Climategate Scientists Colluded With Government Officials To Hide Research that didn't fit their Apocalyptic Global Warming

Dailymail.co.uk:

More than 5,000 documents have been leaked online purporting to be the correspondence of climate scientists at the University of East Anglia who were previously accused of ‘massaging’ evidence of man-made climate change.


Following on from the original 'climategate' emails of 2009, the new package appears to show systematic suppression of evidence, and even publication of reports that scientists knew to to be based on flawed approaches.


And not only do the emails paint a picture of scientists manipulating data, government employees at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) are also implicated.


One message appeared to show a member of Defra staff telling colleagues working on climate science to give the government a ‘strong message’.


The emails paint a clear picture of scientists selectively using data, and colluding with politicians to misuse scientific information.


‘Humphrey’, said to work at Defra, writes: ‘I cannot overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the government can give on climate change to help them tell their story.


'They want their story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made to look foolish.’


Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the centre of the affair, said the group findings did stand up to scrutiny.


Yet one of the newly released emails, written by Prof. Jones - who is working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - said: 'Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden.


'I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.'


In another of his emails, he wrote: 'I’ve been told that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is above national Freedom of Information Acts.


'One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process.'


Other scientists are clearly against such a policy, but some seemed happy to collude with concealing and destroying evidence.


One nervous scientist wrote: 'The figure you sent is very deceptive.'


'I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run,' wrote another.


The lead author of one of the reports, Jonathan Overpeck, wrote, 'The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out.'


A weak performance by Environment Secretary Chris Huhne on Question Time has helped to inflame the row over the second leak of private UEA emails - now described as Climategate 2.0.

Once again, global warming is nothing but a liberal scam that has made Al Gore super rich.

Los Angeles Mayor Tells Occupy Wall Street To Hit The Road

Politico.com:

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa says Occupy LA protesters must leave their encampment on the lawn of City Hall by 12:01 a.m. Monday.


The mayor and police Chief Charlie Beck announced the planned ouster at a Friday afternoon news conference.


The mayor praised the protest and its aims but said the camp of about 485 tents is unsustainable and City Hall Park needs to be cleaned and restored.


Elected city leaders initially embraced the campers and the deadline to leave is a tactic that stands in stark contrast to middle-of-the-night police raids in other cities. Villaraigosa handed out plastic ponchos one rainy day. The City Council passed a resolution to support Occupy LA. Officials found an alternate site for a farmers market that the camp displaced.


But as Occupy Los Angeles entered its seventh week with no end in sight, the dialogue started getting strained.


City Hall still made friendly overtures, trying to make a deal with the activists by offering them 10,000 square feet of office space and empty lots for a garden if they would pack up their tents. Fallout after the proposal was made public and caused the deal to be rescinded.


As camps in other cities degenerated into unrest that led to mass arrests, Occupy L.A. has remained largely a peaceful commune. Police arrive on site only when called in to investigate petty crimes. Marches have resulted in about five spontaneous arrests — the other 70 or so involved protesters who deliberately got arrested to make a political statement.


The hands-off strategy perhaps underscores the liberal leanings of a city that has often been known for counterculture movements.

RELATED: Why African Americans aren’t embracing Occupy Wall Street

Chris Matthews: I Could Argue That The Media ‘Leans A Little To The Left’

Mediaite.com:

On Friday’s episode of Hardball, host Chris Matthews gave something of a needle-scratch moment when he noted that the American media tends to “lean a little to the left.”


Matthews and his panel were discussing what the future holds for Mitt Romney, with guest John Heilemann weighing in on Romney’s strategy for Iowa. “If you go out there as the frontrunner,” he said, “and now you’re playing in Iowa, I think the national media narrative is going to quickly become ‘Is Mitt Romney making the same mistake as he made in 2008 when he tried to do the same strategy – win Iowa, win New Hampshire, put the race away?’”


He added that it would be difficult for Romney’s campaign to “lower expectations the way they think he can.”


Matthews was inclined to agree:


And that’s what we call a dynamic. He goes in there and says, “I’m running, I can win,” and because we know he doesn’t take chances, the national media, which leans a little to the left I could argue, could smash him.


Now remember, Matthews is a guy who had been courted by Roger Ailes to join Fox News (which, for those of you who tend to dwell underneath rocks or on other planets, is decidedly not a left-leaning media enterprise), and who has faced criticism for, at times, taking the Right’s point of new when it comes to certain discussions. So it shouldn’t be all that surprising that, out of all pundits who lean left of center on a network that leans left forward, such an opinion would come from Matthews.

The Left and all the other FOX haters out there will continue to spout the nonsense that FOX is nothing but a propaganda machine for the GOP while ignoring the fact that FOX not only plays it down the middle, but is all but ONE channel. Yet, even though MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and PBS all lean Left and feature anchors who mostly vote Democrat, the more you repeat a lie, the more people will believe it. At least Chris Matthews is honest enough to admit this.

