Using Google Causes Global Warming
You may not know it but by sitting behind the computer and typing a search into Google you are destroying the planet. That is what this article claims.
While millions of people tap into Google without considering the environment, a typical search generates about 7g of CO2 Boiling a kettle generates about 15g. “Google operates huge data centres around the world that consume a great deal of power,” said Alex Wissner-Gross, a Harvard University physicist whose research on the environmental impact of computing is due out soon. “A Google search has a definite environmental impact.”
A recent report by Gartner, the industry analysts, said the global IT industry generated as much greenhouse gas as the world’s airlines – about 2% of global CO2 emissions. “Data centres are among the most energy-intensive facilities imaginable,” said Evan Mills, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. Banks of servers storing billions of web pages require power.
If you found this blog by googling “environment” looking for tips on how to stop global warming you actually contributed to global warming. You should be ashamed of yourself.
The global warming alarmists are coming after everything and everybody. No business or citizen is going to be safe. If using Google is bad for the environment than that would mean that using the internet itself for any reason is bad for the environment, wouldn’t it?
You see where this is going don’t you? The same place that all global warming cures end up at one point or another. A tax. We are going to hear that the internet needs a carbon tax instituted save the planet from all the damage we are causing with our typing.
But it won’t stop there, it never does. The internet will have to be regulated. If people use the internet less because the government is stopping them from going to sites that the government doesn’t think that they should be going to that will also help to save the planet.
I will say it again, the global warming hoax is nothing but a scam that is 
being used to tax and regulate the people. This shows just how imaginative these people can be with their ideas. They will stop at nothing to make sure that every aspect of your life is regulated because regulations bring taxes and fees.
They will not stop unless we stop them. We can’t let these alarmists set the global warming agenda under President Obama. We can’t let them tax us to death on an issue that has not been proved.
There are plenty of scientists out there who see this for the scam that it is. Many are silent for fear of losing their federal grant money. Unfortunately they are being held hostage by governments who have found an issue that it is becoming politically acceptable to tax and regulate. They are being blackmailed with the threat of losing what is most important to their research, money. What good is this research if it has to be manipulated to please the government?
Global warming is not a scientific issue, it is a political issue and we can’t let ourselves to be subjugated under such a false pretence.
Think about this, by coming here you have helped to destroy the planet. By sitting in your own home and typing you are contributing to global warming. How ludicrous is that? It is insane. Please keep coming back, we can destroy the planet together.
(Just for the record, I used Google three times while writing this.)
Barack Obama Snubs Howard Dean
President-elect Obama hasn’t gotten off to the greatest pre-inauguration start. Between the Blogojevich controversy with Rahm Emanuel, the unconstitutional appointment of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, BIll Richardson’s resignation, Dianne Feinstein’s disapproval of Obama’s choice to head the CIA; Leon Panetta, his silence on the Israeli/Hamas battle leading Al-Qaeda to blame Obama for the violence which then in turn led to Obama deciding to talk to the terrorist organization; Hamas, the growing apprehension to his stimulus package from his own party, making fun of Nancy Reagan, and the media finally realizing that there are never any specifics in any of his speeches. The list keeps growing and growing.
Now we can add this to the above list. President-elect Obama has snubbed Howard Dean, angering his supporters. When the president-elect named Tim Kaine to the head of the Democratic National Committee he didn’t even make a courtesy call to Dean and didn’t invite him to attend the press conference to witness the transferal of power.
This is not sitting well with his supporters, especially since Howard Dean was also snubbed in regards to a cabinet position.
“The snub today was no accident,” said one Dean ally. “I guarantee you he would have rescheduled his trip if asked to attend. It’s easy to [screw] over people when you are riding high in the polls, let’s see how many people are singing his praises in six months.”
