Hot Off The White House Press …

President Obama can stop fires, if you agree to give up your energy security and freedom!

ScreenHunter_96 Aug. 05 16.33

No mention that this is the quietest fire season in decades.

ScreenHunter_1655 Aug. 04 06.59National Interagency Fire Center

Half of the country voted for this genius.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Hot Off The White House Press …

  1. mjc says:

    Slightly over half those who voted, voted for him…but that, as a percent of the total population, makes it (even if you limit it to just those eligible to vote) way less than half the country. If you do total population, then it’s a bit under 1/3.

    For some reason, I think if they let 5 yr olds vote, there wouldn’t be much difference in the results.

    • Gail Combs says:

      AHHHhhh,
      But DID “Slightly over half “ of those (live) voters actually vote for him?

      Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts: U.S. Elections: Will the Dead Vote and Voting Machines be Hacked?

      In my state alone: Hundreds of cases of potential voter fraud uncovered in North Carolina

      MORE:
      It’s official: Obama voter fraud reason for “reelection”
      Diebold voting machine FRAUD:
      whatreallyhappened(DOT)com/WRHARTICLES/rigvote.html

      From NZ: Inside A U.S. Election Vote Counting Program
      Bev Harris is the Author of the soon to be published book ” Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering In The 21st Century ”
      (wwwDOT)scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

      Voter Fraud is Real….

      Election fraud in America is no laughing matter. Florida election officials have discovered that the state’s voter polls have 53,000 dead voters still registered to vote.1 That’s a whole city of dead voters still “eligible” to vote – more than the entire population of Pensacola, Florida!

      Unfortunately, in some U.S. cities voter fraud has been so common and so pervasive for so long that it’s more likely to be a punch line than a felony.

      In Chicago, for example, when a couple announces the birth of a new baby boy, their friends are all-too-likely to joke: “Is he registered to vote? …Twice?”

      Then there’s that infamous old adage: “Vote early and vote often” – a funny but revealing quip widely attributed to the Chicago gangster Al Capone, a man who epitomized political corruption, and boasted an illegal empire built on graft and intimidation.

      And by now, of course, it is practically axiomatic that Mayor Richard Daley and Chicago’s Democratic political machine stole the 1960 presidential election for JFK.

      It’s safe to say that when it comes to elections, Chicago has a reputation, a history, or, if we’re honest about it – a problem.

      Voter scams and scandals are notorious in Chicago and across much of Illinois, including outdated voter registrations being voted by precinct captains; fake registrations with made-up names; “ghost” voting by the dearly departed; elderly voters having their ballots cast by care-workers; and ineligible felons and illegal aliens casting illegal ballots. And Chicago’s problem isn’t just distant history.

      The Illinois Attorney General’s Office recently prosecuted and convicted two Cook County election workers for election fraud for violating voter privacy by “supervising” voters as they completed ballots. In 2002, dozens of Chicago’s senior citizens applied for absentee ballots, only to discover that the man who was helping them to apply had already filled in the ballots. As the Chicago Sun-Times reported, when the seniors asked him what he was doing, he answered: “Don’t worry, you’re voting Democratic.”….
      (wwwDOT)nationalcenter.org/NPA636.html

      This is why the Democrats are fighting voter ID laws so fiercely.

      • philjourdan says:

        Whether he got more than 50% of the actual people voting for him is not known. And moot at this point. But what we do know, unequivocally, is that his “official” vote total does not equal the number of people voting for him.

  2. njsnowfan says:

    One word,

    Propaganda

  3. Sleepalot says:

    No mention that Obama got rid of most of the fire-fighting aircraft.

    OT heads-up: there’s a propaganda plan to sail yatchs through the NW passage.
    http://cornellsailing.com/sail-the-odyssey/blue-planet-odyssey/

    I’ve only found two boats (I think there may be a third): Aventura and Drina
    http://northwestpassage2014.blogspot.ca/2014/08/sv-aventura-iv-learns-firsthand-about.html
    http://paulfkerrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/nuuk-greenland-new-friends-and-big-gun.html

  4. Gamecock says:

    “Half of the country voted for this genius.”

    Contemporary polls show ~39% approve of the job he’s doing. Every time I hear such statistics, I wonder, “WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? HOW MESSED UP DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO APPROVE OF WHAT HE’S DOING?” Hardly a week goes by that he doesn’t do something absurd, yet 39% still approve.

