NEA Pushing Climate Change Propaganda in Schools
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/mira-ebersole/2016/08/10/fusion-praises-nea-pushing-climate-change-propaganda-schools…
New FOIA’d Documents Show AGs’ #ExxonKnew Campaign Isn’t Even About Exxon — It’s About … Paris?
…Flashback: Obama used Malia’s ‘asthma’ to justify ‘global warming’ regs
Via: http://junkscience.com/2016/08/asthmatic-malia-obama-caught-smoking-pot/
‘Asthmatic’ Malia Obama caught smoking pot
President Obama used Malia’s “asthma” to justify his global warming rules.
By Steve Milloy – www.JunkScience.com
RadarOnline.com reports that Malia Obama has been caught on camera smoking pot at a concert.
You can watch a video here.
#
Obama in 2015: Malia’s asthma attack made climate change personal – President Obama says climate change first became a personal issue for him when his 16-year-old daughter was rushed to the hospital 12 years ago after suffering from an asthma attack. “What I can relate to is the fear a parent has, when your 4-year-old daughter comes up to you and says, ‘Daddy, I’m having trouble breathing.’ The fright you feel is terrible,” the president told ABC News in an interview broadcast Wednesday. “And if we can make sure that our responses to the environment are reducing those incidents, that’s something that I think every parent would wish for,” Mr. Obama said. “And the good news is there are concrete steps we can take to do something about it.” The White House announced this week a series of initiatives to deal with the impact of climate change on public health, including the upcoming White House Climate Change and Health Summit, ABC News reported.
#
JunkScience.com readers will recall Obama’s claim that Malia was asthmatic and that his global warming rules would prevent child asthma. All this was debunked below.
###
Ozone Triggers Lying Not Asthma
By Steve Milloy
Breitbart.com, June 24, 2015
As part of a public relations campaign launched in April to support EPA’s global warming rules, President Obama told the nation a whopper. He said on ABC’s Good Morning America that his push to address global warming was influenced by an asthma attack his daughter Malia experienced when she was four years old.
Skeptical, I investigated to see if there was anything to the story and, indeed, I found that Malia’s asthma attack was not the first time the Obamas exploited her experience to advance their political agenda.
In a 2012 interview given to promote an article she authored for a radical environmental group, Michelle Obama revealed that Malia’s asthma attack occurred at a circus. Then in a 2013 interview to promote a bill concerning asthma grants to states, President Obama revealed, “Malia actually has a peanut allergy.”
As peanuts are known to abound at circuses, it’s virtually certain that
Claim: ‘Trump Will Make a Much More Eco-Friendly President Than Clinton’
A Donald Trump presidency would be way more beneficial to the environment than a Hillary Clinton presidency.
Trump really needs to mention this point at his rallies, not just for the trolling, but also because it happens to be true.
Consider just one example: the hundreds of thousands of rare birds and endangered bats slaughtered in the US every year by the wind farms that Hillary Clinton applauds (and will no doubt go on subsidising) and that Donald Trump loathes (and will no doubt starve of subsidies and cause to become as extinct as the Dodo).
#
Also see:
Breitbart Writes Donald Would Be “Way More Beneficial To The Environment” Than Hillary
Contrary to what anti-growthers may think, there are many reasons why high growth would be great for the environment. Number one manufacturing would relocate from dirty third world conditions (China, India) back to more modern and cleaner conditions in the USA. Making and buying locally are almost always better for the environment.
Number 2, prosperity also means more money for environmental clean ups.
Number 3: Money would finally pour into massively upgrading the USA’s crumbling and inefficient transportation system, which is plagued by traffic jams, inefficient networks and road conditions that lead to wasteful energy consumption.
Number 4, prosperous nations by far tend to have lower population growth.
– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2016/08/10/breitbart-writes-donald-would-be-way-more-beneficial-to-the-environment-than-hillary/#sthash.Aobfm4Pg.tgtV2E85.dpuf…
Warmists rejoice: Murdoch-Owned TV Channel Will Air Climate Series w/ David Letterman Before The Election
National Geographic Channel will premiere Season 2 of the critically-acclaimed TV series, “Years of Living Dangerously” Sunday, October 30 at 8 pm (ET).
The focus of Episode 1, with correspondents David Letterman (!) and Cecily Strong (of “Saturday Night Live”), is solar energy — in India and the United States. Later episodes feature Jack Black, Gisele Bündchen, Ty Burrell, James Cameron, Don Cheadle, America Ferrera, Thomas Friedman, Joshua Jackson, Aasif Mandvi, Nikki Reed, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ian Somerhalder, Sigourney Weaver and Bradley Whitford.
…
‘Scouring of the climate skeptics’: ‘What to expect on from Team Hillary Clinton
Scouring of the climate skeptics
“We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
— The essence of politics, attributed to both Franklin and loyalist Richard Penn.
Obama strove, with mixed results, to be a conciliator and unifier of America. Clinton will instead strive, as the Clinton’s always have, to crush their political foes. The climate skeptics have earned a spot near the top of that list.
Skeptics are vulnerable to retaliation due to their disorganization and disunity (unlike the climate activists), their epistemic closure (reliance on communication in a closed network of websites), and their association with the far-right (self-isolation rather than coalition-building). Historians might conclude that they bloomed with the “pause” and wilted as warming resumed (climate change in the mid- and late-21st century will determine who was correct, although that’s politically irrelevant in our time).
They hope for rescue by global cooling (perhaps a strong La Nina) and President Trump. Neither of those seems likely (see pp24-25 for the current forecast of a weak La Nina). They might find the results unpleasant.…