People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Monday, November 23, 2009

Trying To Provide Cover


From today's Roanoke Times, a laugher:
A real threat to Medicare

There is one real and immediate threat to Medicare patients that touches on the health care reform debate: Republicans and some fiscal hawks among Democrats are balking at a measure to avert a 21 percent cut in Medicare payments to doctors starting in January.

Such a drastic reduction in reimbursement rates could cause some doctors to quit taking Medicare patients, making it harder for seniors to see the doctor of their choice.

Last week, House Democrats voted overwhelmingly to prevent the cuts, not just next year but ... [link]
Republicans are trying to cut Medicare?


Let's look at what real newspapers are reporting around the country:

Boston Globe: Democrats seek cuts in Medicare Advantage

CBS News: Democrats Aim To Cut Medicare Costs

The Washington Examiner: "Will Obama pay the price for cutting Medicare?"

Again, the Examiner: "Democrats agree to raise taxes and cut Medicare to fund health care reform"

Town Hall: ObamaCare Will Cut Medicare

MSNBC: "Seniors uneasy over Medicare cuts in overhaul"

I wonder if the boys at the Roanoke Times get paid on the side for some of the stuff they write.

Whereas Joe Biden Couldn't Pack a Denny's Restaurant ...

.. at lunch hour, Sarah Palin drew the masses on Sunday:


A Permanent Situation, We Hope

Fort Hood suspect paralyzed from chest down, lawyer says

We Want Someone's Head on a Platter

Here's the least we can expect from ClimateGate, the evolving story that has to do with those global warming scientists activists who cooked their data - and colluded in how best to present it and argue it:

Names are being named.

Reputations are being ruined.

Careers are about to end.

And that's a welcome change from the past.

When all those scientists years ago put forth theories that we were headed into an ice age, what happened to their day jobs?


In fact, many of them simply flipped from arguing that the planet was in a cooling trend to just the opposite.  And nobody took note.  Until recently.

And what happened to those scientists who came up with the goofy theory that hair spray (chlorofluorocarbons therein) was creating holes in the earth's upper atmosphere, resulting in a Democrat Congress passing draconian restrictions on CFC's?


Well now, at least with the latest environmental jihad perpetrated by these loons, we're taking names.  And heads are going to roll.

Science is about to get back on track, after wandering aimlessly in the political wilderness for all these years:
Copenhagen will fail – and quite right too
By Nigel Lawson, Times of London

Exactly a fortnight from today, the United Nations climate change conference opens in Copenhagen. Its purpose is (or was) clear: to agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

Last week an apparent hacker obtained access to their computers and published in the blogosphere part of their internal e-mail traffic. And the CRU has conceded that the at least some of the published e-mails are genuine.

Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals.

There may be a perfectly innocent explanation. But what is clear is that the integrity of the scientific evidence on which not merely the British Government, but other countries, too, through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, claim to base far-reaching and hugely expensive policy decisions, has been called into question. And the reputation of British science has been seriously tarnished. A high-level independent inquiry must be set up without delay. [link]
And who is it that led this charade?  Who are the members of this cabal that tried to twist the scientific data to fit their political motivations and to reach their political ends?

Truth warrior Marc Morano at Climate Depot lists 'em all.

Remember each one.  Mark your records.  Learn from this occasion.

Let's not let this happen ever again.

A Telling Tale About Those Who Hate Sarah

Jonah Goldberg, writing in National Review:
Slate magazine is just one of the countless media outlets convulsing with St. Vitus’ Dance over that demonic succubus Sarah Palin. In its reader forum, The Fray, one supposed Palinophobe took dead aim at the former Alaska governor’s writing chops, excerpting the following sentence from her book:

“The apartment was small, with slanting floors and irregular heat and a buzzer downstairs that didn’t work, so that visitors had to call ahead from a pay phone at the corner gas station, where a black Doberman the size of a wolf paced through the night in vigilant patrol, its jaws clamped around an empty beer bottle.”

