From the category archives:

Corruption

Van Hollen charges five with election fraud

Written By: Daniel Bice

Five Wisconsin residents have been charged with criminal counts of voter fraud in the November 2008 general election, state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen announced today.

Two of those charged – Maria Miles, 36, of Milwaukee, and Kevin Clancy, 26, of Racine – worked for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the embattled community organizing group.

“The complaint alleges that Miles and Clancy submitted multiple voter registration applications for the same individuals, and also were part of a scheme in which they and other (special registration deputies) registered each other to vote multiple times in order to meet voter registration quotas imposed by ACORN,” the Van Hollen release says.

Both were charged with one felony count.

Attempts to reach ACORN today were unsuccessful.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

‘Archaic’ Network Provides Data Behind Global Warming Theory, Critics Say

Written By: Joseph Abrams

Critics are questioning the accuracy of a 120-year-old weather station network that measures surface temperature in the U.S. by tallying paper reports from volunteers whose data is rife with human error.

Crucial data on the American climate, part of the basis for proposed trillion-dollar global warming legislation, is churned out by a 120-year-old weather system that has remained mostly unchanged since Benjamin Harrison was in the White House.

The network measures surface temperature by tallying paper reports sent in by snail mail from volunteers whose data, according to critics, often resembles a hodgepodge of guesswork, mathematical interpolation and simple human error.

“It’s rather archaic,” said Anthony Watts, a meteorologist who since 2007 has been cataloging problems in the 1,218 weather stations that make up the Historical Climatology Network.

“When the network was put together in 1892, it was mercury thermometers and paper forms. Today it’s still much the same,” he said.

The network relies on volunteers in the 48 contiguous states to take daily readings of high and low temperatures and precipitation measured by sensors they keep by their homes and offices. They deliver that information to the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), which uses it to track changes in the climate.

Please Read More Here…

Science’s Big Problem

Written By: Christopher Chantrill

Last week, Dr. Judith Curry, climate scientist from Georgia Institute of Technology, admitted on Watt’s Up With That that climate scientists needed to do a better job of communication in order to reestablish trust after the debacle of Climategate. In reply, both sides, warmist and skeptic, ripped her to shreds. That, Dr. Curry wrote, showed that she had probably got it right.

In fact, Dr. Curry doesn’t have a clue. If she is talking about communication and trust, then she is merely talking about public relations — fancy footwork in the dance of politics. Today in America, we have a climate science that plays second fiddle to climate politics. It is just a prop for the Al Gores and the environmentalists and their program of political power.

It is disgraceful but true. Scientists today serve as loyal subalterns in the army of government power. The narrative of the disinterested scientist is a myth. Scientists get their money from government, and in return, they dance to the music of big government. That is science’s Big Problem.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Anyone with a brain in their head knows that Americans are not happy with D.C.

Yet the politicians in D.C. insist on forcing the current health bill through. This is pride and arrogance plain and simple. D.C. long ago stopped serving the people and started serving themselves and their cronies.

As patriots, we cannot give up. We must continue to let our voices be heard.

CNN Poll: Majority says government a threat to citizens’ rights

Written By: Paul Steinhauser

A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans, according to a new national poll.

Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government’s become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. Forty-four percent of those polled disagree.

The survey indicates a partisan divide on the question: only 37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans say the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans.

Please Read More Here…

Congressional Performance
Voter unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports as 71% now say the legislature is doing a poor job.

That’s up ten points from the previous high of 61% reached a month ago.

Only 10% of voters say Congress is doing a good or excellent job.

Please Read More Here…

Obama Sinks to Record Low Approval

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 25% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 (see trends).

Overall, 45% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. Fifty-four percent (54%) disapprove.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Here are three great articles from American Thinker on climate change. We encourage you to read the entire original articles at the links listed below.

Time to Turn Up the Heat on the Warmists

Written By: Selwyn Duke

At one time, some would call them “deniers.” The more generous called them “skeptics.” But now, increasingly, it appears that they can be called something else: sane. Yes, the climate has certainly changed.

Even in the mainstream media, the less liberal organs are waking up. There is now a never-ending barrage of articles on the climate scam, with The Washington Times, The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post firing some recent salvos. And these inconvenient truths are just adding to a case against the Climateers that has become dizzying.

