Custom Search

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

E. Coli In Nestlé Toll House Refrigerated Cookie Dough?

If, like me, you enjoy eating uncooked cookie dough, then this is for you.

Wapo, "E. Coli Confirmed In Nestlé Samples."

The Food and Drug Administration said yesterday that it had confirmed the presence of E. coli 0157, a deadly strain of bacteria, in samples of Nestlé Toll House refrigerated cookie dough produced at the company's plant in Danville, Va.

Investigators did not find the bacterium inside the factory or on equipment but in a tub of chocolate cookie dough made at the site in February, said David Acheson, assistant commissioner for food safety at the FDA. The dough had a June 10 expiration date.

Nestlé voluntarily recalled 30,000 cases of its refrigerated cookie dough on June 19 after officials at the FDA and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suspected that dozens of cases of E. coli-related illness were linked to the product.

Nearly all the victims, most of whom are female and younger than 19, reported eating raw cookie dough in the days before the onset of symptoms.

Health officials still do not know how E. coli 0157, a bacterium that lives in cattle intestines, ended up in a product that seems so unlikely to contain it. The risk usually associated with cookie dough is salmonella, a bacterium that can be found in raw eggs. None of the ingredients in the dough -- eggs, milk, flour, chocolate, butter -- is known to host E. coli 0157.

The FDA press release:

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced that it has found E. coli O157:H7 (a bacterium that can cause serious food borne illness) in a sample of prepackaged Nestlé Toll House refrigerated cookie dough currently under recall by the manufacturer and marketer, Nestlé USA. The contaminated sample was collected at Nestlé’s facility in Danville, Va. on June 25, 2009.

On June 19, the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned consumers not to eat any varieties of prepackaged Nestlé Toll House refrigerated cookie dough due to the risk of contamination with E. coli O157:H7. The warning was based on an epidemiological study conducted by the CDC and several state and local health departments. As of Thursday, June 25, the CDC reports that 69 persons from 29 states have been infected with the outbreak strain. Thirty-four persons have been hospitalized, nine with a severe complication called hemolytic uremic syndrome. No one has died.

Further laboratory testing is needed to conclusively link the E. coli strain found in the product to the same strain that is causing the outbreak.

Nestlé USA has fully cooperated with the FDA and CDC investigation and has recalled all of its prepackaged Nestlé Toll House refrigerated cookie dough products.

For answers to consumer questions about this recall and warning, go to:

For more information about E. coli, visit the CDC Web site at:

Consumers who have additional questions about these products should contact Nestlé USA consumer services at 1-800-559-5025 and/or visit its Web site at


June 19, 2009 - Nestlé USA’s Baking Division Initiates Voluntary Recall


Sonia Sotomayor--Supremely Wrong

The decision regarding the New Haven firefighters is in, and as expected, Sonia Sotomayor is Supremely Wrong.

For those in Torrance, California, I am speaking tonight to American Congress for Truth at the Sizzler at 2880 Sepulveda Blvd, and doing a book signing.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Preempting Obamacare

From CNSNews:

Voters in Arizona will decide next year whether residents will be subject to mandates in the pending health care reform that President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are promoting.

At least five other states – Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota and Wyoming – have considered proposals to take pre-emptive action against the pending federal mandates, but those proposals have either not made it out of committee, failed to get enough votes from one side of the legislature, or are still being crafted.

Only the Arizona Legislature introduced an initiative (HCR2014), which if passed, would amend the state constitution to codify that no resident would be required to participate in any public health care option. Arizonans will vote on the initiative in November 2010.

“HCR2014 is proactive and will protect patients’ fundamental rights,” Arizona State Rep. Nancy Barto, a Republican, said in a statement. “We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions. Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.”

Encourage your state's representatives to protect your rights with similar bills.


Obama's Campaign Lies Now A Laughing Matter To Press Corps

Video H/T Hot Air:

I think the press corps laughter at Gibbs' prevarications speaks for itself.


Tribute To Michael Jackson

I will not link to the stories floating out there about how Michael Jackson died, what he looked like, his troubles, his suffering.... that is not what I choose to remember about Michael Jackson.

