Posted on 03/17/2010 9:32:22 PM PDT by Abakumov
The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012 or beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is making a bold strategic leap to begin drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. While the United States attempts to shift gears to alternative fuels to battle the purported evils of carbon emissions, Russia will erect oil derricks off the Cuban coast.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
QWell, since you can fiile for unemployment on-line, and get the proceeds by direct deposit, there’s no real need to go anywhere. It’s not like we will need the oil in an Obama economy.
Ping.
The manchild is in over his head and Americans are going to pay for their mistake of electing him to an office that is way above his mental capabilities.
Obama Surrenders Gulf Oil to Moscow
What a great idea!
He and his damn party make me sick.
I do not want to hear about ‘green power’ or electric cars.
Every time they’ve lowered the limits on emissions, American technology has kicked into gear and found a way to meet the new regs. American energy is very clean and anyone who knows anything about it knows that.
So they’ve created a new standard, carbon. Your fuel burns clean? Not good enough. It makes carbon. The universe is made of carbon? Plants breath carbon? Stop changing the subject.
Everything they do in terms of energy policy is designed to protect OPEC. They’ll promote solar and wind, sure, because neither one will reduce our importation of foreign fuel by even a teaspoon. Biofuel, sure, isn’t that what the Brazilians did? They’ll promote that because again it will never be more than a niche product and it won’t threaten OPEC in the least.
And, no, it isn’t how Brazil achieved independence. Brazil drilled her way to energy independence. Obama and Soros are invested in Brazil’s offshore oil business. And they are rigging the game by shutting down yours. I suppose when Americans get tired of being bankrupt and unemployed they’ll do something about it.
Obama’s friend from college tells us that he was a gay Marxist and I guess he still is ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBGBszZ2Qw0
http://www.wor710.com/pages/6350883
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/02/13/marxist-obama-why-the-media-has-been-silent/
The full interview is devastating. Too bad Fox News ignored Dr Drew in 2008 when he contacted them.We now know the gory details of Barry’s Occidental years.
He was an avowed and committed Marxist.
He looked forward to the revolution when the Marxists would overthrow our government.
His love for Marxism was unusually strong .
He was in passionate agreement with the most radical Marxist Leninist professors.
His favorite professor was Roger Boesche , a socialist.
Boesche visited Barry at the White House this year , they remain friends .Barry took Political Theory at Occidental-so, we know one course that he took.Barry took up with Hasan Chandoo, a wealthy foreign exchange student from Karachi, Pakistan.Chandoo financed Barry’s lifestyle, which was apparently very lavish; BMW and a very big house: Lived together, not in a dorm!!!
Chandoo was Barry’s Sugar Daddy.When Drew first met Chandoo and Barry, he thought they were both wealthy gays.Chandoo was at the White House for the Ramadan dinner this year.Chandoo did not go to New York with Barry and Sohale Siddiqi ( another foreign exchange student from Pakistan ) so Barry’s lifestyle suffered.Barry described Sohale in Dreams as “ well built .
”The picture of the two of them is here :
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt231/mojitojoe1/BOluvs%20his%20boys/obamaandroommate-480-1.jpg
They look like two poor and skinny gay men.Barry did not hang out with blacks , mostly the white radicals and his Muslim buddies.Dr Drew is willing to take a lie detector test . His information about Barry’s radical past is extremely detailed.
"Profit" has become a dirty word in Washington and burning oil is so discouraged here. If the Russians come over and suck it up, take it home and burn its OK, because the USA will not be guilty of burning and profit.
And Obama gives billions in low cost loans to George Soros’ Petrobras to drill for Brazilian oil (in return for Soros payments of millions to Obama and the democrat party to also shut down domestic oil drilling).
Reference:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aogq9sBiBhYo
Also, Obama was instrumental in the formation of the Chicago Carbon Futures Exchange when an IL Senator, with Sen Lugar. The exchange was to assume all the London Carbon Exchanges trading also in time and become the worlds’ single carbon trading center. Obama in the early nineties was the lawyer that challenged the Bank of America, I think in CT, to force it to issue what we call subprime mortgages under the Community Reinvestment Act that Clinton arranged. All banks issued subprimes after that precedent. Ob is at the center of something huge, with an incomplete litany of others, and involved in an incomprehensible redistribution of US wealth and power. The US middle class is rapidly being drained, never to recover. We may save ourselves yet, but the hour is late. Bottom line...dead currencies = dead countries. The North Koreans just shot the official in charge of the recent currency devaluation there. We reward our executioners here.
lol what a wide path of destruction he cuts.