Yet amidst this exposition of fact and exposure of fiction, one point never changes: We have been had. And one question remains: Will justice be done?

Let us be clear on the gravity of the Climateers’ crime: They have used billions of our tax money to fund fraudulent science. And why?

For the purposes of promoting policies that would steal billions more.

Please Read More Here…

Climategate: What’s Wrong with this Picture?

Written By: Dexter Wright

Scientific Nobel Prizes are traditionally awarded to scientists whose work has been found to be a foundational discovery in the fields of physics, chemistry, or medicine. However the rules are different for a Nobel Peace Prize. The Peace Prize is more of a popularity contest; otherwise, how could we explain that the PLO thug Yasser Arafat was a recipient? In 2007, the Nobel Committee awarded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) a Nobel Peace Prize to be shared with former Vice President Al Gore. It is important to note that the Peace Prize was not awarded for any discipline in science. As time has passed, the work that went into the award-winning report has come under scrutiny as questions of sloppy scientific methods are raised in the wake of Climategate. Looking closely at the report reveals scientific flaws.

Buried deep in the pages of the report are several graphs claiming to show that the average temperature of the Earth has been warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution. One of the more infamous graphs is the Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction Graph (below). This graph leaves off the Antarctic continent, where routinely, temperatures are recorded at well below -40o Celsius. The coldest temperature on Earth ever recorded was -89o C was at Vostok Station on the Antarctic plateau in 1983. This Northern-Hemisphere-only temperature graph was plotted with an accuracy of one-tenth of a degree Celsius and is touted as strong “evidence” for what has been termed anthropogenic global warming (AGW). The devil is in the details, as they say.

Looking closely at the graph reveals a significant problem: None of the proxy data derived temperature traces agree with each other. Specifically, just after A.D. 1600, the temperature trace in lavender shows temperatures cooling, while the blue line shows that temperatures are warming. In each case, the trends are less than two-tenths of a degree Celsius in variance.

If we peel back one layer of the onion, we can look into the accuracy of proxy data. The accuracy issue was the focus of a scientific paper published by NASA’s Dr. Gavin A. Schmidt in May of 1999. In the abstract of the paper, he asserts that “[p]aleoclimatic inferences from these carbonate isotope records are strongly affected by erroneous assumptions concerning the covariations of temperature and salinity and 18O.”

In English, that means that there are significant problems with the proxy data.

Is it possible that all of these well-documented problems with global temperature data were overlooked by the scientists from East Anglia University in Britain? The answer may lie in one of the recently uncovered e-mails. One such e-mail was in response to a discussion about the 2009 temperature data set and was sent on the 27th of October, 2009 from Dr. Michael Mann to the now-discredited Dr. Phil Jones. Dr. Mann states the following: “As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.”

And for this the Nobel Prize was awarded!

Please Read More Here…

Climate Change Debate Over? It’s Just Begun!

Written By: Ken Blackwell

The Left is wringing its hands over the “failure” of the World Climate Summit at Copenhagen to approve a binding treaty. But perhaps they should thank God (or Gore) for that fact. That’s because the mere threat of job-killing cap-and-trade legislation has been enough for independent voters in the U.S. to abandon left-leaning politicians in droves.

Along with stiff carbon taxes and straitjacket regulations inevitably comes population control. At Copenhagen, China’s Peggy Liu, chair of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration on Clean Energy, bragged about Beijing’s brutal one-child policy. That policy, said this winner of Time Magazine’s “Hero of the Environment” award, “reduces energy demand and is arguably the most effective way the country can mitigate climate change.”

Soviet Communist Party boss Joe Stalin would be proud. “You have a problem with a man. If you get rid of the man, you get rid of the problem,” said the top Communist of the Twentieth Century. (Come to think of it, Uncle Joe Stalin even topped Peggy Liu. He was named Time’s Man of the Year not once, but twice — 1939 and 1942.)

Thomas Friedman of the New York Times hails China’s one-child policy as “reasonably enlightened.” He likes the fact that Beijing’s rulers — unburdened by those pesky voters voting out their betters — can “impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.” Friedman’s bestselling book is titled The World is Flat. (And liberals accuse us of being the Flat Earth Society?)