I choose to remember the boy I grew up watching and listening to, the King of Pop, the man who gave inspiration to thousands of entertainers, the man who gave us some of the finest music and songs ever created and performed.

The entertainer.

This is who I choose to remember.

For those that wish to focus on everything but what he would have wanted people to focus on..... the hell with you.

Join me in remembering Michael Jackson, the king of pop, the entertainer, the ultimate performer.

The video below is how I choose to remember Michael Jackson: (Motown 25 Live)

Billie Jean, the video:

Michael Jackson - Black or White (Live):

Michael Jackson - Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough:

Michael Jackson - Man In The Mirror:

Michael Jackson - Thriller live (1987):

Remember him for what he gave the world, what he gave each of us individually by way of enjoyment and entertainment.

Visit the official Michael Jackson YouTube channel to see the original music videos and remember the man, the heart of him, the king of pop.


RIP Michael.


Help Us Free Sergeant Jermaine Nelson

Here we go again! Yet another member of the United States military being thrown under the bus, and justice denied. From The Warrior Legacy Foundation comes this:

Sgt Jermaine Nelson is the last of three decorated combat Marines charged with killing jihadists during the 2004 battle for Fallujah, Iraq.

Sgt Nelson was a member of the 3/1 Marines from Camp Pendleton, a storied and highly decorated ground-fighting unit. A brand new Corporal at that time, Cpl Nelson's job was to search house to house, on foot, in a 'seek and destroy' mission against jihadists who had flooded the city specifically to kill and conduct a holy war against the Marines. During the battle on 9 November 2004, four military-aged jihadist males were found barricaded in a house, shooting at Cpl Nelson and his team...

Please read and sign the petition to drop the charges against Sergeant Nelson:

More information at BlackFive:

Also, you can join the Free Sergeant Nelson page on Facebook here:

Thank you!

You all know what needs to be done here. Let's all demand justice - again!


Supreme Court Rules in Ricci Case

Many have waited for the Supreme Court decision in the case of RICCI ET AL. v. DESTEFANO ET AL (PDF link to 93 page decision).

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the white firefighters.

There were multiple reasons this case has been in the eye of the public, one of which being that the Obama nominee for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, was part of the panel of judges for the Second Circuit court that ruled against the white firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut.

NYT explains the background on this issue:

Monday's decision has its origins in New Haven's need to fill vacancies for lieutenants and captains in its fire department. It hired an outside firm to design a test, which was given to 77 candidates for lieutenant and 41 candidates for captain.

Fifty six firefighters passed the exams, including 41 whites, 22 blacks and 18 Hispanics. But of those, only 17 whites and two Hispanics could expect promotion.

The city eventually decided not to use the exam to determine promotions. It said it acted because it might have been vulnerable to claims that the exam had a "disparate impact" on minorities in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The white firefighters said the decision violated the same law's prohibition on intentional discrimination.

Kennedy said an employer needs a "strong basis in evidence" to believe it will be held liable in a disparate impact lawsuit. New Haven had no such evidence, he said.

The city declined to validate the test after it was given, a step that could have identified flaws or determined that there were no serious problems with it. In addition, city officials could not say what was wrong with the test, other than the racially skewed results.

"The city could be liable for disparate-impact discrimination only if the examinations were not job related" or the city failed to use a less discriminatory alternative, Kennedy said. "We conclude that there is no strong basis in evidence to establish that the test was deficient in either of these respects."

Reverse discrimination.

According to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation national survey, 65 percent of the American public think the white firefighters were discriminated against, because they were white.

A new national poll suggests that nearly two-thirds of Americans think white firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut where discriminated against when the city tossed out the results of a promotion exam after too few minorities scored high enough on the test.

Monday the Supreme Court, in a five to four vote, ruled in favor of the white firefighters.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation national survey released Monday morning, as the Supreme Court handed down it's ruling, indicates that 65 percent of those questioned say the firefighters were victims of discrimination and should get promotions based on the test results, with 31 percent feeling that the city should a new test to make sure minority firefighters were not victims of discrimination.

