…is a torrential downpour caused by global warming induced drought, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Wake Up America, with a post on IRS targeting victims testifying to Congress today.
Read: If All You See… »
…is a torrential downpour caused by global warming induced drought, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Wake Up America, with a post on IRS targeting victims testifying to Congress today.
Read: If All You See… »
Oh, wait, sorry, he’s upset that Republicans have suggested that Obama and his administration might have engaged in wrong doing and could be involved in the IRS targeting scheme
Accuse first and ask questions later
A third House committee joined the stampede to examine the IRS on Monday, and its chairman did exactly what you would expect somebody to do before launching a fair and impartial investigation: He went on Fox News Channel and implicated the White House.
Asked by Fox’s Bill Hemmer what he hoped to learn at Monday afternoon’s hearing, Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) offered this bit of pre-hearing analysis:
“Of course, the enemies list out of the White House that IRS was engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the conservative political viewpoint across the country — an enemies list that rivals that of another president some time ago.â€
It was a sentence in need of a verb but packed with innuendo. And it is part of an approach by House Republicans that seems to follow the Lewis Carroll school of jurisprudence. Not only are they placing the sentence before the verdict, they’re putting the verdict before the trial.
Welcome to politics, Dana. Remember when Democrats, and their paid flacks like Milbank (hey, if Climate Realists can be accused of being in the pay of Big Oil and Big Coal, MSM writers like Milbank can be accused of being in the pay of Big Democrat and Big Obama) were accusing before asking questions on
The list goes on and on. Heck, just consider how Team Obama Blames Bush 5 years into Obama’s “presidency” and no one in the media bats and eye, including Milbank. What Excitable Dana is upset at is that Republicans have dared to Blame Obama, the guy who had an enemies list, the guy who created the atmosphere where Conservatives and Tea Party members were bad people with his constant attacks and denigration of those groups and individuals, and who has done nothing to deal with the situation after it was exposed.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
Read: Dana Milbank Upset Democrats Dare Accuse Bush, Bush Admin. Of Wrong Doing »
Originally, scientists found that the diabetes drug Avandia could cause heart attacks, so is now used as a drug of last resort (hey, how about those prescription drug commercials which use half the time to describe the possible side effects, like blindness, dark urine, and death? I really like the one about depression drugs causing suicidal thoughts). Anyhow, since the science was settle….
(WSJ) Food and Drug Administration documents released Monday suggested the agency was considering reviving a drug that has been highly restricted for nearly three years—the GlaxoSmithKline GSK.LN -0.58% PLC diabetes pill Avandia—and restoring it to full marketing status in the U.S.
Such a step is still far from certain, but it is on the agenda this week as the agency convenes a 28-member advisory committee of doctors to study the profile of Avandia, once a $3-billion-a-year medicine.
Glaxo recently paid for Duke University to review company research on Avandia. The Duke review upheld a Glaxo study that found the drug didn’t increase the risk of death or cardiovascular death.
A lengthy FDA analysis, made public Monday, endorsed the Duke review and, by implication, the company’s defense of its drug.
See, that’s the way science works. One study said “uh, oh, heart attack potential”, so another study was held. Because it was by the maker, there was concern about bias. So it was reviewed.
In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?
That was from the resignation letter Nobel Prize winning physicist Ivar Giaever wrote the American Physical Society.
Read: After Doing That Scientific Research Stuff, FDA Reconsidering Use Of Avandia »
Cause “climate change”. I have some fresh baked Toll House chocolate chip cookies for anyone who can read the entire ramblin’ wreck of an article before we get to the end
In the Era of Climate Change, Poets Can’t Write About the “Eternal Sea” – In literature, the classic metaphors for the ocean no longer make sense.
If the sea levels continue to rise at their current rate, the day is not far off when Miami and Atlantic City become beds for oysters. The fishing in the sea that was once near the surface now is done by trawls the length of locomotives dropped to the depth of a mile and dragged across the bottom, reducing many thousands of square miles of the ocean floor to barren deserts no longer giving birth to the tiny organisms from which emerge the great chains of being that sustain the life of the planet.
