1.    I do not think anyone should judge a soldier in the field without having been there and done that. Injustices in any war should be determined along with any consequences by the military peers and superiors of those that have committed any infractions.

2.    Even in this day and age of communication, the Bush-era so called “war crimes” are fairly tame when compared to the atrocities committed by other administrations. Consider FDR imprisoning over 100 thousand Japanese-Americans into war camps. Truman dropped the A-Bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima killing thousands of innocent Japanese civilians. Also, under Truman’s watch tens of thousands of German civilians were brutally pillaged after the war was over. So why has history judged both FDR and Truman in a good light if so many atrocities occurred on their watch? The reason is simple, their actions may have been perceived as severe, but in the end it was determined they were necessary to protect our freedom and save American lives. This should sound familiar because this is exactly what Bush-era folks accomplished when they tortured a few detainees.

3.    The Geneva Convention places rules and regulations on how to treat enemy prisoners. However, the Geneva Convention was written many years ago and how we fight wars has changed drastically. Thus, the Geneva Convention covers uniformed prisoners; it does not cover prisoners who fight Americans by blending in with the public.

4.    Today, Obama is giving military detainees all the same rights and privileges that any American citizen would receive including Miranda Rights. This sounds like the right thing to do, but look back on history, when have “war criminals” been given these rights. After WWII did we give the war criminals that masterminded the Holocaust Miranda Rights and a trial on U.S. soil with the best lawyers? Absolutely not, they were tried in a military tribunal and most received the death penalty for their crimes. So it begs to reason, why are suspected terrorists that slaughtered Americans in Embassy bombings or in the Trade Center buildings being given the same rights as you and me? What Bush did was no different than any previous President. Could you imagine the outrage around the globe if we gave Holocaust war criminals the same rights as you and me? I find it peculiar the world views Bush as a war criminal when they did the same exact thing to protect their civilians after WWII. Now, after Americans are slaughtered on 9/11, the world and liberals are viewing us as performing injustices to protect our citizens. Also, remember, American soldiers that commit a crime are not tried in public courts and they are not given the same rights as you and me.  They are tried by a military counsel. Thus, enemy combatants and terrorist now have more rights than American servicemen.

5.    Now, relive the events on 9-11. Remember that day? I always remember the image of individuals trapped in the flames deciding whether to burn or jump to their deaths. When I hear about injustices that happen in Iran and Afghanistan and all this talk about war crimes, I remember this image of Americans plunging 1000 vertical feet to their deaths. Now, how can anyone feel bad that three individuals with ties to Al-Qaida and the atrocities of 9/11 were tortured? I hardly think justice has been served since these men still live.

6.    Obama closed Gitmo because the world viewed this as a symbol of U.S. injustices. In actuality, Gitmo, is nicer than most U.S. prisons and only 3 detainees were tortured. Now we are paying countries to take our detainees because their native countries will not take them. This is the injustice, not Gitmo. Remember, one in seven detainees released by Gitmo have gone back to fight Americans.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

Sarah Palin 20-1: I like Sarah, but to me she is damaged goods. The media and the left have done such a good job destroying this young lady’s political career, her approval ratings have dropped 25 points in her home state. Sarah has been trying to repair her image, but she has a long way to go to be considered a front runner. Her resignation is also going to hurt her future political ambitions.

Mike Huckabee 10-1: Huckabee finished a distant second behind John McCain for the GOP nomination in 2008. Unlike Palin, Huckabee’s image has not been destroyed. Also, Huckabee has been getting excellent exposure with his Fox News program on weekends. Huckabee, like Palin, will be fighting for the hard core conservative voters. Both Huckabee and Palin are true conservative candidates and do not stray from conservative beliefs. What I like about Huckabee is his tax reform to move to a fair tax, and he is one of the smoothest talking Republicans. I think a smooth orator is needed to beat Obama.

Mitt Romney 10-1: Romney finished just behind Huckabee during the GOP nomination process in 2008. Romney holds many of the core conservative beliefs, but Romney has been able to attract independents and Democrats to win the Massachusetts Governorship. Romney is an astute businessman and understands finances better than any candidate. With the federal deficit at record levels, Romney may be a good choice to bring fiscal responsibility back to Washington. However, all of that said, Romney has fallen into obscurity since he dropped out of the GOP race in 2008. Romney needs to be front and center telling Americans why Obama’s spending spree is bad. Romney has ties to Michigan, and that state may be vulnerable in 2012. Michigan is a solid blue state, but the economy and the car industry demise may give Romney a place to pick up ground on Obama if he were to win the nomination.