"Not surprisingly, most Republicans think that the firefighters were victims of discrimination, but a majority of Democrats join in that view," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "Fifty-seven percent of Democrats say the white firefighters were discriminated against. Two-thirds of Independents and three-quarters of Republicans agree."

(Emphasis mine)

Reading the left's reactions to the Supreme Court decision, especially some of those that can be considered extreme leftists, one would think Democrats, as a whole disagreed with the Supreme Court decision, yet the CNN poll shows that liberal bloggers on the left are far more extreme than the Democrats in the general public, who a majority of agree that the white firefighters were discriminated against.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the dissent and in the 10th footnote it said:

The lower courts focused on respondents' "intent" rather than on whether respondents in fact had good cause to act.

So, even dissenting opinions concluded the lower court, focused on the wrong issue.

U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a longtime member and former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued a statement about the decision by the Supreme Court:

“The Supreme Court today correctly held that race-based employment decisions must be justified by facts, not fear,” said Hatch. “These firefighters, who worked long and hard for it, were denied the chance for promotion because of their race.

“In the twenty-first century, race discrimination requires more justification than the fear of being sued. The Second Circuit should have recognized the serious and unique issues this case raised and given it the thorough treatment it deserved.”

The appeals court, in a very short per curiam opinion, upheld the decision by New Haven, Connecticut, to disregard results of a firefighter promotion exam because racial minorities did not score highly enough. Today, the Supreme Court held that discarding the results of a fairly designed and administered employment test solely because of the racial distribution of the result violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

No one denies that for decades and still, in some cases, there was unacceptable discrimination against blacks and minorities, but that does not justify reverse discrimination, by employers or the lower Second Circuit court.

Discrimination is wrong no matter who is being discriminated against.

If you are out reading reactions from the left and right, keep the CNN survey numbers in your head, because liberal bloggers who claim to speak for Democrats on the whole, certainly aren't here or they would be intellectually honest to admit that the majority of the Democrats in this country, agree with the Supreme Court here that the white and Hispanic firefighters on New Haven, Connecticut were discriminated against because of their race.


Monday, June 29, 2009

From Iran to Los Angeles Part II

Today is a hastily cobbled together Monday assortment due to a pleasant Sunday night. The annual Republican Jewish Coalition Summer Bash was a rousing success. I promise to resort to quality blogging tomorrow. My main focus is on Iran today.

In terms of events, tonight Frank Gaffney is speaking at the Luxe Hotel in Brentwood, CA on missile defense.

Tomorrow night I will speaking to the American Congress for Truth (ACT) at the Sizzler in Torrance on 2880 Sepulveda Blvd. I will be doing a book signing as well.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Honduran President Ousted By Court Order

The news hit yesterday claiming there was a coup in Honduras, with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton siding with Hugo Chavez in insisting the so-called "coup" went against the rule of law.

We now find out the ousting of Manuel Zelaya was done by the military and done by court order.

Some 200 soldiers surrounded the president's residence in the east of the capital Tegucigalpa, disarming 10 members of the president's personal bodyguard.

"Today's events originate from a court order by a competent judge. The armed forces, in charge of supporting the constitution, acted to defend the state of law and have been forced to apply legal dispositions against those who have expressed themselves publicly and acted against the dispositions of the basic law," the country's highest court said.

Fausta has the roundup of news, so read all the updates and follow links, but a long story short, Zelaya wanted to rewrite the constitution and insisted on continuing even after he was informed it was unlawful, but he court and Congress.

The president wants to hold a referendum this Sunday to ask Hondurans if they approve of holding a vote on constitutional change at the same time as the presidential election in November.

On Tuesday, the Honduran Congress passed a law that appeared to block these plans. The new bill prevents the holding of referendums or plebiscites 180 days before or after general elections.

Army chief Gen Romeo Vasquez said he could not help to organise the referendum, as he would be breaking the law.

So, Zelaya fired Vasquez and decided to continue along his merry way to breaking the law.

