These emails have been called “the nail in the coffin” of global warming hysteria.

I wish that were true.

Check out the sites where the Chicken Little`s still thrive. About the hacked emails, The Huffington Post says “this criminal activity has created fodder for right-wing groups to promote their own agenda that global warming is not real.” And, after admitting he was “deeply shaken” by the emails, a Guardian columnist adds that “To bury man-made climate change, a far wider conspiracy would have to be revealed.”

Really?

For fun: imagine if these leaked emails weren’t about global warming, but Gitmo. Or Dick Cheney. Or Sarah Palin’s private life. How fast would Time, Newsweek, and an intensely sweaty Andrew Sullivan be all over them – calling these emails corruption of the highest order?

But they can’t do this here. Because the lie is the lie that the media believed in. It’s their Watergate – so it’s no wonder there’s no “Woodward and Bernstein” to bring it down.

So, where does this leave Al Gore? He’s got his hands all over this leafy Ponzi scheme, and he stands to make buttloads of money off propagated fear. Something tells me he won’t be discussing these emails in Copenhagen. Because as long as the sky keeps falling, his bank account keeps rising.

Tonight:

Michelle Malkin!

Barret Swatek!

Alex Blagg!

Remi Spencer!

and other stuff!

In this episode, “NewsBusted” covers: Republicans, Democrats, Jobless Americans, Texas Governor Rick Perry, Fidel Castro, President Obama Poster, Al Gore, Current TV, Sammy Sosa, Lamar Odom, and Khloe Kardashian.

–

Don’t be fooled by the self-effacing humor or Gore’s willingness to engage in gentle self-mockery. As the leader and symbol of this socialist-wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing movement, GE/NBC understands that Gore’s popularity can only aid in the passing of legislation beneficial to GE. And Gore’s “30 Rock” enablers also understand that the more appealing he is, the more appealing his leftist ideas seem…

“Gee, why would such a nice guy want to hurt America?”

The Left will argue, “Come on, it’s funny, it’s harmless…”

No, but it is effective. And in its drip-drip-drip way, relentlessly so.

I’d also appreciate it if Sean Hannity would wake up to the fact that a lot of us change the channel the second that Bob Beckel shows up on the Great American Panel.

On the other hand, I wish that merely as an experiment a dozen or so liberals could be forced to watch Glenn Beck for an entire week. I would be dying to know how they would react after watching videos of Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Cass Sunstein, Anita Dunn, Andy Stern and John Holdren spouting off when they think nobody outside the room will hear about their plans to transform America.  They would have made Dr. Frankenstein blanch but put a smile on Karl Marx’s ugly mug.

Back in 1990, the police raided Barney Frank’s home because his lover, Steve Gobie, was running a male prostitution ring out of his condo. In 2007, the police raided the home of James Ready and arrested him for possession of marijuana. Ready, who is Barney’s main squeeze these days, didn’t just smoke the weed, Farmer Ready was growing the stuff. The congressman was there at the time of the raid but denied he had any idea that those plants in the backyard weren’t rhododendrons. I believe he told the police that he was perfectly clueless when it came to plant life. I guess, like Clinton, he too never inhaled.

Because I am always prepared to grant a liberal politician the benefit of the doubt, I’m sure it’s only a coincidence that Barney has long led the fight to decriminalize the use and sale of the narcotic.

Finally, I understand why so many folks are eager to impeach the president, but that obviously isn’t going to happen. Unfortunately, being a Red and despising America isn’t an impeachable offense. However, there’s nothing to prevent people from gathering signatures in order to recall their arrogant representatives.

I suggest we begin with every single one of those ACORN-loving crumbs who voted for the stimulus bill, cash for clunkers, and ObamaCare.

If their voting against the best interests of present-day American taxpayers, not to mention future generations, isn’t reason enough to throw the bums out, I can’t imagine what would be.

As with the weather, or at least the way it used to be with the weather prior to Al Gore’s turning it into his personal ATM, everyone complains about incumbents, but nobody does anything about them.

Next week NBC is entering their “Green Week” of programming, infusing environmental messages across many of their prime-time shows. But the campaign does not only include entertainment programs – the eco-messaging will also be spread through NBC News’ Nightly News, Meet the Press, and the Today Show.

My question for the NBC News organization is this – will you be discussing the biggest global warming story of the year?

Early this year a study from Oregon State University, entitled Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals, contained the single biggest decision that anyone could make to dramatically lower their carbon footprint. And that decision? Have fewer kids.

The results of the report are actually mind boggling for anyone somewhat informed on environmental policy. The study investigates how the reproductive choices of an individual affects their “carbon legacy”, or said differently, the CO2 emissions attributable to a person’s offspring. What they found was that a US citizen’s decision of having a child adds 5.7 times the expected CO2 emissions for that citizen. Yes, 5.7 times!! This is due to the domino effect of your kids having kids, which have kids, and so on. 