“It’s easy to screw people when you are on top”, that is a harsh statement. Here is more reaction:
It’s the most puzzling thing I’ve ever seen in my life,” added a longtime Democrat and friend of Dean, echoing the exasperation and befuddlement many close to him feel about his treatment since the election. “I have tried my best through [Obama advisers] Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod and David Plouffe to ask if he ever committed some crime. I don’t get it. He’s been a good soldier
If we can forgive Joe Lieberman for actively campaigning against Obama, this seems crazy to me. And Hillary Clinton did OK, and lots of her people are getting plum assignments,” noted the ally. “I really think [Dean] has rehabilitated himself. He showed he can be team player. It just seems so odd, and I don’t know what the reasons are.
“He said he wanted to be in the Cabinet,” joked the source. “So they stuffed him in the Cabinet and locked the door.”
One supporter even blamed friction between Rahm Emanuel and Howard Dean.
Emanuel served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and battled repeatedly with Dean over party priorities in 2006. Emanuel, then an Illinois congressman, wanted to focus resources on competitive House races while Dean was more focused on expanding the party’s reach into red America as part of his “50-state strategy.”
“Now one of them is the chief of staff to the president of the United States, and one of them is the outgoing party chair,” Trippi wryly observed.
You do have to give credit to Howard Dean, his political career looked over after the infamous scream. Conservatives were laughing when Howard Dean muscled his way into the DNC chair, but he led the party to two straight victories in 2006 and 2008. We are not laughing any more.
He brought the party together and now they are in control of the whole thing. But now he is on the outside looking in.
Here is where the problem lies with Obama and his supporters. President-elect Obama promised everything to everybody during the campaign. With his generalities and cliches and his lack of a voting record he was a blank canvass. He was all things to all people. People were able to look at him and listen to his speeches, which sounded great but said nothing, and read into them what they wanted to hear.
There was never any way that Barack Obama was going to make everyone happy but his supporters didn’t see it that way. Some people were always going to be disappointed and now it is happening. Nobody can make everyone happy. This is going to be an ongoing theme throughout his presidency as people realize that he is going to have to make some concessions along the way.
Opponents of candidate Obama were critical of his lack of details on any of his plans, but they themselves were criticized for the criticism by Obama’s supporters. Obama’s supporters denied that Obama was saying nothing because they were enamored with how he said it.
Slowly but surely Obama’s supporters are beginning to see that maybe his critics had some legitimate points. They just have to hope that in the long run he can make enough people happy to win re-election or there will be a change.
Larry Flynt Asks for Bailout of the Porno Industry
After reading this story I just couldn’t help myself, I had to write about it. Larry Flynt and the CEO of the Girls Gone Wild videos are now asking for a federal bailout of the porno industry. Whenever I write about the bailout fiasco I ask, “where will it end?”, and more and more it appears that it will not end.
Everyone is lining up for free government money so why shouldn’t the publisher of Hustler magazine be next?
“People are too depressed to be sexually active,” Flynt said in the statement. “This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex.”
“With all this economic misery and people losing all that money, sex is the farthest thing from their mind. It’s time for congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America. The only way they can do this is by supporting the adult industry and doing it quickly.”
Barack Obama has promised to heal the nation and I guess that according to the above logic we should start with the porno industry. After all what is more important than the health and welfare of the American people?
Larry Flynt is asking for $5 billion for congress to “rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America”, a small price to pay I suppose. I have seen breast cancer bumper stickers that read, save the ta-tas. So let me declare, it is time for the federal government to bailout the porno industry. Save the ta-tas.
While this is going nowhere and please take the above for the sarcasm that it is, it does reflect on my biggest concern with this bailout bullshit. Everyone is lining up for free money from the government. But free money isn’t free, it comes from somewhere. It comes from us.
As more and more people put their hands out for money that does not belong to them I once again ask the question, where does it end?
We need to have companies take responsibility for their actions, we need to stop rewarding bad behavior, we need to stop giving private businesses money from the taxpayers who did nothing to deserve having their money taken from them to bailout those that can’t run a profitable business.
But most of all we need to save the ta-tas.
Democrats Vote to End Term Limits and Save Charlie Rangel’s Ass
On the first day of the new session of congress the Democrats managed to pull a fast one. Democrats voted to end term limits on committee chairs.
Charlie Rangel (D); being investigated for tax fraud.