RCP has the more:

There is strong opposition to the referendum:
* When the armed forces refused to distribute the ballots, Zelaya fired the chief of the armed forces, Gen. Romeo Vásquez, and the defense minister, the head of the army and the air force resigned in protest.
* Yesterday the Supreme Court ordered by a 5-0 vote that Vásquez be reinstated.
* Honduras's Supreme Electoral Tribunal ordered authorities to pick up all the ballots and electoral material, which were held by the country's air force.
* The country's Attorney General requested yesterday that Congress oust Zelaya.
* The courts have declared the referendum unlawful. Last Tuesday the Congress passed a law preventing the holding of referendums or plebiscites 180 days before or after general elections. Congress has also named a commission to investigate Zelaya.

Zelaya insists on holding the referendum and refers to these actions as "a technical coup". UN General Assembly president Miguel D'Escoto - the same guy who declared Fidel Castro "the closest thing we have to a saint" - denounced Zelaya's opposition as staging a coup d'etat against Zelaya, a sentiment voiced also by Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega. Hugo Chavez declared that "we are not going to watch with our arms crossed the goings-on in Honduras," and insisted "we will do what we will have to do so the sovereignty of the Honduran people will be respected."

Chavez is threatening war and Barack Obama has issued a statement siding with the ousted president who was intent on breaking the law to change the constitution in a country who does not have the framework to change the constitution by referendum.

WSJ explains:

While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, told the president that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his side, the president decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

Fox has Obama's statement.

"I am deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras regarding the detention and expulsion of President Mel Zelaya. As the Organization of American States did on Friday, I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference."

According to the Washington Post, the Obama administration tried to meddle into this even before Zelaya got his butt tossed.

Knowing trouble was brewing in Honduras over several weeks, the Obama administration warned power players there, including the armed forces, that the United States and other nations in the Americas would not support or abide a coup, officials said. They said Honduran military leaders stopped taking their calls.

Fausta again has linked to show that the Honduras Congress has officially ousted Zelaya.

The Honduran Congress has officially ousted Zelaya “for repeated violations to the Constitution” and has now named the Congress President Roberto Micheletti as president of the country.

Honduras is scheduled to hold a presidential election next November.

UnoAmérica pide al mundo impedir acción de Chávez en Honduras The Union of American Democratic Organizations, UnoAmérica, requests that democratic governments declare themselves against Hugo Chávez’s meddling in Honduras’s internal affairs.

All that are only the highlights, head over to Fausta for the detail and links to everything and translations.

Reuters reports Chavez threatening military action against the Honduras president.


The coup was condemned throughout the Americas. President Obama joined other regional leaders in calling for a peaceful return of Zelaya to office.

But the Honduran National Congress defiantly announced that Zelaya was out, and its members named congressional leader Roberto Micheletti the new president on Sunday afternoon.

The Honduran Supreme Court also supported the removal of Zelaya, saying that the military was acting in defense of democracy.

Compare Obama's inaction and how long it took him to condemn the violence against the Iranian protesters and yet how quickly he wants to stick his nose into Honduras business, in defense of a dictator that was breaking the law blatantly.


Sunday, June 28, 2009

Tom Brokaw--Rich, liberal and clueless

Tonight in Santa Monica is the annual California Republican Jewish Coalition Summer Bash.

So on this fine Sunday, as the world burns, I will dedicate the day to another wealthy and clueless liberal elitist.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Black Eyed Perez

On this Saturday, I am not in the mood to rant and rave about how the Democrats in Congress are destroying America, one bill at a time. I will wait until Monday for that. Today is some lighthearted fare.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Climate Bill Passes In The House

The House jammed through the climate change bill with a roll call vote of 219 to 212 with 3 not voting.

44 Democratic representatives voted against it and 8 Republicans voted for it.

Wall Street Journal reports the prospects for it passing in the Senate are "murky."

The 1,200 page bill -- formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" -- will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive cars or to heat their homes.

One of the Democratic congressman, Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who voted against the bill issued a statement right after the vote.

“I oppose H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. The reason is simple. It won’t address the problem. In fact, it might make the problem worse.

“It sets targets that are too weak, especially in the short term, and sets about meeting those targets through Enron-style accounting methods. It gives new life to one of the primary sources of the problem that should be on its way out– coal – by giving it record subsidies. And it is rounded out with massive corporate giveaways at taxpayer expense. There is $60 billion for a single technology which may or may not work, but which enables coal power plants to keep warming the planet at least another 20 years.

