Tag Archives: mexico

Venezuela, more deadly than Iraq

CARACAS, Venezuela — Some here joke that they might be safer if they lived in Baghdad. The numbers bear them out. In Iraq, a country with about the same population as Venezuela, there were 4,644 civilian deaths from violence in 2009, according to Iraq Body Count; in Venezuela that year, the number of murders climbed above 16,000. Even Mexico’s infamous drug war has claimed fewer lives. Venezuelans have absorbed such grim statistics for years. Those with means have hidden their homes behind walls and hired foreign security experts to advise them on how to avoid kidnappings and killings. And rich and poor alike have resigned themselves to living with a murder rate that the opposition says remains low on the list of the government’s priorities. Then a front-page photograph in a leading independent newspaper — and the government’s reaction — shocked the nation, and rekindled public debate over violent crime. The photo in the paper, El Nacional, is unquestionably gory. It shows a dozen homicide victims strewn about the city’s largest morgue, just a sample of an unusually anarchic two-day stretch in this already perilous place. While many Venezuelans saw the picture as a sober reminder of their vulnerability and a chance to effect change, the government took a different stand. A court ordered the paper to stop publishing images of violence, as if that would quiet growing questions about why the government — despite proclaiming a revolution that heralds socialist values — has been unable to close the dangerous gap between rich and poor and make the country’s streets safer. “Forget the hundreds of children who die from stray bullets, or the kids who go through the horror of seeing their parents or older siblings killed before their eyes,” said Teodoro Petkoff, the editor of another newspaper here, mocking the court’s decision in a front-page editorial. “Their problem is the photograph.” Venezuela is struggling with a decade-long surge in homicides, with about 118,541 since President Hugo Ch

Headless, Mutilated Bodies Hung From Mexico Bridge

Four decapitated and mutilated corpses were strung from a bridge in a popular getaway outside the Mexican capital Sunday, the latest atrocity as the country battles an escalating drug war. The bodies of the four young men were discovered early on Sunday, hung upside down by their feet from a bridge near a wealthy area of Cuernavaca, a leafy city about an hour outside Mexico City, where many of the nation's elite own homes. The victims' genitals, index fingers and heads had been cut off, according to a statement from the attorney general's office in Morelos state, which includes Cuernavaca. Their heads and genitals were found nearby, along with a handmade sign, the statement said. “This will happen to everyone that helps the traitor Edgar Valdes,” the placard read, referring to a leading drug capo whose real name is Edgar Valdez. It was signed C.P.S., the initials for the South Pacific Cartel, a relatively new drug gang that has claimed responsibility for other gruesome killings. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38808191/ns/world_news-americas/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11054730 added by: ibrake4rappers13

Randi Rhodes: Senate Dem Hopeful Alvin Greene Facing Obscenity Charges ‘Still Better than Jim DeMint’

While lefties are foaming at the mouth over what Republican Senate candidates like Sharon Angle and Rand Paul have to say, they’re not quite willing to publicly embrace or defend the antics of their own duly elected nominee, South Carolina U.S. Senate Democratic nominee Alvin Greene. That is, they weren’t until now.  On the Aug. 17 broadcast of her radio show , Randi Rhodes went to bat for Greene. According to Rhodes, the indiscretions that brought Greene indictments, in which he allegedly showed obscene photos to a University of South Carolina student and then talked about going to her dorm room, weren’t really that bad. Although it’s not clear if Rhodes was being serious, and it’s difficult to tell, she claimed he was “sharing a wonderful moment of pornography” with this student and bewildered why such an approach warranted criminal charges. “Let me tell you – you know my candidate for Senate in South Carolina is Alvin Greene,” Rhodes said. “I left off where he was supposedly indicted for you know sharing a wonderful moment of pornography with a girl who was over 18 in a college library – in a college library where he had attended college by the way, so he still has his ID card to get on the campus, so. I don’t know what law he broke, but apparently they say he did and they indicted him. And so the local TV went over to his house to see what his comments were about the indictment.” Rhodes then played that infamous clip of Greene howling at a reporter from North Carolina station WCNC. And her conclusion – even with this abnormal behavior from an individual that represents the Democratic Party for the South Carolina, he’s still better than the incumbent, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. and lamented the idea he has been unable to raise any money. “He’s still better than Jim DeMint,” Rhodes said. “I don’t give a rat’s – that’s why he’s my candidate. He’s still better than Jim DeMint, OK? A guy that’s howling in his house, ‘Nooooooo, goooooooo,’ is still better than Jim DeMint. And that’s why Alvin Greene will always be my candidate for senator from South Carolina. I love this guy. I think – he’s fabulous. I mean, if they can have the nut bags they have, why can’t I have Alvin Greene? And why aren’t we supporting him? I think the guy has raised $1,000 since this whole thing started.” But Rhodes used those peculiar circumstances surrounding Greene, which have likely hindered this hopeful from raising money to level attacks against Koch Industries and NewsCorp for giving money to the Republican Governors Association, chaired by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. “That’s wrong. You know you got the Koch Industries people give a million dollars Haley Barbour in Mississippi,” Rhodes protested. “[Y]ou know oil and chemicals – the Koch family, Americans For Prosperity, the Koch family, the fake grassroots Tea Party, the Koch family – giving a million dollars to Haley Barbour. Fox News gave a million dollars, News Corp. to Haley Barbour!”