Nothing in the sea lives by itself, nothing either on the earth or in the air or in the minds of men. To know the sea is mortal is to know that we are not apart from it. Man is nature creatively refashioning itself. The abyss is human, not divine, a work in progress, whether made with a poet’s metaphor or with a vast prodigious bulk of Styrofoam.
The funny part is that Mr. Lapham makes a few good points on real environmental issues, like in the above and
We needn’t call upon an angry god to make the sea an object of no small terror. Every year we withdraw from it 160 million tons of fish, deposit in it 7 million tons of garbage. Poisonous chemicals in the Gulf of Mexico have formed a pool of dead water equivalent in size to the state of New Jersey; among the several hundred dead zones elsewhere in the world, one encircles the Chinese coastline.
There was no need to link this to hotcoldwetdry. Let the environmental issues stand on their own so we can all act on them.
Read: Bummer: Poets Can No Longer Write About The Eternal Sea »
Apparently schoolkids won’t know what snow free summers look like (via Steven Goddard)
(The Local) Struggling to know what to do this weekend? Well, summer is officially here so why not head to the ski slopes of the French Pyrénées? Yes, believe it or not a French ski station is reopening its doors to make the most of the unseasonal snow.
A combination of an icy winter and a chilly spring has meant that for the first time ever in the month of June, skiers will have the option of heading to the pistes in the French Pyrénées, French TV TF1 reported on Wednesday.
After recent cold weather, bosses at the ski station Porte Puymorens in the Pyrénées-Orientales region of the mountain range that divides France from Spain have taken the exceptional step to re-open the slopes this weekend after they had closed them at the end of the season in April. (snip)
Those who are not cheered by the prospect of skiing in June should not hold out for any real summer weather just yet, although there is hope the sun might make an appearance in France in July and August.
All because someone refused to stop using their icemaker. Tsk, tsk.
Read: CO2 Induced Warmth Forces French Skiing Slopes To Reopen »
…is a desertified world because someone else used hairspray, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on silly David Ploufe.
Read: If All You See… »
And are upset that they are being blamed for doing what they were told to do
(UK Daily Mail) Interviews with IRS employees have established that the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the Internal Revenue Service was engaged in targeting tea party groups and other conservative organizations for unfair levels of scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.
Rep. Darrel lssa, chairman of powerful House Committee of Oversight and Government Reform, made that startling announcement on CNN Sunday morning.
‘As late as last week,’ he said, ‘the [Obama] administration was still trying to say the [IRS targeting scandal] was from a few rogue agents in Cincinnati, when in fact the indication is that they were directly being ordered from Washington.’
How’d he come up with that statement?
A committee spokesman sent MailOnline partial transcripts of two interviews with unnamed IRS workers about the agency’s actions in early 2010, on whose testimony Issa based his bombshell statement.
One of those interviewees said it was ‘impossible’ for a few IRS agents to have orchestrated such widespread partisan targeting on their own.
‘Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search [for tea party groups], any more context?’ one IRS witness was asked in a closed-door interview.
‘He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases,’ came the reply.
The employee, who said he or she was evaluating 40 such applications for tax-exempt status from conservative organizations at the time, said ‘some went to Washington. D.C. … I sent seven.’
Cases were being requested from D.C.
Asked whether the problem ‘was originated in and contained in the Cincinnati office,’ as some Obama administration officials in Washington have claimed, the agent replied that ‘I still hear people saying we were low level employees, so we were lower than dirt, according to people in D.C. So, take it for what it is.’
‘They were basically throwing us underneath the bus.’
‘[W]e didn’t do anything wrong,’ the agent said, according to the partial transcript. ‘We followed directions based on other people telling us what to do.’
Sadly, these employees didn’t blow the whistle back when this started, but, then, most often low level employees are concerned about retaliation when they blow the whistle on upper levels, as well as worrying that no one at the upper levels will listen. The question for now is “will they blow the lid off this scandal?”
