A MAN accused of breaking into his neighbour's house and stabbing two people - killing one of them - is having neo-Nazi tattoos on his face covered up for his murder trial.
Mark Penn, who worked as Hillary Clinton's pollster during her 2008 run for president, reportedly received $5.97 million from $787 billion stimulus package so he could preserve three jobs at his PR firm.
Petraeus Predicts 'Slow' Progress in Afghanistan
Top U.S. general tells Congress that success of Afghan war strategy will be slower than 2007 Iraq surge
EPA 'Command-and-Control' Warning
White House warns Congress that allowing EPA to regulate greenhouse gases could hurt business
U.S. Citizens Held in Pakistan
Five arrested in anti-terror sweep possibly related to disappearance of five Americans in D.C.
New identity and new life for killer
A MAN who slashed a stranger's throat has changed his name "to start life with a clean slate".
Swimming body to investigate coach
SWIMMING Australia has appointed barrister to investigate "misconduct" claims against Olympic head coach Alan Thompson.
DOCS errors and tragic cover-up
DOCS never met Dean Shillingsworth. Despite 27 harm reports, they never learned to spell his name and now they have covered up a report into his deat
100-year-old sex offender 'still a threat'
A PAEDOPHILE jailed for raping two sisters has been released from prison and says he is too old to change and won't conform.
=== Journalists Corner ===
Barbara's Big 10!
From Fox's own Glenn Beck to the "Lady" America's gone Gaga over!
===
Spend, Spend, Spend!
Obama and the Dems claim it's the only way to get America working, but how does John Q. Public feel about the plan's price tag?
===
Gitmo's Fmr. Chief Prosecutor
He took a stand against terror trials in New York and got fired for disagreeing with the administration! Morris Davis speaks out.
===
Guest: Newt Gingrich
Lowering taxes, interest rates and debt - Will the GOP's alternative to Obama's job plan work?
=== Comments ===
Abbott’s front bench will pull no punches
Piers Akerman
NEW Opposition Leader Tony Abbott wants to debate Kevin Rudd on the topic Rudd claims is the greatest moral issue of our time - global warming - but Rudd won’t be in it. - I gave Turnbull every opportunity and he walked away from me when he broke his promise to me that he would only support a worthwhile scheme, not a meaningless tax. I had thought his politics was clever while he negotiated with Rudd because we were finally seeing how Rudd was willing to compromise on the issue he labeled as the greatest moral challenge. Rudd did some dumb politics thing of delaying announcing his intentions so as to fracture the conservative position .. in that way we owe Rudd a debt for allowing the conservatives to clear the decks of Turnbull.
It is ironic that Rudd may choose to not take a double disolution now that he has destroyed Turnbull. Rudd chose to not take the tax but play politics, and Rudd lost both the double dissolution option and the tax grab. If Rudd dissolves parliament he will lose his senate gains from the last election .. and the next election. If Rudd doesn't go early he will lose as the bills come in. People might have thought Turnbull's petulance entertaining .. wait as Rudd crumbles publicly. - ed
===
President Obama Continues to Fall in the Polls
By Bill O'Reilly
The Gallup company has been polling presidential approval ratings since 1938, and this week its poll says just 47 percent of Americans approve of President Obama's job performance. That is the lowest number ever recorded for any president at this point in his term.
Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs says the White House is not concerned with daily tracking polls as they are vague.
Maybe, but last March Mr. Obama's job approval rating stood at 62 percent, so he has obviously lost a lot of ground.
By comparison, after approximately 11 months, Bill Clinton's job approval rating was 52 percent, Bush the elder 71 percent and Richard Nixon 59 percent. Bush the younger had a whopping 86 percent approval rating, but that was skewed by the 9/11 attack.
Now the reason President Obama is falling in the polls is because many Americans are uneasy with his leadership. It's not one thing, but when you combine Afghanistan with the health care chaos with high unemployment and a string of uninspired speeches, it's not hard to see why some Americans have lost confidence in Mr. Obama.
But with three years remaining in his term, the president has plenty of time to make a comeback, and indeed he gained some support for his Afghanistan policy after his speech at West Point last week. That means that many Americans still have an open mind about Barack Obama, and that's a good thing. They are watching and evaluating him based on performance, not ideology.
As we reported Monday night, I gave President Obama a "B" on jobs, a "C" on Afghanistan and a "D" on health care when asked by "Good Morning America" to grade the president. Some of you disagreed.
