american czars the new american magazine jan 4 2010pdf3209

7/24/2019 American Czars the New American Magazine Jan 4 2010pdf3209

1/48

Climate Teacup Tempest? The Second Amendment and the States Forgotten Influences on the Founders

$2.95

THAT FREEDOM SHALL NOT PERISHwww.TheNewAmerican.com

January 4, 2010


2/48

Newt GingrichThe EstablishmentsConservative

Claiming conservative credentials, NewtGingrich is here, hes there, hes everywhere and he may or may not be running for Presidentin 2012 but are his new credentials for real?(December 7, 2009, 48pp) TNA091207

Enjoying Christmas

As the worsening economy increasingly takesthe tinsel and twinkle out of Christmas, it mightbe expected that the tradition of Christmaswould diminish. Not so, says our cover story.(December 21, 2009, 48pp) TNA091221

Constitutional Candidates

As the primaries for the 2010 elections drawcloser, we examine several viable candidateswho are running on a constitutionalist platforminspired by Ron Paul. (November 23, 2009,48pp) TNA090923

The Diminishing Dollar

The price of gold reaches new highs almostdaily against the U.S. dollar. With the buyingpower of the dollar being a function of bothhow much money the Federal Reserve printsand international trust in the dollar as theworlds reserve currency, whats the future ofthe dollar? (November 9, 2009, 48pp) TNA091109

American Czars

Americans laud our electoral process andthe separation of powers, but since the daysof the New Deal, we have quietly acceptedthe appointment of czars: unelected men

and women who control segments of oureconomy without oversight. (January 4, 2010,48pp) TNA100104

ENTER MIX OR MATCH QUANTITIES AND SUBTOTAL

American Czars

Enjoying Christmas

Newt Gingrich

The Diminishing Dollar

Constitutional CandidatesName _____________________________________________________________

Address ___________________________________________________________

City _____________________________ State __________ Zip _______________

Phone ____________________________ E-mail _____________________________

Check VISA Discover

Money Order MasterCard American Express

# _________________________________________ Exp. Date _______________

Signature ___________________________________________________

VISA/MC/DiscoverThree Digit V-Code

American ExpreFour Digit V-Co

MAIL COMPLETED FORM TO:ShopJBS P.O. BOX 8040

APPLETON, WI 54912

1-800-342-6491

SUBTOTAL TOTALWI RESIDENTS ADD5% SALES TAXSHIPPING

(SEE CHART BELOW)

Order Online: www.shopjbs.org

Credit-card orders call toll-free now!

*For rush orders and special rates for case lots of 100,

call (800) 727-TRUE or go to ShopJBS.org.

For shipments outside the U.S., please call for rates.

QUANTITY TITLE/DESCRIPTION TOTAL PRICE

Standard: 4-14business days.Rush: 3-7 businessdays, no P.O. Boxes,HI/AK add $10.00

Order Subtotal$0-10.99

$11.00-19.99

$20.00-49.99

Standard Shipping$4.95

$7.75

$9.95

Rush Shipping$9.95

$12.75

$14.95

Mix or Match1 copy $2.9510 copies $12.50

25 copies $22.50100+ copies*

Make checks payable to: ShopJBS

0000000000000

000000000000000

000

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

10010

MixorMatchforSpecialQuantityDiscounts


3/48


4/48

COVERSTORY POLITICS

10American Czarsby Jack Kenny As the United States proudly foists American-style democracy on much of the world, presidentially appointedczars control large swaths of the U.S. economy, without oversight.

FEATURES

CLIMATE17Climate Teacup Tempest?

by William F. Jasper When the released e-mails of some of theworlds most respected climate alarmists showed that they weremanipulating data, environmentalists tried to downplay the deceit.

CONSTITUTION CORNER

22The Second Amendment,the States, and the Peopleby Edwin Vieira, Jr. As the caseMcDonald v. City of Chicago,which will determine if States are allowed to have gun control, wendsits way to the Supreme Court, the issues are examined.

BOOK REVIEW

29Rogue or Ruse?by Jack Kenny Sarah Palins new book Going Roguerevealslittle about her aspirations, hard-and-fast stances, or allegiances, soconservatives are left wondering about a possible Palin presidency.

HISTORY PAST AND PERSPECTIVE

34Forgotten Influences on the Foundersby Joe Wolverton II, J.D. The Founding Fathers success atdesigning a Republic with safeguards to prevent citizens loss of libertyand to prevent federal despotism was the result of others insights.

THE LAST WORD

44Fed Backers Seek Power More Than Wealthby John F. McManus

17

22

29

34

DEPARTMENTS

5Letters to the Editor

7Inside Track

9QuickQuotes

33The Goodness of America

41Exercising the Right

42Correction, Please!

10

Vol. 26, No.1 January 4, 2010

COVER Design by Joseph W. Kelly

APImages

APImages

DesignbyJosephW.

Kelly


5/48

Name ______________________________________________________________

Address ____________________________________________________________

City _____________________________ State __________ Zip ________________

Phone ____________________________ E-mail ______________________________

Check VISA Discover

Money Order MasterCard American Express

# _________________________________________ Exp. Date ________________

Signature ____________________________________________________

VISA/MC/DiscoverThree Digit V-Code

American ExpressFour Digit V-Code

10010

Standard: 4-14business days.Rush: 3-7 business

days, no P.O. Boxes,HI/AK add $10.00

Order Subtotal$0-10.99

$11.00-19.99

$20.00-49.99

$50.00-99.99$100.00-149.99

$150.00+

Standard Shipping$4.95

$7.75

$9.95

$13.75$15.95

call

Rush Shipping$9.95

$12.75

$14.95

$18.75$20.95

call

SUBTOTAL TOTALWI RESIDENTS ADD5% SALES TAXSHIPPING/HANDLING(SEE CHART BELOW)

QUANTITY TITLE PRICE

FEATUREDPRODUCTS

TOTAL PRICE

Lives of the Signers(2002, 384pp, pb, $10.95) LOTS

View of the Constitutionof the United States(1999ed, 478pp, pb, $14.95) VOCOUS

Carbon Dioxideand the Climate Crisis

(DVD: 2008, 53min, $19.95)DVDCDCC

The FoundersSecond Amendment(2008, 425pp, hb, $20.95) BKFSA

Reprint: WhateverHappened to Global Warming?(1/$0.75; 25/$15.00; 100/$55.00; 1,000/$500.00)RPGW

The Great GlobalWarming Swindle

(DVD: 2007, 158min, $19.95)DVDGGWS

The Politically IncorrectGuide to Global Warming(2007, 350pp, pb, $19.95) BKPIGGW

Big Red16-digit Calculator($14.95)BRC

The Official Calculatorof the National Debt.Calculates TRILLIONS

with ease!