    Or, just maybe, the pollsters are skewing it up. Based on the people I know, I think 19% approval is more accurate.

    • Shazaam says:

      Have you considered that the approval percentage might just match-up to the ranks of the tax parasites?

      Add-up the number of people collecting government checks, be they government employees or retirees or beneficiaries of government largess (aka, bought and paid for voters) and you might hit that magical “approval” number.

      • Gail Combs says:

        You can leave out retirees. Many of them worked all their lives and are not real happy with a government that has gotten more and more intrusive. Many are Tea Party Members.

  5. R. Shearer says:

    Wild fires today consume 10 times less acreage than before industrialization.

  6. I had a 40 year career with the US Forest Service, 2/3 of which was working in fire management, on the national forests, in the Washington Office, and in fire research. California and adjacent areas have fire problems because of the multi-year drought, which has nothing to do with climate change (Obama and friends maintain otherwise, but they obviously never learned about the great dust bowl of the 30’s that preceded the current warming nonsense, and eventually went away of its own accord). Even IF there were a connection, CLEARLY nothing that could be implemented in the near term to reduce CO2 would have any effect on wildland fire conditions for many, many years. Obama loves to beat the drum for the media and the no-information voters who believe his every word, and never call him to account when nothing he says pans out.

    • geran says:

      Thanks for the “inside” info, Richard. The facts are out there for everyone to see, like waves hitting the beach. But, you provided a tsunami!

    • B.C. says:

      This fecal matter being exuded by the WH is pure, unadulterated propaganda being pushed by the Fabians that have infected the U.S. government.

      Piss poor forest management practices by the very same Federal government “experts” is the main reason for more intense wildfires. For almost 75 years, it was the push by the Feds to have “every fire out by 10 a.m.” that caused the unnatural build-up of fuels in formerly pristine wilderness. Overgrowth of all strata of the flora (understory, midstory and overstory) has caused formerly relatively “cool” fires to be explosive, stand-replacement fires. CO2 and global warming climate change climate disruption climate extremism whateverthehelltheyarecallingittoday has ZERO to do with the number, size and/or intensity of wildfires anywhere on the planet.

      • Ginger says:

        New York Times: July 19.1994: “Beginning about 1100 years ago (long before any human influence on CO2), what is now California baked in two droughts, the first lasting 220 years, and the second 140 years. Each was more intense than the mere six-year dry spells that afflict modern California from time to time, new studies of past climates show. The findings suggest, in fact, that relatively wet periods like the 20th century have been the exception rather than the rule in California for at least the last 3500 years, and that mega-droughts are likely to recur.” It may be politically convenient to blame the current drought on Catastrophic Anthropologic Global Warming, but it would not be honest.

        AL GORE, Congressional Testimony in 2007: “Droughts are becoming longer and more intense” … at least according to Al Gore, who made this unequivocal declaration in his 21 March 2007 testimony before the United States Senate’s Environment & Public Works Committee. So what do you think? Is he right? So right, in fact, that he need only declare it, and without the citing of a single shred of evidence? Perhaps a few quotes from a recent comprehensive review of the subject by Cook et al. (2007) will help to set the record straight, at least for Gore’s “home continent” of North America.
        “Recent advances in the reconstruction of past drought over North America,” in the words of Cook et al., “have revealed the occurrence of a number of unprecedented megadroughts over the past millennium that clearly exceed any found in the instrumental records.” Indeed, they state that “these past megadroughts dwarf the famous droughts of the 20th century, such as the Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s, the southern Great Plains drought of the 1950s, and the current one in the West that began in 1999,” all of which dramatic droughts fade into almost total insignificance when compared to the granddaddy of them all, which they describe as “an epoch of significantly elevated aridity that persisted for almost 400 years over the AD 900-1300 period.”

  7. ossqss says:

    They voted for Barry twice, but got Valerie (twice) making the decisions instead. Just like a bad Godzilla movie transaltion, nothing is in sync in this country anylonger. That is what you get when you elect those who have no appicable experience in management and surround themselves with unelected radical leftists.

  8. bobmaginnis says:

    More fire area than the 5 year average for left coast California, unlike SG’s national map (It is hot here in Ecotopia. Oregon and Washington too.)

