You May Not Know Jack, But You BETTER Know About George

George Soros that is. This guy has a finger in every left leaning pie in the world Many people know Soros is one of the biggest financiers of MoveOn.org but there is much more George supports and not everyone knows he is out there working behind the scenes to influence public policy.

There is an organization called the "Open Society Institute. In addition to supporting lots of liberal causes this organization has been very helpful to NASA's James Hansen. Any scientists who is skeptical of the "global warming consensus" is accused of being backed by big oil. James Hansen has been described as a "lone whistle blower" who was allegedly censored by the Bush administration. An accusation that is made laughable by the fact that NASA changed it's media policies to allow Hansen to continue his crusade. It was recently reported that Hansen received $720,000 to help him spread the alarm about "global warming". Who is politicizing science now? How would Hansen's credibility been affected if everyone knew who was backing him?

The Open Society Institute had a hand in another big news story in 2006. When all the "immigration rallies" began it was reported that this was a spontaneous grass roots movement. There was no mention of an organizer or instigator except for a Los Angeles Spanish-language radio station. That was not true. The truth is that the 17 million dollar Justice Fund, a underling of the OSI listed 19 projects for 2006 and one was "immigration rallies" another was funding illegal immigrants activists groups court cases. These immigrants and their supporters didn't "rise up" on their own. They were manipulated by one of Soro's well funded groups.

You have heard, I'm sure, about some of the court cases that seem to favor terrorists. Have you ever wondered who brings these suits? The Open Society Institute spent $74 million in 2006 to "shape U.S. policy". Some court cases they backed and won include the Supreme Court's decision to abolish military commissions judging terrorists at Guantanamo. They financially supported the radicals who pressured the TSA to eliminate their "Secure Flight" program, which matched passenger lists against lists of terrorists names. The lawyers who persuaded the Texas judge to block tracking terrorists cell phones were funded by OSI too. Soros' OSI partners with a group called the Tides Foundation which is a cause Terri Kerry supports and which is know for very quietly transferring funds from wealthy donors to left wing "fringe groups" like eco-terrorism.

Another "below the radar" political organization called "Democracy Alliance" enjoys great largess from Soros. The policy of Democracy Alliance seems to be that the party whose name is closest to the word Democracy gets full control of the government. This group was formed in 2005 and until this week I had never heard of them, had you? This is another group throwing vast sums of money and misinformation around to further their far left agenda.

That brings us to America Coming Together or ACT which is not dedicated to the sexual fulfillment of all Americans, but would be less worrisome if it were. Remember all the news about "disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff"? Well ACT was fined $775,000 by the Federal Election Commission, the third largest fine in FEC history and there was hardly a ripple in the main stream news about it. In 2004 ACT raised $137 million in 17 states, most of which the FEC says were illegal contributions. Why isn't this BIG NEWS?

Wake up America! You need to know who these people are and what they are doing behind the scenes to manipulate you.

ENVIRO-COMMUNISM or Is Green the New Red?

With the fall of the Soviet Union Communism lost most of it's luster. American Liberals finally had to give up the dream. Without the USSR Communism was never going to catch on and overcome Capitalism. Too bad for the Left but those folks, if anything, are resourceful. They saw early that taking up the cause to "Save the Planet" could open another front in the fight against Capitalism.

From the Nixon administration's creation of the EPA on there has been a never ending battle between capitalism and so called environmentalists (which I shall here in refer to as Enviro-Mentals). Whenever and where ever someone wanted to build homes, factories or any commercial enterprise they would have to run a gauntlet of inspections, regulations and frequently litigation. Hundred year-old family farms were left to dry up and blow away while the water was reserved to save a tiny fish, the snail darter. Logging interests had to be shut down to save the spotted owl who we were told could only live in certain trees. This was disproved when a family of these owls took up residence in a K-Mart sign.

The Enviro-Mentals have successfully prevented the construction of an oil refinery in this country for over thirty years. They opposed the Alaskan Pipeline but were unable to prevent it. Their dire warnings of the destruction the pipeline would cause never came true. Just the opposite occurred. Caribou populations expanded as they found some previously unavailable warmth generated by the pipeline. The Enviro-Mentals have successfully prevented us from tapping the huge oil reserves in Anwar while other Liberals and some reasonable folks denounce our dependence on foreign oil.