NEW

4

0000000000000

0000000000000000

0000

For shipments outside the U.S., please call for rates.

Credit-card orders call toll-free now! 1-800-342-6491

Order Online: www.shopjbs.org

Make checks payable to: ShopJBS

Mail completed form to:ShopJBS P.O. BOX 8040

APPLETON, WI 54912

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___


6/48


7/48

President PiercesConstitutional SenseIn regard to Jack Kennys recent article

Constitutional Healthcare (November 23

issue), while well researched and right on

target, he missed one of the greatest quotes

from our forefathers that could be used

with this issue, issued by President Frank-

lin Pierce.

Writing in an 1854 veto statement of a

bill to authorize the giving away of federal

lands for the erection of State-funded mental

hospitals, Pierce penned a timeless warning

against the unconstitutionality of federal in-

volvement in healthcare:

I readily and, I trust, feelingly acknowl-

edge the duty incumbent on us all as

men and citizens, and as among thehighest and holiest of our duties, to pro-

vide for those who, in the mysterious

order of Providence, are subject to want

and to disease of body of mind; but I

can not find any authority in the Consti-

tution for making the Federal Govern-

ment the great almoner of public char-

ity throughout the United States. To do

so would, in my judgment, be contrary

to the letter and spirit of the Constitu-

tion and subversive of the whole theory

upon which the Union of these States

is founded.

Born in the Founding era, Pierce was edu-

cated on the wisdom of the Founders and

spent nine years in Congress before serving

as President.

JOHNWELDON

Playa Del Rey, California

Gods Helping HandAn event unreported by Joe Wolverton in

Faith in the Face of Skepticism (No-

vember 23) indicates the hand of Godhelping the Pilgrims to establish their

society. According to A. L. Rouse in The

El izabe thans and

America, a 1605 voyage to the Massachu-

setts mainland brought some captured In-

dians back to England. One of them was

named Tisquantum, a Wampanoag from

the tribal village at what is now Pawtuxet,

Massachusetts. During his years in Eng-

land, he learned the English language and

way of life. In 1619, after various adven-

tures, Tisquantum was able to return to his

village. He was set ashore, only to find that

his people were all dead from a disease

possibly bubonic plague caught from

European fishermen. Tisquantum then set-

tled into the remaining Wampanoag tribe

living in the area.

When the Pilgrims arrived, they were

astonished to find an Indian who spoke

fluent English. Without his assistance that

first terrible year in the wilderness, the

Pilgrims would likely have perished alto-gether. Squanto, as they called Tisquantum,

showed them how to plant corn and fertil-

ize the kernels with a fish, and otherwise

increase their food production.

Less known is the fact that, acting for

Massasoit, he provided food, advice, in-

terpreter service, and guidance through

the territory to locations where they could

obtain commodities and seafood, and

showed them how to build warm houses.

He also provided hope in the face of ter-

rible adversity.

The Pilgrims considered Squanto a spe-cial instrument of God for their good beyond

their expectation, as Governor Bradford

wrote in hisHistory of Plymouth Plantation,

1620-1647. Squanto died of an illness during

the second winter of the colony. Bradford

noted that he died desiring the Governor to

pray for him that he might go to the English-

mens God in heaven.JOHNWHITE

Cheshire, Connecticut

Send your letters to: THENEWAMERICAN, P.O.

Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54912. Or e-mail:

[email protected]. Due to vol-

ume received, not all letters can be answered.

Letters may be edited for space and clarity.

Publisher

John F. McManus

Editor

Gary Benoit

Senior Editor

William F. Jasper

Associate Editor

Kurt Williamsen

Contributors

Dennis J. Behreandt

Steven J. DuBord

Selwyn Duke

Gregory A. Hession, J.D.

Ed Hiserodt

William P. Hoar

R. Cort Kirkwood

Patrick Krey

Warren Mass

Alex Newman

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Ann Shibler

Liana Stanley

Joe Wolverton II, J.D.

Art Director

Joseph W. Kelly

Research

Bonnie M. Gillis

Marketing

Larry Greenley

Public Relations

Bill Hahn

Advertising/Circulation

Julie DuFrane

Printed in the U.S.A. ISSN 0885-6540P.O. Box 8040 Appleton, WI 54912920-749-3784 920-749-3785 (fax)

www.thenewamerican.com

[email protected]

Rates are $39 per year (Hawaii and Canada,add $9; foreign, add $27) or $22 for six months(Hawaii and Canada, add $4.50; foreign, add$13.50). Copyright 2009 by American Opin-ion Publishing, Inc. Periodicals postage paid atAppleton, WI and additional mailing offices. Post-master: Send any address changes to THENEWAMERICAN, P.O. Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54912.

THENEWAMERICANis pub-lished biweekly by Ameri-can Opinion Publishing

Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of The JohnBirch Society.

EXTRA COPIES AVAILABLEAdditional copies of this issue of THE NEWAMERICAN are

available at quantity-discount prices. To place your order, visitwww.shopjbs.org or see the card between pages 34-35.

Call 1-800-727-TRUE to subscribe today! 5

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


8/48

Virtue the moral excellence

evident in my life as I consistentlydo what is right

Virtue is a choice.Make it a habit.

Putting Character First!

Sponsored by


9/48

President Barack Obamas December 1 speech at West Point wasmeant to justify sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistanat a cost of $30 billion per year, but he neglected to mention onesmall detail: U.S. intelligence officials estimate there are as fewas 100 al-Qaeda operatives in all of Afghanistan.

President Obama called the al-Qaeda presence there a can-cer, but ABC News reported on December 2 that a senior U.S.intelligence official told them that the approximate estimate of100 al Qaeda members left in Afghanistan reflects the conclusionof American intelligence agencies and the Defense Department.Obama was made aware of this so he could factor it into his deci-sion on whether or not to send in more troops.

Obama did not focus on the size of al-Qaedas presence inAfghanistan when he spoke, but rather said merely that al Qaedahas not reemerged in Afghanistan in the same number as before9/11, but they retain their safe havens along the border. U.S.intelligence officials believe there are several hundred al-Qaeda

fighters just across the Pakistani border, and an Obama adminis-tration official said the additional troops were needed to sand-

wich them between Pakistan and Afghanistan, preventing themfrom re-gaining a foothold in Afghanistan.

So the real question is will Pakistan do enough, said formerWhite House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABCNews consultant. What if they take all the money we given thembut dont really follow through? What [is] the strategy then?

