Sarah Barracuda vs. The Governator?

December 16, 2009

Our governor is a famous tough-guy, but I don’t think even the Terminator should want to take on this battle.

It all began when former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post criticizing the rigged science apparently revealed by the Climategate files and recommending that President Obama skip the UN Conference on Climate Change at Copenhagen, at least until questions about the reliability of the basic climate data could be solved. It was a reasonable editorial that strongly recommended caution in the wake of the expanding scandal. For her troubles, she earned an attack by Al Gore himself, but she returned fire.

Now comes the turn of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who I sometimes suspect wishes he were Al Gore. In Copenhagen for the conference and asked about Governor Palin’s editorial, Arnie replied:

The California governor has become an environmental standard bearer for the Republican party, which is split on the merits of curbing emissions. Sarah Palin, John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 presidential election, has attacked cap and trade and questioned any link between man-made emissions and global warming.

“You have to ask: what was she trying to accomplish?” said Mr Schwarzenegger. “Is she really interested in this subject or is she interested in her career and in winning the [Republican] nomination [for president]? You have to take all these things with a grain of salt.”

Sigh. Governors in glass statehouses shouldn’t throw stones. Sarah Palin has a very good record of environmental stewardship, as any fair examination of her time as governor shows. But, I’ll let her speak for herself:

Why is Governor Schwarzenegger pushing for the same sorts of policies in Copenhagen that have helped drive his state into record deficits and unemployment? Perhaps he will recall that I live in our nation’s only Arctic state and that I was among the first governors to create a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with climate change. While I and all Alaskans witness the impacts of changes in weather patterns firsthand, I have repeatedly said that we can’t primarily blame man’s activities for those changes. And while I did look for practical responses to those changes, what I didn’t do was hamstring Alaska’s job creators with burdensome regulations so that I could act “greener than thou” when talking to reporters.

One shot, one RINO bagged.

She’s right to call attention to Schwarzenegger’s record, because the policies he has championed in the name of “science” have only lead to deeper debt and faster job loss in California, all to little or no real benefit. For example, he supported and signed the draconian AB 32, a statewide “greenhouse gas” bill similar to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill proposed in Congress. It will do nothing to solve the anthropogenic global warming problem (which doesn’t exist, anyway), but its regulatory provisions are already driving jobs out of the state in the midst of a deep recession.  And Arnie’s support for Proposition 71 in 2004 indebted the state for three billion dollars to support fetal stem-cell research – yet more junk science. (Unlike fetal stem cells, adult stem cells show real promise.)

The trouble with our governor is that, to put it simply if bluntly, he falls too easily to the temptation to do what’s currently popular in order to maintain his own popularity, rather than what’s right, even if it makes a large segment of the California public angry. Hence he has done nothing substantive to reduce spending in this state even while revenues crash, he’s agreed to economy-hobbling measures because environmentalism is a “Mom and apple pie” issue in California, and he’s agreed to take on more debt even while the state already suffers under a crushing debt burden. And now he’s chasing (Green) popular appeal in Copenhagen, which includes ritual denunciation of those who dare to be skeptical, such as Sarah Palin.

Governor, you may have been the Terminator, but she is Sarah Palin Conner. Don’t even think about it.  Not talking

LINKS: Hot Air.

Advertisements

Islamists in the UK government? What could go wrong?

December 16, 2009

For several years now, Great Britain has been trying to deal with the growing radicalism in its Muslim population by bringing into government moderate Muslims who can advise the Crown as to the best ways to “reach out” and counter Salafist influence. Trouble is, the “moderates” they keep recruiting aren’t so moderate. Islamist Watch gives us two of the latest examples:

Not Jolly Good: Islamists in the UK Government

Is there any degree of radicalism that disqualifies someone from holding a sensitive government post in the UK? Probably. But it would be difficult to tell based on two recent stories.

First, Treasury official Azad Ali has begun advising the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on combating Islamic extremism. Apparently his suspension earlier this year for blog entries steeped in — you guessed it — Islamic extremism presented no barrier to his joining the “community involvement” panel chaired by the CPS anti-terror chief. In addition to naming radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki, the email pal of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan, as “one of my favorite speakers and scholars”

And…

Second, there is Asim Hafeez, the new “head of intervention” at the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism of the Home Office, where he is charged with “divert[ing] fellow Muslims from the path of violence.” However, Hafeez has been described by a knowledgeable colleague as a “hardcore Salafi,” one who follows a puritanical form of Islam. According to Harry’s Place:

A number of Hafeez’s talks are available online which appear to not only back up [these] accusations but also to suggest that Hafeez might additionally be a hard-line Islamist who wishes to replace the British constitution with “the Quran and the Sunnah.”

Do read the whole thing.

This is only the latest example of how, through a blind devotion to unquestioning multiculturalism and political correctness, we tie one hand behind our backs in our fight with the jihadis. For fear of seeming intolerant or bigoted against all Muslims (and for fear of angering those on whom we depend for our crack oil), we don’t dare inquire into what the people we want to place in sensitive positions might really believe. We turn a blind eye to the very real ideology of violent jihad, Islamic supremacism, and antisemitism that runs throughout the Qur’an, the hadiths, the writings of later scholars to the present day – the core of Islam, not a radical heresy or misunderstanding. At times, as at Ft. Hood, this leads to fatal results.

Do I think there are no moderate Muslims? Far from it. There are plenty who reject the jihad imperative and just want to live quiet lives among their neighbors. But there is a disturbingly large fraction who have taken Islam’s aggressive message to heart and support both the cultural and the violent jihad, seeking Islam’s eventual victory over Western civilization. We do ourselves no favors -indeed, we harm our own cause and that of genuinely moderate Muslims – by refusing to face head-on the ideological and theological challenges posed by Salafist Islam.

Screening for Islamist sentiments should be a basic precaution, hurt feelings be damned.


How many feet can Al Gore stick in his big mouth?

December 16, 2009

The Goracle, speaking at the  UN Copenhagen Climate Change Farce Conference:

And he urged the world to complete a global deal by July, assuming the Copenhagen summit ends this week with a political agreement by all the countries.

Describing a “runaway melt” of the Earth’s ice, rising tree mortality and prospects of severe water scarcities, Gore told a UN audience: “In the face of effects like these, clear evidence that only reckless fools would ignore, I feel a sense of frustration” at the lack of agreement so far.

“Rising tree mortality?” Really? Should I go hug my favorite oak before it dies from drought, gets blown over by gale-force storms created by Man’s folly, and then floats away on the rising seas?

Umm… No. Nope. Not at all.

Al is ignoring inconvenient facts again:

Satellite data for the real world (not the one Mr. Gore lives in) can help give us an idea.

Global


Globally net primary productivity (NPP) has increased. As the IPCC’s WG II report (p. 106) says:

Satellite-derived estimates of global net primary production from satellite data of vegetation indexes indicate a 6% increase from 1982 to 1999, with large increases in tropical ecosystems (Nemani et al., 2003) [Figure 1]. The study by Zhou et al. (2003), also using satellite data, confirm that the Northern Hemisphere vegetation activity has increased in magnitude by 12% in Eurasia and by 8% in NorthAmerica from 1981 to 1999

Read the rest to see how vegetation is actually expanding worldwide.  And, contra the EPA, the trees seem quite happy with rising CO2 levels.

Tell me again why anyone takes bombastic fraud seriously?

RELATED: More Goracle gaffes.

(hat tip: David Freddoso)