Isn’t it really funny how all the “errors” made by the climate scientists seem to fall on one side of the debate? If the glaciers of the Himalayas are all going to melt by 2035, that’s a real problem. But if they’re not expected to melt until 2350, it’s another matter. Guess which date the IPCC chose to publish? Just a typo?

What if the globe is indeed warming, but the warming is part of a cyclical pattern of warming and cooling? That’s the thesis of Dr. S. Fred Singer. Dr. Singer and co-author Dennis Avery write in Unstoppable Global Warming that “evidence from North Atlantic deep-sea cores reveals that abrupt shifts punctuated what is conventionally thought to have been a relatively stable Holocene [interglacial] climate. During each of these episodes, cool, ice-bearing waters from north of Iceland were advected as far south as the latitude of Britain. At about the same times, the atmospheric circulation above Greenland changed abruptly….Together, they make up a series of climatic shifts with a cyclicity close to 1470 years (plus or minus 500 years). The Holocene events, therefore, appear to be the most recent manifestation of a pervasive millennial-scale climatic cycle operating independently of the glacial-interglacial climate state (emphasis added).”

Dr. Singer has been abused by Left-wing bloggers, called a denier, and denounced as a tool of industry. He earned his Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University, worked with NASA for decades, and is thoroughly conversant with satellite measurements of earth’s climate. And he taught environmental sciences at the University of Virginia for twenty-five years. Dr. Singer might be wrong. He might be seriously in error. But so far, no one has demonstrated that his arguments are wrong. Reviling him, calling him names, trying to shut him up and close him down — none of this constitutes a reasoned argument. It is nothing more than (in the words of Al Gore) an assault on reason. Stay tuned, folks. The earth may be warming — but not as fast as the debate over climate is heating up.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

India forms new climate change body

Written By: Dean Nelson

India has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr R K Pachauri.

The Indian government’s move is a significant snub to both the IPCC and Dr Pachauri as he battles to defend his reputation following the revelation his most recent climate change report included false claims that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035. Scientists believe it could take more than 300 years for the glaciers to disappear.

The body and its chairman have faced growing criticism ever since as questions have been raised on the credibility of their work and the rigour with which climate change claims are assessed.

Please Read More Here…

UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article

Written By: Richard Gray, Science Correspondent and Rebecca Lefort

The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountain tops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

Please Read More Here…

IPCC: International Pack of Climate Crooks

Written By: Marc Sheppard

Unquestionably the world’s final authority on the subject, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s findings and recommendations have formed the bedrock of literally every climate-related initiative worldwide for more than a decade. Likewise, virtually all such future endeavors — be they Kyoto II, domestic cap-and-tax, or EPA carbon regulation, would inexorably be built upon the credibility of the same U.N. panel’s “expert” counsel. But a glut of ongoing recent discoveries of systemic fraud has rocked that foundation, and the entire man-made global warming house of cards is now teetering on the verge of complete collapse.

Simply stated, we’ve been swindled. We’ve been set up as marks by a gang of opportunistic hucksters who have exploited the naïvely altruistic intentions of the environmental movement in an effort to control international energy consumption while redistributing global wealth and (in many cases) greedily lining their own pockets in the process.

Perhaps now, more people will finally understand what many have known for years: Man-made climate change was never really a problem — but rather, a solution.

For just as the science of the IPCC has been exposed as fraudulent, so have its apparent motives. The true ones became strikingly evident when the negotiating text for the “last chance to save the planet” International Climate Accord [PDF], put forth in Copenhagen in December, was found to contain as many paragraphs outlining the payment of “climate debt” reparations by Western nations under the watchful eye of a U.N.-controlled global government as it did emission reduction schemes.

The Perfect Problem to the Imperfect Solution

The U.N. signaled its intent to politicize science as far back as 1972 at its Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE) in Stockholm, Sweden. There, an unlikely mélange of legitimate environmental activists, dyed-in-the-wool Marxists, and assorted anti-establishment ’60s leftovers were delighted to hear not only the usual complaints about “industrialized” environmental problems, but also a long list of international inequities. Among the many human responsibilities condemned were overpopulation, misuse of resources and technology, unbalanced development, and the worldwide dilemma of urbanization. And from that marriage of global, environmental, and social justice concerns was born the IPCC’s parent organization — the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) — and the fortune-cookie like prose of its socialist-environmentalist manifesto, the Stockholm Declaration.