The December 2 ABC News article clearly spelled out thehefty price tag fordealing with so fewterrorists: With100,000 troops inAfghanistan at anestimated yearlycost of $30 billion, itmeans that for everyone al Qaeda fighter,the U.S. will com-

mit 1,000 troops and$300 million a year.

Obama Ordered Troop Surge Despite Only 100 al-Qaeda in Afghanistan

When President Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo,Norway, on December 10, he addressed the incongruity of receiv-

ing a prize for peace just after he escalated the war in Afghani-stan: Perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receiptof this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of themilitary of a nation in the midst of two wars.... I come here withan acute sense of the costs of armed conflict filled with diffi-cult questions about the relationship between war and peace, andour effort to replace one with the other.

Obama devoted much of his speech to a philosophical discus-sion of a just war and a just peace. Regarding the almostinevitable need to use force when circumstances warrant it, hesaid: Negotiations cannot convince al Qaedas leaders to laydown their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not

for U.S. Exit From AfghanistanObama administration officials on December 6 made it perfectlyclear that American military forces will remain in Afghanistan fora long time, playing down President Barack Obamas December1 statement that after 18 months [in July 2011], our troops will

begin to come home.Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary

Rodham Clinton, and other top officials appeared in a coordi-nated series of television interviews. A key message was that anyreduction starting in July 2011 would be slow, and this wouldonly be the beginning of the transfer of responsibility to Afghan

a call to cynicism it is a recognition of history; the imperfec-tions of man and the limits of reason.

But what circumstances necessitate placing American sol-diers into harms way? And when such circumstances arise, whoshould make the decision?

The Nobel Peace Prize is an honor bestowed by what is es-sentially an arm of the Norwegian government, accompaniedby a significant monetary award. When the President acceptedthe prize without seeking or receiving congressional approval,he violated Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution, whichstates: No person holding any office of profit or trust underthem, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of anypresent, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, fromany king, prince or foreign state.

forces. The appear-ances of Obamassenior staff mem-bers seemed gearedtoward easing theconcerns of not onlysome U.S. officials

but also officials in Afghanistan and Pakistan that the UnitedStates could be withdrawing too abruptly.

There isnt a deadline, Gates said on CBSs Face the Nation.What we have is a specific date on which we will begin trans-ferring responsibility for security district by district, province byprovince in Afghanistan, to the Afghans.

Obamas Peace Prize

Theres No Deadline

Members of theSouth CarolinaNational Guardin Afghanistan

A P I m a g e s

www.TheNewAmerican.com 7

Inside Track


10/48

William F. Jasper, senior editor for THENEWAMERICAN,and Alex

Newman, contributor to THENEWAMERICAN, attended the sec-

ond week of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in

Copenhagen, which was still in progress when this magazine was

sent to the printer.

The conference opened in the wake of the fallout over Cli-

mategate, the appearance on the Web of incriminating e-mails

written by and to global-warming alarmists connected with the

UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For Jaspers

report on Climategate, see page 17.

The cover story articles in the next (January 18) issue of TNA,

written by Jasper and Newman, will be devoted to the Copen-

hagen story. In addition, we have already published, and will

continue to publish, many online exclusives on global warming

and Copenhagen at thenewamerican.com.

On the Scene in Copenhagen

A monopoly accomplishes for its creator the opportunity to gouge

the public, a consequence generally well known, and generally

despised. There is, however, one commodity existing as a mo-

nopoly that the public does not loathe, the creation of money. This

monopoly seems to most Americans to be the only way to pro-

ceed. They are unaware that our nation once had competing cur-

rencies and this competition led to honesty in the field of money.Several Spanish coins made of precious metal were circulating

during colonial days, even after the Declaration of Independence.

In 1792, the U.S. Mint began its constitutionally authorized oper-

ations, and the people brought their gold and silver to be stamped

into coinage of a fixed size, weight, and purity. Also, there were

private mints issuing precious metal coinage; the government did

not have a monopoly in the field of coining money. But, today, the

only legal money is fiat money issued by the Federal Reserve that

is deemed money by law. Its value continues to decrease because

there is virtually no limit on how much of it can be issued.

Congressman Ron Paul has become well known and admired

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has officially de-

clared that carbon dioxide and other so-called greenhouse gases

are dangerous to public health and welfare, paving the way for

much stricter emissions standards.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson announced the endangerment

finding on December 7. This ruling was needed to allow new emis-

sions regulations for automobiles to move forward, and it sets the

stage for large-scale emitters of these gases such as factories, power

plants, and refineries to be hit with limitations on their output.

These long overdue findings cement 2009s place in history

as the year when the U.S. government began addressing the chal-lenge of greenhouse-gas pollution and seizing the opportunity

for his advocacy of sound money and his opposition to the Federal

Reserve. In addition to his bill calling for auditing the Fed (see

page 44), he has now introduced the Free Competition in Cur-

rency Act of 2009 (H.R. 4248). He notes that, to be useful and

honest, currency has to be durable, portable, divisible, uniform,

stable, reproducible, and scarce. And he notes that mankinds his-

tory demonstrates that gold and silver, not paper bills, have beenthe choices arrived at for money throughout the millennia.

The Congressmans new measure calls for three steps: Repeal

legal tender laws that give paper bills issued by the Fed the mo-

nopoly always sought by thieves and tyrants; eliminate laws that

prohibit private mints from creating coinage to be used as cur-

rency; and eliminate capital gains and sales taxes on gold and sil-

ver coins. Regarding the latter, the Congressman provides a clear

explanation of the absurdity and injustice of taxing the purchase

of gold and silver coins by noting how stupid and unjust it would

be if a sales tax were charged every time a person exchanged a

10-dollar bill for a roll of quarters.

of clean-energy reform, Jackson declared in a statement. The

Obama administration had indicated earlier in the year that it

would make this controversial decision, but the timing of the an-

nouncement was meant to coincide with the opening of the global

climate summit in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Global-warming alarmists argue that the release of carbon

dioxide into the atmosphere by man is causing runaway global

warming, despite the fact that most of the warming that has taken

place since the late 1800s occurred before most of the increase in

atmospheric carbon dioxide. Moreover, viewing carbon dioxide

as a dangerous gas overlooks the fact that it is essential for plantlife, which absorbs it through photosynthesis.

Ron Paul Calls for Competition in Money

EPA Declares Carbon Dioxide a Danger to Public Health

Inside Track

8 THE NEW AMERICAN JANUARY 4, 2010

WilliamF. Jasper

AlexNewman


11/48

What About the U.S. Constitution?For the first time in its history, the North Atlantic TreatyOrganization invoked Article 5.... And the United Na-tions Security Council endorsed the use of all necessarysteps to respond to the 9/11 attacks.In his December 1 speech, President Barack Obamaavoided mentioning the document he has sworn to abideby and pointed instead to NATO (a UN regional arrange-ment) and the UN itself for authorization of the war inAfghanistan.