Woah. I am from IL. How did I not know this? Do you have any articles on this?
A spill there will surely reach us as well, so I don’t get the logic.
Here is the text of one piece without the link, that I still have:
This is the sub-prime house that Barack Obama built
As a young but influential Chicago politician, the American president helped to create the housing bubble.
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 5:34PM GMT 31 Jan 2009
Comments 10 | Comment on this article
It is all very well for President Obama to vent his anger on all those US bankers who continued to claim billions of dollars in bonuses while expecting Washington to bail them out after the sub-prime mortgage scandal brought the banks to their knees. But conveniently overlooked has been the curious part Mr Obama himself played in the sub-prime debacle.
At the heart of it was a 1995 amendment to the Community Reinvestment Act which legally required banks to lend money to buy homes to millions of poor, mainly black Americans, guaranteed by the two biggest mortgage associations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And no one campaigned more actively for this change to the law than Mr Obama, as a young but already influential Chicago politician.
It was this Act which, more than anything, helped to create the US housing bubble, well beyond the point where it was obvious that hundreds of thousands of homeowners would be likely to default. And in 2005 no one more actively opposed moves to halt Fannie Mae’s reckless guarantees than Senator Obama, as he was by then. As the official records show, no senator received more donations from Fannie Mae than he did (although Hillary Clinton ran him close). Thus no US politician arguably did more to promote the sub-prime disaster than the man now expected to pick up the pieces, Rather like Gordon Brown, really.
Johnmonaco
Read the article again. When people wanted to stop the fast and loose lending, Obama was the prime mover in preventing that happening (with, by the look of things, Hillary doing the same as well). Now, since the law Clinton passed could not be altered, what do you think was going to happen? Bush could do squat about it because certain people made sure nothing could be done, yet according to some it was all Bush’s fault.
I suggest you read a bit more about what was actually going on, you may be able to see the light on the whole thing.
Mark
on February 01, 2009
at 06:31 PM
Obama plans to spend $1 trillion, on top of the $4 trillion debt incurred by President George W. Bush. All this does is lower the value of the U.S. dollar. Today it struck me that Obama may be the new “Gorbachev” not the old Jimmy Carter. Perestroika (change) and Glasnost (openess) did not lead to reform, it lead to the collapse of the Soviet Empire! I believe (sadly) that we are watching the end of the American era. The world is full of devils like Putin (Russia) and Mugabe (Zimbabwe), to say nothing of Hezbollah, Hamas and the insane regime in Iran. Who will stand up to these foes? The EU? Not bloodly likely!
Peter Ramsey
on February 01, 2009
at 03:32 PM
Report this comment
One supposes that inside the pristine UltraWhite House, President Obama would wish that the grubby political scene of Chicago, Illinois was as far away as, well, Hawaii, or maybe Kenya... Washington washes whiter?
The sound (or is it smell?) of chickens coming home to roost matching our own - but this time on the other side of the Pond - is all around us.
Now that the Governor of Illinois has been impeached from office with no dissensions, on the back of alleged attempts to sell Obama’s US Senate seat to the highest bidder, I mean donor, can we expect the means by which Barack got into the seat - post- all that hard work with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when an Illinois state Senator - to be examined a little more?
010209-12:34
simon coulter
on February 01, 2009
at 02:25 PM
Report this comment
Very true. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a Carter Administration creation strengthened in the Clinton era, mandated “lousy loans to crummy credits” for low-income “affordable” housing by banks. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were then required by Congress to buy and securitize them. Since the securitized subprimes were Fannie/Freddie paper, they were triple-A (by virtue of the implied federal guarantee)and could be used by banks to meet their Basel capital requirements A house of cards waiting for a collapse - which came.
Jonathan Hayes
on February 01, 2009
at 08:41 AM
Report this comment
*
In addition,spurred on by the CRA, Mr.Obama as a member of community organizing groups regularly used strong arm legal tactics to bring pressure on lending instutions. I believe in return these groups had some shady influence on voter registrations. Now, we hear he plans to repay these groups with $4.2 billion taxpayer funds hidden(neighborhood stabilization activities?) in his stimulus Bill.
it seems the only chnage being brought to the beltway is Chicago style underhanded backhandery.
