Filed under: global-warming, Oil, Oil and Gas | Tags: Al Gore, climate, climate-change, Greenhouse gas, science
Fom TD Daily,
Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature – and not the direct result of man’s contributions.
Of course, anyone who has already read my postings on Global warming already know this. . . Now here’s more confirmation.
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: infomercial, Swing Voters
It appears now that the only people swayed by Obama’s propagandamercial — Oops, I mean the Infomercial — are people that are already in the tank for Obama.
Undecideds that were surveyed said they wanted more than a “thirty-second-soundbite.” Apparently, judging by their reactions, they were disappointed. Even though they liked Obama as a person, they just were not sold.
Now check this out and see how an Obama apologist tries to spin this,
To read two good fact checks on this video, click here and also here.
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin
I’ve already mentioned that Obama keeps on lowering the bar on what “rich” is. One day he says it is $250,000 — later he lowers it to $200,000 — and last of all, Joe Biden lowered it to $150,000. The two of them keep saying that anyone below these bars will get a tax cut. But the question is: How much more further will they lower their standard definition of “rich” before they start hurting the middle class with their tax hikes?
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: Al-Queda, Bin Laden, Terrorism, Terrorists
From NewsMax,
An al-Qaida leader has called for President George W. Bush and the Republicans to be “humiliated,” without endorsing any party in the upcoming U.S. presidential election, according to a video posted on the Internet.
“O God, humiliate Bush and his party, O Lord of the Worlds, degrade and defy him,” Abu Yahya al-Libi said at the end of sermon marking the Muslim feast of Eid al-Fitr, in a video posted on the Internet.
Alright. When you go to the polls on Tuesday remember what Al-Queda wants and then vote the opposite. 
Filed under: Democrats, Economy, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: infomercial, Obama, Taxes
That’s right! Even the Liberal CBS News network knows that Obama’s plans presented in the glamorousinfomercial released yesterday says that the numbers and costs of Obama’s plan just doesn’t add up,
Without question, the Barack Obama infomercial served as a very slick and powerful recitation of the biggest promises he’s made as a presidential candidate. But the very bigness of his ideas is the problem: he seems blind to the concept his numbers don’t add up.
Obama has already proposed a new stimulus package of $188 billion over two years. His tax cuts will cost $85 billion a year. His “army of new teachers”: $18 billion. Renewable energy: $15 billion. CBS News and various independent experts estimate Obama’s total first year spending could exceed $280 billion.
I am absolutely surprised that this is coming out of the Liberal media, saying Obama’s plan is just way to expensive. I am shocked!
Still Obama repeated his claim he can find the money to pay for every proposal.
“I’ve offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost,” he has said.
The fact is the savings Obama has identified do not cover his spending. According to a CBS News estimate, he’s around $90 billion short. The Obama campaign disputes this, saying everything including the stimulus is paid for over 10 years. But other analysts say – even presuming Obama saves money in Iraq and chops the federal budget as promised – he falls short.
Let’s break all of this down, starting with his highly suspect, and widely discredited, claim that he can find federal “spending cuts beyond the costs” of his promises. Very few independent economists believe he has identified the savings needed to offset his remarkable list of tax credits, tax cuts and spending pledges.
Fact: Even if you believe Obama intends to fix health care, most independent analysts say the cost is massive – $1.2 trillion over ten years, according to the highly respected Lewin Group. When the new Congress wakes up next year to a $1 trillion deficit, and answers the overwhelming new demands for another stimulus package, will the leadership really bite on a health care reform package that digs the deficit hole so much deeper?
And that’s just the beginning of what Obama would spend.
Wow! I knew Obama would be one hell of an expensive president, but this is just way too much. — Did I mention this was CBS News and not a Right Wing hack site? — I did? — Yes, I thought so.
Fact: The tax cuts he promises, which are mostly refundable tax credits (code for cash back), will cost $60 billion just in year one, according the National Taxpayers Union, though the Obama campaign’s own estimates in July put that figure at $130 billion.
Well, so much for the Obama tax cuts for the middle class. — But this next fact is very important,
Fact: His new promise to give businesses a $3,000 tax credit for each new job created will cost $40 billion. But economists say this credit is far more likely to benefit companies already planning to expand and will likely not be enough to help companies create new jobs or forestall layoffs.
WOAH!! HOLD IT!!! — Obama promisses to create new jobs and forestall layoffs, but his $40 billion plan is not enough, as expensive as it is? Wow!!