His Huge Election Expenditure May Have Hurt the Political ProcessHe has done long-term damage to the system.After New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent $102 million of his own money ($174 per vote received)to squeak out a reelection win, Public Interest Research Groups Gene Russianoffcontended that thecitys electoral process had been severely harmed.

European Unions New Leader Another GlobalistThe climate conference in Copenhagen is another step toward the

global management of the planet.Prior to taking office on December 1 as the initial President of theEuropean Union (under the Lisbon Treaty), Belgiums Herman VanRompuylet the world know that he is an ardent globalist and anenemy of national sovereignty.

The Border Between the United States and CanadaIs a Bigger Concern Than in the PastWe cant take the chance that the footprints we see are somebodycoming here to live the American dream or somebody coming hereto destroy the American dream.As the official in charge of the U.S. Border Patrols station in northern Vermont, Fernando Beltranhasseen the number of agents in his office tripled to more than 300 since 9/11.

You Can Buy Mao Memorabilia in the Town Where He Was BornBusiness is better than ever.Mao Juxiang, a sales clerk in Shaoshan, China, will happily sell anyone items depicting the late dicta-tors image in a bronze bust for $85, a snow globe for $7, or a key chain for $4.25.

Army Family Members Skeptical About Afghanistan War EndingWe have a friend whos been in the military seven years and has been deployed five of those years. Idont think anyone in the military believes this is going to end soon.The wife of an Army medic who faces another tour in a few months, Jessica Suckarieh, laments thather one-year-old son has seen his father for only two months.

A Sober Warning for Senior CitizensI have a message for you. Youre going to die sooner.Pointing to President Obamas healthcare proposals, Senator TomCoburn(R-Okla.), a medical doctor, claimed that planned cuts inMedicare would result in dire consequences for older Americans.

He Tossed a Shoe at President Bushand Now Has One Aimed at HimHe stole my technique.The famous Iraqi shoe-tosser, Muntadhar al-Zeidi, issued his com-ment after he ducked to avoid being hit by a shoe thrown at himduring a news conference in Paris.

COMPILEDBYJOHNF. MCMANUS

Herman VanRompuy

Muntadhar

al-Zeidi

APImages

APImages

Call 1-800-727-TRUE to subscribe today!

QUICKQUOTES

9

BarackObama

APImages


12/48

by Jack Kenny

It may be considered a strange case ofBack to the Future, halfway around

the world. Twenty years after thetearing down of the Berlin Wall and theapparent demise of Soviet communism,the United States appears to be emulatingpre-Bolshevik Russia. Without knowingexactly how or why, America has becomethe land of the czars, men and womenappointed by some undefined process,often of dubious legality, literally to ruleover various segments and activities of ourpolitical, social, and economic life. Amer-ica has a Science Czar, a School Safety

Czar, a Car Czar, and even a Czars Czar.It didnt start with President Barack

Obama, but the tendency to appoint un-elected officials, in many cases uncon-

firmed by any legislative process, tohigh-level positions of authority over thepolitical and economic life of the nationhas greatly accelerated in the past year,owing in part to the fact that the UnitedStates has taken over corporations in thefinancial and automotive sector that hadpreviously been governed primarily by aprivate-sector free market. Thus we havean Automotive Recovery Czar, a Compen-sation Czar, and others.

Some members of Congress, belatedly

jealous of their political turf, have beengrumbling about the number of new of-fices that the President has created withoutSenate approval. Congress, of course, has

control over appropriations, and runningall of these new offices costs something though many czars have been appointedwith salaries undisclosed. Those who re-member our Republics founding docu-ments, those parchments preserved underglass in our nations capital, may recall oneof the charges leveled against the BritishKing in our Declaration of Independence:He has erected a Multitude of new Officesand sent hither Swarms of Officers to harassour People and eat out their Substance.

THE NEW AMERICAN JANUARY 4, 201010

POLITICS

As the United States proudly foists American-style democracy on much of the world,

presidentially appointed czars control large swaths of the U.S. economy, without oversight.


13/48

Thomas Jefferson and his fellow pa-triots might not have imagined that thenew Republic they had midwifed wouldbe the land of the (more or less) free andthe home of the czars. But America in theage of Obama has made czar production agrowth industry. House Minority LeaderJohn Boehner has accused the President ofcircumventing and subverting the Consti-tution by appointing more than 30 czarsto oversee government operations, most ofthem not subject to Senate confirmation.Many of the positions and responsibilitiesduplicate those of cabinet-level officialsand their departments, he said.

He clearly is circumventing the Con-stitution, in my view, and I think the heatcontinues to build on the administrationto deal with this, Boehner said last fall in

an interview with Newsmax TV. Its onething to have domestic policy advisors orinternational policy advisors, but to havethis many people at the White House whohave really more control than the Cabinetsecretaries, I think is a subversion of theConstitution.

Of course, the unconstitutionality en-tails not just the appointing of czars with-out Senate approval, but also includesmuch of what the czars are actually doing,from telling businesses how much theycan compensate employees to regulating

schools. We have, alas, reached a pointin our history where subverting the Con-stitution is almost as American as applepie. Indeed, though the Republicans mayview it as an Obama phenomenon, czaristAmerica goes back at least to the days ofthe New Deal and has been perpetuated byboth Republican and Democratic adminis-trations ever since.

Any list of so-called czars is to someextent subjective, since the word czaris not in any official title and which posi-tions qualify for the designation may be

debatable. According to Wikipedia, thecurrent use of the term, once reserved forthe rulers of pre-revolution Russia, start-ed during the administration of FranklinRoosevelt, who had 12 such appointees.The number dropped to six under Trumanand one in Eisenhowers White House.Reagan had only one, the Director of theWhite House Drug Abuse Policy, andGeorge H.W. Bush had two. The numberincreased to seven under Clinton, thenballooned to 31 under George W. Bush,

according to the Wikipedia list. The 30-plus appointed by Obama is remarkable foran administration barely a year old.

