President Obama Apologizes to Kamala Harris, Can Still Mislead on Guns, Sequester, Propose a Budget No One Likes

On Wednesday in Denver, the
president made
several misleading comments about gun policies. The mainstream
media is increasingly
picking up on the fact that sequestration isn’t the
calamity his administration
promised. Both Republicans and Democrats are upset by the

president’s budget proposal, which also came two months late.
So what did the president apologize for today? Calling California’s
Kamala Harris, “by far the best looking attorney general in the
country.” Was Jack Conway
upset?

In fact, Jay Carney said the president called her to apologize
for the distraction the comments caused. Obama’s not a stranger to
the wheel of outrage, having apologized in 2008 for
calling a Michigan television reporter “sweetie.” At the LA
Times, Robin Abcarian
offered that the president’s remarks were more “wolfish” than
“sexist” but then pointed out the obvious, that looks matter. She
concluded by repeating that no one would’ve cared what the
“gorgeous” Sarah Palin had to say if she didn’t have good looks, a
familiar
trope used to diminish Palin’s political positions. Obama, of
course, didn’t do that this time. He even prefaced his comments on
Harris by calling her “brilliant” and “dedicated.” But he
apologized anyway.

And you can say you were there, when the president apologized

for innocent drone deaths
his foreign policy
his economic policies getting some things
wrong drawing attention to his opinion on a
politician’s good looks.

Read More

North Korea Warns Diplomats It Can’t Guarantee Their Safety in War, Missiles Moved East, Missile Defenses to Guam, People of Seoul Still Largely Unconcerned

North Korea has told the foreign ministries of
both Russia and the United Kingdom that it can
no longer guarantee the safety of diplomats stationed in
Pyongyang, part of a battery of war rhetoric coming from the
totalitarian country in the last several weeks.
Nevertheless, neither Russia nor the UK have any immediate plans to
evacuate their embassies, although David Cameron, the British prime
minister, said yesterday he was
“very concerned” by North Korean missiles, which he suggested
could make it to the United States or Europe, based apparently on
what the North Korean government says.  

South Korea says the North is moving medium-range missiles

to the Pacific shore of the country, and the United States

announced plans to send a missile defense system to Guam. The
White House press secretary, Jay Carney, said today it would

not be a surprise if North Korea were to conduct new missile
tests. The Obama Administration may even be
looking at a strengthening of U.S.-China relations because of
the mutual hassle North Korea presents. The BBC, meanwhile,

reports that in Seoul, the South Korean capital, residents
remain unimpressed by the North Korean threat, citing “security
fatigue” and a prevailing opinion that North Korean saber rattling
is intended to shore up bargaining chips in future negotiations for
food or fuel.

While the West’s response has so far been cautiously muted, the
non-state actor Anonymous says
it’s been hacking the North Korean government’s social networks
(it has several), and in fact
posted the picture to the right to the government’s official
flickr account. No response as yet from the regime to those
actions.

Read More

David Harsanyi on Why Environmental Alarmists Are Still Losing

All that money. All that
effort. All the sermonizing and bloodcurdling imagery and still,
Americans don't seem to be evolving quickly enough on the
environment. Progressives, writes David Harsanyi, still have their
work cut out for them.

View this article.

Read More

On the Environment, the Alarmists Are Still Losing

All that money. All that effort. All the sermonizing and
bloodcurdling imagery and still, Americans don't seem to be
evolving quickly enough on the environment.

A new poll by Pew Research Center, for instance, finds that a
wide majority of Americans support building the Keystone XL
pipeline, which would transport Canadian oil to refineries in
Texas. Sixty-six percent of Americans favor finishing the pipeline,
with only 23 percent in opposition. Strong support cuts through
every political distinction—other than "liberal" Democrats.

The Obama administration, which likes to count every organism
that's even tangentially connected to a clean-energy project as a
"green job," has dismissed the job-producing prospects of the
long-delayed pipeline as overblown. Perhaps. But cheap and abundant
energy certainly helps save and/or create more jobs
than any stimulus that was dreamed up in Washington.

Nearly half of Americans also support the increase use of
fracking—a major innovation in productivity that helps protect the
environment. This is a remarkable percentage when you consider the
widespread scaremongering we've witnessed on the issue.