Bobby Jindel 20-1: Bobby is still very young and I do not think he is polished enough to win the nomination. However, he may have more opportunities in the future. He is a rising star for the GOP, but he has failed to show me he has the mental fortitude to be a solid leader that the party can depend on.

Rudy Giuliani: 20-1: A poor showing in the 2008 GOP race will not help his cause. Giuliani has solid leadership skills and understands fiscal responsibility, but his experience is soft. He may be the best candidate to fight the war on terror. He witnessed first hand 9/11 and it is something he will never forget. Giuliani’s Achilles heal is that he moderate on many moral issues. I personally do not have a problem with this, but it will cost him votes from staunch Republicans. Thus, Giuliani must excel at getting the votes from moderate conservatives. Even if Giuliani won the nomination, he would have a tough time beating Obama if he can not steal New York from its eternal liberal grasps.

Tim Pawlenty 10-1: Pawlenty is my underdog to win the GOP nomination. He has a solid record in a blue state. If he were to get the nomination, he would most definitely steal Minnesota away from its liberal tendencies.

Newt Gingrich 20-1: I doubt Newt would run, but he would be my top choice at this point in time. Newt is a gifted orator and a walking encyclopedia that would destroy Obama in any debate. The liberal left has claimed Gingrich was behind many scandals and insist skeletons remain in Newt’s closet. The constant accusations from the media and left will more than likely deter Gingrich from running.

The Field 2-1: Right now, I am willing to bet that the 2012 GOP nominee will not be one of the supposed front runners mentioned above and that is why I give the rest of field of 50% chance to win the nomination. I give each of the following candidates a 25-1 shot at the nomination: Texas Congressman Ron Paul, South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, Indiana Congressman Mike Pence, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Nebraska Senator Sam Brownback, RNC leader Michael Steele, Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, EBay chief Meg Whitman, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, and South Dakota Senator John Thune.  My personal favorite out of this group is Paul Ryan, but he is a little known commodity at this point.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

Dubai – Dubai is asking creditors for more time to pay off 60 billion dollars in debt. Many of the creditors are United States financial institutions. If Dubai were to default on its payments it could send another ripple through our financial sector claiming more jobs and businesses. Time will tell, but this is certainly bad news for all global markets. The lesson learned is that financial businesses really need to look hard at their investments. Dubai was lavishly spending money on grandiose dreams such as the tallest building in the world.

The Economy – According to Obama, the only way to solve the jobless problem is to spend more money we do not have. Liberals feel the only way to solve any problem is to throw money at it. It is easy to understand why many liberals have absolutely no business experience since their actions will only bankrupt any business. Thus, the left over funds from TARP will be used to attempt to create jobs instead of paying down our ridiculous debt.  

Bush Bashing – Obama continues to blame Bush despite being President for nearly a year. His latest Bush bashing was about his Afghanistan strategy and their handling of TARP. Interesting though how Obama’s Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, handled the Bush administration’s strategy on Afghanistan. Also, Obama’s Secretary of State, Tim Geithner, was a big player in defining the TARP plan under Bush. Obama is proving he is nothing more than the most divisive and polarizing president in U.S. history.

National Debt – The Democrats raised the ceiling on our national debt by another 1.8 trillion dollars. That is nearly twice as much as was expected. The reason is so this topic does not come up again next year, which happens to be an election year. The national debt cap is now at 14 trillion dollars!

Max Baucus – The leader of the Senate Finance committee tried to get his girlfriend appointed by Obama as a federal judge in Montana. Democrats are backing Baucus despite this blatant ethics violation.

B+ - Obama gave himself a grade of B+ for his first year of service. He is delusional and must constantly reinforce his super ego persona with positive reinforcement. I suppose there is not much room for improvement in his performance. That is bad news to those that are currently unemployed.

Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

The worst thing about ObamaCare is it fails miserably at controlling the rising costs of health care. Neither the House nor Senate bills bend the health care cost curve downward. The Democrat’s objective to lower health care costs is to attack and destroy the private insurance industry. They have painted this industry as being evil, and would like nothing more than to eliminate them completely to meet their objective of a single payer system run by the government. Sure, it makes sense to lower health care premiums by creating more competition. However, liberals think this can only be accomplished with a bureaucratically run government public option. Logic would dictate this can be done by letting consumers shop for medical insurance across state lines, similar to auto insurance.