The offices created by executive order of George W. Bush included the Chairmanof the Presidents Council on Bioethics, or the Bioethics Czar, and the Advisor to thePresident for Public Health Emergency Awareness, dubbed the Bird Flu Czar. Thespecial counselors to the President included a Communications Czar. Bush createdthe Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives, headed by the Faith-Based Czar,and even gave the nation a Birth Control Czar, formally the Deputy Assistant Secre-tary of Population Affairs in the Department of Health and Human Services. FormerAssistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams was the Deputy National Security Advisor

AP Images

Newscom


AIDS Czar:Jeffrey Crowley

Auto Recovery Czar:Ed Montgomery (right)

Car Czar:Ron Bloom (left)


14/48

for Global Affairs, known incongruouslyas the Democracy Czar.

Obamas additions include an Advisorto the President and the Vice President onDomestic Violence and Assault Issues, orthe Domestic Violence Czar. The GreenJobs Czar is the Special Advisor for GreenJobs, Enterprise, and Innovation. There isa Health Czar who is the Director of the

White House Office of Health Reform andCounselor to the President. There is alsoa Car Czar for the auto industry, a Com-pensation Czar for companies receivingordeal money under the Troubled AssetRelief Program, which has its own TARPCzar, the Assistant Secretary of the Trea-sury for Financial Stability. The WhiteHouse has both a Science Czar, the Assis-tant to the President for Science and Tech-nology, and a Chief Technology Officerknown as the Technology Czar. The Di-rector of the Office of Safe and Drug-free

Schools is the Safe Schools Czar. Thereis even a Regulatory Czar, confirmed bythe Senate, to regulate the regulators. TheDirector of the Office of Information andRegulatory Affairs is based within the Of-fice of Management and Budget.

On the international scene, there is theGuantanamo Base Closure Czar, who is aspecial envoy of the Department of State.

The United States has former UN Ambas-sador Richard Holbrooke as the SpecialRepresentative for Afghanistan and Paki-stan, or the Afghanistan Czar. Former Sen-ate Majority Leader George Mitchell hasan even broader role as the Special Envoyfor Middle East Peace, or Mid-East PeaceCzar. The Sudan Czar is officially the Spe-cial Envoy to Sudan.

Even in the comparatively czar-freeClinton years, when there were only seven,the President had an advisor to oversee theefforts of the other domestic policy advi-

sors. The chief domestic pol-icy advisor and Director ofthe White House DomesticPolicy Council was called,simply, the Czar Czar.

I think this whole issuehas gotten way out of controlin terms of the number ofczars that he has and advi-sors around him, Boehnersaid about the reign of czarsunder Obama. Some Senate

Democrats, including Dianne Feinstein ofCalifornia and Russ Feingold of Wiscon-sin, also have expressed misgivings.

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) wroteObama a letter warning: The rapid andeasy accumulation of power by WhiteHouse staff can threaten the constitution-al system of checks and balances. At theworst, White House staff have taken di-rection and control of programmatic areasthat are the statutory responsibility of Sen-ate confirmed officials.

Just who are these czars? Some arenewcomers to the national political scene.Only a couple even come close to hav-ing what might be considered householdnames. They include, as I have mentioned,special envoys, and there have probablybeen special envoys in every administra-

tion, starting with George Washingtons.Obama has appointed diplomats to dealwith particular areas, such as Holbrookeas the administrations specialist in Af-ghanistan. As Boehner indicated, this kindof appointment has the potential for caus-ing confusion both at home and abroad.

Is it possible, for example, that Hol-brooke, the Afghan/Pakistan Czar, might,intentionally or otherwise, undercut theauthority and influence of Secretary ofState Hillary Clinton in Afghanistan andpotentially elsewhere? Wars, as Secretary

of Defense Robert Gates said recently,are fraught with unintended consequenc-es. The same is true with political wars.And it is not that long ago that BarackObama and Hillary Clinton were lockedin serious political combat. For politicalreasons, he could not leave her out of hisadministration altogether, and surely shehad the knowledge and experience to takeon the foreign policy issues the Secretaryof State must confront. It may be unlikelythat Obama would use Holbrooke or anyother czar to deliberately undermine

Clintons efforts abroad. But he mighthave in mind the possible advantage ofhaving people, answerable only to thePresident, in Afghanistan and elsewhereto keep an eye on Secretary Clinton tobe sure she is not undermining Obamasefforts. He would not want her goingrogue, after all.

And if Holbrooke is answerable onlyto the President, who makes sure that heand Secretary Clinton are on the samepage, so to speak, and not sending mixed

No sane person is in favor of any

disease, especially a deadly disease.

But politically speaking, AIDS is a

favored disease and has been favored

with its own czar. There is yet no publicly

announced czar for typhoid fever or other

communicable diseases.

AP Images


POLITICS

Economic Czar:Paul Volcker


15/48

messages? And might his mission un-dermine the authority of the U.S. Ambas-sador and other embassy officials in bothAfghanistan and Pakistan? Holbrooke isalso authorized to work with Gen. DavidPetraeus, head of CENTCOM, to inte-grate civilian and military efforts in theregion. Is there someone in Washington,below the office of the President, whois making sure all these efforts are inharmony with one another? Is there anopening for a Special Assistant for Coor-dinated Communications or a Synchro-nization Czar?

Holbrooke is a veteran diplomat whowas ambassador to the United Nationsfrom 1999-2001. He has long been a fix-ture in the foreign policy establishment ofthe Democratic Party, and like most, if not

all, of the czars, he is a member in goodstanding of the Council on Foreign Rela-tions cabal. He was Assistant Secretary ofState for East Asia and the Pacific duringthe Carter administration (1976 to 1980).He began his work in Foreign Serviceunder President John F. Kennedy in 1962and remained employed therein through1976. From 1972 through 1976, he wasthe editor of Foreign Policymagazine, thehouse organ of the Council on ForeignRelations. Holbrooke was useful on manyfronts to President Bill Clinton. Prior to

his appointment as UN ambassador, Hol-brooke brokered the Dayton (Ohio) PeaceAccords to end the fighting in Bosnia.

Another veteran of international poli-tics and CFR member, George Mitch-ell, is also a veteran of the legislativechambers. The former U.S. Senator fromMaine was Majority Leader from 1989-94 and was later Clintons Special Envoyto Northern Ireland, where he was instru-mental in bringing about an agreement toend the fratricide there. As Special Envoyfor Middle East Peace, Mitchells job is

to maintain the very shaky cease-fire be-tween Israel and Hamas. He is no strang-er to the Middle East, having led a fact-finding mission in the year 2000 to studyviolence in the region. His 2001 Mitchellreport formed the basis for the so-calledroad map for Middle East peace.

A multi-talented investigator and dip-lomat, Mitchell has also been the leadinvestigator into steroid use in MajorLeague Baseball, making him perhapsbaseballs first Juice Czar.