“Worse, the bill locks us into a framework that will fail. Science tells us that immediately is not soon enough to begin repairing the planet. Waiting another decade or more will virtually guarantee catastrophic levels of warming. But the bill does not require any greenhouse gas reductions beyond current levels until 2030.

“Today’s bill is a fragile compromise, which leads some to claim that we cannot do better. I respectfully submit that not only can we do better; we have no choice but to do better. Indeed, if we pass a bill that only creates the illusion of addressing the problem, we walk away with only an illusion. The price for that illusion is the opportunity to take substantive action.

“There are several aspects of the bill that are problematic.

1. Overall targets are too weak. The bill is predicated on a target atmospheric concentration of 450 parts per million, a target that is arguably justified in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but which is already out of date. Recent science suggests 350 parts per million is necessary to help us avoid the worst effects of global warming.

2. The offsets undercut the emission reductions. Offsets allow polluters to keep polluting; they are rife with fraudulent claims of emissions reduction; they create environmental, social, and economic unintended adverse consequences; and they codify and endorse the idea that polluters do not have to make sacrifices to solve the problem.

3. It kicks the can down the road. By requiring the bulk of the emissions to be carried out in the long term and requiring few reductions in the short term, we are not only failing to take the action when it is needed to address rapid global warming, but we are assuming the long term targets will remain intact.

4. EPA’s authority to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the short- to medium-term is rescinded. It is our best defense against a new generation of coal power plants. There is no room for coal as a major energy source in a future with a stable climate.

5. Nuclear power is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out. Nuclear power is far more expensive, has major safety issues including a near release in my own home state in 2002, and there is still no resolution to the waste problem. A recent study by Dr. Mark Cooper showed that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than to generate the same amount of electricity from energy efficiency and renewables.

6. Dirty Coal is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out. Coal-based energy destroys entire mountains, kills and injures workers at higher rates than most other occupations, decimates ecologically sensitive wetlands and streams, creates ponds of ash that are so toxic the Department of Homeland Security will not disclose their locations for fear of their potential to become a terrorist weapon, and fouls the air and water with sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and thousands of other toxic compounds that cause asthma, birth defects, learning disabilities, and pulmonary and cardiac problems for starters. In contrast, several times more jobs are yielded by renewable energy investments than comparable coal investments.

7. The $60 billion allocated for Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) is triple the amount of money for basic research and development in the bill. We should be pressuring China, India and Russia to slow and stop their power plants now instead of enabling their perpetuation. We cannot create that pressure while spending unprecedented amounts on a single technology that may or may not work. If it does not work on the necessary scale, we have then spent 10-20 years emitting more CO2, which we cannot afford to do. In addition, those who will profit from the technology will not be viable or able to stem any leaks from CCS facilities that may occur 50, 100, or 1000 years from now.

8. Carbon markets can and will be manipulated using the same Wall Street sleights of hand that brought us the financial crisis.

9. It is regressive. Free allocations doled out with the intent of blunting the effects on those of modest means will pale in comparison to the allocations that go to polluters and special interests. The financial benefits of offsets and unlimited banking also tend to accrue to large corporations. And of course, the trillion dollar carbon derivatives market will help Wall Street investors. Much of the benefits designed to assist consumers are passed through coal companies and other large corporations, on whom we will rely to pass on the savings.

10. The Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) is not an improvement. The 15% RES standard would be achieved even if we failed to act.

11. Dirty energy options qualify as “renewable”: The bill allows polluting industries to qualify as “renewable energy.” Trash incinerators not only emit greenhouse gases, but also emit highly toxic substances. These plants disproportionately expose communities of color and low-income to the toxics. Biomass burners that allow the use of trees as a fuel source are also defined as “renewable.” Under the bill, neither source of greenhouse gas emissions is counted as contributing to global warming.

12. It undermines our bargaining position in international negotiations in Copenhagen and beyond. As the biggest per capita polluter, we have a responsibility to take action that is disproportionately stronger than the actions of other countries. It is, in fact, the best way to preserve credibility in the international context.