Global warming? According to Pew, 69 percent of Americans say
there is solid evidence that the earth's average temperature has
been getting warmer over the past few decades. But you'll notice
something more interesting when you break the numbers down.

Among those who see the irrefutable scientific evidence of
global temperatures rising, only 42 percent believe that most of it
should be attributed to human activity. In fact, when you break it
down, 23 percent of Americans believe that natural patterns in the
earth's environment are heating the earth, and another 27 percent
don't believe there is any solid evidence of warming at all. The
more appropriate question would be: Do you believe in man-made
global warming? The answer: Less than half of Americans would say
yes. That, even after the unrelenting cultural, educational and
political bombardment we've all had to endure on the topic.

And though 33 percent of Americans believe that global warming
is a "very serious" problem, that number has declined by 6 points
since October 2012.

The crusade to convince us that global warming can only be dealt
with by wealth destruction and higher energy prices began with an
effort to "raise awareness," which turned into some delicate
nanny-state prodding before efforts to artificially inflate prices.
You might remember that cap-and-trade legislation was a top
priority for the president. The administration employed a number of
extremists—from science czar Dr. John Holdren, who once advocated
for mass sterilizations, to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who once
advocated raising gas prices to match those in Europe—to press the
case.

What's next? Shame. Those who don't buy the apocalyptic plotline
are, at worst, deniers—with all the immorality that signifies—or,
at best, quacks. Take a recent survey from lefty pollsters at
Public Policy Polling of 20 "widespread and/or infamous conspiracy
theories." It found that 6 percent of voters believe Osama bin
Laden is still alive, 7 percent of voters think the moon landing
was faked, 5 percent of voters believe that Paul McCartney actually
died in 1966, and so on.

The survey also found that 37 percent of voters believe global
warming is a hoax and 51 percent do not, as if ridiculous
conspiracies, easily disprovable, were the same as a theory that
has been overhyped and manipulated for political ends. Americans
may be "evolving" on so many fronts, but the issue of energy is
less open to emotional appeals and pandering. Progressives, then,
still have their work cut out for them.

Read More

David Harsanyi on Why Environmental Alarmists Are Still Losing

All that money. All that
effort. All the sermonizing and bloodcurdling imagery and still,
Americans don't seem to be evolving quickly enough on the
environment. Progressives, writes David Harsanyi, still have their
work cut out for them.

View this article.

Read More

On the Environment, the Alarmists Are Still Losing

All that money. All that effort. All the sermonizing and
bloodcurdling imagery and still, Americans don't seem to be
evolving quickly enough on the environment.

A new poll by Pew Research Center, for instance, finds that a
wide majority of Americans support building the Keystone XL
pipeline, which would transport Canadian oil to refineries in
Texas. Sixty-six percent of Americans favor finishing the pipeline,
with only 23 percent in opposition. Strong support cuts through
every political distinction—other than "liberal" Democrats.

The Obama administration, which likes to count every organism
that's even tangentially connected to a clean-energy project as a
"green job," has dismissed the job-producing prospects of the
long-delayed pipeline as overblown. Perhaps. But cheap and abundant
energy certainly helps save and/or create more jobs
than any stimulus that was dreamed up in Washington.

Nearly half of Americans also support the increase use of
fracking—a major innovation in productivity that helps protect the
environment. This is a remarkable percentage when you consider the
widespread scaremongering we've witnessed on the issue.

Global warming? According to Pew, 69 percent of Americans say
there is solid evidence that the earth's average temperature has
been getting warmer over the past few decades. But you'll notice
something more interesting when you break the numbers down.

Among those who see the irrefutable scientific evidence of
global temperatures rising, only 42 percent believe that most of it
should be attributed to human activity. In fact, when you break it
down, 23 percent of Americans believe that natural patterns in the
earth's environment are heating the earth, and another 27 percent
don't believe there is any solid evidence of warming at all. The
more appropriate question would be: Do you believe in man-made
global warming? The answer: Less than half of Americans would say
yes. That, even after the unrelenting cultural, educational and
political bombardment we've all had to endure on the topic.