Other CzarsAIDS Czar: Jeffrey Crowley,Director of the Office of National AIDS Policy. No saneperson is in favor of any disease, especially a deadly disease. But politically speaking,AIDS is a favored disease and has been favored with its own czar. There is yet no pub-licly announced czar for typhoid fever or other communicable diseases.

The AIDS Czar reports to the President as part of the Executive Office of the PresidentsDomestic Policy Council. Crowleys qualifications appear bomb proof. He has a Master ofPublic Health Degree from the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and PublicHealth. His credentials include his work as Senior Research Scholar at Georgetown Uni-versitys Health Policy Institute and Senior Scholar at the ONeill Institute for National

AP Images

AP Images

13Call 1-800-727-TRUE to subscribe today!

Border Czar:Alan Bersin

Climate Czar:Todd Stern


16/48

and Global Health Law, part of the Georgetown University Law Center. He was DeputyExecutive Director for Programs at the National Association of People with AIDS. In hisczarist role, Crowley coordinates HIV/AIDS policy not just domestically but also interna-tionally, since the United States provides billions of dollars in foreign aid to combat AIDS.

Auto Recovery Czar: Ed Montgomery,Director of Recovery for Auto Communi-ties and Workers. Montgomery was Deputy Secretary and Chief Economist at the LaborDepartment (1997 to 1998) and is Dean of the College of Behavioral and Social Sciencesat the University of Maryland (2003 to present). He has a Ph.D. in economics from Har-vard, which should help him explain what hes doing to the man to whom he reports,Larry Summers, the former president of Harvard who is now President Obamas top

economic advisor. Montgomery also hadthe advantage of being a donor of $1,200to Obamas 2008 presidential campaign.He is married to the granddaughter of aGeneral Motors worker from Portland,Michigan.

His task is to leverage governmentresources to support the workers, com-munities, and regions that rely on theAmerican auto industry. To leverage gov-ernment resources sounds so much betterthan to fleece the American taxpayers. Ifhe needs a third job, Montgomery may bein line for Euphemisms Czar at the Minis-try of Truthless Consequences.

Economic Czar: Paul Volcker,Chair-man of the Presidents Economic RecoveryAdvisory Board. If the bad economic newsbecomes too much for the honchos from

Harvard, former Federal Reserve Chair-man Volcker will attempt to bring the mar-kets back from the brink. Appointed Fedchairman by Jimmy Carter in 1979, Vol-cker helped wring the inflation out of theeconomy too late to help Carter, but justin time to help Reagan in the mid-1980sHe has reportedly taken on at no pay thetask of offering independent, nonpartisaninformation, analysis, and advice to thePresident as he formulates and implementshis plans for economic recovery. PerhapsLarry Summers thought that is what he had

been doing because in the eat or be eatenworld of Washington politics, there havebeen reports that Volcker has been margin-alized by Summers. Of course, the advicefrom these two is essentially the same spend more, create more money out of thinair, pile up more debt, etc.

Border Czar: Alan Bersin,AssistantSecretary for International Affairs andSpecial Representative for Border Affairs.A double Ivy man, Bersin is a graduate ofHarvard and earned his law degree at Yale.He was chairman of the San Diego Re-

gional Airport Authority (2006 to 2009),Secretary of Education for California(2005 to 2006), and Superintendent ofSan Diego Public Schools (1998 to 2005).He was U.S. Attorney for San Diego from1993 to 1998, during which time he wasalso Attorney General Janet Renos specialrepresentative on border issues. Now hereports to Homeland Security chief JanetNapolitano and is supposed to handle il-legal immigration and drug violence alongthe Mexican border. His view of illegal im-

AP Images

AP Images


POLITICS

Science Czar:John Holdren

StimulusAccountability Czar:Earl Devaney


17/48

migration, however, may be troublesome,since he said during his days as ClintonsBorder Czar that he wanted to focus onsmugglers of both drugs and people andwas not interested in prosecuting eco-nomic migrants. He did, however, insti-tute Operation Gatekeeper, which led toan increased presence of border guards todeter illegal border crossings. However,when Bersin left the position in 1998, bor-der arrests were on pace for an 18-yearlow of just more than 200,000.

Whatever the justification for the posi-tion since the Department of Home-land Security has had from its beginningthe mission of protecting our borders Bersin appears eminently qualifiedfor it. But the $50,000 he has given topolitical campaigns in the past 10 years,

nearly all of it to Democrats, may haveensured that his qualifications would notbe overlooked. And his membership inthe establishment Council on ForeignRelations doesnt hurt either.

Car Czar: Ron Bloom,Counselor tothe Secretary of the Treasury. Not to beconfused with the Auto Recovery Czar,a natural mistake. Another Harvard man,Bloom earned his MBA there. Prior tothat he worked for the Service Employ-ees International Union. He was an in-vestment banker with Lazard Freres &

Co. from 1985 to 1990. He co-foundedthe investment banking firm Keilin andBloom. From 1996 to February 2009, hewas special assistant to the president ofUnited Steelworkers. He has negotiatedrestructuring deals for more than 50 com-panies, getting major concessions fromboth unions and corporations.

Bloom is a leader of the White Housetask force overseeing auto company bail-outs. He reports to Treasury SecretaryTimothy Geithner and Larry Summers,head of the National Economic Council.

Climate Czar: Todd Stern, SpecialEnvoy for Climate Change. Another Har-vard Law School grad, Stern was mostrecently a Senior Fellow at the Center forAmerican Progress, where he focused onclimate change and environmental issues.A top aide to President Bill Clinton, Sternwas head of the Initiative on Global Cli-mate Change (1997 to 1999) and Advi-sor to the Secretary of the Treasury from1999 to 2001. He helped negotiate theKyoto Treaty on climate change during

the Clinton presidency, but the pact wasnot submitted to the Senate for ratificationafter the Senate, by a 95-0 vote, passed aresolution making it clear that the treatywould surely die there. He is responsiblefor developing international approaches toreduce the emission of greenhouse gases.He supports a national cap-and-trade sys-tem to limit carbon emissions and reduce

our nations dependency on foreign oil.He reports to Secretary of State HillaryClinton.

Science Czar: John Holdren, As-sistant to the President for Science andTechnology, Director of the White HouseOffice of Science and Technology Policy,and Co-chair of the Presidents Councilof Advisors on Science and Technology.Holdren is the top advisor to Obama onscience and technology issues. He hastaught at both Harvard and Berkeley andstudied aerospace engineer-

ing and plasma physics atthe Massachusetts Instituteof Technology. He is an out-spoken advocate of the needto reduce greenhouse-gasemissions. In a 2008 NewYork Times op-ed, Holdrencalled climate-change skep-tics dangerous membersof a denier fringe.