But for now the president is having a pretty hard time, and he needs to take a hard look at his liberal agenda because the country is moving to the right.
A new study by uber-Democrat James Carville says that 45 percent of Americans now call themselves conservatives. If President Obama continues to govern to the left and the economy continues to be shaky, he will be a one-term guy.
I believe he'd have a much better chance at success if he moved to the center.
===
STAY CLASSY, ALP
Tim Blair
Labor celebrates Bob Hawke’s 80th birthday by gawping at “John Howard” in a bikini:
Kevin Rudd was in the audience. Hopefully he’ll remember it.
UPDATE. Another shot from Labor’s laugh-in:
===
WORKERS RUN FOR THEIR LIVES
Tim Blair
He sounds scared:
Kevin Rudd has accused Tony Abbott of unleashing ‘’the most hardline, right-wing people in the country’’ onto the workers …
===
CLIMATE JUSTICE FAIL
Tim Blair
After vowing to rejoin the fast as soon as possible, climate hunger-monger Michael Morphett up and quits:
Just a quick blog to officially note that Michael Morphett ended his Climate Justice Fast! yesterday, after 32 days.Meanwhile, rival food activist campaign Climate Justice Feast! boldly marches on. Last night, at a small gathering to mark Steve Price’s farewell from 2UE, my Climate Justice Calorie Count included calamari, beef carpaccio and rack of lamb. Joe Hockey had veal. And in the US, fellow Diner for Justice Mr Bingley had half a cow, man:
The fight for justice continues.
===
SVINES
Tim Blair
Carbon quotas are a svindel!
===
Colder, hotter, whatever
Andrew Bolt
The ABC demonstrates a perfect example of confirmation bias:
Africa correspondent Andrew Geoghegan travelled to the southern African country of Lesotho, where the locals claim be to already suffering from climate change…(Thanks to reader Demetrios.)
ANDREW GEOGHEGAN: Something odd is happening in the mountain kingdom of Lesotho. It hasn’t stopped raining for the past week and the temperature has plunged towards freezing. This may be normal at the height of winter, but this is summer…
THABISO METLA: This climate has changed because in the past it was no longer cold at this time. It is cold yet it is summer...
PRINCE SEEISO SEEISO: The summers, when they do come, they’re very dry, extremely dry. The temperatures have risen I think on average three, four, five degrees. So I mean there is a definite visible change in our weather patterns.”
===
Which warming is this gauge actually measuring?
Andrew Bolt
Boy on a Bike was wondering why the temperature at Cape Naturaliste, in WA, was rising so much:
And then he noticed where the temperature gauge was - right next to a stretch of baking asphalt:
He adds:
If memory serves me correctly, when I visited this place back in the 1980s, this was a gravel road - not tarmac.Further north, JoNova can’t find much warming at other sites.
===
141 experts challenge the UN: prove man is warming the world
Andrew Bolt
From an open letter to the United Nations Secretary General:
We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.Australia’s Professor Cliff Ollier explains why the models on sea level rises are junk:
Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:The qualifications of the signatories are impressive. Each one of them has better formal qualifications in the field than do Al Gore, Rajendra Pachauri, Nicholas Stern or Tim Flannery.
Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.
===
Climategate: Gore falsifies the record
Andrew Bolt
Al Gore has studied the Climategate emails with his typically rigorous eye and dismissed them as mere piffle:
Q: How damaging to your argument was the disclosure of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University?And in case you think that was a mere slip of the tongue:
A: To paraphrase Shakespeare, it’s sound and fury signifying nothing. I haven’t read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old. These private exchanges between these scientists do not in any way cause any question about the scientific consensus.
Q: There is a sense in these e-mails, though, that data was hidden and hoarded, which is the opposite of the case you make [in your book] about having an open and fair debate.In fact, thrice denied:
A: I think it’s been taken wildly out of context. The discussion you’re referring to was about two papers that two of these scientists felt shouldn’t be accepted as part of the IPCC report. Both of them, in fact, were included, referenced, and discussed. So an e-mail exchange more than 10 years ago including somebody’s opinion that a particular study isn’t any good is one thing, but the fact that the study ended up being included and discussed anyway is a more powerful comment on what the result of the scientific process really is.