It was seven years later that UNEP was handed the ideal villain to fuel its counterfeit crusade. That was the year (1979) in which NASA’s James Hansen’s team of climate modelers convinced a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel to report [PDF] that doubling atmospheric CO2 — which had risen from 280 ppmv in the pre-industrial 1800s to over 335 ppmv — would cause nearly 3°C of global warming. And although the figure was wildly speculative, many funding-minded scientists — including some previously predicting that aerosols and orbital shifts would lead to catastrophic global cooling — suddenly embraced greenhouse gas theory and the inevitability of global warming.

It was at that moment that it became clear that the long-held scientific position that the Earth’s ecosystem has always and will always maintain CO2 equilibrium could be easily swayed toward a more exploitable belief system. And the UNEP now had the perfect problem to its solution: anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

After all, both its abatement and adaptation require huge expansion of government controls and taxation. Furthermore, it makes industry and capitalism look bad while affording endless visuals of animals and third-world humans suffering at the hands of wealthy Westerners. And most importantly, by fomenting accusations that “rich” countries have effectively violated the human rights of hundreds of millions of the world’s poorest people by selfishly causing climate-based global suffering, it helps promote the promise of international wealth redistribution to help less fortunate nations adapt to its consequences.

Best of all, being driven by junk-science that easily metamorphoses as required, it appeared to be endlessly self-sustaining.

But it needed to be packaged for widespread consumption. And packaged it they surely have. Here’s an early classic.

The year was 1988, and Colorado Senator Tim Wirth had arranged for Hansen to testify on the subject before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to help sell the dire need to enact national environmental legislation. As Wirth has since admitted, he intentionally scheduled Hansen’s appearance on what was forecasted to be the hottest day of the hearings. And in a brilliantly underhanded marketing ploy, he and his cohorts actually snuck into the hearing room the night before and opened the windows, rendering the air conditioning all but useless.

Imagine the devious beauty of the scene that unfolded in front of the cameras the next day — a NASA scientist preaching fire and brimstone, warning of “unprecedented global warming” and a potential “runaway greenhouse effect,” all the while wiping the dripping sweat off his brow. No wonder the resultant NY Times headline screamed, “Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate.”

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how climate hysteria and not one, but two of its shining stars were born. For coincidentally, that was the same year the IPCC was established by the U.N. Its mandate: to assess “the scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change.”

How perfect: an organization formed not to prove or disprove AGW, but merely to assess its risks and recommend an appropriate response.

Now it was time to really get to work.

You Must Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Congress Went to Denmark, You Got the Bill

CBS News Investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports official filings and our own investigation show at least 106 people from the House and Senate attended – spouses, a doctor, a protocol expert and even a photographer.

For 15 Democratic and 6 Republican Congressmen, food and rooms for two nights cost $4,406 tax dollars each. That’s $2,200 a day – more than most Americans spend on their monthly mortgage payment.

CBS News asked members of Congress and staff about whether they’re mindful that it’s public tax dollars they’re spending. Many said they had never even seen the bills or the expense reports.

Please Read More Here…

Looks like Global Warming is the last thing on Americans’ minds.

Public’s Priorities for 2010: Economy, Jobs, Terrorism

UN wrongly linked global warming to natural disasters

THE United Nations climate science panel faces new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods.

It based the claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny — and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link too weak. The report’s own authors later withdrew the claim because they felt the evidence was not strong enough.

The claim by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that global warming is already affecting the severity and frequency of global disasters, has since become embedded in political and public debate. It was central to discussions at last month’s Copenhagen climate summit, including a demand by developing countries for compensation of $100 billion (£62 billion) from the rich nations blamed for creating the most emissions.

Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change minister, has suggested British and overseas floods — such as those in Bangladesh in 2007 — could be linked to global warming. Barack Obama, the US president, said last autumn: “More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent.”

Please Read More Here…

Lawns may contribute to global warming

It’s the sort of headline that would grab the attention of any city dweller: Urban ‘Green’ Spaces May Contribute to Global Warming. As it turns out, “green spaces” doesn’t mean pocket parks or wooded areas. It refers to grass. Grass in parks and grass covering athletic fields.