Read this article:
Randi Rhodes: Senate Dem Hopeful Alvin Greene Facing Obscenity Charges ‘Still Better than Jim DeMint’

Media Use Crazy Weather to Hype Global Warming, Despite Admissions Weather Isn’t Climate

Last winter, as blizzard snowfalls piled up into several feet in the nation’s capital, conservatives mocked global warming alarmists for trying to link weather incidents to global warming. But as summer heat waves, volcanoes and sinkholes have appeared recently, climate alarmists proved they missed the point . A top Obama administration scientist attacked global warming skeptics during the winter by pointing out that “weather is not the same thing as climate.” ABC’s Bill Blakemore argued the same thing in order to defend the existence of manmade global warming on Jan. 8, 2010. But Associated Press, USA Today , The New York Times and The Washington Post have all promoted a connection between the extreme heat and weather around the world this summer and global warming. One CNN host asked if the events were the “apocalypse” or global warming. The Huffington Post proposed naming hurricanes and other disasters after climate change “deniers.” “Floods, fires, melting ice and feverish heat: From smoke-choked Moscow to water-soaked Iowa and the High Arctic, the planet seems to be having a midsummer breakdown. It’s not just a portent of things to come, scientists say, but a sign of troubling climate change already under way,” the AP wrote, sounding more like Al Gore than an objective news agency. AP cited the World Meteorological Organization, NASA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) saying that “extremes” were expected in a warming scenario. But its report didn’t include any other viewpoints or propose other possible reasons for the weather events. And it failed to point out the scandals connected to IPCC, NASA and the warming movement as a whole. The 2009 ClimateGate scandal and subsequent scandals undermined the very credibility of the climate alarmist movement , but were underreported by the network news media. AP left out meteorologists who explained some of those events based on jet stream activity. According to New Scientist magazine, the jet stream is being blocked right now and has consequently slowed down. Meteorologists say that the jet stream’s slower movements are responsible for the deadly fires in Russia, the floods in Pakistan and other rare weather events. “The unusual weather in the US and Canada last month also has a similar case,” New Scientist wrote. Discover Magazine expounded on the New Scientist article saying “this happens from time to time, and it sets the stage for extreme conditions when weather systems hover over the same area.” Despite other explanations and viewpoints, The New York Times also linked weather to climate saying, “the collective answer of the scientific community [whether global warming is causing more weather extremes]” is “probably.” Like the Times, many news outlets promoted the connection between warming and weather, but were careful to briefly note that individual weather events cannot be proven to have been caused by global warming. Out of the Times’ 1,302 word article, only 113 words were used to offer a caveat saying it is difficult to link “specific weather events” to climate change and to quote a NASA scientist who admitted he hasn’t “proved it” yet. Semantics aside, those mainstream stories were nearly as biased in their coverage as blatantly left-wing websites like the Huffington Post. Huffington Post argued that ” global weirding ” incidents such as landslides, sinkholes and volcanoes are “consistent” with global warming. The site interviewed David Orr, a professor of environmental studies and politics at Oberlin College, who said, “you ask is this evidence of climate destabilization, the only scientific answer you can give is: It is consistent with what we can expect.” The complete list of “weird” stuff was heat waves, floods, landslides, wildfires, ice islands, sinkholes, volcanoes, dead fish and oyster herpes. Dead fish and oyster herpes? Huffington Post said, “These are certainly stories to be filed under weird: Although climate change can’t necessarily be held responsible, some scientists are suggesting it as the instigator of strange ocean occurrences.” The fact is that the alarmists and the news media will find someone to support claims that just about everything is correlated to man-made global warming. MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan even claimed that Snowpocalypse (the nickname for the blizzard activity on parts of the East Coast) was consistent with global warming. Media Says Warming Predictions ‘Supported’ by Weather Events, Push Government Action It has been a summer of wild weather and related disasters from fires in Russia, to giant sinkholes, to floods in Pakistan and Europe. All of this has sparked the news media’s desire to reignite the climate alarmist movement after a scandal-filled winter. The headlines said it all: “In Weather Chaos, a Case for Global Warming,” proclaimed one Times header. The USA Today warned, “Think this summer is hot? Get used to it.” The AP story hyping weather disasters’ correlation to warming was called, “Climate Change Predictions Supported By Summer of Fires, Floods And Heat Waves: IPCC.” “The weather-related cataclysms of July and August fit patterns predicted by climate scientists,” AP declared. The story criticized the U.S. unwillingness to cap carbon emissions. “The U.S. remains the only major industrialized nation not to have legislated caps on carbon emissions, after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last week withdrew climate legislation in the face of resistance from Republicans and some Democrats,” AP said. A bit later, they quoted a UN “specialist” who argued “much more needs to be done.” Perhaps under the strain of working at CNN, meteorologist Chad Myers actually switched views since 2008, when he said “to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant.” But on Aug. 10, Myers said “Yes,” when asked if the weather phenomena were manmade. Myers, however, offered this qualification: “Is it 100 percent caused by man? No. There are other things involved. We are now in the sunspot cycle. We are now in a very hot sun cycle. We are, we are – many other things going on …” CNN host Fareed Zakaria also used the crazy weather to promote legislative action on emissions – pushing Cato Institute’s senior fellow Pat Michaels to accept the idea of a carbon tax. After another guest warned of devastation if we fail to act on the issue of global warming, Zakaria turned to Michaels and said: “You hear all this. Doesn’t it worry you? I mean, I understand your position, which is, you know, we don’t have a substitute for fossil fuels right now. But surely that isn’t an argument for stand pattism?” MICHAELS: No. ZAKARIA: Don’t you want to do something about this? MICHAELS: What I worry about