Next, CBS refutes Obama on health care,
Fact: Obama’s claim he will lower health care premiums by $2,500 is: 1.) guesswork, which is 2.) based on health care savings that might, in a perfect world, happen over 10 years – a fact Obama neatly glosses over.
And the next and last huge Obama cost,
Fact: Obama, when referring to savings he can make by leaving Iraq ($90 billion, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates), has spent these savings several times over, across several different promises depending on the crowd he’s addressing.
Most of the time he spends the Iraq savings in the context of the roads he wants to build; sometimes it’s for the teachers he wants to hire. Tonight, he riffed rhetorically on the savings, asking how many scholarships could be funded, or how many schools could be built. In the end though, presuming he really saves $90 billion, he can only spend it once.
Remember he also mentioned rebuilding the military ($7 billion/yr); his education initiative ($18 billion/yr); and his energy initiative ($15 billion/yr). He did not mention the $188 billion that he would spend on the brand new stimulus package he has proposed.
All I have to say is “Wow.” — My hat is off to CBS News for cutting through the crap at least once in a long time. –Also, to see another fact check on the Obama Infomercial click here.
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Sarah Palin | Tags: Pennsylvania, swing state
According to a newly released NBC/Mason Dixon, John McCain is closing the gap with Barack Obama in the “must win” state of Pennsylvania.
Obama now has 47% — McCain has 43%. — The poll has a margin of error of 4 points, so McCain is within reach.
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: election, Imfomercial, Politics
Just today Obama released his 27 minute ad that goes into what he plans to do as president. He uses a few every-day American families to help illustrate how he plans to improve your life.
Below the video of his infomercial I will list the problems with what Obama has to say:
Alright, now that you have apparently seen the Obama commercial, here are the reasons why I unimpressed with it:
- In about 4.40 minutes of the infomercial Obama says that this economy is the worst since the Great Depression. — I beg to differ. We don’t have the high unemployment level that existed at the time of the depression. Even though there is a credit problem (like there was then) it is certainly nowhere near the level the credit problem was in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Also, the poverty that contributed to the depression is nowhere near the level. — So it is almost definitely NOT the worse economy since the Great depression. — It certainly is the worse since Jimmy Carter.
- In five minutes, Obama says he will cut taxes for those making under $200,000 a year. — This is apparently Obama’s standard definition of “rich.” — But actually, he has changed this standard. Before he made this ad Obama’s “Standard” of “Rich” was higher. — On his website he said, “The Obama Plan Provides Generous Tax Cuts for Almost All American Families – and will not raise any tax rate on families making less than $250,000 per year, period!” (Click here to read) — So actually, between the “Fact Checking” of Obama’s tax plan and the making of the infomercial, Barack Obama has actually lowered his standard definition of rich by $50,000. — But wait, there is more: Just earlier after the infomercial was filmed and before it was released, the Obama-Biden campain lowered the standard yet again to $150,000. (Click here) — How many times are they going to lower the standard until they start defining $50,000 as rich?
- Next, Obama goes into a laundry list of how he will help, such as giving business tax credit providing they hire workers in the U.S. and will do the opposite with business that transport workers overseas, etc, etc, etc. — Now here comes my basic problem with his plan. Rather it is what he says (within 5.30 minutes) right out: “Now that Grows Government. It grows the economy.” — I have no problem with the latter (i.e., growing the econ) but I do have a major problem with Obama’s plan to, in his own words, to ”grow the government.” — And if you want limited government instead of a growing government, Obama’s words should worry you. According to a Rasmussen Poll, 59% of Americans agree that government is the problem, not the solution. (Click here) Apparently Obama believes it’s the solution meaning he is out of touch with the American people.
- The irony now is that within 6.30 minutes of the infomercial, Obama now says that Americans neither expect government to solve all their problems or give out a load of handouts. — Since he knows this, why does he insist of “Growing government” as I’ve mentioned in my former problem with the infomercial?
- He says we have a “right” to affordable health care. — Though there is nothing wrong with “affordable health care” in and of itself, it could hardly be called a “right.” At least not in Obama’s way of thinking of using the government to implement it. I say this because the constitution guarantees no such right, nor is it among any of the constitutional duties of the government.
