Page: 1 2 3 Next »

Jack Burton

Profile Information

Member since: Sun May 18, 2014, 10:44 PM
Number of posts: 14,194

Journal Archives

Why is Cuba poor?

It isn't because of a trade embargo with the U.S., It is because they are COMMUNIST. Period. Communism always results in poverty and oppression. And liberals continually swoon over the gumdrop fantasy of communism.

Layoffs at NYT worse than expected

http://www.nyguild.org/ny-times-news-details/items/times-to-lay-off-21-from-guild-total-cuts-to-exceed-100.html
Times to lay off 21 from Guild; total cuts to exceed 100
Despite having announced its target of reducing newsroom staff by 100 – and accepting the buyout applications of 57 Guild members and nearly 30 excluded employees – The Times told the Guild on Monday that it would lay off another 21 Guild-represented employees this week. Whatever the total (the number of excluded employees to be laid off is not known at this time), the company clearly will exceed its stated goal of 100 job cuts.

Management is expected to deliver the layoff news to targeted employees on Tuesday and Wednesday. Discharged employees will be presented with a severance package and will likely be told that their last day of work is sometime this week, possibly even the day they are given the news. Regardless of when their last day is, most terminated employees will receive two weeks of notice pay. Employees hired before May 1, 1994, can be offered an additional 15 weeks of work or paid out for the time.
All good things come to an end.

Climate Change = Show me the money!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/12/15/lima-climate-change-shakedown/
The great Lima climate change shakedown
The global warming brigades from around the world gathered last week at a United Nations climate change conference in Lima to save the planet. The nations from across the planet were supposed to link hands and all would agree to slash their green house gas emissions.

Instead the conference was a complete dud.

That might be putting it charitably. The BBC described the final agreement as "a weak and ineffectual compromise" while green groups complain that it actually "weakens international climate rules." It turns out most of the nations of the world see the climate change issue as merely a shake down opportunity to leverage more aid money from American taxpayers.The lesson of Lima is that the rest of the world is not going to cut its carbon emissions. Period. China and India, with two billion people, have nearly doubled their carbon emissions over the last decade with no end in sight and this has negated any progress in the U.S. and Europe.

Mr. Obama has agreed to an historic climate change deal with... himself. America will give up jobs and money (eventually trillions) and pay higher energy prices and in exchange the rest of the world will do nothing. In the climate change racket, we are being played for fools.

How the Lima climate change talks failed

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/11293478/How-the-Lima-climate-change-talks-failed.html
How the Lima climate change talks failed
No doubt we should have expected it. The latest round of climate change negotiations in Lima, Peru – which opened with high hopes – have ended up failing to fulfil them. Supposed to clear away most of the blocks in the road to reaching a formal agreement to combat climate change in Paris next December, it merely – like similar sessions over the last two years – kicked the can down it instead. So the big issues will have to be resolved over the next 12 months, or in Paris itself, making success much less likely.

It was not supposed to be like this. The Lima talks opened with more optimism than any since the ill-fated Copenhagen summit five years ago...

In truth, as Mary Robinson – the former President of Ireland who now serves as the UN's Special Envoy for Climate Change put it, the talks made just enough headway “to keep the multilateral process alive, but not enough progress to give confidence that the world is ready to adopt an equitable and ambitious legally-binding climate agreement in Paris next year”.

In other words, the people supposedly worried about CO2 output generated an enormous carbon footprint to fly around the world and party down and their only outcome is agree to do it again next year. Way to save the planet.

12 Days of Progressive Christmas

Feds spend $22 billion on global warming

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/28/global-warming-gets-nearly-twice-as-much-taxpayer-money-as-border-security/
New estimates show the federal government will spend nearly twice as much fighting global warming this year than on U.S. border security.

The White House reported to House Republicans that there are 18 federal agencies engaged in global warming activities in 2013, funding a wide range of programs, including scientific research, international climate assistance, incentivizing renewable energy technology and subsidies to renewable energy producers. Global warming spending is estimated to cost $22.2 billion this year, and $21.4 billion next year.

