The Think Progress blog goes after the National Review Online for suggesting a harsh approach to dealing with the terrorists at Gitmo.

Step (1): Return all Gitmo detainees to Yemen.

Step (2): Use Predator missiles to strike the baggage-claim area 20 minutes after they arrive.

Just an idea.

Cynical? Of course. Are the bloggers at Think Progress in denial about terrorism? Even President Obama has veered away from campaign rhetoric to deal with the realities of terrorism. From today’s NY Times:

President Obama declared for the first time on Saturday that a branch of Al Qaeda based in Yemen sponsored the attempted Christmas Day bombing of an American passenger jet, and he vowed that those behind the failed attack “will be held to account.”

Do the bloggers at Think Progress believe that Obama’s promise to hold these terrorists “to account” means hugs and flowers or does it mean bombs and bullets? I don’t believe President Obama was being cynical.

Here is yet another dumb lefty blogger who wants to get rid of the filibuster because the Congress won’t pass cap and trade to fight “global warming.”

See Open Left.

Does he care that the global warming data was fudged?

Does he care that scientists are skeptical about CO2’s alledged role in global warming is in doubt?

Does he care about the decade long cooling trend or that some scientists are predicting five decades of global cooling?

No. He just wants at your wallet.

With the global warming folks on the ropes due to climategate and cooling temperatures, they fight back with comedy:

NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias – Weak: Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart Attack Inhofe’s Climate Skepticism.

Link

A left-wing blogger at The Left Coaster calling himself/herself “Turkana” goes on a rant against Senator Joe Lieberman. Turkana is hurt that Joe has decided to think for himself rather than follow the hard-line dogma of the left.

During the emotional outburst, Turkana manages to work in some of the Progressive favorites.

Compaing Republicans to the Taliban? Check.

Blaming someone other than President Clinton for the impeachment of President Clinton? Check.

Using the term “corporate media?” Check.

Making an adoring comment about former Vice President Gore? Check.

Mentioning that Florida was “stolen” in 2000? Check.

Personal attacks? Check.

You can read it all if you wish:

Link

How many times have you wanted a list of reasons why the global warming crowd is full of soup? Forward the list to friends and family.

100 Reasons why proponents of ‘man-made’ Global Warming theory of Climate Change are completely wrong.

Link

There will be more content other than global warming and climate change here. It’s just low-hanging fruit right now.

Nice, eh?

Strong-arm tactics cause British scientists to sign a government loyalty oath on global warming.

More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the “professional integrity” of global warming research. They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures.

. . .

One scientist told The Times he felt under pressure to sign. “The Met Office is a major employer of scientists and has long had a policy of only appointing and working with those who subscribe to their views on man-made global warming,” he said.

The concept of scientists–or journalists, or artists–signing a petition is ludicrous. The idea is that they are lending their authority to whatever cause the petition represents–but in fact they are undermining that authority, which is based on the presumption that they think for themselves.

The problem with the petition as a form is also a problem with the Met Office petition’s substance. The purpose of the petition is to shore up scientists’ authority by vouching for their integrity. But signing a loyalty oath under pressure from the government is itself a corrupt act. Anyone who signs this petition thereby raises doubts about his own integrity. And once again, the question arises: Why should any layman regard global warmism as credible when the “consensus” rests on political machinations, statistical tricks and efforts to suppress alternative hypotheses?

Link

Follow the money.

More on climategate:

…the Liberal Icon and Pacifist Saint Dwight David Eisenhower had this to say:

“…the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

Link

Beautiful.

Now that we know global warming numbers were “fixed,” where are the liberals turning to keep the hoax alive? Comedians!

HuffingtonPost.com – Jon Stewart On ClimateGate (VIDEO)

“That guy thinks global warming is debunked every time he drinks a slushy and gets a brain freeze.” Stewart said.

Link

He is funny, but he is not a scientist.

As always, follow the money on global warming.

More light on the climate change fraud:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

Link

This is a major blow to the religion of global warming.

I wonder how deep the fraud goes?

Congratulations to the scientists who have been skeptical of the politically driven “consensus.”