New World Order

By Soopermexican  

I’m not really partial to conspiracy theories, in fact, I love to debunk them, but even though a certain quote from Obama’s speech on Tuesday will bring out the crazies, it should also alarm the more rational among us.
The Washington Post‘s Chris Cilliza highlighted this excerpt [emphasis added]:

“But whether people see what’s happening in Ukraine, and Russia’s aggression towards its neighbors in the manner in which it’s financing and arming separatists; to what’s happened in Syria — the devastation that Assad has wrought on his own people; to the failure in Iraq for Sunni and Shia and Kurd to compromise — although we’re trying to see if we can put together a government that actually can function; to ongoing terrorist threats; to what’s happening in Israel and Gaza — part of peoples’ concern is just the sense that around the world the old order isn’t holding and we’re not quite yet to where we need to be in terms of a new order that’s based on a different set of principles, that’s based on a sense of common humanity, that’s based on economies that work for all people.”

Yes, this is the kind of “New World Order” quote that puts money in the wallet of Alex Jones, but aside from positing that Obama is a lizard space alien hellbent on imposing Sharia-Illuminati martial law on the world, it actually displays an amazing but troubling aspect of Obama’s “philosophy” of the world, if you can call it that.

While more and more people are looking around the world and seeing the turmoil that follows on America receding from the global stage, Obama just sees business as usual – he doesn’t believe he has any hand at all in all these events. He doesn’t believe that selling out our allies on missile defense and the “Russian Reset” encouraged Putin, or that making impotent threats against Assad emboldened him, or that pulling out of Iraq prematurely brought on the ISIS terrorist resurgence. He really believes this is all just normal.
And so he’s seizing on these crises that he himself worsened, and using them as a springboard to say we need more “hope and change” or whatever vapid phrase he’s going to attach to whatever it is he’s selling.
Let’s hope the American people choose something better than the broken road Obama has been us guiding onto.

The World is a mess

Sunday on CBS's “Face the Nation,” former Clinton administration Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said, "To put it mildly, the world is a mess.

Children crossing border: 'Obama will take care of us'

By Jerome R. Corsi
 
McALLEN, Texas – In an exclusive interview with WND and Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, a 13-year Border Patrol veteran revealed many in the recent surge of illegal immigrants, including unaccompanied minors, are coming prepared to game the U.S. immigration system, even repeating the mantra, “Obama will take care of us.”
“I don’t usually get into the political part of it,” explained Chris Cabrera, now a vice president in the National Border Patrol Council Local 3307, “but I find it odd that their whole thing is, ‘We are going to get amnesty when we get here. Where is my permiso? Where is my permission to go north so I can get my medical care and my schooling and all that? President Obama is going to take care of us and make sure we’re all OK.’
“Whether it’s the adults or the young kids, one thing we consistently hear is, ‘Obama will take care of us,’” he explained.

He also suggested the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors illegally entering the United States appear to have been coached on what to say when they cross the border.
“The ‘magic words’ are something along the lines of ‘asylum,’ or ‘political asylum’ or to say ‘fighting in my home country,’” Cabrera said. “They know these words … because we can’t send them home because it’s too dangerous back there.”
The only way to stop the flow of illegal immigration and child smuggling across the border, he says, is to eliminate the entitlement mentality with a return to strict, border enforcement.
“What needs to be done is 100-percent detention and 100-percent removal,” Cabrera says.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/children-crossing-border-obama-will-take-care-of-us/#0JjmDZQdTjrJmBAd.99

Among Religions, Muslims approve most of Obama

Article By Melanie Batley

President Barack Obama's approval rating is higher among Muslims than any other religious group in the United States, a new poll has found.

According to a Gallup Poll conducted over six months from January to June, 72 percent of Muslims said they approve of the president, compared with just 20 percent who disapprove.

But in the survey of 88,801 adults, a higher percentage of Christians — both Catholic and Protestant — disapprove of Obama than approve. Specifically, 44 percent of Catholics approve of the president compared to 51 percent who disapprove.

In the category Protestants/Other Christians, just 37 percent approve compared to 58 percent who disapprove.