It is impossible to stem the rising costs of health care without everyone in the medical industry making sacrifices. Private insurance companies profits this past quarter was 3.2%. Meanwhile, other players in the industry such as big pharmaceuticals, generic drug makers, and home health care, to name a few, are miraculously given a pass and have not had to make any concessions on health care reform. These industries had profit margins of 17%, 6.2%, and 6.8% respectively. Thus, they have more room for sacrifices than private insurance companies. 

Trial lawyers are also given a pass in ObamaCare. In fact, they are defended in the House bill. The bill says any state trying to reduce punitive damages will be denied government health care funding. This is ridiculous! Tort reform will save billions each year in malpractice insurance while reducing the need for unnecessary tests. A good health care reform bill should be focused on eliminating frivolous lawsuits that are costing us billions in useless litigation.

Finally, this country has more of a health problem than a health care problem. Health care reform should follow the model used by Steve Burb at Safeway. He has been able to keep health care costs, at Safeway, flat over the past 5 to 6 years by rewarding good behavior. Healthier people pay less, but employees can receive a rebate on their premiums if they become healthier over the course of the year. You cannot have true health care reform without including personal responsibility. Health care is a simple supply and demand economic problem. Healthier people equates to less demand for doctors and medical services. It is as simple as that!

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent. It is an honor to be a Townhall blogger with you. I have been humbled this past year to have two of my blogs from The Theory of Mediocrity published in the August and November issues of Townhall Magazine. I appreciate you and the other radio hosts and Townhall for giving a common man, like me, an opportunity to have a voice on these critical issues.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

We wanted to provide you with an update on the progress of health care reform and our efforts to strengthen – and pass – this landmark legislation. We are closer than ever to accomplishing monumental reform.

We are hard at work to provide you with security and stability with your health insurance, ensure you have access to quality, affordable health care, and rein in out-of-control health care costs. The health care reform bill will put an end to insurance company denials for pre-existing conditions and ensure you have coverage you can count on – that can’t be taken away.

This week we joined 9 other Senate freshmen in announcing a package of amendments that will work to lower costs and move our health care system into the 21st Century. This means less paperwork, less fraud and lower costs. And it means quality time with your doctor and better value for your dollar.

This bill will also protect and strengthen Medicare. Seniors will continue to have guaranteed access to their doctors, home health care providers, nursing homes, prescription drugs and hospital care. We will extend the Medicare trust fund, lower premiums or cost-sharing, increase Medicare benefits and improve access to providers. And we will eliminate co-pays seniors have to pay for preventive care – making seniors’ colonoscopies or mammograms free.

Together, we will continue to fight for a bill that gives patients more choices, reduces costs and doesn’t add one dime to the deficit - all goals that we believe can be achieved with the help of a strong public option.

We can and must pass meaningful health care reform because the status quo is no longer an option. If we do nothing, we will be left with a system that puts profits before patients and leaves millions of Americans paying too much for their insurance or without any health care at all.

We’re optimistic that in the coming weeks we can achieve meaningful health care reform for Colorado’s families.

This was my latest response to my ingenious Senators

Your letter sounds great, but anyone with any cognitive ability can ascertain that you are living in a fantasy world. Please explain to me the following contradictions and hypocrisies in your latest message to deceive your constituents:

1.    How are you going to cut nearly 500 billion from Medicare while expanding the program to include qualifying individuals at 55, lower premiums, increase benefits, improve access, and eliminate co-pays for expensive preventative care? This makes little sense.

2.    Your amendment expands another bureaucracy “the Medical Advisory Board”. How is this expense going make health care more affordable? The government has not been able to run Medicare and Medicaid, which are set to go bankrupt in the next decade. So what makes you think you can run another entitlement such as this “public option”. Many do not trust the government to run a lemonade stand, let alone 15% of our economy.

3.    The latest cost estimate (By Medicare) says the updated revision to the Reid Bill will add 250 billion to the deficit, and this does not include another 250 billion for the “doctor fix”. How do you explain this, since you claim the bill is deficit neutral?

4.    Why are you so focused on attacking private insurance companies (3.2% profit last quarter) with a public option, but let pharmaceutical companies (17% profit), trial lawyers, and other facets of the medical industry such as home care (7% profit) get a pass? You cannot have meaningful health care reform if all players in the medical industry are not expected to make sacrifices. Why haven’t cost savings from these parts of the medical system been included in health care reform? It sounds like you have been influenced by special interests and lobbyists, is this true? And why won’t you let small businesses and individuals shop for health insurance across state lines? If you did this, the public option would not be necessary, right? It sounds like you and your liberal constituents want to destroy the “evil” private insurance industry and force everyone into the public option, is this true?

