LET’S HOPE SO, THAT’S WHY HE WAS ELECTED …
A Tale of Two Presidents: Why is President Donald J. Trump so reviled by the LEFT, Democrats, MSM and Progressives? Is it because of his brash, harsh tweets, his take no prisoners attitude, his say what he damn well feels like it to the media or his just mere presence? Well yes of course. But the real reason is Trump is undoing the Obama years piece by piece. The Progressive dream is being dismantled. To the LEFT’s horror, the global warming and illegal immigration are on the top of the hit list. Whine as the LEFT and Never-Trumpers’ try and lie that Trump is somehow like Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini, it was in fact Barack Hussein Obama who was the one who weaponized the FBI, IRS, DOJ and EPA against his enemies. Not Trump. All Trump is doing is undoing the past 8 years of Obama and “Making America Great Again” to the reality of a stock market that crossed a record 26K today.
Obama, waiving goodbye to his legacy
Yet one way of understanding Trump — particularly the momentum of his first year — is through recollection of the last eight years of the Obama administration. In reductionist terms, Trump is the un-Obama. Surprisingly, that is saying quite a lot more than simple reductive negativism. Republicans have not seriously attempted to roll back the administrative state since Reagan. On key issues of climate change, entitlements, illegal immigration, government spending, and globalization, it was sometimes hard to distinguish a Bush initiative from a Clinton policy or a McCain bill from a Biden proposal. There was often a reluctant acceptance of the seemingly inevitable march to the European-style socialist administrative state.
Even his critics sometimes concede that his economic and foreign-policy agendas are bringing dividends. In some sense, it is not so much because of innovative policy, but rather that he is simply bullying his way back to basics we’ve forgotten over the past decades.
The wonder was never how to grow the economy at 3 percent (all presidents prior to 2009 had at one time or another done just that), but rather, contrary to “expert” economic opinion, how to discover ways to prevent that organic occurrence.
Obama was the first modern president who apparently figured out how. It took the efforts of a 24/7 redistributionist agenda of tax increases, federalizing health care, massive new debt, layers of more regulation, zero-interest rates, neo-socialist regulatory appointments, expansionary eligibility for entitlements, and constant anti-free-market jawboning that created a psychological atmosphere conducive to real retrenchment, mental holding patterns, and legitimate fears over discernable success. Obama weaponized federal agencies including the IRS, DOJ, and EPA in such a manner as to worry anyone successful, prominent, and conservative enough to come under the federal radar of a vindictive Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, or a FISA court.
Trump has sought to undo all that, point by point. The initial result so far is not rocket science, but rather a natural expression of what happens when millions of Americans believe they have greater freedom and safety to profit and innovate, and trust they will not be punished, materially or psychologically, for the ensuing successful results. The radical upsurge in business and consumer confidence is not revolutionary but almost natural. The Left and Never Trump Right claim that Trump is Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini. In fact, for the first time in eight years, it is highly unlikely that the FBI, IRS, CIA, DOJ, and other alphabet-soup agencies see their tasks as going after the president’s perceived opponents.
BIG BLOW TO BARACK OBAMA’S CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVE …
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations that is part of his global warming climate change initiative. 27 states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab” and that the regulations would greatly increase energy costs and put some of their industries out of business. Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2, 2016. Thankfully, the SCOTUS put a hold on anything going forward as Powerline opines, “Obama’s EPA was betting that the slow legal process would mean that they’d have a lot of things in place, and many utilities would have complied with the EPA’s dictates, before the law was settled at the Supreme Court.”
A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration’s sweeping plan to address global warming.
In a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.
The surprising move is a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab.”
By temporarily freezing the rule the high court’s order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.
The court’s four liberal justices said they would have denied the request.
The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030.
“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Clean Power Plan while litigation proceeds,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.Earnest said the administration’s plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, and gives the states time to develop cost-effective plans to reduce emissions. He also said the administration will continue to “take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions.”
- According to the dishwasher manufacturers, setting stricter limits on the amount of water each dishwasher can use (3.1 gallons), will force users to run their dishwashers more, in turn using more water.
Daily Commentary – Tuesday, July 21, 2015 Download
18 Apocalyptic Predictions Made During the Time of the First Earth Day in 1970 That Were Just Flat Out Wrong
WOW, COULD THE 1970′S GLOBAL ALARMISTS BEEN MORE WRONG?