"The United States remains a predominantly Christian nation, with roughly half of Americans identifying with a Protestant religion and another quarter identifying as Catholics. Thus, the opinions of these Christian groups are by far the most influential in determining Obama's overall ratings," Gallup's Jeffrey Jones said in the poll's statement.

Behind Muslims, Non-Christians and No Religion/Atheists give the president the next highest approval ratings, of 59 percent and 54 percent, respectively. Those who identify as Jewish also give him a comparable approval rating of 55 percent.

Mormons are the least approving religious group with a 78 percent disapproval rating compared to just 18 percent who approve of the job Obama is doing.

The poll noted that the relative rank order of the religious groups on job approval has been consistent throughout Obama's presidency. "In fact, the current rank order, with Muslims most approving and Mormons least, exactly matches the order seen over the more than five years he has been in office since January 2009," Jones writes.

At the same time, approval ratings among each religious subgroup is currently between 5 and 7 percentage points lower than the average rating the president has had from 2009-2014.

"In general, when Obama's approval rating has dropped among all Americans, his approval rating in each religious subgroup has dropped by a similar amount," Jones said.

"As Obama's overall job approval rating has had its ups and downs over the five-plus years he has been president, his ratings among religious groups have moved in tandem. That is, Americans of various faiths seem to react similarly to the factors that cause the president's popularity to wax and wane, rather than reacting in idiosyncratic ways tied to their religious beliefs," Jones said.

Someone on the right gets hammered for her conservative beliefs

Holly Fisher is no stranger to people disagreeing with her political beliefs. But the West Virginia mother has recently been receiving death threats, some that have extended beyond her to her children.
It all started with this photo, which earned her the nickname “Hobby Lobby Holly.”

Image source: @HollyRFisher/Twitter

Fisher told TheBlaze in their town, the Chick-fil-A and the Hobby Lobby are next to each other. On the day of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow small companies with religious objections to decide not to provide certain kinds of birth control as part of their insurance, Fisher was wearing a “pro-life” shirt and she and her husband went to the fast-food chain, whose leadership has taken a stance against gay marriage.
“My husband looked at me and said, ‘you look total right winger right now,’” Fisher said.
That’s when Fisher, who had already amassed about 20,000 followers on Twitter for her political views since the 2012 presidential election, convinced her husband, a member of the U.S. military who served in Afghanistan, to take a photo of her outside the Hobby Lobby, holding her Chick-fil-A cup and sporting the “pro-life” shirt.
Fisher said she knew upon posting the photo that reactions would be a mixed bag based on people’s political views, but she never expected what happened next.
“One of first responses I got was from a guy who that said that he wanted to shove the Chick-fil-A cup down my throat,” she said.
And that was one of the mild reactions.
Some supported Fisher but pointed out that all she was missing in the photo was the American flag, a Bible and a gun.
So on the Fourth of July, Fisher snapped a picture with all those elements, which she said ended up causing even more of a ruckus than the first.
Biggest complaint I'm getting about my #HobbyLobby pic is there's no gun, bible, or flag. Tried to make up for it
“I know the picture is kind of ridiculous. It was kind of a joke for those people saying I was missing the bible and the gun, but it was also a kind of a ‘just deal with it — these are my beliefs. You’re not going to bring me down; you’re not going to silence me,’” Fisher said.
This photo was compared by some to an image of Reem Riyashi, an extremist mother from Gaza who killed four people with a suicide bomb a decade ago.
“It was Independence Day. I was standing in front of flag, which represents our freedom, holding my First and Second Amendment rights in my hands and people are comparing me to a woman who wants to kill everyone in our country and what it stands for?” Fisher said.
“This week I have realized why our Constitution was written, why our founders would write this out. It’s like they knew this would happen. These are the people the Constitution was written for,” Fisher said of the those attacking her viewpoints and those trying to take away what she believes are protections made in the Constitution.
For sharing her recent beliefs, which earned her another 16,000 or so followers on Twitter, Fisher has been blasted not only on the micro-blogging site but on liberal blogs in a way that she said she hasn’t seen before.
“It’s just been so vile and shocking I can’t even describe,” she said.
One person said he wished she would come down to Florida to be stoned, “you know, for religious fundamentalism.”
And it’s not the only death threat she’s received.
“The exact words were: I hope your murderer husband gets murdered. I hope your children shoot themselves, and I hope you get killed you dangerous c***,” Fisher read.
And she doesn’t think if the tables were turned that conservative equivalents would react the same way.
“We’ve seen the women walking around in the vagina costumes, these outrageous get ups. Code Pink then goes and screams at people…that’s always the left. We kind of expect that,” Fisher said. “I don’t see my friends going to those people and saying you’re fat, ugly. I’ve been called the c-word, the b-word. I don’t see conservative news sites personally attacking and twisting someone’s views to make them seem as crazy as possible.”
“I think they’re scared,” she added later as to why there’s such a backlash to her opinions. “I think they’re afraid that conservatives are going to gain some ground back.”
Though the harsh words of many have not gotten to her, Fisher said she does get upset when people say her husband is a murderer and make personal threats to her children.
Some, she said, have also dredged up her past posts and are spinning them into lies, specifically details about her family losing health coverage they had for a cardiologist for their 10-month-old daughter who had a condition after their plan changed when the Affordable Care Act was enacted.
Even when she was posting about her family’s trials in June, she said people messaged her saying they hoped her daughter would die “because that’s one less conservative underling that the world can worry about.”
In light of her more recent posts, Fisher said she’s glad most of the focus is back on her.
Overall, Fisher, who is involved in local politics — behind-the-scenes stuff like encouraging people to get out and vote, she said — doesn’t expect everyone to agree with her, she only hopes that they might seek out the whole story.
Though there have been times when she admits she wants to “crawl under my bed … at same time I feel like people are counting on me to be this voice.”
And she intends to continue putting her thoughts out there.

Romney was Right

Romney Was Right on Several Major Issues, Observers Say

By Todd Beamon

In the nearly 20 months since Mitt Romney lost the election to President Barack Obama, many of the former Massachusetts governor's predictions have played out on the world stage.

For instance, Romney called Russia the nation's "number one geopolitical foe"; he pledged strong support for Israel amid tense relations with Iran and other neighbors; declared that corporations are "people" — and said that illegal immigration remained a continued threat to the American economy...

"Mitt Romney, in retrospect, was not omniscient," Bradley Blakeman, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, told Newsmax. "He saw what was there to be seen. He saw the world as it was — not the way he wished it would be. "Obama believed that he could change the world with just his presence on the world stage and with his words. His hope was naïve and impossible," Blakeman added. "He was running for president, not messiah. He never has been able to match his words with deeds. And, today, if it were not for bad news — Obama doesn't make news."....

Here are some of Romney's statements and how things have developed:

Russia

"Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe. … They fight every cause for the world's worst actors. The... idea that [President Obama] has some more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling, indeed.

"Russia is not a friendly character on the world stage. … And for this president to be looking for greater flexibility, where he doesn't have to answer to the American people in his relations with Russia, is very, very troubling, very alarming."

-- CNN interview, March 26, 2012

Since his re-election in 2012, Russian President Vladimir Putin has worked vigorously to expand his power on several world fronts, particularly in Ukraine and Syria. He responded to the Ukrainian revolution in February that ousted President Viktor Yanukovich by refusing to recognize the interim government and moving quickly to annex Crimea with military troops.   The show of force led Ukraine's acting government to concede defeat and withdraw its troops from Crimea — and came despite warnings from President Obama that Moscow would face "costs" if it intervened in the region.

Putin then demanded and won his parliament's approval to invade Ukraine and rapidly escalated the Russian military presence there.

Obama and Putin have talked several times during the crisis, with the American president threatening to isolate Russia economically, while Putin declared that he had a right to invade his neighbor to protect Russian citizens there.

In Syria, Putin upstaged Obama last September by proposing that President Bashar Assad turn over his chemical arsenal to international control.

Putin seized on an off-hand comment by Secretary of State John Kerry that Syria could avoid a U.S. missile attack by turning over the chemical weapons. The Russian president insisted that the deal would only work if the United States agreed not to use force.  The move came one week after President Obama asked Congress to authorize a military strike against Syria over its use of chemical weapons against civilians. The deal was signed in November, vaulting Putin into the world spotlight.

Putin even took to op-ed page of The New York Times two days after making his proposal to argue his case directly against U.S. military intervention in Syria. He also slammed Obama's idea of American exceptionalism, which the American president had highlighted in a national speech the previous night.

Relations between Obama and Putin remain frigid — and Putin weighs whether to engage more with Obama on Ukraine or risk more sanctions that could undermine Russia's economy, which is already nearing recession.

"Romney understood Putin more than a sitting president who dealt with him face to face with no results," Blakeman told Newsmax. "Romney knew Putin was playing Obama and knew that Russia's ultimate near-term goal was the cobble back the super power status of the old Soviet Union and needed to weaken and distract the U.S. to accomplish it."

Iran

"The president should have built a credible threat of military action and made it very clear that the United States of America is willing, in the final analysis, if necessary, to take military action to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon. Look, one thing you can know and that is if we reelect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon."

-- Republican Candidates Debate, St. Anselm College, N.H., Jan. 7, 2012

In August 2012, the United Nations reported that Iran had installed three-quarters of the nuclear centrifuges needed to produce nuclear fuel at a deep underground site at Fordow. The U.N. report described it as a major expansion of Iranian enrichment activities.  The Obama administration responded the following February with more crippling economic sanctions against Tehran amid charges by Israel that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and calls for increased international pressure. In November, the United States and other world leaders signed a deal with Iran that would curb some of its nuclear activities in return for $7 billion in sanctions relief.

Many Republicans opposed the deal, despite assurances from President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry that Iran would honor the agreement, and Israel called it a "historical mistake." The deal led to talks on a final agreement to end Tehran's nuclear program — but they stalled over Iranian demands regarding the size of its future capabilities. A new two-week round of talks began on Thursday amid concerns that no accord will be reached by a July 20 deadline.

"Romney was right when he stated that Obama was incapable of stopping Iran's development of a nuclear weapon," Blakeman told Newsmax. "Iran today has no credible threat that would prevent their nuclear program from proceeding full speed ahead and enjoys Russia's help."

Israel

"We have a solemn duty and a moral imperative to deny Iran's leaders the means to follow through on their malevolent intentions. We must not delude ourselves into thinking that containment is an option."

-- In Jerusalem, July 29, 2012

Relations between Israel and the United States have been spiraling downward throughout President Obama's stay in the White House — and it did not help when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu endorsed Romney during the election.

Israel continues to oppose the nuclear talks with Iran, and Netanyahu has repeatedly said that his country stands ready to attack Tehran — unilaterally if necessary. Instability has grown even worse in the Middle East with the uprising of the jihadist group ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, and U.S. plans to "recognize and fund" the new Palestinian Authority government. The government unites the more moderate Fatah faction with Hamas, which is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S.

"Romney made it clear that Israel is our most valued ally that must be supported and not weakened by pandering to her enemies, thinking appeasement will make the region more stable and will lead to a pathway to peace," Blakeman said. "Under Obama's tenure, Israel is much more vulnerable as nations surrounding her are in chaos." He added that the GOP presidential candidate had been "mocked by the media as someone who was a businessman, not a diplomat," adding that Obama had four years' experience as president. "The only problem with that is that he had no successes and he presided over a meltdown of the Middle East, a more aggressive Iran and North Korea, a China and Russia that thwarted our foreign policy at the U.N., as well as bilaterally and multilaterally."

Corporations

"Corporations are people, my friend. … Of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?"

-- Iowa State Fair, Aug. 11, 2011

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled, in effect, that certain companies are entitled to exercise religious rights, just as do people.  In a 5-4 decision, the justices backed Hobby Lobby Inc.'s right to object to the contraceptive mandate in Obamacare on religious grounds.   Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said protecting the religious rights of closely held businesses — often small, family-run operations — "protects the religious liberty of the humans who own and control them." These companies cannot be forced to pay for their employees' insurance contraceptives, the court ruled.

The decision came four years after the justices agreed — also 5-4 in the Citizens United case — to expand the free-speech rights of businesses and labor unions. The court struck down limits on political spending by such groups. That unleashed a huge flood of private money into political campaigns.

Companies are "are made up of people and act by and for them," Blakeman told Newsmax. "It is common sense."

Illegal Immigration

"I've indicated I would veto the DREAM Act if provisions included in that act say that people who were here illegally — if they go to school here long enough, if they get a degree here — then they can become permanent residents. I think that's a mistake.  "We have to follow the law and insist that those that have come here illegally return home and apply — get in line with everyone else."

-- GOP Candidates Debate, Myrtle Beach, S.C., Jan. 17, 2012

The U.S. has experienced a deluge of illegals turning up at the border with Mexico, particularly in the last year amid hopes of comprehensive immigration reform. Between Oct. 1 and June 15, more than 181,000 immigrants have been arrested by U.S. Border Patrol agents — and now, they are apprehending thousands of minors traveling alone. More than 52,000 minors have been arrested in the same period alone.

The Rio Grande Valley area of South Texas has been a particular hotbed of activity, and Obama administration officials have come under intense fire by Republicans for creating what the president has described as "a humanitarian crisis" through reports in Central American media touting policies that defer deportation for certain groups of illegals.

This week, Obama vowed to respond to the crisis with executive action, and he is expected to ask Congress next week for $2 billion to address the issue.

"Romney favored the principle of honoring the rule of law," Blakeman said. "He said that anything less would be unfair and invite further abuses.  He also said that our first obligation is to secure our borders. Today, we are seeing a crisis of child migration to our southern border that proves if anything that our borders are anything but secure."

But despite Romney being on target on many issues, both Schoen and Blakeman told Newsmax that they doubted he would ever become the nation's chief executive. "While Romney may never be president, he will be a leader within the GOP for years to come," Blakeman said. "Obama is likely to just fade away."

The Touchstone of Political Action is Hatred

A Heroine for Our Times
We now have a politics of meanness and spite, where hatred is a sign of legitimacy.

By F. H. Buckley

The narrative of decline is one of a slow and silent accumulation of ills. Looking backwards, we don’t remember a special moment when the evil days came, or the years drew nigh when all would be changed, but only the painful contrast between the days of our youth and the decrepitude of age. So it is with countries. We fail to see sharp breaks where we can say: There, there is where it all happened.
And yet such moments do exist, the points of inflection where the curve changes from positive to negative. We might have thought little of the changes at the time, perhaps, but they made all the difference, and it is the task of the historian to bring them to light.
I am no historian, but I have one such moment in mind. It was when The New Republic’s senior editor Jonathan Chait wrote in 2003, “I hate President George W. Bush.” TNR was always a liberal journal, but under editors such as Andrew Sullivan (before he went mad) and the restraining hand of Martin Peretz, it prided itself on its reasonableness. The magazine might have been coma-inducing boring, but by God it was reasonable.And then came Chait’s tirade. For conservatives who seek to be loved by the Left, it was deeply painful. More cynical conservatives took it in stride. And just what was it anyway? Merely an op-ed. But then it was more than that too. It was a sea change in which the swimmer suddenly finds himself in frigid water. And Chait’s permission slip for hatred explains what has happened to American politics since then, the bitterness, the calls for revenge, the IRS campaign against the Tea Party.
A conservative friend of mine asked me the other day why congressional Republicans had failed to offer amnesty to Lois Lerner in exchange for her testimony. What that fails to recognize is that she is already immunized, by an administration, a Department of Justice, and a mainstream media that have her back. She’d get nothing better from a congressional immunity, and what she’d lose is the support of the most powerful people in America. That has to be a no-brainer. Nothing indeed will happen to her, and provided she doesn’t rat anyone out she’ll soon be lionized as one who was unfairly persecuted. We’ll see well-paying lectureships, law-school chairs, ambassadorships offered her. Wait and see.

For her many years of service to the Democratic party, she deserves it all. Sure, she did splendid work in torpedoing the Tea Party, but her efforts to criminalize conservatism go back years, and one of them came to light very recently. In 1996 Al Salvi ran for the U.S. Senate in Illinois against Dick Durbin. Salvi had contributed $1.1 million of his own money to the campaign, as he had every right to do. The Federal Election Commission objected, however, and Salvi found himself talking to an FEC official. “Promise me you’ll never run for office again,” he was told, “and we’ll drop the case.” The official was Lois Lerner.
We wouldn’t be seeing any of this in the America of the recent past. Today, it is happening in another country, Jonathan Chait’s America, where “arrogance and hatred are the wares / Peddled in the thoroughfares,” the country of meanness and spite foretold by William Butler Yeats. If the touchstone of political action, of legitimacy, is hatred, then almost anything is permitted — low crimes, persecution of opponents, disdain for the Constitution — provided the enemy is made to suffer.

Most Americans Now Receive Government Benefits

We've Crossed The Tipping Point; Most Americans Now Receive Government Benefits 

by  Merrill Matthews 

I explore public policy and politics and expose foolish ideas. 

Obamacare has pushed us over the entitlements tipping point.  In 2011 some 49.2 percent of U.S. households received benefits from one or more government programs—about 151 million out of an estimated 306.8 million Americans—according to U.S. Census Bureau data released last October.
Currently, around 6 million to 7 million Americans who have signed up for Obamacare are receiving taxpayer-provided subsidies (though the administration’s numbers cannot be trusted, it’s all we have to work with).  There are another 3 million who have signed up for Medicaid.
That means some 10 million Americans—or a total of about 161 million—are now getting government subsidies (though the final number might be somewhat lower since some may have been receiving benefits already).

A Fool and His Money (Photo credit: CarbonNYC)

Thus, perhaps 52 percent of U.S. households—more than half—now receive benefits from the government, thanks to President Obama.  And Mr. Entitlement is just getting started.  If Obamacare is not repealed millions more will join the swelling rolls of those dependent on government handouts.
Conservatives have long dreaded the day when the U.S. crossed the halfway mark because of all the implications for individual and fiscal responsibility. As Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”  They learned that from the 2008 election and turned out in big numbers again in 2012.
It’s not that all of those Americans are “takers,” as former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney suggested.  Some 42 million are seniors receiving Social Security and Medicare.  They aren’t getting something for free; they faithfully paid into the system for decades with the expectation that they would be getting it back at retirement. And they deserve every penny they get—or may not get if Social Security or Medicare has to cut benefits.
But attitudes can change once people are on the receiving end of benefits, even if they are owed those benefits.  Seniors who support limited government and fiscal responsibility—in short, the exact opposite of Obama’s policies—become very protective of their benefits.  And that makes change difficult.
The bigger issue is the public at large.  Conservatives worked so hard to repeal Obamacare over the past few years because once the taxpayer-provided subsidies started to flow, millions would embrace the entitlement and repeal would be very tough.  Especially when the media start running stories about people losing their coverage because of heartless Republicans changing the law—although forcing millions to lose their coverage because of Obamacare didn’t stop liberals.
They knew if they were able to ride out the Obamacare rollout storm, the law would likely be here to stay.  Franklin D. Roosevelt captured this mentality when he observed: “We put those payroll contributions there so as to give contributors a legal, moral and political right to collect their pensions.… With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program.”
And no politicians have; indeed, they have only grown the program over the years.
The country has crossed the entitlement tipping point.  The only hope is to try to transition some of these programs, primarily Social Security but also Medicare, into personal retirement accounts.  They would, over time, be better funded, actually belong to the worker or retiree, and, perhaps most importantly, they would take millions of Americans off the government benefits roll.

Global Warming - Biggist Fraud in Field of Science

Apollo Astronaut: Climate Alarmism Is the ‘Biggest Fraud in the Field of Science’

July 2, 2014 - 4:01 PM

97% Climate Consensus ‘Most Nonsensical, Stupid Number in the World’

---

By Craig Bannister

 

Climate alarmism is "the biggest fraud in the field of science" and the 97% consensus claim is nonsensical, Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham tells MRCTV in a preview of his presentation at the upcoming Heartland Institute climate conference, July 7-9.
"Since about 2000, I looked farther and farther into it," Col. Cunningham (USMC, Ret.) tells MRCTV in an exclusive interview. "I found that not one of the claims that the alarmists were making out there had any bearings, whatsoever. And, so, it was kind of a no-brainer to come to the conclusion."

Cunningham rejects the notion of man-made climate, not only as fact - but also as even qualifying as an actual "theory":
"In the media, it was being called a theory. Obviously, they didn't know what it means to be a theory."
"If we go back to the warmist hypothesis - not a theory, but, a hypothesis - they've been saying from the very beginning that carbon dioxide levels are abnormally high, that higher levels of carbon dioxide are bad for humans, and they thought warmer temperatures are bad for our world, and they thought we were able to override natural forces to control the earth's temperature. So, as I've looked into those, that's the problem that I've found, because I didn't find any of those to be correct - and, they certainly were not a theory, it was just their guess at what they wanted to see in the data they were looking at."
Cunningham urges Americans to look at the data and decide for themselves, instead of taking anyone else's word for it:
"You go out and take a look at it and you find out that a lot of it is pure nonsense and wishful thinking on the part of the alarmists who are looking for more and more money to fall into their hands."
"Don't believe it just because your professor said it. You gotta go take a look at it. Go back and look at the history of temperature and carbon dioxide, and you look at the value of carbon dioxide, and how it's a benefit today."

Cunningham notes that, while climate alarmists are concerned that the atmosphere currently contains 400 parts per million of CO2, that's only a tenth of the level his spacecraft had to reach before causing concern. In his Apollo craft, an alarm would go off when CO2 reached 4,000 parts per million and, in today's space shuttle, the trigger is 5,000. And, in submarines where crewmen may be on three-month missions, CO2 has to reach 8,000 parts per million before the alarm is activated.
"In one area after another, we find these people overly concerned about, one, the danger they're trying to push on us and, secondly, the claim that we can somehow or other control the earth's temperature by affecting it," Cunningham says.
"I can't say we don't have any impact, at all, but it'd be so miniscule and so tiny, that it wouldn't be worth any effort."
So, what does dictate the Earth's temperature? Cunningham says it's well-established that "principle controllers" are natural forces like sun, ocean temperature, and even volcanic activity.
Thus, he calls climate alarmism "the biggest fraud in the field of science":
"The case is, to me, really, it's laughable to find somebody who claims to be a serious scientist - that he would buy into this. So, I would really question anybody who claims to be a scientist doing this - so, what they do is try to control the nomenclature."
"To me, it's almost laughable, it's the biggest fraud in the field of science, certainly in my lifetime, maybe the biggest one in centuries."
"If you go back and you look at the data that has been well-documented over the years, you can look and see, for example, that right now both carbon dioxide and temperature are simultaneously at one of the lowest levels in at least the last 600-800 million years. The last time they were both together at this low a level, more or less, was 300 million years ago, and if you go back go back about 500-600 million years ago, carbon dioxide was 15 times higher than what it is now. So, what I'm getting at is this, the history shows you that most of this is just plain nonsensical today."
"And, the amazing thing to people like me... is that there are people that believe the nonsense they're being fed."
The media are largely to blame for public misconceptions - not because they're intentionally misleading the public, but because they "just don't want to go into the time and trouble to find out." "If they do go into it and look at it for themselves, they become a lot more neutral in their presentation," he says.
Worst of all, Cunningham says, media are promoting the "nonsensical" claim that there's scientific consensus accepting the hypothesis of man-made climate:
"When they're out propagating this so-called 97% of scientists believe we're controlling the temperature - I mean, that's the most nonsensical, stupid number in the world - and all they have to do is do a little research on Google - I'm not going to do it for them - go in there and take a look and you find out that's a ridiculous statement that people are making - and even the president makes a statement like that."
"If you have a totally anonymous survey of real scientists involved in this field, I would almost guarantee you that you going to have a majority that are not going to agree with the alarmists."
"I can only tell you that, even back in the days of Apollo, we didn't have to face this kind of nonsense," Cunningham concludes.

We need jobs!