An even more astounding aspect of the report was a comparison of the addition of two children to, say, the standard practices that lower your carbon footprint. For example, if a woman adopted all of the six eco-friendly behaviors highlighted in the report, she would reduce her carbon footprint by 486 tons of CO2 over her lifetime. But if she were to have two children, this would eventually add nearly 40 times that amount of CO2 to the earth’s atmosphere.

The decision of having fewer children decreases the carbon legacy of an individual by a staggering amount and is by far the single biggest decision an individual can make to affect the environment. This finding cannot be overstated. So it begs the question, why hasn’t the report affected global warming legislation?

As Al Gore has stated, “Our world faces a true planetary emergency.” If his apocalyptic vision is true, why has not one piece of legislation adopted an incentive for individuals to have fewer children?

I can think of only one possible answer…there is no emergency.

Around the time my beautiful daughter was born just a few years ago I noticed the increase in “stuff” attributed to her that went into our garbage on a daily basis. This rather obvious phenomenon sparked a question in my head that I shared with an eco-activist working on a “green” project of mine. “Why doesn’t the green movement encourage people to have less children as a solution to this global emergency,” I asked. “Well, we don’t talk about that because it isn’t politically correct,” he responded.

It was this answer, by someone spreading the message of apocalypse, that started my gradual transformation away from the alarmist position of global warming.

Having “fewer children” is not a policy that I am advocating here. I use it merely as a litmus test to the alarmist’s urgency. If China is any example, the “one-child” mandate has horrific social consequences. However, if we truly face the biggest crises we’ve ever encountered, the global warming proponents would surely have the political will to pass controversial legislation. Political correctness should not even remotely be the first concern for this group. In fact, it would hardly be considered controversial if the consequences were actually between life and extinction.

As recently as this past Monday, Senator John Kerry penned a Huffington Post article that read (emphasis added):

Now it’s time for a new generation of Americans to get in motion – because the very survival of our planet depends on them. Now is the time for young people who learned to flex their political muscle last November to shift into high-gear and get Washington to take on our historic legislation to combat global climate change.

For those that feel that our world will literally cease to exist, the findings in this report should have been viewed as the silver bullet to stop or, at the very least, dramatically slow the effects of global warming. But it wasn’t.

Why? Because companies like GE, the parent company of NBC News, doesn’t make a dime from a “solution” such as the one presented in the report. And Big Government can’t tax such a solution either. But both benefit from the “historic” cap-and-trade legislation pushed by Senator Kerry and the like. And if there is no emergency, why not take the money route.

Now of course there are sincere people that have a real concern for our environment and man-made pollution. I know many of them and include myself in that mainstream group. They create low toxicity products, encourage recycling and reuse, and are producing higher fuel efficient vehicles each year. We really do need to pay attention to our natural resources and protect against harmful effects on the environment. But after several years of working in the green movement, I’ve come to a rather cynical, yet I believe accurate, conclusion about global warming alarmism.

And that conclusion – global warming alarmism is a weapon, used by those wielding it, for personal gain.

Few would be surprised that MSNBC has aligned itself with this administration’s climate change legislation. But for non-opinion news organizations, studies like the “carbon legacy” report should provide ample fodder for questioning alarmist environmental policy. It shows just how far the hand of Big Green has reached into our lives when both NBC News and the heralded Meet The Press willfully agree to promote global warming legislation rather than turn a critical eye to alarmism.

So what do you call it when the federal government steers money to a major broadcast network so that the major broadcast network will stump for the federal government’s agenda? 

That’s precisely what’s happening over at NBC this week.  According to the Associated Press: 

NBC gives new meaning to the phrase “green screen” next week, spreading a pro-environmental message across five of its prime-time entertainment programs.  “30 Rock,” where Al Gore takes a cameo role, leads the way. Environmental themes were also added to the scripts of “The Biggest Loser,” “The Office,” “Heroes” and “Community.”  NBC Universal’s three-year “green” campaign has largely focused on off-camera issues like making company facilities more eco-friendly. News and information programs have also been enlisted to do stories on environmental issues, but except for one “30 Rock” episode two years ago, the campaign hasn’t touched the prime-time lineup. 

Now, it’s clear that NBC has pushed this “green agenda” for years.  And that makes sense – General Electric owns NBC, and General Electric is at the forefront in terms of producing “green products” like energy efficient lightbulbs.  In May 2005, GE launched its $90 million “Ecomagination” advertising campaign, designed to demonstrate “GE’s commitment to address challenges such as the need for cleaner, more efficient sources of energy, reduced emissions and abundant sources of clean water,” according to GE CEO Jeff Immelt. 