The new Crisis du jour from the Enviro-Mentals is "Global Warming" Ah, if not for Global Warming we might have heard the last of Al Gore, but no such luck. Again, those who so loudly decry the horror of an increase in the temperature of the northern hemisphere of less than two degrees in one hundred years vehemently oppose the one source of energy which causes no carbon emissions, nuclear power.

Most Americans may be unaware that Canada uses nuclear power for a lot of their energy needs. France produces 76% of it's electricity from 56 nuclear power plants. There hasn't been a nuclear incident for decades and we can certainly make safe use of a power source that has been mastered by the French. Does Global Warming guru Al Gore call for a switch to nuclear power? Absolutely not. Instead he calls for all of us to live our lives greener. Gore himself can't do so, his mission is too important, but he expects you to lessen the way you live your life.

Some scientists disagree with the "global warming consensus". Al Gore calls them "Deniers" comparing them to people who claim one of history's darkest events never happened. Anyone who fails to buy the "global warming lie" hook line and sinker is attacked. During the Clinton Administration any government scientist who doubted global warming was fired any others were advised they would be blacklisted from receiving any government grants.

The only solution the Enviro-Mentals will accept is to throw even more draconian hurdles in front of American business interests. The estimated cost to our economy for reducing carbon emissions per Al Gore's baby, the Kyoto Treaty was 77 to 338 Billion in 1992 dollars. I assure you the price hasn't decreased in the past 15 years. A hefty price tag has never been a deterrent to those on the left who seek bigger and bigger government. No problem, they'll just "tax the rich".

All to keep the planet at it's current temperature. The benefits of some additional warming are never discussed. There is significant scientific evidence to support theories that the earth has been warmer than current temperatures in the past. Directly prior to the Renaissance for example. A warming trend resulted in longer growing seasons and world wide benefits to mankind. Now record heat is big news and record cold is ignored. Here's an idea, if we have to ignore something let's make it Al Gore.

I Love Liberals

I love liberals, don't you? Only a liberal can pick a fight and then if you respond in any manner other than total capitulation they accuse you of attacking them and suddenly take the high road. Recently I had two email encounters that seemed to go that way. The first was quite a shock as seemingly out of the blue a business acquaintance sent me a brief tirade about President Bush and Vice-Pres Chaney. When I replied with some defense I got a haughty reply about how neither of us will likely convince the other so we should drop it. HE started it but WE should drop it. No problem there I deleted him form my address book. He was a flaky attorney from Dade County. He won't be missed.

This does explain how so many liberals can support Hillary Clinton. I find it totally unreasonable for anyone to attack then cry foul, hardly good sportsmanship or even adult behavior. Apparently many disagree and that makes it reasonable, for them and for Hillary to have it both ways. When Hillary accuses some imaginary "Vast Right wing Conspiracy" for making up lies about her husband canoodling with an intern that is a perfectly legitimate claim. When it turns out that her husband was doing exactly what he was accused of he is the only liar in the scenario no apology is offered. When asked by Tim Russert if she owes an apology for that accusation Mrs. Clinton reverts to innocent victim replying only "I wish that none of us had to go through that very difficult time. Never taking any responsibility for causing the "very difficult time".

When Hillary and others accuse the President of every evil imaginable including knowingly allowing September 11th to happen that is their Constitutional Right. If anyone dares to reasonably point out that these statements might damage our country and hurt our chances of winning the war in Iraq they scream foul! "How dare you" they cry! "How dare you impugn my patriotism". It's amazing to me. You can watch it time and time again, first outrageous behavior and then when that behavior is commented upon immediate highhanded victim hood. This passive aggressive ploy has silenced Americans nationwide. Millions of conservative and moderate Americans just pipe down to avoid the theatrics the left employs if you dare speak up.

One good example occurred at a women's bible class of all places. A very outspoken woman thought it appropriate to say in a bible class how she "hates" being in any group that thinks President Bush is so great. This was not in response to anything said in class, politics had not been mentioned. This woman just wanted us all to know that if we had anything positive to say about the President, that would be offensive to her. I think I would have been happier living in the 1950's when folks were more likely to be offended by negative statements about the President.

Here we are, in a country where you would hesitate to say in public "I think President Bush is doing the best job possible under very difficult circumstances". Hows that for muzzeling the opposition. Millions of people are afraid to voice and support for our President. Supporting the President openly has been deemed "rude" but defaming him venomously is perfectly allowed.

It's a crazy time! And, not in a good way.