Please answer my simple questions, or stop sending me these emails that insult the intelligence of anyone who can think for themselves (and not need you or the government to do it for me). I will take no response meaning that my assumptions are correct and will broadcast them on my blog.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

Thank you for contacting me regarding comprehensive health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

On Saturday, November 21st, the Senate voted to begin debate on The Patient Protection and Affordability Act. I also voted to start debate on this bill. We're going to go through weeks of debate and amendments to improve the bill. That is the right process to go through. If we stick with it and we do the hard work that people in Colorado and across the country need us to do, we will have made a meaningful difference.

If we are going to solve the fiscal problems that threaten our economy and our kids’ future, we need to pass effective reform that will rein in skyrocketing health care costs. This bill will significantly reduce the deficit, bring down costs and provide affordable health insurance to all Americans. Now is the time to put politics and special interests aside and enact meaningful, fiscally-responsible health care reform that will put our families, our small businesses and our country on a sounder footing for generations to come.

Coloradans, like all Americans, want a health care system that affords real choice – so you can keep your doctor – and you can select the health coverage that best suits your needs and those of your family. Reform must also end annual double-digit increases to health care costs, and promote better access to affordable quality care for more families. Coloradans want these changes accomplished in a fiscally responsible way. We should be open to any and all options that will help achieve these goals.

Coloradans are frustrated because they are seeing double digit increases in their premiums, do not have adequate access to doctors and nurses and, in many cases, are being completely shut out of the system.

Small businesses are under enormous pressure to stay competitive in this economy. As health care becomes more costly, small and even large businesses are dropping employer-based coverage, leaving individuals at-risk of unaffordable coverage, or denials due to pre-existing conditions. Colorado leads the nation in entrepreneurship and innovation and we cannot allow health care costs to continue to be such a burden to our businesses.

We must also invest in cutting-edge medical research to save lives and bring competitive biotechnology jobs to Colorado. We must be committed to establishing a fair Medicare and Medicaid payment system that does not hurt providers and does not put beneficiaries at risk of losing coverage. I will continue to support legislation to modernize our health care system by encouraging hospitals, nursing facilities, health centers, and physicians to keep investing in information technology, saving both lives and dollars.

I hear countless stories from Coloradans across our state about how year after year they have paid for private insurance only to discover that when they needed coverage the most, it wasn’t there. The public option is a common-sense approach that would inject competition into the marketplace, drive down costs, and provide affordable health insurance for Coloradans. If we are going to require people to have insurance, we need to make sure they have a choice. A public option should be just that, an option, one of a number of choices – public, private, and non-profit – that families and small businesses can choose from. The public option should also be affordable, self-sustaining, and shouldn’t pay at Medicare reimbursement rates.

As the Senate continues its work to address this crisis, I will keep your thoughts in mind. I value the input of fellow Coloradans in considering the wide variety of important issues and legislative initiatives that come before the Senate. I hope you will continue to inform me of your thoughts and concerns.

For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/. Again, thank you for contacting me.

This was my response back to him:

I am perplexed and puzzled as to why you ask for feedback to only respond with a form letter conveniently hidden by the fact you use my actual name. Please do not insult my intelligence since it would be better if you did not respond if you cannot take the time to read the letter. I am once again challenging you to read my previous letter to you and respond to my points. It is your civic duty to convince me this bill is right for me. I have taken the time to read the bill and there is no way it will stop the rising costs of health care, be deficit neutral, improve and lower the costs of my current plan, and improve Medicare. Please read my previous letter to see why I think you and your constituents are wrong about this bill. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

• Climate Change – At his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama says he will continue to push the United States to cut carbon emissions. All of this despite the recent climate gate scandal revealing scientists have been found guilty of “fudging” numbers to deceive the world into believing this massive hoax.

• Nuclear Disarmament – He is pushing for nuclear disarmament at a time when Iran and North Korea are developing long range missiles and building multiple uranium enrichment facilities. And let’s not forget terrorist groups such as Al-Qaida and the Taliban have been trying to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction. Pakistan is fighting these groups feverishly to prevent them from obtaining their nuclear weapons.

• The Eastern Europe Defense Shield – If Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, there will be no missile defense system to protect our NATO friends because Obama cancelled this project.

• Iran Election Fallout – Thousands of Iranians protested Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s fraudulent election win. This would have been the perfect opportunity for Obama to condemn the election and throw his support behind the masses to overthrow the corrupt regime. Obama did nothing.