Everyone who was old enough during the 1970′s remembers the constant predictions that there would be an ice age. There was gloom and doom of apocalyptic type catastrophes and that were were headed into an Ice Age. It is those same disingenuous people who now predict that man made global warming will be the end of times. Hey folks, can you people settle on your scientific lies? From the American Enterprise Institute comes the following 18 predictions made in the 1970′s around the time of the first Earth Day. Take a good look and see just how wrong these alarmists have been already. Now we are supposed to give their present day predictions any credence?
To watch these VIDEOS is just amazing. Interestingly enough, the media called Earth Day a failure.
EARTH DAY … A QUESTION OF SURVIVAL (Walter Cronkite)
How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970? The answer: “The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong,” according to Bailey. Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started.
1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” [Um, wouldn't this mean that the world would have ended between 1985 and 2000? If my calendar serves me correctly, isn't it 2015? As Maxwell Smart, Agent 86 would say, "missed it by that much".]
2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment. [Hmm, see prediction 1.]
3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” [The 1970's editorial folks might want to visit Beijing, China.]
4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” [Wow, some one really got this one wrong.]
5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By… some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” [Paul Ehrlich was on a stuck on stupid role in the 1970's with his predictions.]
6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.” [Dude, the Great Die Off, really? The only thing that died between 1980 and 1989 was Paul Ehrlich's reputation and credibility.]
Earth Day 1970 Part 6: Boston … Boston Police break up protest at Logan Airport (CBS News with Walter Cronkite)
7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness. [Good grief, even though his predictions were toal BS, this guy is still spouting his bovine scatology.]
8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” [Wrong again, what was this fascination with famine? Or was it wishful thinking?]
9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” [OMG, ROTFLMAO]
10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” [Watt also predicted the world would run out of oil by the year 2000 and that humans would emit so much nitrogen light would actually be filtered out of the atmosphere. Where is my head shaking emoticon?]
Earth Day 1970 Part 11: White House Reaction (CBS News with Walter Cronkite) – What’s comical is that Pres. Nixon is the one who created the EPA
11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate. [These folks spread this BS and made a living out of doing so. UNREAL.]
12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in his 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles. [Oh no, its Paul Ehrlich again with another ridiculous claim of gloom and doom. This dude must have been a laugh-riot to be around]
13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. [Damn, I hope this is not the case. Note to Ehrlich, the life expectancy in the United States as of 2012 is 78.74 years.]
14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” [Oh no, I better go fill up the Chevy. Oh wait, its 2015. My prediction, by the year 2000 Ecologist Kenneth Watt had zero street cred.]
15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990. [I guess its good for him that he died in 1986 and wasn't around to see his bone-head wrong prediction.]
16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” [His prediction should have been that 75-80 percent of the 1970 Earth Day predictions were extinct.]
17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.” [Paul, Paul, Paul ... sometimes silence is golden, especially with your predictions].
18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” [What would Al Gore say ... Al said that the Earth had a fever, not the chills. From an Ice Age to Global warming and we experienced neither.]
Barack Obama EPA Official Compares Agency Enforcement to Roman Crucifixions … We’re “Crucifying” Oil And Gas Companies
Obama’s hope & change … CRUCIFIXION.
If any one ever wanted to really know how Barack Obama feels about oi and gas companies, they need to look no further than the CNS News report where Obama’s EPA official Al Armendariz, admitted that EPA’s “general philosophy” is to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies.
In the video, Administrator Armendariz says:
“I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement, and I think it was probably a little crude and maybe not appropriate for the meeting, but I’ll go ahead and tell you what I said:
“It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them.
“Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.”
VIDEO Hat Tip: The Foundry
Sen. James Inhofe (OK-R) stated on the US Senate floor that Armendariz’s words offer a “rare glimpse” into the Obama administration’s mindset on how they wish to deal with oil and gas companies.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe took to the Senate floor Wednesday to announce an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency’s “crucify them” enforcement strategy to keep oil and gas producers in line.
Inhofe said Armendariz’s words offer a “rare glimpse” into the Obama administration’s mindset, and pointed to examples of the EPA allegedly employing the strategy against natural gas producers in Parker County, Texas, Pavilion, Wyoming, and Dimock, Pennsylvania.
The Gateway Pundit is correct, Let’s face it. These people are out to destroy America.