But something’s different this year.  Now it’s not merely that NBC employees are supposed to recycle their paper.  It’s not just that the news division focuses on stories about water and air quality.  It’s that mainstream, prime-time programs have had their stories changed in order to accommodate these liberal messages.

So what changed?  Couldn’t have anything to do with the Obama Administration’s stimulus plan, which pledged to spend billions on “green jobs,” could it?  GE backed the stimulus package to the hilt, with Immelt leading the way:

A balanced package of targeted tax relief combined with the swift infusion of capital into sustainable infrastructure like renewable energy, transportation and healthcare can add new jobs and, equally important, save existing jobs that otherwise are in real danger … We at GE will continue to support and advocate swift passage of legislation that is acceptable to the Senate, the House, and the Administration, and that can be promptly signed into law by the President.” 

According to the 2008 GE Annual Report Letter to investors:

In the U.S., stimulus will target clean energy and smart grid technology. GE is well positioned to capitalize on these investments. We have a $7 billion renewable energy business with solid positions in wind and solar energy. We are deploying smart grid technology with key utility customers such as Pacific Gas and Electric Company, American Electric Power, and Florida Power & Lighting. This is an approximately $635 million business today, but will grow substantially in the next few years.

While certain sectors of GE took a major hit in 2008, the energy sector grew by 19%, and according to CNN.com, “Those units are expected to perform even better if GE is able to successfully bid on some of the government’s stimulus contracts.  Immelt said on the conference call that stimulus should help speed up more than $100 billion of infrastructure projects in the company’s pipeline, including implementation of smart grid technology and health IT projects.”  Which also helps explain GE’s support for the Obama health care plan.

And GE’s newly-enthused infusion of green propaganda into its mainstream shows couldn’t have anything to do with President Obama’s back-room deal with the pharmaceutical companies, could it?  Big Pharma, as it is called, recently cut a deal with the Obama Administration that would limit its liability to $80 billion over the next ten years, so long as Big Pharma spends $100 million on pro-health care plan advertising – basically, a payoff for NBC and other mass media from the pocket of the pharmaceutical industry.

Obama’s warm relationship with Jeff Immelt also couldn’t be the reason he refuses to do anything about the massive charges of financial fraud leveled at GE in August, could it?  In August, GE agreed to pay a $50 million fine for SEC accounting violations.  “GE bent the accounting rules beyond the breaking point,” explained Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.  In Obama’s America, that type of malfeasance usually ends in executive heads rolling.  In this case, it has ended with Immelt presiding over a bunch of green entertainment shows.

There is both a qualitative and a quantitative difference to what NBC is doing this year with its Go Green campaign.  Prime-time broadcasting reaches a far greater audience than NBC News programming, and it can be far more effective in paving the way for social change. 

It may seem like only a minor issue when it’s seen as a few messages about recycling, but it will seem far less mild when the Obama Administration rolls out its cap and trade plan – a plan which will benefit GE enormously.  Jeff Immelt has already called the cap and trade plan “is the most effective way to create a market and go … let’s get it done.”  Under Obama’s budget, “climate revenues” were slated to receive $646 billion over eight years, so it’s no wonder Immelt labeled the Obama Administration a “financier” and a “key partner.”  As Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner explains:

In the fourth quarter of 2008 as the company’s stock fell 30 percent, GE spent $4.26 million on lobbying — that’s $46,304 each day, including weekends, Thanksgiving and Christmas. In 2008, the company spent a grand total of $18.66 million on lobbying.  Reviewing their lobbying filings, you might think you were looking at Al Gore’s agenda. GE’s specific lobbying issues included the “Climate Stewardship Act,” “Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act,” “Global Warming Reduction Act,” “Federal Government Greenhouse Gas Registry Act,” “Low Carbon Economy Act,” and “Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act.”  This isn’t altruism or public relations. GE has started a joint venture called Greenhouse Gas Services, which invests in — and hopes to manage the trade in — greenhouse gas credits.

How can the quid pro quo here not be seen as a soft payola scandal?  Clearly GE is directing NBC to push the Obama green agenda using all of its available outlets in order to both flog GE products and in order to incentivize the Obama Administration to continue directing a river of cash to GE. 

Neither CBS nor ABC is pushing the green message, unlike the volunteerism message all the networks inserted in their programming several weeks back.  This is a company-specific decision made by an executive board looking for more payoffs from a willing Administration.  At the very least, NBC should run a disclaimer under the screen: “This segment brought to you by President Obama and his environmental agenda.”

–

In this episode, “NewsBusted” covers: Democratic Health Care Bill, Health Care Protests, 10.2% Unemployment, NBC News, Maine Rejects Same-Sex Marriage, Al Gore, Newsweek Magazine, Twitter, and MSNBC.