• Honduras coup d’état – The government overthrew Honduran leader Manuel Zelaya after he tried to change the constitution so he could stay in power longer. This was a similar act followed by Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro who created leftist dictatorships in Venezuela and Cuba respectively. Once again, Obama was on the wrong side of justice condemning the coup and supported bringing Zelaya back to power.

• Muslim and Global Relations – Obama has traveled more than any president in a single year. His main mission has been to bow and apologize for past United States behavior, especially against Muslims. Apparently no one in the Obama administration is aware that thousands of Americans have lost their lives fighting for the freedom of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Balkans.

• End the War in Afghanistan – According to the Obama strategy, the war in Afghanistan will end in 18 months. He will give General McChrysal 18 months to win the war or we will retreat and concede defeat to the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11.

• Civil Liberties – Obama has given enemy combatants, in the fight on terror, all rights afforded to every American to appease liberals around the world. Remember, these are rights that our military servicemen do not have.  

The global plan Obama has been following: accept the status quo in rogue nations, make friends with everyone including terrorists, and commit to climate change and nuclear disarmament regardless of the consequences. Thus, Obama is selling out Americans so he can satisfy his ego by winning the coveted Nobel Peace Prize.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

• First and foremost, the federal government has not run a successful business or program. Look at Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and welfare, which account for over half of our federal budget, and each will be bankrupt within 10 years. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Post Office, the car industry, and Amtrak are examples of federally run companies that are losing money hand over fist. Keep in mind that no one in the Obama Administration has much experience running anything like a small business. Face it; they are all bureaucrats that only know how to spend money.

• CBO forecasts for previous bills and legislation always grossly underestimate the costs of running programs. Medicare has cost the federal government 10 fold what predications and forecasts stated. Always be skeptical of an organization that puts out numbers without any accuracy. This is because the CBO tends to use best case numbers for projecting legislation costs. If they had any ethical backbone they would also publish an estimated cost using worse case numbers.

• Both House and Senate bills do not account for the “doctor fix”. The doctor fix is government spending to doctors that support Medicare patients. This is a cost adjustment to make sure physicians do not have to endure huge pay cuts and leave the medical industry. These costs are estimated at 250 billion that would create a budget deficit for both the House and Senate bills.

• Both bills are responsible for creating new committees, departments, and other bureaucracies that will make these pieces of legislation inefficient and wasteful over the long haul.

• Neither of these bills actually works at resolving the root cause of the problem: rising health care costs. Thus, health care costs will continue to spiral out of control without tort reform, prescription reform, personal responsibility, and so forth.

• Many of the taxes created to pay for health care reform are on the medical industry. These taxes will be passed on to the consumer. Taxes will be placed on manufacturers of generic drugs and medical equipment. This is an idiotic concept because it will make health care more expensive for all.

• The last and probably the most glaring fiscal problem with these health care reform bills is their fuzzy and deceptive accounting practices. Both bills do not go into effect for 4 years, but the Medicare cuts and taxes to pay for the legislation go into effect immediately. This means the CBO projections over the next decade account for 10 years of collecting money to pay for 6 years of running the programs. Anyone with a lick of commonsense would be able to surmise that after a decade the cost of the program will add to the deficit if no new cuts or taxes are created. This is the same type of fuzzy accounting practices that landed the executives of defunct Enron and WorldCom in jail.

In summary, regardless as to what is in either of these bills, it will cost too much to support and place our great nation further into debt. It will also make health care more expensive for every American.  

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

White House Security – I really did not want to cover this story, but it just will not go away. Apparently, two party crashers attended a White House event a few weeks back. The real issue and concern is the breakdown in security. You would think the White House would want to get to the bottom of this, but they claimed “executive privilege” and will not let Congress interview the White House Social Director, Desiree Rodgers. In fact, the fight between the White House and the media has gotten out right ugly over this issue. The confrontation between Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and the media’s April Ryan was heated and devolved into some name calling. What can the White House be hiding? I may not agree with Obama, but I want the man safe. God forbid if something happened to him, it would lead to even more widespread division in this country. However, it is possible that the Obama administration created this story to shift the media focus from the economy, Afghanistan, and the global warming conspiracy.