More at Scared Monkeys, The Gateway Pundit, protein wisdom, and Wake Up America (which has a partial transcript)
Over the years I and other Climate Realists have consistently pointed out that Warmists rarely practice what they preach, and, at best, only take token measures within their own lives, such as replacing a bulb or two with CFLs. When you read my posts on “climate change” or comments around the web that theme will be included more often than not. Warmists are often very upset with me for calling out their blatant hypocrisy. Fortunately, James Turner, the head of communications for Greenpeace International’s Save the Arctic Campaign, is here to say “don’t feel guilty”
A friend recently returned from a camping trip in the Sierra Nevada. His eyes shone as he described the opalescent sky, the vitality of wildlife in spring and the fun he’d had playing with his two young daughters during the mellow evenings. It had been a really good trip, an experience to treasure, he said.
I casually asked how long it took to get there. “Oh, it wasn’t too bad,” he said, and then caught himself, as if he’d said something wrong. “But we took the minivan this time, which I suppose means we weren’t so in tune with nature after all.”
I felt slightly hurt. I am an environmentalist — I work for Greenpeace. Did he think that makes me some moral arbiter of fun, sternly passing judgment on those who ignore the perils of climate change to enjoy a weekend in the mountains?
Of course, it wasn’t really about me. What my friend expressed was climate guilt, a feeling that many of us who care about environmental issues experience every day. I am not immune. We feel guilty about driving cars and watching TV and turning on lights, as if that makes us personally responsible for this gigantic threat that looms over us.
But, you know who’s at fault for making Warmists feel guilty for being hypocrites?
Whether this “guilt barrier” is deliberately constructed or just innate to our psyches, it’s being exploited by the fossil fuel cartel. Its members are content to have us feel guilty, particularly if it contributes to a sense of helplessness. Where once companies such as Exxon Mobil denied that their products were causing dangerous levels of pollution, now they claim it is impossible to switch from them. “Look at your life,” this thinking goes. “You’re up to your neck in it. You really want us to turn off the tap?”
See? It’s the fault of Big Oil for pointing out that Warmists are hypocrites (hey, remember the 2005 UN IPCC in the exotic vacation spot of Bali, where so many private jets brought that they had to deadhead (fly without passengers) them to other islands to park them?), apparently hurting Warmist feelings and making them feel bad.
This accusation is based on a false premise: that all alternatives are equally accessible to consumers, and we’re all happily choosing fossil fuels. That’s simply not true, and nowhere is this more evident than in the case of the oil industry’s greatest threat: the electric car.
Despite encouraging news that the Toyota Prius has become the No. 1 selling car in California, fully electric vehicles remain out of financial reach for all but the most affluent families. And like most of America, our state lacks the charging infrastructure to support many such cars anyway. More barriers to entry.
Hey, you could ride a bike. Live close to work. Walk. Take the bus. If you really believe that fossil fuels are evil, you’d find a way.
Whatever my friend might personally think about climate change and air pollution, he has to stick to a budget that will support his whole family. Nor will he risk stranding them all along I-5. His “choice” of a minivan is in fact no choice at all. He’s left feeling disempowered, implicated and hypocritical. Any desire to act is supplanted by resignation. But whose fault is it?
Well, if he really believes, he wouldn’t take that fossil fueled trip in the first place. He could, at least, purchase a small, fuel efficient car, or even take the bus. And, yeah, Mr. Turner continues to blame Big Oil in the next paragraph.
Maybe it’s time for us to remove the guilt. Yes, I drive a car that runs on gasoline. I fly for work when necessary and occasionally for vacation. But doing these things is not the same as admitting they are inevitable. Five years ago I flew more; now I use Skype. Bike lanes have been newly painted in my neighborhood, so I cycle to the store. In a couple of years, electric cars might come into my price range. In the meantime, I refuse to feel guilty.
In the battle against climate change, we should not be waging guilt trips on one another. Rather, we should take the fight to those who use our sense of personal responsibility against us. Climate change is a problem, and we must fix it. But it’s certainly not our fault.
See? It’s that easy, Warmists. It’s Someone Else’s fault, so, buck up little campers, don’t feel guilty…do any actually feel guilty? I’ve yet to run across any Warmist who feels guilty about being a climahypocrite. They also seem to have lots of excuses handy as to why they barely take even token measures within their own lives. Anyhow, I really find amusement in the notion that Warmists are supposed to fight back against those who attempt to make them feel guilty, because that’s apparently more important than practicing what they preach.
Read: Greenpeace Warmist: Hey, All You Warmists Shouldn’t Feel Guilty About Being Complete Hypocrites »