And though 33 percent of Americans believe that global warming
is a "very serious" problem, that number has declined by 6 points
since October 2012.

The crusade to convince us that global warming can only be dealt
with by wealth destruction and higher energy prices began with an
effort to "raise awareness," which turned into some delicate
nanny-state prodding before efforts to artificially inflate prices.
You might remember that cap-and-trade legislation was a top
priority for the president. The administration employed a number of
extremists—from science czar Dr. John Holdren, who once advocated
for mass sterilizations, to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, who once
advocated raising gas prices to match those in Europe—to press the
case.

What's next? Shame. Those who don't buy the apocalyptic plotline
are, at worst, deniers—with all the immorality that signifies—or,
at best, quacks. Take a recent survey from lefty pollsters at
Public Policy Polling of 20 "widespread and/or infamous conspiracy
theories." It found that 6 percent of voters believe Osama bin
Laden is still alive, 7 percent of voters think the moon landing
was faked, 5 percent of voters believe that Paul McCartney actually
died in 1966, and so on.

The survey also found that 37 percent of voters believe global
warming is a hoax and 51 percent do not, as if ridiculous
conspiracies, easily disprovable, were the same as a theory that
has been overhyped and manipulated for political ends. Americans
may be "evolving" on so many fronts, but the issue of energy is
less open to emotional appeals and pandering. Progressives, then,
still have their work cut out for them.

Read More

You Can Love Nature and Still Hate the Tyranny of Environmental Regulations

Environmental activists and politicians would like you to think
that we must love their regulations -- or hate trees and
animals.

I love trees and animals.

But you can love nature and still hate the tyranny that
environmental regulations bring.

The Environmental Protection Agency just announced it will boost
gas prices ("only" a penny, although industry says 6 to 9 cents) to
make another minuscule improvement to air quality.

In New York City, my mayor wants to ban Styrofoam cups, saying,
"I think it's something we can do without."

Congress already dictates the design of our cars, toilets and
light bulbs.

Originally,
environmental rules were a good thing. I love the free market, but
it doesn't offer a practical remedy to pollution. I could sue
polluters for violating my property rights, but under our legal
system, that's not even close to practical.

So in the '70s, government passed rules that demanded we stop
polluting the air and water. Industry put scrubbers in smokestacks.
Towns installed sewage treatment. Now the air is quite clean, and I
can swim in the rivers around Manhattan.

But government didn't stop there. Government never stops. Now
that the air is cleaner, government spends even more than it spent
to clean the air to subsidize feeble methods of energy production,
like windmills and solar panels. Activists want even more spending.
A few years back, the Center for American Progress announced they
were upset that "Germany, Spain and China Are Seizing the Energy
Opportunity ... the United States Risks Getting Left Behind."

In this case, we're better off "left behind." After spending
billions, those European governments made no breakthroughs, and now
they're cutting back.

The Endangered Species Act was another noble idea. We all want
to save polar bears. But now the bureaucrats make it almost
impossible for some people to improve their own property.

Louisiana landowner Edward Poitevent wants to build homes and
offices north of Lake Pontchartrain. He could provide safe
high-ground housing to people eager to move away from areas that
were flooded during Hurricane Katrina. But he is not allowed to
build because the government decided 1,500 acres of his land should
become a preservation area for a threatened species called the
dusky gopher frog. None of these frogs currently live on his
property. Poitevent told me, "The Fish and Wildlife Service has
certified that the frog has not been seen in the state of Louisiana
since 1967."

Fish and Wildlife Service officials said they were "not
available" to talk with me about this. Instead, they posted a video
on YouTube that says they work "with" landowners: "The Service has
many voluntary partnership-based programs that can provide
technical and financial assistance to manage species."

That sounds nice, but the government's handbook on
how to work with them is an onerous 315 pages
long.

The environmentalists so torment those who resist their schemes
that some landowners tell each other, "If you find an endangered
species, shoot, shovel and shut up!" That's mostly a joke. But it
does happen, and it's one more way government regulations
backfire.

Throughout the world, most reductions in pollution have been
achieved because of capitalism, not government control.

Fracking for natural gas reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Even much-hated coal and oil provide benefits. Science writer
Matt Ridley says, "Burning of fossil fuels is helping the
rainforest in the Amazon to grow."