13. International assistance is much less than demanded by developing countries. Given the level of climate change that is already in the pipeline, we are going to need to devote major resources toward adaptation. Developing countries will need it the most, which is why they are calling for much more resources for adaptation and technology transfer than is allocated in this bill. This will also undercut our position in Copenhagen.

“I offered eight amendments and cosponsored two more that collectively would have turned the bill into an acceptable starting point. All amendments were not allowed to be offered to the full House. Three amendments endeavored to minimize the damage that will be done by offsets, a method of achieving greenhouse gas reductions that has already racked up a history of failure to reduce emissions – increasing emissions in some cases – while displacing people in developing countries who rely on the land for their well being.

“Three other amendments would have made the federal government a force for change by requiring all federal energy to eventually come from renewable resources, by requiring the federal government to transition to electric and plug-in hybrid cars, and by requiring the installation of solar panels on government rooftops and parking lots. These provisions would accelerate the transition to a green economy.

“Another amendment would have moved up the year by which reductions of greenhouse gas emissions were required from 2030 to 2025. It would have encouraged the efficient use of allowances and would have reduced opportunities for speculation by reducing the emission value of an allowance by a third each year.

“The last amendment would have removed trash incineration from the definition of renewable energy. Trash incineration is one of the primary sources of environmental injustice in the country. It a primary source of compounds in the air known to cause cancer, asthma, and other chronic diseases. These facilities are disproportionately sited in communities of color and communities of low income. Furthermore, incinerators emit more carbon dioxide per unit of electricity produced than coal-fired power plants.

“Passing a weak bill today gives us weak environmental policy tomorrow,” said Kucinich.

Just as Barack Obama and the Democratically controlled Congress are trying to jam through socialized medicine, despite seeing how unsustainable it is in other countries, we see that they are doing the same here with climate change.

Passing a bill that other countries have already passed and are now "preparing to kill."

Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

Republican Senator, Jim Inhofe, assures the public this bill is as good as dead already in the Senate:

At the time of the interview Friday morning, he said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was only two votes short of winning and predicted that if she brought the question up for a vote, it would indicate she had found them. Late Friday, the bill was approved in the House on a 219-212 vote.

“It doesn’t matter,” he declared flatly, “because we’ll kill it in the Senate anyway.”

Asked if he was confident that would be the case, Oklahoma’s senior senator said he was “absolutely certain.” He noted that it would take 60 votes to break an anticipated Republican filibuster over cap and trade and predicted the most the Democrats can muster is about 34.

He said all the hubbub in the House was over Pelosi’s desire to attend a conference in Copenhagen and be able to stand up and say, “Oh, we’ve passed this out of the House and we’re going to lead the way in America but it’s not going to pass the Senate.”

Inhofe said the bill, if passed, would constitute the largest tax increase in the history of the country.

He scoffed at Democratic claims that “cap and trade” doesn’t represent a tax increase at all but instead is a free enterprise solution.

“MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and the Wharton School of Economics came out with an analysis of what this is. They said that the range is between $330 and $350 billion a year. That translates in Oklahoma to $3,200 per family. Everyone who’s reading this story right now, that would be a tax increase of over $3,000 per family. I can give you all the documentation on that.”

In the meantime, the margin that allowed the bill to be passed in the House, 7 votes and 8 Republicans defected to vote for this piece of garbage.

Malkin has their names.

The 8 cap-and-tax Republican turncoats again are:

Bono Mack (CA) (202) 225-5330
Castle (DE) (202) 225-4165
Kirk (IL) (202... (And he’s seriously considering running for Senate!)
Lance (NJ) (202) 225-5361
LoBiondo (NJ) (202) 225-6572
McHugh (NY) (202) 225-4611
Reichert (WA) (202) 225-7761
Smith (NJ) (202) 225-3765

(Click image to enlarge)

This is a chart created by John Boehner and below is a video of him explaining the chart.

A little bit for everyone, except the American taxpayer, who will be paying all these people.... to the tune of $3,200 per family per year.

Call your Senators, make sure they kill this bill in the Senate. Make it clear they will never make it passed their reelection bids if they even consider passing this through the Senate.