    The below statistics are tracked on a weekly basis and provide a snapshot of the number of fires and acres burned. These numbers are subject to change until the final fire season reports are completed and tabulated.
    Number of fires and acres:
    January 1, 2014 through July 26, 2014 3,616 40,236
    January 1, 2013 through July 26, 2013 3,035 67,980
    5 year average (same interval) 2,495 34,576
    http://cdfdata.fire.ca.gov/incidents/incidents_stats?year=2014

  9. bobmaginnis says:

    And this also doesn’t show up that big in Steve’s National graph.
    California, Oregon and Washington have declared states of emergency to deal with the wildfires, as experts warn that this fire season, which runs from mid-May to mid-October, could be one of the worst on record.
    “Basically our fire season never ended last year,” said Dennis Mathisen of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/04/us-usa-washington-wildfires-idUSKBN0G41SI20140804

    • And the Rocky Mountains may be having the quietest fire season on record

      • bobmaginnis says:

        That would be consistent with temperature departures

        • Anything is possible says:

          In the real world, that’s called “weather”.

          In the White House, it’s called “climate change”

        • squid2112 says:

          Hey Bob, how many of those fires were started by “global warming” ?

          Other than lightning strikes, exactly how many fires in history have been started by “weather” ?

          Does “global warming” cause some sort of spontaneous combustion? Is CO2 a flammable gas?

          You do realize that better than 90% (9 out of 10) wildfires are caused by humans (the other 1% by lightning), either through negligence or maliciousness, right? With that being said, perhaps you can explain how “climate change” has any effect upon wildfires, and even if it did, with 90% being human caused, can you explain how you could identify the “climate change” signal through the 90% noise?

        • Warmer temperatures and lower humidities over extended periods dry out forest fuels, which make them considerably more susceptible to ignition from any heat source, lightning or man-caused, Drier fuels enable a fire to burn with greater intensity and spread faster, making control more difficult, if not impossible. Doesn’t matter if the hot, dry weather is due to climate change or just “normal” summer weather. The Pacific Northwest has been drier due to the normal el nino / la nina cycle in the Pacific Oscillation. California and the SW, or course is in the throws of a multi-year drought. Both are historical cyclic weather patters that have been around long before CO2 became the scapegoat for anything out of the ordinary.that can be used by governments to impose controls and taxes.

    • geran says:

      bob, how many matches do you have in your possession? Are they registered?

    • Jl says:

      Trying to prove there are more fire now is only half your battle. Then, which none of you have done, is to prove they’re solely the result of man adding additional CO2 to the atmosphere. Good luck.

      • _Jim says:

        This a ‘game’ of Three-card Monte performed by the AGW hucksters; the only way to ‘win’ is not to play … unfortunately, the general public and the press are not so smart and get ‘taken in’.

    • Tom In Indy says:

      Bob, thanks for the link. Can you quantify how much lower the number of acres burned would be if we eliminated all man-made CO2 and added 2 billion people to the fraction of the earth’s population who survive by cooking meals over dung fires?

      Thanks and looking forward to your answer.

  10. JJ says:

    Its a desert. Isn’t CO2 a fire extinguisher? /sarc

    • squid2112 says:

      According to the Global Warming Nazis, CO2 is now a flammable gas!

      • Warmer temperatures and lower humidities over extended periods dry out forest fuels, which make them considerably more susceptible to ignition from any heat source, lightning or man-caused. The link to climate change according to the AGW crowd is that increased CO2 is causing warmer temperatures because of the greenhouse effect increased CO2 is alleged to cause. The gas itself, being a trace gas in the atmosphere, has no effect on fires.

        • philjourdan says:

          It also helps that the government has increased the fuel source by forbidding any kind of thinning or recovery of fallen trees.

        • Actually, much (but certainly not all) of the blame for lack of thinning and logging must rest with the misguided environmentalists who have used the courts (with judges ignorant about forest management) to block many thinning and timber harvesting projects that would do a whole lot toward reducing the flammability of forested areas. The environmentalist dogma that the best forest is one that is left in a natural condition is wildfire’s best friend.

        • philjourdan says:

          Very true – but the courts are powerless unless given the weapons by the government. Environmentalist use the laws (some say pervert them) to do as you say. If the laws did not exist in the first place, the courts would be powerless to side with the environmentalists.