Ridley also points out modern industrial farming allows people
to grow more food on less land, and so people cut down fewer trees.
"New England used to be 70 percent farmland -- it's now 70 percent
forest."

You can even see the difference between areas that get greener
and ones that don't from space: The Dominican Republic is
noticeably greener than its immediate neighbor, Haiti, mainly
because the Dominican Republic uses fossil fuel instead of burning
wood from its forests for fuel, as Haiti does.

Industry and technology, not regulations, are humanity's
greatest contribution to the environment. Leave people their
freedom, and they come up with new, smarter, more efficient and
thus cleaner ways of doing things. Stifling that process with
regulation isn't "progressive."

Read More

John Stossel on Environmental Tyranny

Environmental activists and politicians would
like you to think that we must love their regulations -- or hate
trees and animals. But that's not true, writes John Stossel. You
can love nature and still hate the tyranny that environmental
regulations bring.

View this article.

Read More

Four Months After Sandy, The Rockaways Still Look Awful [PHOTOS]

When Hurricane Sandy struck no one was prepared, least of all the communities in the Far Rockaways and Staten Island that were hardest hit. More than four months later, these communities are still reeling. 

In November, the damage was so bad that Mayor Bloomberg made it clear there would never be a new wooden boardwalk. When we went out there residents spoke of the difficulty and delays in getting emergency aid.

By December business and individuals were getting back on their feet, but power and telephone service had only just resumed for many residents. In January as Congress fought over the specifics of an aid deal, people in the Rockaways were busy trying to save their homes.

In early February, early plans for how to use the first $1.77 billion for New York City from the $51 billion in federal aid for Hurricane Sandy relief, were released, but city officials warned it could take months for the money to be distributed.

But residents have persevered on their own. With local businesses like Suncycle Studios reopening already. And the YANA (You Are Never Alone) Center, another important aid center during the initial weeks after the storm, is close to reopening with the help of Occupy Sandy and other volunteer organizations.

Just last week, plans for aid were finalized, and in the Rockaways people say it is desperately needed. They're close to giving up hope.

 

As you drive into the Rockaways, a blue sky filled with puffy white clouds can give the impression everything is back to normal.

But there are many reminders of work to be done.

In February, Mayor Bloomberg presented New York City's initial plan for its first $1.77 billion installment from the $51 billion relief funds set aside by Congress.

Source: "City Plans to Allot First $1 Billion in Storm Aid to Housing and Businesses"

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Business Insider on Twitter and Facebook.

Read More

Reality TV Ratings: 'Dancing With The Stars, 'The Voice' Still Have Legs

NEW YORK — Two popular reality shows made a splash upon their re-entry during the past week – and a new one had a strong debut.

A new episode of "Dancing With the Stars" premiered on ABC last week before 17 million viewers, just behind CBS drama "NCIS" as the week's most popular program. It was down to 14.5 million Monday night, facing competition from the return of "The Voice" on NBC.

Read More...
More on Dancing With the Stars

Read More

NATE SILVER: Florida Gulf Coast Still Has Almost No Chance To Win It All

Nate Silver updated his forecast for the NCAA Tournament, and things are still looking bleak for America's team, Florida Gulf Coast. FGCU now has a 0.019% chance of winning it all, Silver's model says. That works out to 1 in 5180 odds. Before the tournament the school's odds were 0.0001% (1 in 79322), so things have improved considerably, but not to the point that you'd call a FGCU national title "realistic." So why are the odds still so small? FGCU has a really tough path to the Final Four. The other three teams in its bracket (Kansas, Michigan, and Florida) are seeded 4th or higher. In addition, all the stats say Florida is one of the five best teams in college hoops, even though they're just a 3-seed. So it would take two monumental upsets for FGCU to get to the Final Four, and they'd still have to win two more games after that. Here are Silver's odds for FGCU to advance from here on out:

• Elite 8: 5.6%
• Final Four: 0.76%
• Title game: 0.13%
• Winning it all: 0.019%

Check out Silver full Sweet 16 forecast here >

Please follow Sports Page on Twitter and Facebook.Join the conversation about this story »

Read More