Conservatives, Romney, and Electability

WSJ.com:

Conservative resistance to Mitt Romney's nomination increasingly emphasizes electability as much as ideology, concentrating on his perceived weaknesses as a candidate along with an inconsistent approach to the issues. In headlining a typical blog post, Erick Erickson of RedState.com laments: "Mitt Romney as the Nominee: Conservatism Dies and Barack Obama Wins."


Such projections of doom portray Mr. Romney as the dreary second coming of John McCain—a hapless moderate foisted on the disillusioned rank and file by the GOP's country-club establishment, with no real chance to rally the conservative base or draw clear distinctions with Barack Obama.


This analysis, endlessly recycled on the right, relies on groundless assumptions about recent political history. Three myths in particular demand rebuttal and rejection as a prerequisite to GOP success in 2012 and beyond:


1) Many analysts cited by the New York Times, Washington Times and other prominent media sources continue to blame the Republican defeat in 2008 on the millions of conservative true believers who allegedly stayed home rather than vote for the notorious "RINO" (Republican In Name Only) John McCain. In fact, the exit polls showed that the 34% of all voters who described themselves as "conservative" in 2008 precisely matched the portion of the electorate that saw itself as conservative for George W. Bush's re-election in 2004. Because of the much larger overall turnout in 2008, this meant that far more self-identified conservatives (44,627,000) showed up at the polls for the McCain-Obama battle than in the prior duel between Mr. Bush and John Kerry (41,571,000).


Mr. McCain lost because he performed more feebly than Mr. Bush among moderates (winning only 39%, down from 45%) and particularly among Hispanics (down to 31% from 44%), according to the exit polls—and not because right-wingers refused to vote or capriciously abandoned the Republican cause. Election Day 2008 saw the biggest turnout of self-described conservatives in American history, and Mr. McCain drew an even larger portion of those voters (78%) than did Ronald Reagan (73%) in his landslide over Jimmy Carter in 1980.


2) According to another prevailing myth, frequently promoted on talk radio and in right-wing blogs, Republican elites disregarded the obvious public preference for more unequivocally conservative candidates and forced the nomination of the unpopular , Washington-tainted insider, John Mr. McCain, who proceeded to run a disastrous campaign that dragged down the GOP at every level.


None of this bears the slightest connection to reality. In the run-up to the nomination, the party establishment preferred anyone but Mr. McCain (with Bush loyalists still smarting from his "maverick" challenge to their crown prince in 2000). The establishment split its support among Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani.


By January 2008, Mr. McCain had been all but cut off by major GOP contributors. With his campaign broke, he finished a miserable fourth in Iowa, before his stunning come-from-behind victory in New Hampshire and subsequent sweep to victory in 30 of the remaining primaries and caucuses.


Moreover, in the general election Mr. McCain ran ahead of the Republican ticket in every region of the country. He drew 7,750,000 more votes than did GOP candidates for the House of Representatives, winning 45.7% compared to 42.5% for his GOP running mates. Mr. McCain captured 49 congressional districts where the Republican candidates who ran alongside him lost. If GOP nominees had performed as well as Mr. McCain in those districts, the Republicans would have won a House majority of 227. and John Boehner would have become speaker two years earlier.


Contested statewide races for governor and U.S. Senate seats told a similar story, with Mr. McCain running ahead of the Republican ticket in 61% (28 of 46). In most of the few cases where statewide candidates outperformed Mr. McCain, the GOP ran veteran office holders (Lamar Alexander in Tennessee, Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, Susan Collins in Maine, Jon Huntsman in Utah, Jim Douglas in Vermont) with even more pragmatic, centrist reputations than Mr. McCain. Across the country, his performance justified the main practical rationale for his nomination as he won literally millions of votes that other more stridently conservative candidates failed to get.


3) Rush Limbaugh's favorite slogan, "Conservatism wins every time," is more a statement of wishful thinking than an accurate summary of electoral experience. It's true that Ronald Reagan's inspiring, comprehensive conservatism brought two sweeping victories (in 1980 and '84). But the same supremely gifted candidate lost two prior runs for the presidency (in 1968 and 1976) to two charismatically challenged, moderate rivals, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford.


Barry Goldwater electrified Republicans with his delineation of "The Conscience of a Conservative," but he lost 44 states to the unspeakable Lyndon Johnson in 1964. More recently, tea party-affiliated candidates won several high-profile primary victories in 2010 and went on to ignominious defeats in easily winnable Senate races in Delaware, Nevada, Colorado and Alaska.


The big Senate gains for Republicans in 2010 came mostly from establishment figures like John Hoeven in North Dakota or Dan Coats in Indiana, along with unapologetic moderates like Mark Kirk in Illinois. The two most celebrated tea party victors in Senate races, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah, actually won lower vote percentages in their states than Mr. McCain did two years earlier.