The interesting aspect to this story is the implications it will have on the corrupt Charlie Rangel, committee chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. As the chair of the House Ways and Means committee Charlie Rangel is responsible for writing the tax code. So it is interesting that Charlie Rangel is being investigated for tax fraud, it appears that if you write the tax code you know where the loopholes are. Or at least he thought that he did.
Here is a list of Charlie Rangel’s alleged indiscretions:
Rangel, according to allegations reported by the New York Times, failed to report $75,000 in rental income from a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic on either his state or federal tax returns.
He also allegedly helped to preserve a tax loophole for an oil-drilling company whose chief executive pledged $1 million to an education center that will bear the congressman’s name.
In addition, he allegedly gave his potential support for tax legislation that would save A.I.G. millions of dollars a year after a $5 million pledge was made by the insurance company’s largest shareholder to the Charles Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York.
Here is where the whole aspect of this story about the Democrats voting to end term limits gets interesting.
The Democrats promised to run the most honest and open congress in history. Nancy Pelosi also promised to release the findings of the ethics committee’s investigation into Charlie Rangel but she never did. When the congress convened it’s last session the chair of the ethics committee investigating Charlie Rangel had reached his term limit.
Nancy Pelosi will make the newest appointment to chair the ethics committee and we will never find out the findings of the investigation into Charlie Rangel unless someday he is indicted. How convenient is that?
While the ethically challenged Charlie Rangel will be allowed to forever hold the seat that allows him to write the loopholes in the tax policy that he flaunts, the man in charge of investigating him will not be returning to his committee chair.
So much for the most open and honest congress in history.
Barack Obama Plans to Talk to Hamas
Through the whole Israel/Hamas conflict president-elect Obama has remained suspiciously quite. His excuse for not getting involved is that there can only be one president at a time. This excuse has not stopped him from being actively involved in the economic crisis and upcoming stimulus package however.
The president-elect appears to be ducking a very controversial issue in the Israel/Hamas conflict for fear of offending wither side. But then last week Al-Qaida accused Barack Obama of not doing anything to stop Israel’s attack on the Gaza strip, and now everything has changed.
Today it has been learned that the president-elect is set to open up a dialog with Hamas. The president-elect is going to open up talks with a terrorist organisation. All it took was a little chiding from another terrorist organisation and Barack Obama seemingly overnight has decided to talk to the enemy of one of America’s allies.
If this is any indication of how Barack Obama plans to deal with threats from enemies than we are in for a long four years. This is no surprise as Barack Obama said that he would meet with terrorists without precondition during the campaign. He is finally keeping one of his campaign promises, it’s just the wrong one.
And now Hillary Clinton who mocked Obama consistently over the issue of talking to terrorists will have to do the president’s bidding.
We now know why Barack Obama has been silent on the Israel/Hamas conflict, he intends to alienate one of out allies.
In my first post on the issue of Obama’s silence over the conflict I wrote that we needed to know what side Barack Obama was on. Now we know.
The new question is, after Obama is done caving into Al Qaida by holding talks with Hamas, who’s next?
House Democrats Pass New Rules to Silence Republicans
The dawn of a new day is almost here. On January 20th the new president will be sworn in. This president has promised to be bipartisan, he claimed that we are not red state America or blue state America, but the United States of America. He said to those of you whose vote I didn’t get, I will work to get it next time, I am your president too.
Democrats in the house and senate promised the most open and honest congress in history. They promised to heal the wounds of Americans, they promised to bring us all together.
But on their first day in congress the house passed new rules that are designed to silence Republican lawmakers and render them impotent. Instead of working with Republicans to better the country Democrats have decided to shut them down, to drown them in the seas of irrelevance.
When Democrats speak of uniting the country what they are really talking about is making the whole country agree with them. As these new rules prove, they have no intention to work with Republicans it is quite the contrary. They have made it more difficult for the people who don’t agree with them to have any representation.
Is this bipartisanship? Is this how to heal a country? Is this how to be open and honest? Is this how to unite a country?