And, although the study – from the University of California Irvine – looked at grass in parks, the conclusions may give pause to lawn-proud homeowners, too:

Dispelling the notion that urban “green” spaces help counteract greenhouse gas emissions, new research has found – in Southern California at least – that total emissions would be lower if lawns did not exist.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Climategate: CRU Was But the Tip of the Iceberg

Not surprisingly, the blatant corruption exposed at Britain’s premiere climate institute was not contained within the nation’s borders. Just months after the Climategate scandal broke, a new study has uncovered compelling evidence that our government’s principal climate centers have also been manipulating worldwide temperature data in order to fraudulently advance the global warming political agenda.

Not only does the preliminary report indict a broader network of conspirators, but it also challenges the very mechanism by which global temperatures are measured, published, and historically ranked.

Last Thursday, Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo and computer expert E. Michael Smith appeared together on KUSI TV [Video] to discuss the Climategate — American Style scandal they had discovered. This time out, the alleged perpetrators are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

NOAA stands accused by the two researchers of strategically deleting cherry-picked, cooler-reporting weather observation stations from the temperature data it provides the world through its National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). D’Aleo explained to show host and Weather Channel founder John Coleman that while the Hadley Center in the U.K. has been the subject of recent scrutiny, “[w]e think NOAA is complicit, if not the real ground zero for the issue.”

And their primary accomplices are the scientists at GISS, who put the altered data through an even more biased regimen of alterations, including intentionally replacing the dropped NOAA readings with those of stations located in much warmer locales.

As you’ll soon see, the ultimate effects of these statistical transgressions on the reports which influence climate alarm and subsequently world energy policy are nothing short of staggering.

Please Read More Here…

UN climate change expert: there could be more errors in report

The Indian head of the UN climate change panel defended his position today even as further errors were identified in the panel’s assessment of Himalayan glaciers.

Dr Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.

Please Read More Here…

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

(This almost encourages us to start watching CNN again.)

Jack Cafferty Rips Obama on Failed Openness Pledge: ‘Just Another Lie Told for Political Expediency’

C-SPAN CEO: White House Has Allowed Only ‘One Hour’ of Health Care Coverage
Sorry C-SPAN, say Dems

A day after House Democratic leaders rejected C-SPAN’s request to allow television cameras in the room during the negotiations over health care reform, Senate Democrats also said no to the idea, agreeing with the assertion made by their House counterparts that the bill has been publicized enough.

“The drafting of this health care insurance reform bill has set new standards for transparency,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

White House Press Corps Clash With Gibbs Over C-Span Promise

White House: We will NOT discuss broken C-Span promise

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs declined to answer questions about the president’s campaign commitment to hold health-care negotiations on C-Span. Gibbs said he had not seen a letter from C-Span’s Brian Lamb to congressional leaders requesting the coverage and thus could not comment on it.

On Wednesday, Gibbs was asked again about the C-Span commitment. The story had gotten pretty big in the intervening time, and presumably Gibbs had had a chance to familiarize himself with it. So reporters tried for a second day to get him to comment on the president’s commitment to holding televised health-care talks. Gibbs’ answer? “We covered this yesterday.” Gibbs referred reporters to the transcript of Tuesday’s briefing and said, “The answer I would give today is similar.”

But of course, he hadn’t answered the question at all. Here is the transcript from the Tuesday briefing:

QUESTION: C-Span television is requesting leaders in Congress to open up the debate to their cameras, and I know this is something that the President talked about on the campaign trail. Is this something that he supports, will be pushing for?

GIBBS: I have not seen that letter. I know the President is going to begin some discussions later today on health care in order to try to iron out the differences that remain between the House and the Senate bill and try to get something hopefully to his desk quite quickly….

Later in that same briefing, a reporter raised the C-Span issue again:

QUESTION: Okay, just lastly, why can’t you answer the C-Span question –

GIBBS: I did.

QUESTION: You didn’t, because you said –

GIBBS: I said I hadn’t seen the letter, which I haven’t –

QUESTION: do you need to see a letter? I mean, this is something the President said during the campaign and he talked about he wants everything open on C-SPAN –

GIBBS: Dan asked me about the letter and I haven’t read the letter.

QUESTION: Well, I’ll just ask you about having it on C-Span –

GIBBS: I answered Dan’s question and I answered this before we left for the break, Keith. The President’s number-one priority is getting the differences worked out, getting a bill to the House and the Senate…

QUESTION: There are a lot of reasons not to do it on C-Span — people could showboat. Does he regret making that statement during the campaign?