In 1971, he co-authored apaper on Global Ecology

suggesting some form of ecocatastrophe,if not thermonuclear war, seems almostcertain to overtake us before the end ofthe century.

Conservative critics have quoted a state-ment in a book he co-authored in 1977,Ecoscience: Population, Resources andEnvironment. The controversial quotationsays that population-control laws, even

including laws requiring compulsory abor-tion, could be sustained under the existingConstitution. (James Madison, call youroffice!)

More troublesome, because its morerecent than a 32-year-old book, is Hol-drens involvement in Climategate, thedeliberate manipulation of scientific data,the stonewalling of Freedom of Informa-tion requests, and the overall propagandaefforts of scientists charged with studyingthe causes and effects of climate change.

In a book John Holdren co-authored

in 1977, Ecoscience: Population,

Resources and Environment, it says that

population-control laws, even including

laws requiring compulsory abortion,

could be sustained under the existing

Constitution.

AP Images


DeposedGreen Jobs Czar:Van Jones


18/48

All of that, long suspected by skeptics ofthe climate crusade, was revealed and doc-umented after a hacker tapped into the e-mails of the scientists working on the proj-ect and made public their communications.Those communications, said Rep. JamesSensenbrenner (R-Wis.) at a committeehearing, show a pattern of suppression,manipulation and secrecy that was inspired

by ideology, condescension and profit.Sensenbrenner quoted Holdren from the e-mails and scolded him for name-callingof global-warming skeptics.

Stimulus Accountability Czar: Earl

Devaney, Chair of the Recovery ActTransparency and Accountability Board.A former director of criminal enforcementat the Environmental Protection Agency,Devaney now leads the oversight boardthat monitors money distributed under thestimulus act. He reports to Vice PresidentJoe Biden.

Green Jobs Czar: Van Jones,SpecialAdvisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise, andInnovation at the White House Councilon Environmental Quality. Joness mete-oric career rise has taken him from theOakland, California, grass-roots orga-nizing scene to the leader of a nationalmovement to spur the green economy.He is the founder of Green for All, an or-ganization focused on creating green jobsin impoverished areas, and co-founder ofthe Ella Baker Center for Human Rights

and Color of Change, which includes BayArea PoliceWatch, a group devoted toprotect[ing] the community from policemisconduct.

His 2008 book, The Green Collar Econ-omy: How One Solution Can Fix Our TwoBiggest Problems , made the New YorkTimesbestseller list.

His job was to promote environmen-

tally friendly employment within the ad-ministration and boost support for the ideanationwide. He reported to Nancy Sutley,head of the Council on EnvironmentalQuality, or the Eco Quality Czar.

But Jones may be the first of the de-posed czars; his reign lasting only sixmonths. Hired in March, he apparentlywas not adequately vetted by White Housestaff, another reason why critics of czar-ist government say appointees should gothrough the Senate confirmation process.By early September he was the center of

controversy and issued two apologies,one for signing a petition circulated by911Truth.org that questioned whetherBush administration officials may haveallowed the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to goforward, perhaps as a pretext for war.The other was for using a crude term to de-scribe Republicans in a speech he gave be-fore joining the administration. Jones hadalso been involved with a radical group inthe San Francisco Bay area called Stand-ing Together to Organize a Revolution-

ary Movement, or STORM, a group withMarxist roots. As if that were not enough,Jones, who began his career as an advo-cate of prison reform, generated still morecontroversy by his pleas for clemency fordeath-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal, whowas convicted of shooting a Philadelphiapolice officer in 1981.

Safe Schools Czar: Kevin Jennings,

Director of the Office of Safe and Drug-free Schools in the federal Department ofEducation. A former member of the ho-mosexual activist group ACT UP, famousfor disrupting church services and throw-ing condoms at worshippers, Jenningsis said to have funded a pornographicACT UP exhibition at Harvard Univer-sitys art museum. He is also founder andlong-time leader of the Gay, Lesbian and

Straight Education Network (GLSEN),a group that has condemned heterosex-ism, along with racism, sexism, and ho-mophobia, as detrimental to a healthyschool climate. Indeed, Jennings himselfhas accused American schools of pro-moting heterosexuality and recruit-ing children to be heterosexuals by as-signing such literature as ShakespearesRomeo and Juliet.

Worse still, Jennings claimed in a year2000 speech that he encouraged a teenagerwho was in a homosexual relationship with

an adult male. If the child was underage,as Jennings said at the time, then todaysSafe Schools Czar may well have violatedthe law by not reporting the apparent statu-tory rape. Jennings later changed his story,saying the boy was past the legal age ofconsent.

But beyond the moral decadence liesanother threat to American freedom in theform of an overgrown government. Eventhe best of public servants and the ros-ter of czars contains a number that do notfit that description seek to expand their

power and to coerce and control thosewho do not conform to the ideologicalblueprint. When Sen. Russ Feingold, (D-Wis.) objected to invasions of privacy andother abuses of civil liberty in the Bushadministration, he was told that his think-ing was pre-9/11. The administrations,he replied, was pre-1776.

Between foreign terrorists and domestictyrants, the enemies without and the czarswithin, American liberty remains undersiege in the Age of Obama. n

AP Images


POLITICS

Safe Schools Czar:Kevin Jennings


19/48

by William F. Jasper

As near as I can tell, Climate-Gate is almost entirely a

tempest in a teacup, wroteKevin Drum in a November 30 columnfor the left-wing magazineMother Jones.Theres nothing questionable there, heinsisted. The tempest-in-a-teacup/no-big-deal trope has been regularly invoked bythe proponents of global-warming alarm-ism to dismiss the significance of whatmay be one of the biggest science scandalsin history.

The Climategate to which Drumrefers is, of course, the still-developingscandal involving the release of thousands

of e-mails and documents from a Britishclimate research center. The leaked docu-ments expose some of the biggest scien-tific names in the global-warming debateto serious charges of fraud, unethical at-tacks on colleagues, censorship of oppos-ing viewpoints, and possible criminal de-struction of, and withholding of, evidence.

The timing of Climategate has beena major boon to skeptics of catastrophicclimate change and a monster headacheto alarmists, breaking onto the world

scene only three weeks before the Unit-ed Nations Climate Change Conference(COP15) convened on December 7 in Co-penhagen, Denmark.