AND this one with Link:
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9629
Canada Free Press - Printer Friendly Page
© V2.0 - CJ Website Design
www.cj-design.com
Al Gore, Maurice Strong
Obama’s involvement in Chicago Climate Exchange—the rest of the story
Judi McLeod Bio
Email Article
By Judi McLeod Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Good news to know that the truth will always out—even when you’re Barack Obama.
“Obama Years Ago Helped Fund Carbon Program He Is Now Pushing Through Congress” is a FOXNews story by Ed Barnes. In short, “While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he is now trying to push through Congress as president.”
The charity was the Joyce Foundation on whose board of directors Obama served and which gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were “instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”
And that’s only the beginning of this tawdry tale, Mr. Barnes.
The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Obama cohorts Al Gore and Maurice Strong.
For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.
Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as “the world’s first and North America’s only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil.”
Gore, self-proclaimed Patron Saint of the Environment, buys his carbon off-sets from himself—the Generation Investment Management LLP, “an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C., of which he is both chairman and founding partner. The Generation Investment Management business has considerable influence over the major carbon credit trading firms that currently exist, including the Chicago Climate Exchange.
Strong, the silent partner, is a man whose name often draws a blank on the Washington cocktail circuit. Even though a former Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the much hyped Rio Earth Summit) and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations in the days of an Oil-for-Food beleaguered Kofi Annan, the Canadian born Strong is little known in the United States. That’s because he spends most of his time in China where he he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the failing Kyoto Protocol.
Full credit for the expose on the business partnership of Strong and Gore in the cap-and-trade reduction scheme should go to the investigative acumen of the Executive Intelligence Review (EIR).
The tawdry tale of the top two global warming gurus in the business world goes all the way back to Earth Day, April 17, 1995 when the future author of “An Inconvenient Truth” travelled to Fall River, Massachusetts, to deliver a green sermon at the headquarters of Molten Metal Technology Inc. (MMTI). MMTI was a firm that proclaimed to have invented a process for recycling metals from waste. Gore praised the Molten Metal firm as a pioneer in the kind of innovative technology that can save the environment, and make money for investors at the same time.
“Gore left a few facts out of his speech that day,” wrote EIR. “First, the firm was run by Strong and a group of Gore intimates, including Peter Knight, the firm’s registered lobbyist, and Gore’s former top Senate aide.”
(Fast-forward to the present day and ask yourself why it is that every time someone picks up another Senate rock, another serpent comes slithering out).
“Second, the company had received more than $25 million in U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) research and development grants, but had failed to prove that the technology worked on a commercial scale. The company would go on to receive another $8 million in federal taxpayers’ cash, at that point, its only source of revenue.
“With Al Gore’s Earth Day as a Wall Street calling card, Molten Metal’s stock value soared to $35 a share, a range it maintained through October 1996. But along the way, DOE scientists had balked at further funding. When in March 1996, corporate officers concluded that the federal cash cow was about to run dry, they took action: Between that date and October 1996, seven corporate officers—including Maurice strong—sold off $15.3 million in personal shares in the company, at top market value. On Oct. 20, 1996—a Sunday—the company issued a press release, announcing for the first time, that DOE funding would be vastly scaled back, and reported the bad news on a conference call with stockbrokers.
“On Monday, the stock plunged by 49%, soon landing at $5 a share. By early 1997, furious stockholders had filed a class action suit against the company and its directors. Ironically, one of the class action lawyers had tangled with Maurice strong in another insider trading case, involving a Swiss company called AZL Resources, chaired by Strong, who was also a lead shareholder. The AZL case closely mirrored Molten Metal, and in the end, Strong and the other AZL partners agreed to pay $5 million to dodge a jury verdict, when eyewitness evidence surfaced of Strong’s role in scamming the value of the company stock up into the stratosphere, before selling it off.
In 1997, Strong went on to accept from Tongsun Park, who was found guilty of illegally acting as an Iraqi agent, $1 million from Saddam Hussein, which was invested in Cordex Petroleum Inc., a company he owned with his son, Fred.
These are the leaders in the Man-made Global Warming Movement, who three years later were to be funded by the man who was to become President of the United States of America.
If we follow the time line on where Obama was during the funding of the Chicago Climate Exchange, he was still a professor at the University of Chicago Law School teaching constitutional law, with his law license becoming inactive a year later in 2002.