At the same time, the federal government will spend nearly $12 billion on customs and border enforcement this year.

climate change is all about money and power, not the climate

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/12/lima-climate-change-talks-stumble-cash-emissions-cuts
Lima climate summit extended as poor countries demand more from rich
Climate talks in Lima ran into extra time amid rising frustration from developing countries at the “ridiculously low” commitments from rich countries to help pay for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

The talks – originally scheduled to wrap up at 12pm after 10 days – are now expected to run well into Saturday , as negotiators huddle over a new draft text many glimpsed for the first time only morning.

The Lima negotiations began on a buoyant note after the US, China and the EU came forward with new commitments to cut carbon pollution. But they were soon brought back down to earth over the perennial divide between rich and poor countries in the negotiations: how should countries share the burden for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, and who should pay?

?w=590&h=441

A man of the people?

Or just another dipshit politician who thinks they are better than everyone else?

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20141215/howard-beach/tardy-de-blasio-delayed-100-passengers-after-having-jetblue-flight-wait
Tardy De Blasio Made JetBlue Flight Wait at the Gate
NEW YORK CITY — Notoriously late Mayor Bill de Blasio kept more than 100 people waiting at the gate to board a JetBlue flight from JFK Airport to Puerto Rico last month because he was running late and had the plane held for him, DNAinfo New York has learned.

The passengers — including state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and numerous other lawmakers as well as vacationers — were forced to cool their heels for roughly 20 minutes on Nov. 6 as they waited to board JetBlue Flight #703 for San Juan, where the Somos El Futuro Fall 2014 Conference was being held.

Do You Agree with Obama’s Global Warming Alarmism?

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/20/video-do-you-agree-with-obamas-global-warming-alarmism-watch-what-dem-invited-witnesses-say/
The subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety hearing didn’t go as Democrats planned. Four former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrators were invited by the Subcommittee Democrats to testify regarding Obama’s global warming alarmism.

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) began his time reminding the committee and those testifying of two statements made by Barack Obama that speaks to his push for climate policies. On November 14, 2012, Barack Obama said, “The temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago.” Then, on May 29, 2013 he said, “We also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or 10 years ago.”

Senator Sessions then asks those former EPA Administrators who were there to testify the following question. He asked, ““So, I would ask each of our former Administrators if any of you agree that that’s an accurate statement on the climate. So if you do, raise your hand.”

Not one hand was raised and there was absolute and complete silence.

#t=90

100% of climate scientists agree

http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/the-new-consensus-100-of-scientists-agree-that-global-warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter?print=1
The New Consensus: 100 Percent Of Scientists Agree That Global Warming ‘Stopped’ Or ‘Slowed Down’
The Obama administration and environmental groups have long claimed 97 percent of scientists agree that human activity is causing the Earth to warm, but there’s a new consensus they may be less willing to acknowledge.

Using the same methodology as the vaunted “97 percent” paper by researcher John Cook, two climate scientists have made a bold discovery: virtually all climate scientists agree that global warming has “stopped” or “slowed down” in recent years.

“We didn’t find a single paper on the topic that argued the rate of global warming has not slowed (or even stopped) in recent years,” wrote scientists Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger with the libertarian Cato Institute.

“This is in direct opposition to the IPCC’s contention that global warming is accelerating, and supports arguments that the amount of warming that will occur over the remainder of the 21st century as a result of human fossil fuel usage will be at the low end of the IPCC projections, or even lower,” the two scientists added. “Low-end warming yields low-end impacts.”

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/18/if-97-of-scientists-say-global-warming-is-real-100-say-it-has-nearly-stopped/
If 97% of Scientists Say Global Warming is Real, 100% Say It Has Nearly Stopped
The central premise of “global warming” is that human greenhouse-gas emissions will lead to a rise in the earth’s average surface temperature, and that as emissions continue to increase (a result of population growth and the desire to improve public health and welfare through increased energy availability), global average temperature will rise ever faster, that is, accelerate.

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), back in 2007, claimed the acceleration was happening. This is a central part of both their global warming meme and the notion that it will lead to all sorts of negative consequences (and few, if any, positive ones).

For example, is global warming really accelerating? Not these days. In fact, observations show that the rise in the global average surface temperature has been little different (in the case of the University of East Anglia record, no different) from zero for the past 18 years or so. So instead of accelerating, global warming is actually decelerating, or, (nearly) stopped.

This period is colloquially known as the global warming “hiatus,” “pause,” or “slowdown,” and its existence seriously undermines the high-end, high-impact climate scenarios so beloved by the IPCC.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »