Obama spending $650 million on shorelines

WND ^ | July 13, 2013 | Steve Peacock

[Steve Peacock]

Prepping for 'climate change' floods everywhere but in U.S.

The Obama administration wants to spend as much $650 million to improve urban- and local-government service delivery, which includes the development of strategies to adapt to climate change and respond to natural disasters.

The endeavor will target cities and towns around the globe – with the exception of those in the United States.

Many coastal cities around the world are ill-prepared to deal with rising sea levels and extreme weather events that the administration expects from “climate change.”

[Iron Munro]

Obama is intentionally trying to bankrupt the nation.

He just looks for ways to spend money on projects that have no intrinsic value and won’t do anything lasting to improve the job market or the out of control spending.

[Right Wing Assault]

So, he’s going to build a wall around all the coastal areas, I wonder? Or put all the building on stilts?

[stockpirate]

Redistribution, aka stealing, of our nations wealth to supporters of fascism worldwide.

[rdcbn]

Modern day Lysenkoism

[ProtectOurFreedom]

“No intrinsic value”? How can you say that? The best projections are seas will rise a millimeter or two in the next 100 years. We can’t prepare soon enough for the impending disaster.

[volunbeer]

He’s going to build a big slush fund and pay top dollar to Acorn and liberal universities to “study the problem.”

Same thing they did for electric car companies.

[Zuse]

Shovel-ready Sea Quester.

[rlmorel]

I don’t watch the news. But my wife does. The other night she was watching the news with the POS Brian Williams on, and he does a segment on wasteful spending in Afghanistan...34 million dollars on a building the military isn’t going to ever use. I don’t know how long the segment was on, but it made my blood boil.

THIS was an example of the most wasteful spending. The military. On a building.

I wanted to puke. Liberals spend HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of dollars on absolute CRAP, and THIS was the example they got all huffy about?

THAT is precisely why I don’t watch television generally, or the news specifically.

And now this posted article highlighting REAL BS spending. But people won’t hear about it. They are going to hear about how the military costs too much.

[llevrok]

how about pumping all that into NOLA? I don’t ever want to hear of that sh&t hole again.

[longfellow]

I’ll take climate change over the communist change this marxist spouts.

[DoughtyOne]

Good God, it never ends...

[SampleMan]

$650 million? That’s like half of his personal social budget. He must be really serious.

[blackdog]

Uhmmmmm...........

Doesn't congress have to appropriate funds?

[i_robot73]

Tell me, O’Dumbo, how much of N.Y. and N.J. are still in shambles after promising to remove the current ‘red tape’ since their natural disaster? FEMA still sitting around their command station with their thumbs up their asses?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Yes, he spends our money on foreign shores, because We Have It Too Good (TM).

DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News

Latest from Real Climate

Latest from Climate Depot

Latest from Greenie Watch

[af_vet_rr]

He just looks for ways to spend money on projects that have no intrinsic value and won’t do anything lasting to improve the job market or the out of control spending.

Congress, including the GOP-led House, is more than happy to help him.

[UCANSEE2]

Obama spending $650 million on shorelines

A large portion of which will be dedicated to the shoreline in front of his new home in Hawaii.

[Steve Peacock]

Congress arguably is equally guilty. But keep in mind that while it weighs & approves/disapproves each fiscal year State & Foreign Operations bill, it does not clear in advance every program. Congress, for instance, says "Yes, we approved [insert amount] dollars for USAID," and perhaps it specifies a few particular programs or issues. But then USAID, State Dept., USTDA, etc., then carries out a multitude of programs that Congress never heard of or simply ignores later on. For instance, how many congressmen would actually support a project to offer "trauma education" and "reflective workshops" to warring tribes and cattle raiders in and around the Kenyan border? (i.e: "USAID Pushing Kenyan 'Peace' Projects"). No doubt some might say, "Yeah. Good idea." But perhaps if more of these men and women (in Congress that is, not Kenyan couples arguing about the value of reprisal attacks against rivals) actually took the time to look into these things they would not be so quick to write a back check to the White House.

[ourworldawry]

“Redistribution, aka stealing, of our nations wealth to supporters of fascism worldwide.”

---

It is...and we are doing nothing about it.