The Democrats on their first day in office have proved that they are all rhetoric, but short on action.They are all promises but no commitment.
The change that Barack Obama must have been talking about was to silence the opposition and not let them have a voice. At least that is what I gather from the congess’ first day on the job.
A federal judge has decided that he will hear arguments in a case being brought about in order to stop the Reverend Rick Warren from giving the invocation at Barack Obama’s inauguration.
There are about forty groups and individuals who are trying to stop Rick Warren from speaking at Obama’s inauguration, led by America’s most famous atheist Michael Newdow.
What is equally troubling to me is not only that these people are actually trying to stop Warren from speaking but that they actually found a judge that would hear this case.
Someone is going to have to explain to me how by Rick Warren giving an invocation at Obama’s inauguration this is in violation of the first amendment. The first amendment says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. How is a man saying a prayer at Obama’s inauguration in any way in violation of that phrase? How can that leap be made seriously? How can a prayer being said at an inauguration be congruent to congress passing a law establishing religion?
Barack Obama would just be exercising his constitutional right to practice his religion. The second half of the freedom of religion clause in the constitution says “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Wouldn’t the prohibition of Warren from the inauguration be what is in fact a violation of the constitution?
As well as his freedom of speech?
The second half of the freedom of religion clause in the constitution is the half that is conveniently forgotten by atheists and liberal judges who have misinterpreted the constitution for many, many years.
There is no separation of church and state in the constitution and there is nothing unconstitutional about a person saying a public prayer. There is however something very unconstitutional about prohibiting a man from saying a prayer, whether in public or not.
The phrase “separation of church and state” was written in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists in 1801, twelve years after the constitution was ratified.
A judge looked outside the parameters of the constitution to find a document that justified his perverted interpretation of the constitution and he referred to Jefferson’s letter in order to twist the constitution to say what he personally felt it should say rather than what it does say.
Now based on precedence all acts of, or displays of faith are being banned from public places to the extent that the constitution is being violated. It is just being violated in the opposite manner of which the courts would have you believe.
If you are walking down the street and a Christmas tree on the commons offends you, you are too easily offended. Grow up. You shouldn’t be offended by another person’s faith or their constitutional right to that faith. A prayer in public, or a display in public is not a law establishing religion. You can still go home and believe what you want to believe, but it is time to stop trying to force your non belief on the believers.
That is unconstitutional.
Massachusetts Governor Eyes an Internet Sales Tax That Could Have Federal Implications
A funny thing happened on the way to Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick’s campaign promise of lowering the state property tax — nothing. Not only did he break his promise early on in his governorship but he has looked for all sorts of different mechanisms for raising taxes on top of the property taxes.
Last November the voters of Massachusetts voted against repealing the state income tax. This left the leadership in Massachusetts with an opening to raise taxes. By voting against the repeal the voters look willing to accept taxes, after all if they didn’t like taxes they would have repealed the income tax right? Especially in the state that began the American Revolution based mostly on taxes imposed by the Britons. So if one tax is acceptable why not try another?
Governor Patrick’s latest scheme is to implement a sales tax on items that Massachusetts residents purchase over the internet. This measure seems to have wide approval in the Massachusetts legislature, no surprise there.
In Massachusetts, the tax proposal appears to enjoy broad support in the Legislature,
But his plan is far more devious than just implementing an internet sales tax on Massachusetts residents. There is already a voluntary multi-state pact called the streamlined sales tax initiative, this is the plan that Deval Patrick would be entering. Under this pact there are certain retailers who have agreed to charge a sales tax on residents of states who have agreed to join the pact. Massachusetts is about to join the pact. According to the article that I linked to above, because this is a voluntary program Massachusetts would only receive about $15 million in revenue.
This is where my claim that there is something more devious at play here by the governor. Because $15 million is nothing compared to the Massachusetts government’s deficit there is a plan in the works that could raise the state $545 million. And it involves the federal government.
state officials said passage of the law would help spur Congress to approve a broader version of an Internet sales tax that could produce hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue.
What is this quote talking about?