more is the concept of opportunity cost. We had legislation, again, that went through the House last summer which would have cost a lot and been futile. And when you, when you take that away, or when the government favors certain technologies and politicizes technologies, you’re doing worse than nothing. You’re actually impairing your ability to respond in the long run, and that’s my major concern along this issue. ZAKARIA: But if you were to have a carbon tax, if you were to have a gas tax – MICHAELS: YOU, can put in the carbon tax… Zakaria pushed Michaels further, arguing that it is a “simple” law of economics to tax a behavior if you want less of it. But Michaels stressed that the problem is how high the tax would have to be to reduce carbon dioxide enough to make a difference, and the “political acceptability” of such a tax.” The CNN host’s biased segment, which included three panelists (Michaels included), used the apocalyptic weather as a set up: “It has been a scorcher of a summer. Record high temperatures all over the United States, huge chunks of glacier the size of four Manhattan islands breaking off Greenland. One-third of Pakistan is now under water. Fires burning out of control in Russia. Floods in Europe,” Zakaria said on Aug. 15. “So is this just another summer on planet Earth? Or is it the apocalypse? Or is it global warming?” His panel of guests was stacked 2-to-1 (3-to-1 if Zakaria is counted) in favor of legislative action to stop global warming and failed to consider that weather is not climate. NASA’s Gavin Schmidt and Jeffrey Sachs , director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, were on the panel with Michaels. Zakaria accepted Schmidt’s views unquestioningingly, but then challenged and argued with Michaels’ points, going so far as to ask about his research funding. Schmidt is a favorite climate change expert for many news outlets, including the Times. He told the paper, “If you ask me as a person, do I think the Russian heat wave has to do with climate change, the answer is yes. If you ask me as a scientist whether I have proved it, the answer is no – at least not yet.” Environmental studies professor Roger Pielke, Jr. responded to that on his blog saying: “This neatly sums up the first of two reasons why I think that the current debate over whether greenhouse gas emissions caused/exacerbated/influenced recent disasters around the world is a fruitless debate.  It is not a debate that can be resolved empirically, but rather depends upon hunches, speculation and beliefs. Debates that cannot be resolved empirically necessarily involve extra-scientific factors.” In another post, Pielke criticized the World Meteorological Organization (which was cited by AP) for issuing a statement saying that the severe weather events “matches IPCC projections.” ” The WMO statement is (yet) another example of scientifically unsupportable nonsense in the climate debate. Such nonsense is of course not going away anytime soon,” Pielke said, noting that the IPCC didn’t make any projections for 2010. MSNBC Snows Viewers, Along with the rest of the Media During the winter, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., poked fun at alarmists when his grandchildren built an igloo on the National Mall and called it “Al Gore’s New Home.” Fox News host Glenn Beck sarcastically made fun of an Al Gore “disappearance” (implying that since the snow started falling Gore wasn’t publicly warning about climate change) and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Kennedy wrote in 2008 that global warming had resulted in “anemic winters” in Washington, D.C. The 2009-2010 winter and its multiple blizzards contradicted Kennedy’s claims, Beck noted. Despite media and lefty claims , conservatives weren’t trying to say that the snowy winter disproved global warming. Rather they were arguing that strange weather should not be used as evidence to support climate change (summer or winter). But that was exactly what the left and the news media had been doing, and it is what they are doing again this summer. Alarmists like Al Gore, Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” and MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan had claimed the severe weather was “consistent” with global warming. Gore blamed three straight days of rain on warming saying, “Just look at what has been happening for the last three days,” Gore said. “The so-called skeptics haven’t noted it because it’s not snow. But the downpours and heavy winds are consistent with what the scientists have long warned about.” Ratigan claimed that “these ‘ snowpocalypses ‘ that have been going through DC and other extreme weather events are precisely what climate scientists have been predicting, fearing and anticipating because of global warming.” His rant continued: “Why is that? The thinking that warmer air temperatures on the earth – a higher air temperature – has a greater capacity to hold moisture at any temperature,” Ratigan said. “And then as winter comes in, that warm air cools full of water, and you get heavier precipitation on a more regular basis. In fact, you could argue these storms are not evidence of a lack of global warming, but are evidence of global warming – thus the 26 inches of snowfall in the DC area and the second giant storm this year.” [Emphasis added] Ratigan also criticized a TV spot by Virginia Republicans designed to ridicule proposed climate change policies that could hurt the state’s job situation. Global warming alarmists in the media and academia proved last winter that they want it both ways: weather can “support” their opinions about global warming, but weather cannot disprove or discredit those same opinions. So they continue to link everything, even seemingly contradictory weather events like droughts and floods, to the problem of climate change. UN Climate Conference May Have Trouble in Mexico The recent media hype over unusual weather events may be designed to counter declining public fears over global warming. After all, unless the public thinks global warming is a threat they are unlikely to support costly government intervention or make drastic changes in their lives. After the flop at Copenhagen, proponents of global warming alarmism wanted the next UN Climate Change Conference, coming up this November/December, to move forward toward curbing emissions. But recent news reports indicate the Mexico meeting may not be as successful as they’d hoped . According to The Christian Science Monitor, the Cancun meeting scheduled to begin Nov. 29 and run through Dec. 10 seems “to have been thrown into reverse – at least for now.” “Unfortunately, what we have seen over and over this week is that some countries are walking back from the progress made in Copenhagen and what was agreed there,” Jonathan Pershing, leader of the U.S. negotiating team, said according to the Monitor. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

See original here:
Media Use Crazy Weather to Hype Global Warming, Despite Admissions Weather Isn’t Climate

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Derides the ‘Heated’ and ‘Ugly’ Rhetoric from Those Who Oppose Mosque

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday complained about “ugly” comments arising from the debate over the Ground Zero mosque. She also spun the founder and chief proponent of the construction as a moderate, “despite some criticism of the Imam from the right.” [MP3 audio here .] After fellow MSNBC anchor Chuck Todd asserted that the President felt like he had to speak out because “the debate was getting so loud,” Mitchell editorialized, ” Getting loud, heated, ugly and inaccurate, in fact. ” She then proceeded to tout Feisal Abdul Rauf to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius. Mitchell enthused, “And despite some criticism of the Imam from the right, it turns out that Feisal Abdul Rauf has been an unofficial U.S. ambassador to the Muslim world in addition to promoting peace and religious tolerance in Manhattan.” At no time did she offer her viewers any hint that Abdul Rauf has made some controversial assertions. These include making comments that seem supportive of Sharia law in the United States, refusing to condemn Hamas and referring to the United States as an “accessory” to 9/11. Instead, she touted, “And Walter Isaacson, who we both know well from the head of the Aspen Institute, was quoted as saying, ‘He’s consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam.'” However, this doesn’t square with Abdul Rauf’s September 30, 2001 appearance on 60 Minutes where this exchange occurred: ED BRADLEY: Are — are — are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened? IMAM ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened. BRADLEY: OK. You say that we’re an accessory? ABDUL RAUF: Yes. BRADLEY: How? ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA. Given Mitchell’s complaints about “inaccurate” statements in the Ground Zero debate, her above quote is sloppy at best. A transcript of the August 18 segment, which aired at 1:18pm EDT, follows: ANDREA MITCHELL: And when they speak privately to you Chuck, are they annoyed with Harry Reid for escalating this as a political matter? CHUCK TODD: You know, they have not been critical of anybody, even privately, on how they’ve reacted to this because, frankly, they understand that they created a bit of a political problem for everybody else. I’ve talked to other Democrats outside the White House who believe that the Harry Reid could have handled this differently, who think that maybe Harry Reid invited holding up more opportunities for Republicans to put other Democrats in a position to have to come out with a statement about this, have to deal with this in their own races, because here’s a guy who, basically, felt the need to respond to his opponent in Nevada, to respond to Sharron Angle. So if he can respond, then, of course, why can’t anybody else who is running for re-election in 2010 respond to their Republican opponent in their district or state? So I think that is where the annoyance I’ve heard. I have not heard it from the White House because the White House gets it and the President himself said they read polls and know that they put members of their own party in an awkward position. But, this is a case where they feel like, where the President himself felt like he had to speak out on this, because, frankly, the debate was getting so loud and heated and, maybe, unproductive. MITCHELL: Getting loud, heated, ugly and inaccurate, in fact. And we’re going to set the record straight on some of that coming up. … MITCHELL: We are now learning more, indeed, about the man behind the proposed Islamic center. And despite some criticism of the Imam from the right , it turns out that Feisal Abdul Rauf has been an unofficial U.S. ambassador to the Muslim world in addition to promoting peace and religious tolerance in Manhattan. Here with me now, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. Uh, David, you’ve been looking at this from removed- and also from inside the White House and inside the State Department. And it’s extraordinary. This is a man who traveled with- to Doha in 2006 at the worst time in the Iraq war with Karen Hughes from the Bush State Department as an envoy, an unofficial envoy, spoke out after 9/11 in Manhattan. DAVID IGNATIUS: Andrea, from everything that we can tell about him, he is almost a model of what you want as a moderate Islamic cleric, with credibility among Muslims to be sure, who is prepared to speak out to the United States. I mean, if you were going to design, as a thought experiment, a way to pull people away from al Qaeda and it would be hard to think of somebody more powerful than this who says that the 9/11 attacks were wrong . Working with the United States is right. Speaking out against a violence is an obligation for Muslims. If we’re ever going to get out of this mess, if we’re going to avoid a war with Muslims around the world, which we all deeply want to do, this is the kind of ally we need and the attacks on him, I have to admit, I don’t understand some of them. MITCHELL: And Walter Isaacson, who we both know well from the head of the Aspen Institute, was quoted as saying, “He’s consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam. That’s why I find it a shame that his good work is being undermined by this inflamed dispute. He’s the type of leader to be celebrating in America and not undermining.” And this at a critical time. Is it your sense, and I know you had a meeting at the White House on the national security meeting a week or so ago and were at the State Department involved with Hillary Clinton. So, your sense from the President and his comments that he is trying to reach out because of what is coming up in the Muslim world? He’s got in the balance Israeli and Pakistani negotiations just on a tipping point trying to get something going for the first week in September before he has to go to the UN for the annual speech, the third week in September. This is a very critical moment. IGNATIUS: My sense, Andrea, with the President ten days ago, and I have to stress this was before his intervention at the Ground Zero mosque was that he wants to reanimate these themes that are prominent in his presidency, both notably in his Cairo speech, that he’s trying to reach out to the Muslim world and make progress of his very difficult issues of Israeli/Palestinian negotiations, that he is signaling a willingness, indeed a desire to reopen the negotiations with Iran about the nuclear program. These are themes that the President was really hitting hard and I think it’s- but in the case of Iran, it’s a real last attempt before we get on an inexorable clock with Iran heading towards nuclear weapons capability, see some other way to go.

More:
MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Derides the ‘Heated’ and ‘Ugly’ Rhetoric from Those Who Oppose Mosque

Ariz. Sheriff to Obama: Give Me Half Hour, I’ll Show You How to Secure Border

Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Ariz., is issuing an invitation to President Barack Obama: If the president will come and spend a half hour with Babeu in Arizona, the sheriff says, he will convince the president he can succeed in securing the border and thus make himself into a hero who transcends partisan politics.   Babeu’s southern Arizona county, while not contiguous with the border, has been designated by the Justice Department as part of a High Intensity Drug Trafficking region that is a major route for drug and alien smugglers bringing narcotics and illegal aliens into the United States from Mexico. Babeu has joined with Sheriff Larry Dever of neighboring Cochise County, Ariz.-which does sit on the border-as well as with Arizona’s two senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl, in endorsing a ten-point plan for securing the border.     Noting that President Obama has visited Afghanistan to assess the security situation there, CNSNews.com asked Babeu in a videotaped interview whether he would like the president visit with him in Arizona so he can have the opportunity to persuade the president that his plan to secure the border will work. “If the president gave me a half hour, I am confident that I could convince him and to show him the way that he can personally secure the border, and he would be the hero of everybody that truly transcends bipartisan politics and secures that border,” said Babeu. “I believe that if a leader truly wanted to do that we have the means and the resources necessary to secure our border and to protect America once and for all, and then we can get to the point in the future, only after the border is secure, that there is some type of discussion about what do we do with the approximate 13 million people who are here illegally.”     The  ten-point border security plan  backed by Sheriffs Babeu and Dever and Senators McCain and Kyl includes provisions to complete 700 miles of double- and triple-layered border fending, significantly increase the number of drone surveillance aircraft patrolling the border, and deploy 3,000 National Guardsmen to the Arizona section of the Mexico border alone until the governor of Arizona in consultation with local law enforcement officials certifies that the border is secure. Crossposted at NB sister site CNSNews.com  

Follow this link:
Ariz. Sheriff to Obama: Give Me Half Hour, I’ll Show You How to Secure Border

John King Asks Quayle: You Really Think Obama’s the Worst President Ever?