GIBBS: No.

Fast forward to Wednesday’s briefing. Another question from another reporter:

QUESTION: During the campaign the President on numerous occasions said words to the effect of — quoting one — “all of this will be done on C-SPAN in front of the public.” Do you agree that the President is breaking an explicit campaign promise?

GIBBS: Chip, we covered this yesterday and I would refer you to yesterday’s transcript.

QUESTION: But today is today and –

GIBBS: And the answer that I would give today is similar to the one –

QUESTION: But there was an intervening meeting in which it’s been reported that the President pressed the leaders in Congress to take the fast-track approach, to skip the conference committee. Did he do that?

GIBBS: The President wants to get a bill to his desk as quickly as possible.

QUESTION: In spite of the fact that he promised to do this on C-Span?

GIBBS: I would refer you to what we talked about in this room yesterday.

QUESTION: But the President in this meeting yesterday –

GIBBS: And I addressed that –

QUESTION: — pressed for something that’s in direct violation of a promise he made during the campaign.

GIBBS: And I addressed that yesterday.

Another reporter took up the questioning:

QUESTION: Well, does the President think it would be more helpful if this process were more transparent, that the American people could see –

GIBBS: Mike, how many stories do you think NBC has done on this?

QUESTION: Speaking for myself –

GIBBS: Just a guess.

QUESTION: That’s not the issue. The issue is whether he broke an explicit campaign promise.

GIBBS: So the answer is –

QUESTION: I deal with the information that –

GIBBS: So the answer is hundreds, is that correct?

QUESTION: Right, but that’s got nothing to do with it. I deal with the information, however much or little of it, there is. I’m saying would people benefit by having more information?

GIBBS: Have you lacked information in those hundred stories? Do you think you’ve reported stuff that was inaccurate based on the lack of information?

QUESTION: Democrats ran against the very sort of process that is being employed in this health care –

GIBBS: We had this discussion yesterday. I answered this yesterday. Is there anything –

QUESTION: But the President met with members of Congress in the meantime –

GIBBS: And he’ll do so today.

QUESTION: — and pressed them to –

GIBBS: Do you have another question?

And that was the end of that. If the public wants to know why President Obama didn’t keep his pledge to hold televised health-care negotations, they’ll have to look for answers elsewhere. The White House isn’t talking.

Here’s a great cartoon from Michael Ramirez

More Health care Coverage on Liberty’s Army

Contact Your U.S. Representative

Contact Your U.S. Senators

Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act. ~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer

“In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ~ George Orwell

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }

Eight Clips of Obama Promising Televised Healthcare Negotiations

Nancy Pelosi takes swipe at President Obama’s campaign promises

Nancy Pelosi takes swipe at President Obama’s campaign promises

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, piqued with White House pressure to accept the Senate health reform bill, threw a rare rhetorical elbow Tuesday at President Barack Obama, questioning his commitment to his 2008 campaign promises.

A leadership aide said it was no accident.

Pelosi emerged from a meeting with her leadership team and committee chairs in the Capitol to face an aggressive throng of reporters who immediately hit her with C-SPAN’s request that she permit closed-door final talks on the bill to be televised.

A reporter reminded the San Francisco Democrat that in 2008, then-candidate Obama opined that all such negotiations be open to C-SPAN cameras.

“There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail,” quipped Pelosi, who has no intention of making the deliberations public.

Obama prods Congress to pass health bill quickly

President Barack Obama is prodding House and Senate Democrats to get him a final health care bill as soon as possible, encouraging them to bypass the usual negotiations between the two chambers in the interest of speed.

Obama delivered the message at an Oval Office meeting Tuesday evening with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his No. 2, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined in by phone.

They agreed that rather than setting up a formal conference committee to resolve differences between health bills passed last year by the House and Senate, the House will work off the Senate’s version, amend it and send it back to the Senate for final passage, according to a House leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the private meeting.

Obama himself will take a hands-on role, convening another meeting with congressional leaders at the White House on Wednesday, the aide said.

The aim is to get a final bill to Obama’s desk before the State of the Union address sometime in early February.

Share This With Friends:
  • Print
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • MySpace
  • Mixx
  • Netvibes
  • NewsVine

{ 0 comments }