Legislation by Congress would require all 45 states that have sales taxes to collect on those transactions. Because it would be a federal mandate, the law would dramatically increase the number of retailers required to participate, generating as much as $545 million for Massachusetts alone, according to an analysis by the University of Tennessee.
And guess in which state the sponsor of this bill is from:
The US House version of the bill is sponsored by Representative William Delahunt, Democrat from Quincy
So 45 out of the 50 states would be required to pay an internet sales tax if this federal bill passes and this is born out of Governor Deval Patrick’s lust for raising revenue instead of cutting spending.
Thank God I am in one of the 5 states that does not have a sales tax. At least for now. When Governor John Lynch sees the money that Deval Patrick may be swimming in all bets are off.
Of course there is no way that in the final version of this bill the 5 states which don’t have a sales tax will be exempt from paying an internet sales tax. That is just a pipe dream on my part.
Boston Mayor’s Son Moonlights for Politically Connected Firm
Boston Mayor Thomas Menino’s son has a part time job that pays $86,000 in taxpayer funded money. That isn’t a bad salary for a 20 hour a week position. Thomas Menino claims that there is no conflict of interest but then goes on to say the following:
“It wouldn’t be a story if his name wasn’t Menino”
No shit mayor. That is precisely what the problem is. Thanks for validating the questions being asked.
That quote made me laugh out loud.
Harry Reid,The New George Wallace?
Today George Wallace Harry Reid stood on the steps of the schoolhouse senate and denied a black student senator from entering. Harry Reid not only denied A black senator, but the ONLY black senator, a senator who was legally appointed by his states rules, from entering the senate and taking the seat that is rightfully his.
Whether or not you think that Blagojevich should have appointed anyone to this seat is actually irrelevant. The fact is that Blagojevich is the governor of Illinois and as governor he not only has the right to appoint a replacement senator to fill a vacancy he has a duty to fill that seat.
Blagojevich has yet to be indicted and because of this he has the obligation to send a senator to Washington and he did. In my opinion there may never be charges brought against Blagojevich because Patrick Fitzgerald mysteriously moved in before the crime was actually committed. This is the same Fitzgerald who continued to investigate the Valerie Plame leak for a year after he knew who the leaker was. But for some reason he stopped this crime from going down. Probably to protect either Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel, or Jesse Jackson Jr.
So there is no reason in hell that Blagojevich should be stopped from appointing Roland Burris to the senate.
Harry Reid has no constitutional basis for denying anyone from taking their rightful seat in congress, in fact it is unconstitutional for him to do so. There is also stare decisis on this issue from the 1969 case, Powell v. McCormack which ruled the senate could refuse to seat a member only if that person failed to meet the minimum qualifications set out in the Constitution, those being age, residence and citizenship. Roland Burris meets all of the qualifications.
What was Harry Reid’s motivation for prolonging a situation that is very embarrassing to president-elect Obama?
Harry Reid is a Mormon.
What does that have to do with anything? During the primary season much was made about Mitt Romney’s Mormonism. In fact at one point Mitt Romney was being called a racist for belonging to a racist religion. It wasn’t until 1978 that the Mormons allowed black people into their church. Somehow this reflected on Mitt Romney and he had to defend himself from accusations of racism.
Fast forward to today when Harry Reid vehemently opposed the seating of a black senator to his rightful spot in the senate. Can we not ask that Harry Reid be held to the same standard as Mitt Romney? Harry Reid and Mitt Romney are of the same religion, if Romney belonged to a racist church than doesn’t Harry Reid?
But we can take it one step further, there is no need to stop here. Harry Reid had multiple conversations with Blagojevich about president-elect Obama’s empty senate seat, he has not denied this. It is fact. Harry Reid also provided a list of three unacceptable candidates who he would not welcome to the senate. (Again this is unconstitutional, Harry Reid has no fucking business telling a state or it’s residents who they can send to the senate.)
Let’s take a look at the three candidate who Harry Reid found unacceptable, here are their pictures:
Do you notice anything that these candidates have in common with Roland Burris?