John King on Friday went after Arizona Congressional candidate Ben Quayle, son of former Vice President Dan Quayle, for claiming in a campaign commercial that Barack Obama is the worst president in history. In case you missed it, Quayle released an ad (embedded right) on Wednesday saying that as a result of Obama’s policies, “my generation will inherit a weakened country.” As this has struck a nerve with Obama-loving media across the fruited plain, King asked his guest: You’re a Republican in a crowded 10-candidate Republican primary. So going after President Obama is not a surprise. But the worst president ever? He’s been in office less than two years. Not Nixon, not Harding, not anybody else? Why Barack Obama? After Quayle answered, King followed up by asking him about his postings to a “racy website, DirtyScottsdale.com” (video follows with transcript and commentary): JOHN KING, HOST: A congressional race in Arizona is suddenly getting national attention and quite a bit of it. Partly because of a campaign ad that’s gone viral and partly because it’s from a candidate with a famous name. Ben Quayle, a Republican running in Arizona’s third district, joins me now to go “One-on-One.” And Ben Quayle, I want to get to this ad. First tell our viewers, if they don’t know, you’re the son of the former vice president Dan Quayle. You’re running for an open Republican seat in the Scottsdale-Phoenix area of Arizona. And the reason that you’ve generated such a national controversy is this ad. Let’s listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BEN QUAYLE (R), ARIZONA CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Barack Obama is the worst president in history. And my generation will inherit a weakened country. Drug cartels in Mexico, tax cartels in D.C. What’s happened to America? I love Arizona. I was raised right. Somebody has to go to Washington and knock the hell out of the place. (END OF VIDEO CLIP) KING: Now, you’re a Republican in a crowded 10-candidate Republican primary. So going after President Obama is not a surprise. But the worst president ever? He’s been in office less than two years. Not Nixon, not Harding, not anybody else? Why Barack Obama? QUAYLE: Well, John, this is a claim that — I’ve thought about long and hard. And it was something that I wasn’t happy about. But President Obama, through his ideology and his policies, has fundamentally changed our country for the worst. And I think that he’s taken a country, which was admittedly in bad shape, but he has made it worse and his policies are actually going to affect future generations in a negative way. And the future that he has created for my generation and other generations is pretty terrifying. It seems like right now he’s starting to destroy the American dream. KING: Now, because of what you’re saying in this ad, which is quite provocative, and because of who you are, there are a number of — shall we say — parodies of your ad already popping up online. Some of them are just funny and some of them are pretty pointed and they go right after you. I want you to listen to one of them from a standup comedian. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That’s why I want whatever job Ben Quayle had before he decided to run for Congress. I don’t know what it was, but I know I’ll be better at it than that schmuck. I love America and I was raised right. By which I mean neither of my parents ever forgot how to spell potato. (END OF VIDEO CLIP) KING: A chance to respond. I want to ask as you do — you’re getting a lot of attention because of this. Some of it’s not necessarily polite. But are you benefiting from it? QUAYLE: Well, you know, John, having the last name of Quayle, we’re used to being made fun of and has some parody and having things that aren’t true being said about you. So, you know, it stings but you know that’s the way that politics goes nowadays. KING: And as you know, many of your rivals there and many people who’ve covered politics for a — long time like myself say, well, why would he do this? And some people think you’re trying to change the subject because you’re in a bit of a dust-up of first saying no, that wasn’t me, and then acknowledging that you had submitted some postings to a pretty racy Web site, DirtyScottsdale.com. A, why did you say no when it was you? And B, why did you do it? QUAYLE: John, I have been consistent with my story from the beginning. The Web site that is currently smearing me is a despicable Web site. And I have had no affiliation with that Web site. This is a smear campaign that’s being pushed by one of my opponents. And, you know, it’s the type of gutter politics that we really are trying to get away from and the people here in CD-3 are sick of. I mean if you look at what’s happened since this commercial, it’s been 36 hours. We’ve had over 300,000 YouTube hits. This is the thing that people are looking at. The issues that President Obama is trying to take our country towards a social welfare state and that we need to get people into office who are actually going to combat that. That’s what people want to focus on. KING: Well, I won’t dispute that except I do want to be very clear. DirtyScottsdale.com. This is a quote from you, “I just posted comments to drive — try to drive some traffic.” You did post some things to DirtyScottsdale.com? QUAYLE: I posted a — this is what I’ve said from the beginning. I posted a few comments on a Web site that doesn’t exist anymore. They’re innocuous. And, you know, these are the types of smear campaigns that have been pushed against me about nothing. This is much ado about nothing and, you know — but since it’s a famous last name, people want to focus on that. So — but I’ll be tough and then I’m just going to be staying focused on the issues and focusing on bringing our country back from the brink right now. KING: Well, to a degree, you’re right about the criticism. And I want to read you something from one of your opponents, Pam Gorman. Again, there are 10 Republicans seeking this nomination. She says there’s 10 people in this race, there’s nine of us that may not agree on anything. But we all agree that it’s completely offensive that Dan Quayle is trying to buy his little boy a seat in Congress. How would you respond to that? QUAYLE: Well, that’s what I’ve been dealing with since day one on this campaign. They know that they can’t attack me on the issues because I’m — I have a much better future — vision for the future of our country. I know the issues better than they do and I have a better campaign right now than they do. And so they just attack me on that sort of things that doesn’t make any sense. So she can say what she wants, but in the end, we will take the nomination and move on to the general election. KING: You are in a state right now. Let’s talk about some of those issues. You’re in a state that is ground zero in the border security and immigration debate in the United States right now. You’ve written letters critical of the Obama administration, tried to nudge your former governor, Janet Napolitano, now the Homeland Security secretary. The president signed into law today a new border security measure, $600 million. He was already sending National Guard troops. This does a bit more beefing up the Border Patrol, beefing up customs and the like. Is it a positive step? QUAYLE: I believe it is a positive step. But we need more. We need more troops at the border. And we need them right now. We were supposed to get the National Guard troops on August 1st, and now it’s not going to be until the end of September. If you go down to our southern border and see what’s happening to the ranchers down there and see the devastation that happens from the drug cartels and the human smuggling, it’ll rip your heart out. It is absolutely impossible to not see the problems we have with the poorest border. KING: We speak on the 75th anniversary of Social Security. Just about everybody agrees if you’re going to deal with the deficit long term, structurally, you have to do something with the big entitlement programs. What would Ben Quayle recommend to do to change Social Security? QUAYLE: Well, with Social Security, we would protect those who are in or near retirement today. But for people of my generation and younger, we would actually have to reform it which would be to start to gradually increase the retirement age up to 70 and allow a portion of the people to allow — take a portion of their Social Security and actually invest it into private accounts. These sorts of things need to be done because our entitlement programs are unfunded liabilities related to those are between $16 and $100 trillion which will freeze out all other spending and eventually bankrupt our country. KING: Let me close where I began. The worst president in history. Nineteen months into office. You at the age of 33. You’re sure you can make that conclusion? QUAYLE: He — what he has done in a year and a half, he’s actually changed the country dramatically for the worse. More so than any president in our history. And I stand by my statement. KING: Ben Quayle is a candidate — Republican candidate for Arizona. Mr. Quayle, thanks for your time today. QUAYLE: Thank you. KING: Thank you. So King began with this issue, and ended with it. Hadn’t Quayle sufficiently answered King’s question the first time? Did it require a follow up minutes later? After all, you could make the case that Quayle’s position is premature considering Obama has been in office for less than nineteen months. However, this is a campaign ad, and candidates make all kinds of intentionally inflammatory remarks in such commercials; King should know that. Exit question: Would a Democrat have been questioned twice in such an interview about a campaign ad in which he or she called George W. Bush the worst president in history?