Global Warming – Despite the latest leak of emails detailing how scientists at the Climate Research Unit in the U.K. have falsified data, Obama is still looking to cut carbon emissions at the expense of the economy. As world leaders convene at the United Nations summit on climate change in Copenhagen, many media outlets are not talking about the incriminating evidence leaked. Apparently global warming pundits will continue their onslaught to push their agenda, which only proves it is about the money. Obama is proposing that the United States will cut carbon emissions by over 80% of 2005 levels by 2050. Obama has an agenda and he will not let anything get in his way of achieving it. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is on board with this plan. Even if it means regulating and mandates over carbon emitting industries, which will raise energy bills and eliminate thousands jobs. All of this risk over a science that indeed appears to be flawed.  

Nobel Prize – The chosen one accepted his undeserved Nobel Peace Prize this week. He went on to explain that he may not deserve the award today, but his work on climate change and nuclear disarmament would qualify for him for the award in the future. Obama rambled on for nearly an hour. What an ego!

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

Environmentalists claim one of the latest threats to our environment is soft toilet paper. Luxury quilted toilet paper comes from extra long wood fiber trees. These types of trees are old and massive, which are obviously excellent sources to absorb harmful carbon emissions. However, if the trees are replaced with new ones, they would be able to absorb more carbon emissions than older trees. That should be the focus of environmentalist instead of trying to ban a product that consumers already pay extra to enjoy.   

Wal-Mart is going to start placing an environmental score card on all products it sells. This is not necessarily a bad idea, but only if the final results are trustworthy. Besides, there is no guarantee that the score card for a product is going to be accurate, fair, consistent, or factual. After all, how are they going to obtain the information for the study? They will probably have to rely on the company that manufactures the product to give them “honest” feedback. Also, when politics comes into the equation you can expect certain companies to pay kickbacks in return for higher scores to squash their competition. In the end, the consumer will pay higher prices for this service that may or may not lead to positive changes in behavior to help the environment. After all, if people do not take responsibility for their own well being by eating nutritional foods, then what makes us so sure they will be responsible about the environment? Environmentalists are only hopeful this will work.

Environmentalists would be better off using some commonsense and focus on fighting matters that will really make a difference. For example, building a nuclear power plant would yield jobs as well as cut carbon emissions. On the other hand, going after every bad product may sound good, but what is the impact and benefit for making a change to one product. Think about it! Even massive cap and trade legislation will only save the planet a few one hundreds of a degree in temperature increase over the next 50 years. And this is assuming carbon emissions are in deed aiding in climate change. If this is true, banning luxury toilet paper will yield no negligible effect on pollution or climate change. It is a wasted effort and lack of focus.  

My Book: Is America Dying (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

• He is not a scientist and cannot decipher technical jargon to make an educated assessment on global temperatures. He is no more an expert on this topic than most Americans that have read any information on the subject.
• He has made millions of dollars by pushing global warming. If he was true to his cause, his effort would be non-profit and he would reinvest his profits to meet his goals.
• He has always been an over exaggerator and making ridiculous claims such as “inventing the internet”. The picture of the Earth on the cover of his new book was photo shopped to add hurricanes and eliminated polar ice.
• He rationalizes his personal over abundant reliance on carbon emitting planes, cars, and homes because he is “getting the word out”. He claims he buys carbon offsets, drives hybrids, installed solar panels, and therefore is entitled to the energy he uses. Thus, he uses money to justify his hypocritical actions. Is this really leading by example? If only we all had millions to spend to offset our carbon emissions. These are the actions of a typical politician that only knows how to solve a problem by throwing money at it.   
• He claims “the denial movement is in the sunset phase”, and “Older people are telling their grandchild these patterns are different. Farmers are no longer able to predict the arrival of rainfall. People who look for birds are finding dramatic shifts in their range”. If weather patterns are becoming unpredictable then why does he insist on changing to renewable energy sources that are weather dependent? Billion dollar wind farms are rendered useless if wind patterns change. Dams and hydropower become unusable if they dry up. Solar power becomes less usable if areas become more cloudy or if a volcano erupts and its ash blocks a portion of the suns energy. This illustrates that Gore and his followers simply lack the intellect and commonsense to make sound decisions. They should be focusing their effort on renewable energy sources that do not rely on weather and its unpredictability such as nuclear power.
• His main objective is to place a price tag (tax) on carbon emissions. Hence, he is a big proponent of cap and trade legislation. In other words, Gore is in favor of driving up energy prices for all Americans by thousands of dollars and destroying the American economy by driving corporations out of business. But, hey, it must be the only solution to the problem because Al Gore proposes it. Yes, there are less evasive ways to solve the problem.  
• He says we have seen big changes since Obama has been president because the “stimulus kick started the construction of a U.S. super-grid”. It remains to be seen how this turns out since government run projects are generally wasteful, inefficient, and take decades to complete.  
• He also claims that people “should not watch Glenn Beck” if they want the truth. This is so typical of our political partisanship in Washington. If Gore’s argument is so compelling, then why should he object to others viewing Beck when he has guests that propose conflicting views? The reason is that Gore’s argument is not that convincing and that is why he refuses to debate his adversaries on the subject.
• He also claims that the reason that China is way in front in the race to obtain renewable energy is because of the political power of carbon polluters. China opens a new coal power plant every week and that does not stop them from pursuing renewable energy because they have an environment conducive to businesses. There economy is stable and they have 15% lower corporate tax rates than the United States. China is the new economic and industrial power in the world and they will lead the way in the 21^st century as long as our government hinders progress in the private sector with unnecessary regulation and taxes.