These people are examining what they can or should do to deal with the P.R. dimensions of this, but where the scientific consensus is concerned, it’s completely unchanged. What we’re seeing is a set of changes worldwide that just make this discussion over 10-year-old e-mails kind of silly.In fact, as Watts Up With That shows, one Climategate email was from just two months ago. The most recent was sent on November 12 - just a month ago. The emails which have Tom Wigley seeming (to me) to choke on the deceit are all from this year. Phil Jones’ infamous email urging other Climategate scientists to delete emails is from last year.
How closely did Gore read these emails? Did he actually read any at all? Was he lying or just terribly mistaken? What else has he got wrong?
(Thanks to readers Sinclair and Peter.)
UPDATE
Reader Barry:
Actually the e-mail archives are named by Unix timestamp, ranging from Thu, 07 Mar 1996 14:41:07 GMT through to Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:17:44 GMT. This is a strong indicator they are extracted from an enterprise archive, probably by the FOIA Compliance Officer and not hacked from individual’s workstations.
===
Leave my children alone, Hamilton
Andrew Bolt
This is seriously creepy. Is Green extremist Clive Hamilton now trying to turn my children against me - and by warning them I’m a corrupt killer?
Hi there,There is something sick about a man who, having failed to convince the adults, feels his best option is to terrify their children.
There’s something you need to know about your father.
Your dad’s job is to try to stop the government making laws to reduce Australia’s carbon pollution. He is paid a lot of money to do that by big companies who do not want to own up to the fact that their pollution is changing the world’s climate in very harmful ways.
Because of their pollution, lots of people, mostly poor people, are likely to die. They will die from floods, from diseases like dengue fever, and from starvation when their crops won’t grow anymore.
The big companies are putting their profits before the lives of people. And your dad is helping them.
===
Happy Christmas from Rolf
Andrew Bolt
You get all set to scoff, and then you think, well, it’s Rolf - and if someone has to have the Christmas number one, why not him?
ROLF Harris is shooting for the coveted British Christmas No. 1 with a song about his childhood celebrations in Australia.Twenty years of work? Can’t say it shows. Indeed, the melody at “every single day” suggests exactly where the inspiration really came from.
Christmas In The Sun captures the idiosyncracies of the Down Under silly season, right down to picnic lunch under the jacaranda trees and, “Dad’s got a cold one from the fridge to help him brave the barbecue”.
Harris said the song took 20 years to finish ...
===
Labor helps itself to your millions
Andrew Bolt
Kevin Rudd is stimulating votes with your cash:
LABOR electorates have received the lion’s share of funding for community jobs-boosting projects from the Rudd Government’s ‘’jobs fund’’, a Herald analysis has found.===
Of $132 million in one-off grants so far, $109 million can be traced to specific locations. Of this, $77 million, or 71 per cent, has gone to projects in Labor-held electorates. Liberal seats received $18 million, or 17 per cent, despite Liberal MPs holding 36 per cent of seats in Parliament.
Even when they party, they hate
Andrew Bolt
Labor parties at Bob Hawke’s 80th birthday bash not only by mocking John Howard, but using the flag - upside down - to rub it in. Sexist and meanspirited - ah, yes, the moral Left at play.
Qeustion: would Howard’s 80th birthday party feature bikini babes in Kevin Rudd masks?
===
One out of 35 ain’t bad
Andrew Bolt
Add it to all the other sounded-good-at-the-time promises - FuelWatch, Grocery Watch, an ETS by next year, taking Japan to court over whaling, taking the Iranian president to the International Criminal Court, taking over hospitals, cutting spending.... need I go on?
KEVIN Rudd’s promise to build 35 GP super clinics across the nation appears to be in tatters, with only one completed centre in operation after two years of Labor government.===
The Australian can reveal that despite the Prime Minister’s claims that six more centres are partially complete, at least two are offering little more than conventional GP services…
Mr Rudd campaigned for the 2007 election promising to spend $275 million on super clinics—medical one-stop shops in areas struggling with inadequate medical services.