See the rest here:
John King Asks Quayle: You Really Think Obama’s the Worst President Ever?

Foreign Golfers May Not Play in Ryder Cup Due to UK Taxes

Those who don’t believe that high taxes on the rich don’t influence economic activity or economic behavior, which of course includes many in the establishment press, are going to have a tough time explaining away this brief item that’s being reported in the Associated Press: Tour officials hampered by UK tax rules European Tour officials are in talks with the British government over tax rules which they say could deter leading golfers from playing in the Ryder Cup in October. Players competing in the match between Europe and the United States at Celtic Manor, Wales, could be seriously affected by new rules issued by the customs and revenue agency, which can now tax foreign sportsmen and women not just on prize money earned but on sponsorship and endorsements. Mitchell Platts, the European Tour’s director of public relations corporate affairs, said Tuesday the tax rule was “seriously hampering our efforts.” This is pretty obviously double taxation of the same income in both the home country and the UK.  If they don’t fix this by the London 2012 Olympics , there may be an unplanned return to what used to be known as the amateur ideal, as many of the world’s Olympic-level athletes, particularly in sports like basketball and tennis, may decide to take a pass. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Continued here:
Foreign Golfers May Not Play in Ryder Cup Due to UK Taxes

CNN’s Myers Who Once Called Manmade Global Warming ‘Arrogant’ — Now Drinking the Alarmist Kool-Aid?

Want evidence that working at CNN can wear you down? Although this isn’t definitive, something has happened to network meteorologist Chad Myers. Back on Dec. 18, 2008, Myers explained to viewers of CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that he thought the entire notion that mankind could affect the weather was “pretty arrogant.” “You know, to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant,” Myers said. “Mother Nature is so big, the world is so big, the oceans are so big – I think we’re going to die from a lack of fresh water or we’re going to die from ocean acidification before we die from global warming, for sure.” But fast forward a year and a half and you’ll see how things change. On the Aug. 9 daytime broadcast of CNN’s “Rick’s List,” that same Myers has a little bit different view. Myers was asked by the show’s host Rick Sanchez the so-called “$60,000 question,” but not without a preemptive cheap shot at climate skeptics on the right. “Is there anything, from your perspective – and I know you are one of many scientist experts out there – that would lead you to believe that because these three things are happening right now, we’re more apt to be able to prove or somebody out there is able to prove that there is a consequential global warming and that it’s caused by man?” Sanchez asked. “That’s the big part of this question.  And guess what – Myers responded differently than he did in 2008. Mankind can influence the climate – but he’s not “100 percent” there yet. “Is it caused by man? Yes.” Myers responded. “Is it 100 percent caused by man? No. There are other things involved. We are now in the sunspot cycle. We are now in a very hot sun cycle. We are, we are – many other things going on. But yes, a significant portion of this is caused by greenhouse gases keeping heat on the shore, on the land, in the atmosphere that could have escaped without those greenhouse gases. So, yes, it’s warmer.” Sanchez went on to ask Myers if certain weather events were “conclusive” proof of these factors – like global warming or sunspots. He didn’t take it that far. “No, absolutely not. No, there is definitely something going on. Whether it’s like el Niño   and, you know, it can’t be everything all the time. You just can’t say, ‘Oh – you know, it’s like being a cafeteria meteorologist. I want to pick that today. I will pick that today. I’m going to have the Jell-O. I’m going to have the – I’m going to have the Fudgesicle whatever it might be. There is absolutely something going on here for this summer being the hottest and some of the water that we have in the Atlantic and in the Gulf of Mexico being the hottest ever on record, which could cause a pretty significant – significant hurricane season still to come.”

See original here:
CNN’s Myers Who Once Called Manmade Global Warming ‘Arrogant’ — Now Drinking the Alarmist Kool-Aid?

4,500 Animals Killed in BP Spill … And Counting

Photo via CenCOOS As BP moves to permanently seal the blown-out well that unleashed 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, the focus is turning to the toll of the disaster. It should be said that the true and total toll will not be known for some time, until scientists have had a chance to properly investigate the extent of the damage above and below the sea. But there are some things we can start looking at now: Like the direct numb… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Follow this link:
4,500 Animals Killed in BP Spill … And Counting