        • Not sure which laws you refer to. The problem is not necessarily with the law, but rather with the activist liberal federal and state judges that the environmentalists choose to file their suits before. The applicable statutes are those that require environmental impact studies before major projects such as those that are the subject here, and it is the interpretation of the results of those studies that become the issue. I have seen impact statements that quite properly find no adverse impact get challenged in court by environmentalist groups and the impact study get thrown out by a judge sympathetic to the environmentalists, and a new study ordered. So, until the impact statement is redone, and accepted by a court, nothing happens out in the forest regardless of how urgent the project might be.. .Years can go by.

        • philjourdan says:

          @Richard Chase

          Not sure which laws you refer to. …The applicable statutes are

          You answer your own question.

        • mjc says:

          There are two ways of dealing with a forest…manage it or leave it alone. You need to be willing to put up with consequences of each decision. That means you can’t leave it alone and expect the same things, like fire control, as if it was managed. If left alone, that means no intervention, especially during a fire. Fire is nature’s way of clearing the board and starting over…and when a forest gets overgrown, sickly or otherwise in a poor state, it WILL burn. That’s the natural cycle.

          And the flip side is, that if managed, then you need to be willing to do things like cut down trees, thin the stands and keep undergrowth/brush cleared, dead/dying trees to a minimum and so on.

          With managed vs left alone, there is no ‘best of both’…they are mutally exclusive.

        • As a professional forester I have disagree slightly with your “either…or” scenario. Management of a forest has many shades depending upon the purposes for which it is being managed, and can range from an objective that maximizes the utilization of the resources that are present through many combinations of objectives to one of maintaining it in a healthy quasi-natural condition representing a chosen stage of its natural progression. There are many management practices available, depending on the overriding management objective. For example, fire hazards can be reduced by selective logging and understory thinning in a way that allows the area to heal in a few short years, if a “natural” looking condition is the over-riding objective. Also use of prescribed fire (i.e., controlled burns by fires ignited under conditions that enable the fire to consume hazardous fuels, but not incur more than slight, temporary damage to desirable vegetation) is a valuable managment tool for mitigating the potential for large, disastrous fires.
          .

        • mjc says:

          Richard…yes there are various management strategies, but they are still managed.

          It’s back to those misguided idiots that force unrealistic options that make it ‘either or’…it’s a courted ordered ‘or’, most of the time.

  11. David.B says:

    I just attempted to reply to the White House email and I recieved this response.
    Hello,
    Due to the high volume of messages received at this address, the White House is unable to process the email you just sent.
    To contact the White House, please visit:
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
    Guess they’re busy…

  12. philjourdan says:

    And the fox promises not to eat you Mr. Gingerbreadman if you just jump on his back for a ride across the river.

    The problem with Obama is he is so illiterate.

  13. bit chilly says:

    i misread the graph as bum acreage , and immediately thought upside down tiljander proxies were used in its construction 🙂

  14. D. Self says:

    Lies, Lies, and more Lies. This administration is beyond corrupt to the point of being evil.

  15. Dave N says:

    If by “act” they mean curtail CO2 emissions, perhaps they should be sending the press release to China.

  16. dp says:

    It is a regional thing, of course. In Washington state we do have fires. Today I drove 300 miles to Puget Sound from north of the hardest hit areas. The towns of Mallot, Brewster, Pateros, and all along the Columbia River gorge there was wide spread destruction. The burned areas look like they were sterilized. The glacier-worn lava flows and glacial benches are cleared entirely of brush, and the flows look like new thanks to post-fire heavy thunderstorms. Everywhere we traveled there was evidence the best fire breaks were the apple and soft fruit orchards. South of the Beebe bridge we came onto a narrow section of gorge and there were ghostly twists of smoke on the water – hovering, rolling, and coiling.

    Continuing south through Wenatchee (showing 102ºF on the thermometer) and up and over Blewett Pass we came onto a fresh blaze about half a mile from the main highway in tall trees. The flames were towering well above the tree tops and bright enough to illuminate the thick smoke column. Large areas were ordered to evacuate. The sunlight streaming through the smoke cast a deep redish amber color to everything. Steep slopes seem to suggest this one is going to grow. A few miles south along I-90 the winds were whipping deciduous and coniferous trees into a frenzy – not what is needed in a tree top fire zone.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s