Al Gore, liberals, and the Climate Research Unit are pulling off one of the biggest cons in the history of man kind and are laughing all the way to the bank. If they would simply state that pollution is bad, that is something maybe everyone can rally behind. But to insist that carbon emissions are causing global warming is just fear mongering to make a buck. Al Gore is nothing more than a big carbon emitting oxygen thief.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)

Today is another day that the Weather Service failed to predict our daily temperature within 20% accuracy. If the Weather Service cannot predict the weather in one location, 12 hours in advance, how do we expect they will be able to predict global temperatures in 10 or more years? Weather is predicted using chaos theory. I used chaos theory to try to predict how integrated circuits would behave with limited success. You can find integrated circuits in all the electronic gadgets we own. What if I told you that a particular cell phone, TV, or IPod could break in one week or a year because my model was only so accurate? Or what if I told you I did not understand the complicated model I used to predict the performance of electronic devices? Would you buy this product, or would you look for another brand? Obviously, any person with a lick of commonsense would look for another brand with higher quality.  

The same can be said about the weather, how can you believe in global warming without understanding the complexity and accuracy of the model that is being used?  If people only understood the inaccuracies and possible errors that occur while predicting weather using chaos theory, maybe global warming would not be a major issue. For instance, temperature data taken at any given point in time is only accurate to +/- 0.5 degrees. A half of degree in any direction is huge when talking about global warming. I guarantee that all meteorologists do not understand the models they use to forecast weather on a daily basis. So why do we listen to Al Gore or meteorologists that claim carbon emissions are causing climate change? They are no more an expert than you and I, so why listen to them? In actuality, the onus should be on them to prove climate change without any doubt.  

However, if people simply used astute observations, they too could come to this conclusion without listening to the convoluted theories of a few super egos. Here are a few simple observations, other than poor temperature forecasts by the weather service, which contradict climate change theories. If carbon emissions are at cataclysmic levels in our atmosphere (390 ppm), then why is Congress funding the rebuilding of New Orleans, a city that is 10 feet below sea level? How do we explain why more people around the globe live in coastal regions despite the risk of rising tides? Why didn’t we hear about how calm this past hurricane season was? Why don’t hear about the failed prognostications made a few decades ago that claimed most coastal regions would already be under water today? We do not hear about any of this because it does not defend the consensus believing in climate change.   

Finally, if global warming was on trial for causing climate change that is killing species, how would a jury rule? Remember, a jury must have conclusive and indisputable evidence that a crime was committed. If there is a shred of doubt, they must acquit. How can anyone say will 100% certainty that the models used by scientist are 100% accurate in predicting climate change? No one can. Besides, during the same time period when species have gone extinct, more new species have been created. Thus, global warming is innocent until proven guilty. The only way global warming is found guilty is if we use emotion instead of logic to rule on the outcome.  

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

To make matters worse, most global warming activists are hypocrites. In other words, they do not practice what they preach. I live in a state where climate change is a big issue. Colorado is a beautiful state and it loaded with outdoor enthusiasts that want to protect the environment. Or at least they say they want to protect the environment. Interestingly, my wife and I are in the bottom 2% of water and energy usage. That means most of the so called activists are using considerably more water and energy than us. All the other so called environmentalists and global warming activists do not want to hurt environment by drilling for oil or natural gas, nor do they want a nuclear power plant, but they are willing to populate thousands of acres with wind turbines. Wind turbines waste more land and create just as many hazards for wildlife and birds as other renewable energies. Once again, this proves global warming activist will believe anything they hear or read without asking questions or logically trying to come up with a reasonable solution to the problem.  