Other readers pounced like wolf-sized Dobermans on an intruder. One guffawed, “That sentence by Sarah Palin could be entered into the annual Bulwer-Lytton bad writing contest. It could have a chance at winning a (sic) honorable mention, at any rate.”

But soon, the original contributor confessed: “I probably should have mentioned that the sentence quoted above was not written by Sarah Palin. It’s taken from the first paragraph of ‘Dreams From My Father,’ written by Barack Obama.”

The ruse should have been allowed to fester longer, but the point was made nonetheless: Some people hate Palin first and ask questions later. [link]
Like Goldberg (presumably) I've not heard one person ever criticize Obama's writing capability.  But then he's black.  And Palin is only a hockey mom.

So it all makes sense.

This Is Just Great

You can bet, Osama bin Ladin and 12 million other Muslim fanatics around the globe will be tuned to their TV sets for this:
Lawyer: 9/11 defendants want platform for views
By Karen Matthews, Associated Press

New York (AP) - The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but "would explain what happened and why they did it."

The U.S. Justice Department announced earlier this month that Ali and four other men accused of murdering nearly 3,000 people in the deadliest terrorist attack in the U.S. will face a civilian federal trial just blocks from the site of the destroyed World Trade Center.

Mohammed, Ali and the others will explain "their assessment of American foreign policy," Fenstermaker said.

"Their assessment is negative," he said. [link]
Obama has given these animals a platform, a microphone, and a TV camera with which to spew their hatred of the U.S. and to rally the faithful around the world.

My God.

- - -

The front page of today's New York Post:

What are we doing?

When Fools Run Things

I'm not sure whether I should be more upset with tho L.A. Times reporters or with idiotic Congressional spokesmen over this one:
LA Times Changes Its Mind: Science Doesn't Matter On Climate Bill
By Candace Moore, NewsBusters

That thumping sound you hear is the Los Angeles Times moving the goal posts in the global warming debate.
On November 22, while responding to the growing scandal about alleged proof that global warming is a hoax, the Times brushed it off with a puzzling claim that science should have no bearing on climate legislation.
What a difference a few leaked e-mail messages could make: just over a month ago, the exact same paper had insisted science was behind the push for regulation. Now with the validity of that science in doubt, the Times was quick to find a different angle.

The whole point of the meeting in Copenhagen has been to limit pollution that supposedly destroys the planet based on evidence gathered and purported by researchers specifically involved in the email scandal. If the very premise of global warming has possibly been exposed as a fraud, why would that not be of interest to those who want to legislate global warming?

Because, according to the Times, the fight to stop possibly nonexistent global warming would be about saving the economy:

"But advocates of action to curb global warming dismiss those claims, and political leaders and analysts say the Senate bill to limit greenhouse gas emissions will sink or swim based on economics, not science.

'The scientists are going to fight about this for decades,' said Robert Dillon, a spokesman for Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, one of several Senate Republicans who say they are open to some form of a climate bill. 'We should be doing something to curb our emissions that would not harm the economy, and would in fact boost the economy,' he said." [link] [my emphasis]
Okay, that's stupid.

And deserves no further response.

He's Goin' Down

I'm no expert but I'm guessing this isn't good:

Why aren't more people approving of Obama's job performance, I wonder.  Shouldn't we all be appreciative of his efforts to reduce unemplo ... of his efforts to win the war on terr ... of his efforts to reduce health care co ... of his efforts to reduce the national d ... of his efforts to bring Osama bin Lad ... of his efforts to turn the econo ... of his efforts to bring peace to the Middl ... of his efforts to balance the budg ...

Uh, now I understand.

Chart courtesy of the Gallup organization.

Did Anyone Expect a Different Outcome?

After all, they are DEMOCRATS:

I'm trying to remember, when Obama was campaigning to be president, did he tell us that his primary goal was to punish Americans and reward illegals?

I'm trying to remember ...