RELATED: Romney: Let’s face it, I’m probably the only guy with a chance to beat Obama

Obama Ass-Kisser Brian Williams Lashes Out at CNBC Guest Who Dared Criticize Obama

Newsbusters.org:

Assuming he even tried, Brian Williams could not suppress his smirk Tuesday night as he took a shot at a guest who had appeared earlier that day on CNBC. Businessman and Mitt Romney support Ken Langone said that President Obama's anti-business rhetoric and lack of leadership was preventing a true economic recovery from taking hold, exclaiming at one point that "businessmen and fat cats need to feel like they're doing something good, not that they're villains and not that their criminals."


In response, Williams decided to carve out a full minute from from his Nightly News to regale viewers with a sarcastic shot at Langone from the left-wing Gawker.com: "The writer John Cook on the Web site Gawker said, "Why should you make fat cats feel badly about getting fat, while the middle class taxpayers who financed that bailout slide into poverty? They need to be made to feel good about earning record profits!"


Williams made clear his politically-correct lens at the start of his piece: "Here's something you don't hear every day, because people usually don't say it out loud. Ken Langone is a businessman, co-founder of Home Depot, a philanthropist, and an ardent foe of President Obama. And this morning on Squawk Box on CNBC, under questioning by Andrew Ross Sorkin, he said this."


Nightly News viewers then saw the following clip from Squawk Box, followed by Williams reading Gawker's put-down of Langone:


KEN LANGONE: If we change the faces in the White House, we're on the road to recovery. I believe -


CNBC's ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Do you believe it's that simple?


LANGONE: I believe it's that's simple. We need leadership, we need cheerleading, we need encouragement. Businessmen and fat cats need to feel like they're doing something good, not that they're villains and not that their criminals.


WILLIAMS: As you might imagine, people had at Mr. Langone all day. The writer John Cook on the Web site Gawker said, "Why should you make fat cats feel badly about getting fat, while the middle class taxpayers who financed that bailout slide into poverty? They need to be made to feel good about earning record profits! It's hard enough without cheerleaders." End of quote.

Yes, Brian really does "love him some Obama.

Liberal Comedian Jimmy Fallon Sandbags Michele Bachmann with "Lyin' Ass Bitch" Intro Music

I'm in the blaming both sides camp on this one. First, Bachmann's handlers for putting her on a late-night liberal comedian's show where she could only look stupid (and she did)--I mean as much as Fallon isn't one of the top names when one thinks of late-night hosts, anybody who does their research would know that Fallon's politics strongly lean Left. Then too, Bachmann just isn't good when it comes to comedy. The point being what good could've possibly come out of Bachmann's appearance here? It's the same thing I wonder about when conservatives choose to go on MSNBC knowing full well that the network serves as Barry's "reelection team"? Secondly, this was just a cowardly move on the part of Fallon and his hip-hop band the Roots--granted the Roots do have a history of using intro music to diss guests in the past who weren't conservatives, but to think if this had happened to a female Democrat politician, the outrage from the MSM would be stupedous. That said, Fallow owes Bachmann an apology and Bachmann's handlers need to do a better job at vetting people before agreeing to allow their candidate to appear on their show, much less look like a fool or risk getting sandbagged:

Submitted for your disapproval, in case you haven’t already seen the clip elsewhere. Compare and contrast with the Fishbone original. The dumbest part of this, of course, is the drummer tweeting about it to make sure everyone got “the joke,” which defeats the purpose of disguising the insult. If you know the media’s going to be buzzing about it tomorrow, why not just call Bachmann a “lyin’ ass bitch” to her face? At least that way she’d get to defend herself and the show wouldn’t look like it’s stabbing her in the back.


A Twitter user asked the drummer last night, “you don’t think indirectly calling a guest on your show a ‘bitch’ might blow up in your face? & maybe it should? (I’m a democrat)”. Here was the response. Fallon himself tweeted a few hours ago that the drummer is “grounded” but we’ll have to wait ’til tonight’s show to find out if that means anything more than “please stop yelling at me about Bachmann.”


Two clips here, one of the intro and the other, via the Right Scoop, of Beck recounting his chat with Bachmann last night and her telling him what a nice time she had.


Update: See, it was a joke. Get it?


“The performance was a tongue-in-cheek and spur of the moment decision. The show was not aware of it and I feel bad if her feelings were hurt. That was not my intention,” Ahmir “Questlove” Thompson said in a statement…


Thompson is a known supporter of President Obama and has contributed to his campaign. His Twitter account features a photograph of the drummer with the president.

RELATED: The Five’s Greg Gutfeld Calls The Roots ‘Sleazy,’ ‘Cowards’ For Michele Bachmann Song Stab