We’re cooler than the IPCC predicted
Andrew Bolt
Dr. Lucia Liljegren, an atmospheric researcher with the Ames Laboratory at Iowa State University, checks what the IPCC models claimed would happen to our climate against what actually did. She finds that we’re cooler than even the IPCC claimed would be the best-case scenario (the lower of the thin red lines):
What is interesting is that the earths observed surface temperatures fall mostly below the multi-model mean and barely penetrate the “best estimate” even during the 2007 El Nino. It is possible to discuss this quantitatively, but I won’t here.INCIDENTALLY, I recently attended a closed-session presentation by a leading climate alarmist who claimed global temperatures were at or above the IPCC projections. I pointed out that his slide’s data ended at 2005, rather than 2009, and asked him why. Check the above graphic (the link will take you to an enlargement) and you may have your answer. The rules of the meeting forbid my identifying the person responsible.
Currently, the earth’s surface temperature fall near the -1SD value for multi-model mean projections of this value.
So, for now we can see that despite the El Nino, the earth’s annual average temperatures fall below the projected trend. This El Nino may last, and we may finally bust through the multi-model mean trend in some definitive way. Or, El Nino may be week, end in March dive. If so, the annual average temperatures may do no more than graze the mean projected values.
===
Prediction made, and one year will settle it
Andrew Bolt
Note down the prediction:
David Jones, the head of climate analysis at the Bureau of Meteorology, said yesterday that claims by sceptics the planet was cooling were wrong… Dr Jones said an El Nino event in the Pacific Ocean - linked to hotter, drier conditions in Australia - would have an effect on the world’s climate next year. ‘’There is a significant probability next year will be the globe’s warmest year on record.’’Jones has claimed that even eight years of no cooling was too short a period to make any conclusion about global warming. But one year of warming, caused by an unusual El Nino - well, that’s plenty for this alarmist now.
===
If Hansen can’t predict our past…Andrew Bolt
Warming alarmist Bob Reiss reports that NASA’s James Hansen, the Godfather of Global Warming and Al Gore’s advisor, has mades another terrifying prediction:
I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress. I went over to the window with him and looked out on Broadway in New York City and said, “If what you’re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?” He looked for a while and was quiet and didn’t say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, “Well, there will be more traffic.” I, of course, didn’t think he heard the question right. Then he explained, “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.” Then he said, “There will be more police cars.” Why? “Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.”So when was this prediction of doom-in-20-years made?
Twenty years ago.
New York’s weather:
The National Weather Service was expecting colder-than-normal temperatures in the Midwest, Northeast and Mid-Atlantic next week, with the parts of the Northeast hardest hit.New York’s crime:
The Washington Post reported in late July that the crime rate fell sharply in most American cities during the first six months of 2009. Rates were down for homicide, robbery, and sexual assault… (M)ost cities, from Boston, New York, Charlotte, and Atlanta in the east to Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles in the west, reported dramatically lower homicide rates, with declines ranging from 11 percent to an astonishing 67 percent.(Thanks to reader Baa Humbug.)
===
WARMING HANGED
Tim Blair
The reporter formerly known as Ben Cubby Environment is alarmed by Gaia lynching:
This week I received an unsigned letter containing a black and white photograph of a figure hanging from a lamp post. On the back was written the word “Climategate”.Give me a break, Ben Cubby Environment. A few letters amount to an “unprecedented” info war on the issue of climate change? Perhaps you’re forgetting the kilotons of pro-warmy propaganda emitted every day by various awareness-raising groups, beginning with the UN. BCE continues:
The letter is one of many being sent to scientists, politicians and journalists as part of an unprecedented information war being waged around the science of climate change.
‘’Climategate’’ refers to the scandal in which a series of emails were stolen from the University of East Anglia and published as supposed proof that the science underpinning climate change action is based on fraud. A minority of people still believe the email affair is being hushed up by newspapers.He had to explain what “Climategate” meant because his readers are unfamiliar with the term.
UPDATE. Age readers aren’t buying it: “When it comes to dishonest representation of the climate debate, you don’t get more bare-faced than this piece.”
UPDATE II. Sarah Palin: “Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.” (Via Nicole)
UPDATE III. The Gore Effect hits CNN:
Al Gore warned CNN viewers Wednesday about imminent planetary doom at the hands of his favorite bogeyman global warming just seconds before Kiran Chetry reported the “monster storm paralyzing travel in more than a dozen states” with “winter still two weeks away.”===
Climategate: even Age readers aren’t buying the reporters’ excuses
Andrew Bolt
Climategate can’t be wished away. Consumer resistance to the “nothing to worry about, folks” line at The Age. The responses also suggest the readers have done more research than the writer.