There I said it. I feel better already. It’s time to fess up that it isn’t about our beliefs or principles, or morality or the Constitution.  It’s all about race. We conservatives have feigned our approval of Michael Steele, Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder and a host of other Black conservatives for far too long.  We reject Ward Connerly, Niger Innis, Shelby Steele, Armstrong Williams and Kenneth Blackwell. Who needs them!

The leftist are correct:

If Obama were a white guy we would all be in favor of a government takeover of our health care system and happy to stand in the government line and take whatever medical care the left deemed sufficient to dole out to us. We would favor “Cap and Trade” and be happy to kick in a bunch more dough for our heating oil to keep our kids warm in the winter. We would believe in global warming and wouldn’t mind that Al Gore has made more money off of carbon than all the coal mines in West Virginia.

If Obama were a white guy we would be in favor of turning our Constitution over to the United Nations; love it when our President bows to the King of Saudi Arabia and makes nice with minor dictators like Castro and Chavez; be in favor of the government takeover of GM and regulating private sector pay checks; happy to walk away from the war on terror; support getting the Gitmo detainees into this country and making all illegal aliens citizens tomorrow…

If Obama were a white guy we would even be happy to quote from the Little Red Book.

Irish directors Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney have brought Gore’s controversial picture back under critical focus in their new documentary, “Not Evil Just Wrong,” which addresses the science and language of Al Gore and other environmentalists who see global warming as a major problem. Nearly 10,000 people in 22 countries simultaneously watched the film as it was streamed online via USTREAM (28,000 tuned in at different times), as well as almost 8,000 screenings across the U.S., all of which started at 8 p.m. EST. yesterday, October 18. 

This isn’t the first time “An Inconvenient Truth” has been critically studied. When the British government planned to send the DVD to 3,500 secondary schools in 2007, volunteer school governor Stewart Dimmock challenged the decision, believing it is inaccurate and biased. Just over two years ago (Oct. 11), British High Court Judge Michael Burton found nine significant errors in the film, and ruled that it could be shown in schools only if accompanied by guidance to counter its one-sided views. Without this guidance, showing the film would have been breaking the law. While Gore himself claimed he won the case, Judge Burton disagreed, saying, “I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of … the 1996 Education Act.” 

“Not Evil Just Wrong” picks up where the High Court left off, picking apart both Gore’s film and the environmental movement through case studies and in-depth interviews. It addresses the economic and societal impacts of environmental regulations, as well as the scientific truth behind today’s environmental hype. Key components included a study of DDT, a chemical that kills mosquitoes. It helped end malaria epidemics in many countries, and was once widely used in the United States until environmentalists convinced governments around the world that it caused cancer and was harmful to wildlife. Because of this DDT was banned. Without DDT, malaria-carrying mosquitoes have thrived in third-world countries, especially in Africa, and have killed millions. But in 2006 the World Health Organization removed its ban on DDT after beliefs about its negative affects were disproven. 

The film also revealed that the “hockey stick” global warming graph, which was cited in “An Inconvenient Truth” as evidence of global warming, was in fact incorrect since its compiler Michael Mann used flawed mathematics to reach his end result. Its underlying mathematics was flawed. The film cites a warm period during the Middle Ages and the 1930s as exceptionally hot periods. 

Gore himself declined to be interviewed for the film, but McAleer was able to pose a question to Gore at the Society of Environmental Journalism’s 2009 conference in Madison, Wisconsin, giving his film a burst of publicity just before its release. They briefly sparred after McAleer asked Gore whether he accepted the British High Court’s ruling that there were nine significant errors in the film and what he’d done to correct the errors. Gore evaded the question and the two locked horns over one issue: the number of polar bears alive today. This is probably the worst of the nine errors to fight over, since neither side can say with certainty how many polar bears there are. Terence P. Jeffrey, an editor at large for Human Events, wrote in May of last year that there is really no evidence to base numbers on other than estimation. 

On the whole, the film excellently uncovered the facts about Gore’s campaign, though when the lights came up, I for one would have liked to know more. In that vein Andrew Breitbart plans to help the filmmakers launch “Big Environmentalism” as a platform for environmental truth. McElhinney announced the decision at the panel discussion after the Washington, D.C. film premiere.

Online video chat by Ustream

**If you are having problems watching the film, watch it here.***

Big Hollywood is proud to be a part of the “Not Evil Just Wrong” premiere.

The film Al Gore and Hollywood doesn’t want you to see premieres right here, online at Big Hollywood, RIGHT NOW, Sunday October 18th, 8pm ET/5pm PST.

For more information, please visit the “Not Evil Just Wrong” website.

Leave comments below.
]]> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bighollywood/2009/10/18/right-now-not-evil-just-wrong-premiere-big-hollywood-live-stream/feed/ 98