- The infomercial calls Obama a “leader on the issues.” — But what has he actually lead on? What are his accomplishments? — He apparently only has one (Yes, ONLY ONE) accomplishment which only has to do with the Republic of Congo, but that’s all. (Click here to see). If Obama has virtually no accomplishment then he cannot rightfully be called a “leader on the issues.”
- Obama, near the end, emphasizes hard work to get what one wants. This is inconsistent with his “Nanny government” position in which government should solve our problems.
- Obama then says he will “listen to you when we disagree.” — Really? — Then why has Obama tried to shut up descent in the past? For example, he tried to censor NRA ads because he just didn’t like what they said about him. (Click here)
Well, these are my problems with Obama’s infomercial. Hope this helps cut through the crap.
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: election, Politics, Stupid, Uninformed, uninformed voters, Vote
Hey, I mean it. If you are not informed, you should just stay away from the voting booth because you don’t know what you are voting for.
(Video Link: Jack Stossel says uninformed voters should stay home on Nov. 4)
Filed under: Democrats, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: Ethics
Finally even the liberal media, namely Campbell Brown, sees Obama for the hypocrite he is now admiting he has broken his promise on campaign finance,
Without question, Obama has set the bar at new height with a truly staggering sum of cash. And that is why as we approach this November, it is worth reminding ourselves what Barack Obama said last November.
One year ago, he made a promise. He pledged to accept public financing and to work with the Republican nominee to ensure that they both operated within those limits.
Then it became clear to Sen. Obama and his campaign that he was going to be able to raise on his own far more cash than he would get with public financing. So Obama went back on his word.
It is a real breath of fresh air to see the liberal media (or at least one person in said media) calling out Obama and seeing him for what he is. – Campbell Brown goes into Obama’s excuses as to why he broke his campaign finance promise,
He broke his promise and he explained it by arguing that the system is broken and that Republicans know how to work the system to their advantage. He argued he would need all that cash to fight the ruthless attacks of 527s, those independent groups like the Swift Boat Veterans. It’s funny though, those attacks never really materialized.
The Washington Post pointed out recently that the bad economy has meant a cash shortage among the 527s and that this election year they have been far less influential.
Barry accepted the money because he wanted to fight 527 ads ’cause he didn’t want to be “swift boated” like John Kerry in 2004. . .
Hell, Barack, since these attacks never happened then the least you can do is give it all back. . . . It was unethical enough that you broke your promise, but you could have vindicated yourself to an extent by refunding the dinero.
The courageous among Obama’s own supporters concede this decision was really made for one reason, simply because it was to Obama’s financial advantage.
On this issue today, former Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, an Obama supporter, writes in The New York Post, “a hypocrite is a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue — who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings. And that, it seems to me, is what we are doing now.”
Thanks Bob. Just for your honesty you deserve to be reelected. — Campbell Brown concludes by rightfully saying
For this last week, Sen. Obama will be rolling in dough. His commercials, his get-out-the-vote effort will, as the pundits have said, dwarf the McCain campaign’s final push. But in fairness, you have to admit, he is getting there in part on a broken promise.
Well said, Ms. Brown. — I agree.
Filed under: Democrats, Economy, McCain, Media Bias, Obama, Republicans, Sarah Palin | Tags: Joe Biden, rich, Taxes
All through the campaign the Obama-Biden campaign had a standard definition of “rich” as those who earn $250,000 a year saying only those who earned that amount (or more) would be the ones getting tax raises.
Apparently now the Obama-Biden campaign is now lowering their standard definition of rich to those earning $150,000 a year. — Until now, this was considered middle class by Obama.
Could this be a sign that Obama will in fact raise taxes on, not only the rich, but also the middle class as well as the poor? –
MArk my words, if the Obama campaign is willing to lower its standard of definition of “rich” by $100,000, then there is no reason why it shouldn’t do the same again.
I really like McCain’s take on this,
During a rally in Hershey, Pa., McCain told supporters the gaffe revealed the Democrats’ true tax-and-spend intentions.
“It’s interesting how their definition of ‘rich’ has a way of creeping down,” McCain said.
“Senator Obama has made a lot of promises. First, he said people making less than $250,000 would benefit from his plan.
“Then, this weekend, he announced in an ad that if you’re a family making less than $200,000 you’ll benefit – but yesterday right here in Pennsylvania, Senator Biden said tax relief should only go to ‘middle-class people’ – people making under $150,000 a year.
“At this rate, it won’t be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just $42,000 a year should get a tax increase.