It may be interesting to note that the Chicago Climate Exchange in spite of its hype, is a veritable rat’s nest of cronyism. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers.
What a flap when it was discovered that the senator from Chicago had nursed on Saul Alinsky’s milk, had his political career launched at a coffee party held by domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, and sat for 20 years, uncomplaining in front of the “God-dam-America pulpit of resentment-challenged Jeremiah Wright.
Folk were naturally outraged that the empty suit who would go on to become TOTUS was spawned from such anti-American activism.
But the media should have been hollering, “Stop Thief!” instead.
The same Chicago Climate Exchange promoting public rip-off was funded by Obama before he was POTUS.
Even as man-made global warming is being exposed as a money-generating hoax, Obama is working feverishly to push the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme through Congress.
Obama was never the character he created for himself in the fairy-tale version in “Dreams of My Father”. He’s the agent of Change and Hope for cohorts making money down at the Chicago Climate Exchange.
The Barbarians are pushing at the gate of the Global Warming fraud, and to borrow a line from children playing Hide and Seek, Here they come, ready or not!
(14) Reader Feedback | Subscribe
Judi McLeod Most recent columns
Copyright © Canada Free Press
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at: judi@canadafreepress.com
Older articles by Judi McLeod
Printed from: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9629
Your links led me to these links to the two part interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wCl57cL274&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7OQDc6lLZo&NR=1
Also, if the US is placed under cap and trade, it will have to pay fatal economic taxes when its credits run out. THE US CARBON CREDITS THAT EXIST RUN OUT IN SIX YEARS. Obama will be out of the Presidency and retired in Indonesia:
Fair carbon means no carbon for rich countries
* 21 September 2009 by Jim Giles
WHAT might a truly fair and effective solution to climate change look like? One answer to that question has just been released and it makes for disturbing reading. For one thing, the scale and speed of emissions cuts required by developed nations is far greater than the commitments governments are currently willing to make.
The new analysis is based on the idea that each person on the planet has the right to the same carbon footprint. Researchers at the German Advisory Council on Global Change, which advises the country’s government, looked at the impact of this fairness principle on attempts to limit the average global temperature rise to 2 °C, a level that is widely regarded as necessary to avoid disaster, such as high rises in sea level.
Calculations published earlier this year (Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature08017) suggested that no more than 750 billion tonnes of carbon can be released between now and 2050 if the world is to have a 2-in-3 chance of staying within the 2 °C rise. If that global allowance was distributed according to population levels, many developed nations would face almost immediate carbon bankruptcy.
With 4.6 per cent of global population, the US would receive a 35 billion tonne allowance between now and 2050, which it would use up in around six years at current rates. The European Union’s budget would run out in 12 years and China’s in 24. “It is clear that the industrialised countries must carry out rapid and comprehensive decarbonisation if they wish to present themselves as credible advocates of global climate protection,” concludes the council.
The US carbon budget would run out in six years, Europe’s in 12 and China’s in 24 years
Big emitters like the US would only be able to meet their target by buying unused emissions from poorer nations that have large populations but low per-capita emissions. For example, India and Brazil’s allowances would last 88 and 46 years respectively at current rates. That imbalance has benefits, says the council, because the money transferred would help poorer nations to improve their living standards using low-carbon technology such as wind and solar electricity generation.
Climate policy researchers say the analysis is a useful framework for evaluating the global challenge, but probably will have little effect on the crucial climate negotiations scheduled for December in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Michael Grubb at the University of Cambridge says that nations will come to the negotiations with emissions reduction targets in mind, based on what they believe is possible domestically. They would not be willing to sign up to a formula that takes that decision out of their hands, even if it is rational and equitable. “This proposal is not grounded in political realities,” adds Elliot Diringer at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change in Washington DC.
South Africa is one nation that might find the results hard to live with. It relies heavily on coal-fired power plants and so is grouped with rich nations in terms of per-capita emissions, despite having a GDP per capita just below the global average. To meet its allowance it would have to buy emissions credits from abroad. Without overseas support that prospect would be unacceptable in a developing country struggling with poverty.
Some flexibility would be needed to deal with cases like that, says Dirk Messner, vice-chair of the council and director of the German Development Institute in Bonn, probably in the form of aid from richer nations. But even if some countries do not like the allowance that the formula produces, it could still be used to shed light on progress at Copenhagen. “I hope it will bring some transparency to the debate,” Messner says.
Issue 2726 of New Scientist magazine
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.