than ever because of global warming. A recent experiment conducted by Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, supports the theory. All established under controlled man created conditions. So watch out for poison ivy.

Now if you are one of the many scientists who have not climbed aboard the Gore train of believers, then you may be listed as a denier in the Society of Environmental Journalists guide book “on climate change that lists a number of publications on global warming, scientists and seven environmental groups, each with positive descriptions. Under the "Deniers, Dissenters and 'Skeptics'" category are four listings -- all negative. They suggest that these folk are venal, partisan and bad scientists, or all of the above.”

Get this right now, if you want correct information about global climate change, global warming or cooling, or changing weather patterns, then you should go to this ‘guide book’ to lead you in the right direction. I mean, they are journalists after all. If you one of those just a bit skeptical about the entire man caused climate change theory, then you are labeled. That a way to go independent journalists. Debra Saunders has brought this to light in her article today right here on Townhall.

And then there are everyday average people who feel that the entire global warming thing is a bunch of hooey. A poll has determined that 71% of just average day in day out everyday people think that temperature changes naturally. And 65 percent think that scientists' catastrophic predictions if pollution isn't curbed are 'far fetched'.   More of that

The Bottom line.  It's a bunch of hooey, but there are enough scientists out there wanting to take part in the government grants for more research and studies so that the honest opposition has little chance of their voice being spotlighted.  Follow the money, and it is in the hands of the feds who dispense that lucrative cash and also have jobs and careers at stake.  A sad affair, but that's progressive life in the twenty first century, and so we will have to adapt and live with the new and improved light bulbs and carbon offsets and untold hundreds of additional legislation intrusions.