Thursday, January 28, 2010

State of the Obamanation & More on Climategate

OBAMA SPANKS THE SUPREME COURT
Obama once again showed his disdain for the Constitution by spanking the Supreme Court in his first State of the Union. The Court had overturned several unconstitutional laws that have been around for quite a while, as well as parts of the McCain-Feingold act.

This was not the forum to disagree about campaign finance reform. A press conference or weekly radio address would have been much more appropriate. Besides, how much of Obama's money came from foreign interests? We may never know, since much of it was contributed in cash by people with false names and addresses. Also, a significant portion came through the internet and is not verifiable. Obama has opened himself up to a lot of criticism for this hypocrisy.

Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. [Click to read more from the "Times of London"]


Yup. UEA was clearly breaking the law, and the scientists were being unethical--that is, they were lying about data and hiding it to cover their tracks. Why? Probably to steal more taxpayer money for bogus research. Well, now they've been found out. They all need to be sacked and prevented from doing research ever again! They have damaged the reputation of the scientific method.

1 comment:

  1. There was much internet chatter regarding the source of contributions to the Obama campaign, but of course the NSM never picked up the story.

    The President's sudden interest in campaign finance reform is the type of thing that would make a cynical person want to review the funding of the recent MA election and the upcoming midterm elections. Is it possible the party in power would attempt to slant the rules into their favor prior in the election right as they slip in the polls? Nooo, that's just crazy talk. Washington would NEVER do that!

    ReplyDelete