The point is this, unless an activist can prove their point without any doubt, they are an alarmist. And since most activists do not have the logic or intellect to theorize or understand complex mathematical models about climate change, they are an alarmist. Maybe my theory is wrong, but at least I try to logically analyze a problem and ask the right questions. Al Gore is a perfect example of an individual that is incapable of making a sound decision on climate change, thus he allowed himself to be brainwashed by what others told him. After all, it is convenient to accept the consensus point of view without asking questions, which categorizes most global warming activists.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Nobel, Amazon.com)

In order to prove that global warming is caused by carbon emissions, there needs to be a very complex, but accurate math model to predict this. Predicting weather is surely possible, but it is complex and has never been an exact science. Think about it, how well do meteorologists predict the weather in your area? In most case they can predict the weather for tomorrow within 10% of temperature, wind, and other conditions. However, the accuracy goes down dramatically if they were to try to accurately predict the weather for next week or further out in the future. If meteorologists cannot accurately predict what the weather would be in a certain location one month from today, how do you expect them predict the temperature for the entire earth in the next 10 years or longer? It is very hard to do and practically impossible. It is all dependent upon accuracy of the computer models they use.

Scientists create computer models to predict weather using a complex math concept called “chaos theory”. Chaos theory consists of thousands of linear equations that represent possible weather patterns and conditions. I am certainly no expert in chaos theory, but have spent a large portion of my career as an engineer trying to predict the performance of integrated circuits. To complete this task, it consisted of using complex matrix math to solve linear equations to create empirical models. Empirical models are based off actual data. If empirical models were not sufficient to model the response, apriori models were also generated. Apriori models consist of mathematical equations that help to predict responses. My results were at best accurate to about 10%. My point is this, it is hard to model and accurately predict how an integrated circuit or the weather will behave.

Most people that support global warming assertions are not a scientist, nor do they have the cognitive ability to realize what a difficult task it is to predict future weather patterns. Most people believe what they hear or read without asking any questions. The problem with predicting weather is it so complicated most global warming activists do not have the logic or competence to ask the right questions. Thus, they trust certain scientists and their conclusions as being gospel.

Anyone that is a global warming activist needs to read Bjorn Lomberg. He is the only person that analyzes global warming from an economic standpoint. He also offers logical solutions by thinking out of the box. He has tried to debate Al Gore on the subject, but Gore avoids him. Most Global Warming activists are unrealistic and lack commonsense to solve problems logically. For example, cap and trade is a drastic solution to solve global warming because it will kill jobs, raise energy prices, and force industries into bankruptcy. Instead, by using logic and thinking out of the box, one may see that creating economic instability may be troublesome and come up with a different solution. Lomberg suggests using a material that can be placed in our ocean waters to reflect sunlight. Other suggestions include filling our atmosphere with a biodegradable material that reflects sunlight and absorbs carbon emissions. These solutions will not complicate the delicate nature of our global economy. In any event, the solution to such a complex problem should not include government interference over our private sector industries and economy.   

My Book: Is America Dying? (Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com)

Afghanistan – After 3 months of deliberations, Obama has finally made a decision about a strategy in Afghanistan. Obama has decided to partially follow McChrystal’s outline by surging troop levels by 30,000. He hopes to meet McChrystal’s 40,000 troop level mark by adding an additional 10,000 troops from NATO. The real problem with the plan is that it will take months for troop levels to reach the target set by McChrystal. The result will be prolonging the war and unnecessarily putting current troops in Afghanistan in harms way. In essence, they will be fighting a losing battle until the troop surge is complete. Does this make sense? What’s worse is that Obama has given a timeline for withdrawal before even implementing the strategy. This is absolutely insane! Since when is it a good idea to let our enemies know what our military plans are. The withdrawal is planned to start only a little more than a year after the start of the surge. That will be a tough deadline to meet and secure a victory.

Iran – They are now claiming they will build 10 new uranium enrichment facilities. Once again, Iran is antagonizing the U.S. and the free world with their refusal to comply with global demands to halt uranium enrichment. Iran also held war games to protect their nuclear sites if they were to be attacked. And Iran was given a vote of confidence by the Brazilian President.

ObamaCare – The Senate debate over their partisan bill has begun. Democrats will have to figure out how to keep their entire coalition together since some do not like the public option and others have a problem with the plan funding abortions. Reed and Pelosi will buy moderate liberal constituents as they did with Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu. The Senate bill gives Louisiana an additional 300 billion for Medicaid expenditures that other states do not receive. Currently, the Republicans are pushing a bunch of amendments to the bill, which of course are being shot down.

My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)