===
Let the peasants walk
Andrew Bolt
The limousine radicals arrive at the Copenhagen talks to reach a deal to make the rest of us cut the gases they’ve just blown driving in. Amid all their limos, the free but empty bus they refused to take instead.
===
Climategate: ordering a better scare for Australia
Andrew Bolt
CSIRO alarmist Barrie Pittock tells off Climategate scientist Mike Hulme of the University of East Anglia for not presenting material that’s scary enough for green groups:
I would be very concerned if the material comes out under WWF auspices in a way that can be interpreted as saying that “even a greenie group like WWF” thinks large areas of the world will have negligible climate change. But that is where your 95% confidence limit leads.Hulme agrees to help, up to a point, to hide some doubts:
Sorry to be critical, but better now than later!…
Dr A. Barrie Pittock
Post-Retirement Fellow*, Climate Impact Group
CSIRO Atmospheric Research
My reason for introducing the idea of only showing changes in T and P that *exceed* some level of ‘natural’ variability was a pedagogic one, rather than a formal statistical one (I concede that using ‘95% confidence’ terminology in the WWF leaflet is misleading and will drop this). And the pedagogic role of this type of visual display is to bring home to people that (some, much or all of) GCM simulated changes in mean seasonal precip. for some regions do *not* amount to anything very large in relation to what may happen in the future to precip. anyway…Pittock then explains why he’s so keen to “improve” this material - and also illustrates just how close green groups are to the CSIRO (whose climate change risk expert Penny Whetton is married to a Greens politician):
The point behind all this is to emphasise that precip. changes are less well-defined than temp. changes *and* that we should be thinking of adaptation to *present* levels of precip. variability, rather than getting hung up on the problems of predicting future precip. levels. This pedagogic thinking is hard to communicate in a short WWF brochure.
Your concern about my message is well taken, however, and I intend to remove any reference to 95% confidence levels, to re-word the text to indicate that we are plotting precip. changes only ‘where they are large relative to natural variability’, and to reduce my threshold to the 1 sigma level of HadCM2 control variability (e.g. this has the effect of showing precip. changes for the majority of Australia even in the B1 scenario).
But I do not intend to abandon the concept. I think it important - even for Greenie groups - to present sober assessments of magnitudes of change. Thus making it clear that future changes in T are better defined that future changes in P, and also to point out that future emissions (and therefore climate change) may be as low as the B1 scenario (is B1 climate change negligible? I almost think so), whilst also being possibly as high as A2 is I think very important.
The alternative is to think that such a more subtle presentation is too sophisticated for WWF. But I think (hope) not.
Thanks again Barrie for forcing me to think through this again.
I should perhaps explain my delicate position in all this. As a retired CSIRO person I have somewhat more independence than before, and perhaps a reduced sense of vested interest in CSIRO, but I am still closely in touch and supportive of what CAR is doing. Also, I have a son who is now a leading staff member of WWF in Australia and who is naturally well informed on climate change issues. Moreover, Michael Rae, who is their local climate change staffer, is a member of the CSIRO sector advisory committee (along with some industry people as well) and well known to me. So I anticipated questions from WWF Australia, and from the media later when the scenarios are released...Hulme then alerts another colleague to this exchange, under an interesting header, as an example of the massaging of their message to fit an audience:
From: Mike HulmeWord sure had got around the green traps about how helpful the University of East Anglia was prepared to be to green campaigners. Here is an email from green entrepreneur Adam Markham to Hulme, asking for “beefed up” scares and directing him to Pittock’s more alarming scenarios, as and example of what WWF likes:
To: Jennifer F Crossley
Subject: Re: masking of WWF maps
... it illustrates nicely the nuances of presenting climate scenarios in different Fora
From: Adam Markham(Thanks to reader Peter.)
To: m.hulme@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, n.sheard@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: WWF Australia
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:43:09 -0400
Cc: mrae@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Hi Mike,
I’m sure you will get some comments direct from Mike Rae in WWF Australia, but I wanted to pass on the gist of what they’ve said to me so far.
They are worried that this may present a slightly more conservative approach to the risks than they are hearing from CSIRO. In particular, they would like to see the section on variability and extreme events beefed up if possible. They regard an increased likelihood of even 50% of drought or extreme weather as a significant risk. Drought is also a particularly importnat issue for Australia, as are tropical storms.
