The Obama adminstration versus the environmental scientist???
I can’t make a whole lot of sense of what’s happening here. But I know it sounds potentially interesting.
Very:
A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, possibly over the veracity of that article.
Charles Monnett, an Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, was told July 18 that he was being put on leave, pending results of an investigation into “integrity issues.” But he has not yet been informed by the inspector general’s office of specific charges or questions related to the scientific integrity of his work, said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
On Thursday, Ruch’s watchdog group plans to file a complaint with the agency on Monnett’s behalf, asserting that Obama administration officials have “actively persecuted” him in violation of policy intended to protect scientists from political interference.
The Obama administration, “actively persecuting” the environmental scientist? WTF??
Manufacturing a scapegoat?
I knew we shouldn’t have followed that White Rabbit down the rabbit hole.
Semi OT.
I was musing last night on what would happen if a President were to have an epiphany and completely invert his philosophical moorings.
Suppose, for example, that Obama were to have a road to Damascus type conversion, realize that his and the country’s problems are being caused/ exacerbated by his hard left views, and called a press conference to announce his newfound allegiance to Tea Party principles. (The response of the talking heads on the alphabet networks would alone be priceless.)
What would his leftist masters do, once they overcame their astonishment? Invoke the 25th amendment? Re-examine their own views? (Nah.) Excoriate the apostate, and do the full Bush on him? What would Congressional Democrats do when he called for free market solutions?
What would the Americans do? Welcome the prodigal son to the Republican Party/ Tea Party? What would American blacks do – switch allegiance and continue to support him, or stay on the Democrat plantation and turn against him?
I’m not making any prognostications here, obviously, since Obama doesn’t have the intellectual heft to be capable of such a sea change, but it’s an entertaining scenario to consider, isn’t it?
Maybe the scientist was about to testify the polar bears didn’t drown but were actually killed by Mexicans using ATF purchased guns.
A true conversion would have Obama apologizing to Alice Palmer, Hillary Clinton, and how many others has he thrown under the bus?
If, finally, the package becomes too unwrapped, Obama’s own party will devour him.
A true conversion would have Obama apologizing to Alice Palmer, Hillary Clinton, and how many others has he thrown under the bus?
Yep, he would. But imagine that he did the full mea culpa, Whitaker Chambers style, and renounced Satan … er … socialism.
I suspect you’re right: the Party would devour him (or at least try to), as it did Whitaker Chambers.
For one thing, those transcripts would be on the Internet within the hour!
Neo’s post about allegations that the Obama Administration was “actively persecuting” an environmental scientist reminded me of this notion.
Apologies for an off-thread comment, but the following website is a “fax your rep” facilitation site. I feel kind of miffed that the Beohner proposal turned out to be fraudulent.
http://www.grassfire.com/3156/offer.asp?Ref_ID=7902&CID=160&RID=32088238
Excerpt:
Enraged fiscal conservatives panned Boehner’s prior bill as nothing short of an accounting sham and betrayal, which ultimately gave Obama’s Democrats everything they want.
I faxed!
What would his leftist masters do, once they overcame their astonishment?
well.. if i remember correctly..
two Kennedy were killed who were anticommunist and the one that survived became friends with the kgb…
ie.. the same thing that neo mentions in another thread
Propaganda by the Deed
few of his kind switch horses… ever
if you can find it, read Richard wrights too smart to be a communist
or something like that. it basically describes how he WANTED t be a part, like web du bouis… but they were always too suspicious that he was too smart and would figure it out and realize the game of the innocents clubs/fronts.
no.. he has his whole reality invested… and has and gets all his benefits from that and his lineage
MOST who change, change because of some of the practices i pointed to in the catechism of the revolutionary…
ie… their loyalty is paid with betrayal that serves the party, but does bad to them.
few are prepared to be the cut out for the cause..
but if you read bella dodd. you read how she places pedophiles and others in the catholic church (she testified to that)… and how, over time, being a very smart jewish woman getting odler… she starts to realize she is being used…
so bella dodd, wakes up, and testifies.. and now we know that the president of the CPUSA is also the president of the Teachers union… (and who taught the kids to love communism and hate capitalism?)
lots of changed sides and confessed. but few if any read my lists of noting them to learn from…
bella dodds book is school of darkness.
frieda utley was another.
lots and lots of examples and detailed information from insiders…
heck… it would be like not wanting to read about the nazis who plotted the demise of hitler and beleiving they existed… or if you do read them, accepting what the party says about them, so not bother.
like the perloined letter, its not hidden.
its the conspiracy tht is in the open.
Communism was a hoax perpetrated by financiers “to control the common man” and to advance world tyranny. – Bella dodd
The Communist Party operates by infiltrating and subverting social institutions like the churches, schools, mass media and government. Its aim was “to create new types of human beings who would conform to the blueprint of the world they confidently expected to control.” (162)Bella dodd
now why would anyone want to read that kind of insight, and learn and read the lineges and people and techiques and such?
i mean, isnt texas no holdem more fun when your in for a million and dont know the rules?
by the way… its taken years for people to come aroud to what i knew from day one, as i had read these people and so on…
seems that i was clued in 30 plus years ago
and now with the game almost over, they start to wake up…
“The party did all it could to induce women to go into industry. Its fashion designers created special styles for them and its songwriters wrote special songs to spur them…. War-period conditions, they planned, were to become a permanent part of the future educational program. The bourgeois family as a social unit was to be made obsolete.” (153)
it was NOT my idea to declare the feminsits as the makers… it was the makers telling us in their writings, that this is what they are..
the quotes in the summary paragraph below are dodds
hows that reset button working?
“I now saw that with the best motives and a desire to serve the working people… I and thousands like me, had been led to a betrayal of these very people…. I had been on the side of those who sought the destruction of my own country.” (229)
so to think one can wing their way out of this..
when it started a generation before they were born and is being coordinated the way you build a gothic cathedral over 150 years.
and yet, we cant imagine such things, as we see images of notre dame…
Interesting what-if, Occam’s B., but of course any reconsideration of his ideas by Obama is about as likely as Lucy Lawless showing up on my doorstep and asking to come in and get out of these wet clothes–devoutly to be wished, possible, but not likely.
There is no indication that this administration has, as it’s put above, the intellectual heft to reconsider much of anything. And it’s not just a matter of intellectual heft–firmly convinced of their own keen intelligence and acumen, experiential and empirical evidence is beneath them.
It’s one reason why I say something I never, ever, thought I would say: “I’ll be voting for whoever the Republicans put up next time.”