I guess the bottom line is that if they are going to go with a big public splash on this they need something that will get good support from CSIRO scientists (who will certainly be asked to comment by the press). One paper they referred me to, which you probably know well is: “The Question of Significance” by Barrie in Nature Vol 397, 25 Feb 1999, p 657
Let me know what you think. Adam
UPDATE
Reader Grant:===
There is an explosive admission in this exchange that needs to be drawn out and it is to do with the following comment:Your concern about my message is well taken, however, and I intend to remove any reference to 95% confidence levels, to re-word the text to indicate that we are plotting precip. changes only ‘where they are large relative to natural variability’, and to reduce my threshold to the 1 sigma level of HadCM2 control variability (e.g. this has the effect of showing precip. changes for the majority of Australia even in the B1 scenarioIn statistics this is important because any 1st year undergrad is told that the scientific approach for testing for significance is a 2-sigma test; ie the 95% confidence interval. Results that are significant at no more than 1-sigma significant are as good as meaningless in the sense that they are no different to sheer randomness and would be laughed all the way out of a 1st year course on stats.
Europol warns: ETS ruined by crooks
Andrew Bolt
Global warming is the ultimate honey pot for scam merchants . In fact, Europol - the European Union’s police organisation - says Europe’s own emissions trading scheme has been hopelessly riddled with corruption:
The European Union (EU) Emission Trading System (ETS) has been the victim of fraudulent traders in the past 18 months. This resulted in losses of approximately 5 billion euros for several national tax revenues. It is estimated that in some countries, up to 90% of the whole market volume was caused by fraudulent activities…I’m sure Kevin Rudd’s ETS will be better. Really. I think. No worries. Of course.
Mr. Wainwright, Director of Europol, says “These criminal activities endanger the credibility of the European Union Emission Trading System and lead to the loss of significant tax revenue for governments...”
===
Climategate: but why these debates only now?
Andrew Bolt
CNN holds another debate of the kind the ABC finds almost impossible - and which we should have been holding for years before this Copenhagen summit.
===
Green alarmists are now costing us business
Andrew Bolt
Warming hysteria is already costing Victoria serious money - and costing the world’s poor the cheap power they need:
THE Brumby Government has shelved its controversial plans to allow the mining and export of Victorian brown coal to India, amid fears of a voter backlash.Our future is now in the hands of idiots.
Three months after plans to allow Melbourne-based Exergen to launch a $1.5 billion coal export scheme were revealed, Energy Minister Peter Batchelor has now ruled it out…
Education Minister Bronwyn Pike and Housing Minister Richard Wynne, who both face a growing green vote in their inner-suburban electorates, are believed to be among those cabinet members to have shown interest in the issue recently. The Age’s revelations, particularly about the proposal to export coal to India, prompted claims that the state was putting commercial opportunity ahead of its responsibility to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
The cabinet documents acknowledged that community concerns could be raised by the export of brown coal, a relatively ‘’dirty’’ fuel that emits far more greenhouse emissions to generate power than most alternatives.
===
Napoleon Rudd advances on Copenhagen
Andrew Bolt
Just sending over the huge Australian contingent to Copenhagen would have half-killed the planet. Kevin Rudd, the megalomaniac, has taken over an official team of 114 summitteers - while Britain has made do with 71.
No wonder Rudd gravy train is so long, when its passengers include:
- 11 personal staffTo see which Australians are oinking at the Copenhagen smorgasboard, read on and marvel:
- a personal photographer
- an ‘Ambassador for Climate Change’ AND a “Special Envoy for Climate Change” (what’s the difference?)
- a ‘Political Advisor’ from the Department of Climate Change! ...
- 7 media advisors
===
Rudd’s armada
Andrew Bolt
If Kevin Rudd can’t even stop boats, how can we trust him to stop global warming?
UNAUTHORISED boat arrivals in Australia have hit 2500 people in the last year alone with confirmation of another interception last night near Christmas Island.===
It’s the largest influx of asylum-seekers since the Howard Government introduced controversial offshore processing under the Pacific Solution ...
Gaia whispers in Wong’s earth: “Save the planet!”
Andrew Bolt
Climate Change Minister Penny Wong gets her advice straight from Gaia. Just check the official Australian delegation at Copenhagen:
Ms. Gaia Puleston
Political Adviser
Department of Climate Change
No comments:
Post a Comment