Michael Mann, James Hansen, PhilJones, Michael Oppenheimer, StephenSchneider, and Kevin Trenberth someof the biggest names in global-warmingalarmism are unfavorably exposed inthe documents that were posted on the In-ternet on November 20 by unknown hack-ers who penetrated the computer systemof the Climate Research Unit (CRU) atGreat Britains University of East Anglia.Phil Jones, the director of the CRU and atop guru in the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC), the UNs

climate brain trust, comes off especiallypoorly in the e-mails. After initially balk-ing at calls to resign or step down, theuniversity announced on December 1 thatJones would be taking temporary leavewhile an independent inquiry is conduct-ed into the matter.

Climatologist Patrick Michaels, whohas long criticized the IPCC process, seesthe e-mail scandal far differently thanKevin Drum, and chooses a much differ-ent metaphor to describe it. This is not a

smoking gun, says Dr. Michaels, this isa mushroom cloud. On the face of it, itwould seem difficult to dispute ProfessorMichaels assessment. The Climategate

e-mails provide powerful confirmationof charges by many scientists over theyears that the UNs IPCC process is po-litically not scientifically drivenand that claims of scientific consensusto justify radical policies are a gross cor-ruption of science. In the past, scientistswho questioned the Jones-Mann-IPCCconsensus have been denounced asdeniers a vicious attempt to associ-ate them with Nazi holocaust denial orshills for the fossil-fuel industries orboth. Now, however, scientists who can-

not be classified as skeptics indeed,some are prominent names in the alarmistcamp are challenging the IPCC and theClimategate defendants to come clean andrelease the data on which they have beenbasing their dire predictions, but have beenwithholding from the public and their sci-entific peers.

Tricks and ConsensusIn one damaging e-mail that has beenwidely publicized, Jones writes to col-

When the released e-mails of some of the worlds most respected climate alarmists

showed that they were manipulating data, environmentalists tried to downplay the deceit.

A P I m a g e s

17Call 1-800-727-TRUE to subscribe today!

CLIMATE

ClimateTeacup Tempest?


20/48

leagues that he has just usedMikes Nature trick ofadding other temperaturedata to hide the decline inrecent global temperatures.They had to resort to suchtrickery because the dataconflicted with their claimsthat anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming,or AGW, is heating up theplanet to unacceptable levelsand must be curtailed beforeit leads to irreversible globalcatastrophe.

The Mike referred to inthis message is MichaelMann, professor of me-teorology at Pennsylvania

State University, whoseinfluential hockey stickgraph utilized statisticalmanipulation to produce acurve that would supportclaims of recent human ac-tivities causing the warmestperiod in the past millennia.The now thoroughly discredited hockeystick, which was a big component of AlGores Nobel Prize-winning documen-tary, An Inconvenient Truth, attemptedto wipe the Medieval Warm Period, one

of the most solidly established periodsof climate history, from the historical re-cord.

During the Medieval Warm Period(about A.D. 800-1300), temperatures werehigher than today; the Vikings colonizedthen-balmy Greenland and roamed theice-free waters of the North Atlantic. Ifallowed to stand, this inconvenient truthwould undercut the alarmists exaggeratedclaims that burning fossil fuels is causingthe warmest temperatures in 1,000 years.

In trying to make the Medieval Warm

Period disappear, the Jones/Mann teamwent too far, and other scientists respond-ed with a robust smack-down of this at-tempt to falsify the historical record. How-ever, before Mann was forced to retractsome of his most egregious statistical fal-sifications, he and his allies had managedto vilify many reputable scientists andkeep their sham going for several years. In1998, astrophysicists Sallie Baliunas andWillie Soon of the Harvard-SmithsonianCenter for Astrophysics challenged the

Mann-Jones thesis, arguing in the journalClimate Researchthat the evidence sup-ported the existence of the Medieval WarmPeriod. Drs. Soon and Baliunas were soonsubjected to a smear campaign and six

editors at Climate Researchwere forcedto resign for allowing the Soon-Baliunasarticle to be published.

Now the Climategate e-mails are show-ing that the corruption of science in thename of saving the planet from the sup-posed scourge of climate change is farmore extensive and egregious than thepublic or the scientific community real-ized.

In an e-mail of January 29, 2004 to Mi-chael Mann, Phil Jones refers to the re-cent death of global-warming critic John

L. Daly with this churlish comment: Inan odd way this is cheering news! In thesame e-mail, Jones then suggests to Mannthat he has obtained legal advice that hedoes not have to comply with Freedom ofInformation (FOI) requests from other sci-entists to release data and codes underly-ing his research claims.

Some of the e-mails seem to confirmconcerns that Jones, Mann, et al., havedestroyed data that could expose theirfraudulent methods. That appears to be

the case in a May 29, 2008e-mail message, in whichJones writes to Mann aboutdeleting data for the IPCCFourth Assessment Report(AR4):

Mike, Can you deleteany e-mails you mayhave had with Keith reAR4? Keith will do like-wise.... Can you also e-mail Gene and get himto do the same?... Willbe getting Caspar to dolikewise.

In another e-mail that hasshocked and infuriated

many in the scientific com-munity, Jones reveals thelengths to which he is will-ing to go to sabotage fellowscientists in order to main-tain the myth of AGW con-sensus. In a July 8, 2004e-mail, Jones assures Mann

that he (Jones) and Kevin Trenberth willcensor opposing scientific views from theforthcoming IPCC report. Jones writes:

I cant see either of these papers

being in the next IPCC report. Kevinand I will keep them out somehow even if we have to redefine what thepeer-review literature is!

Similar e-mails paint a picture confirmingthe charges of critics that Jones, Mann,and other IPCC activists constitute a cli-mate mafia or climate cartel that pun-ishes dissenters and rewards those who toethe global-warming party line. The e-mailsare shedding light on ugly episodes overthe past decade or more in which the car-

tel trashed the reputations of, and slammeddoors on, distinguished scientists whodared to dispute the politically ordainedAGW orthodoxy. With this kind of con-trol, claims of overwhelming consensusbecome a self-fulfilling prophecy; con-trary opinions are effectively barred frompublication in accepted peer-reviewedliterature. Besides Drs. Soon and Baliunas,other eminent scientists who are trashed orreferred to crudely in the CRU e-mails in-clude Richard Lindzen; Hans Von Storch;

Climate alarmist James Hansenof NASA poses by a gravestone symbolizingcasualties attributed to global warming.

Newscom


CLIMATE


21/48

Sonia Boehmer-Christianson; Patrick Mi-chaels; Roger Pielke, Sr.; Robert Balling;Fred Singer; and Tim Ball.

Huge government grants, impressivecomputer models, and guaranteed head-line stories from sympathetic activists inthe media have transformed climate sci-entists into celebrities and power brokers.However, even with their super computerprograms, political connections, and pres-tigious awards, they still havent learnedhow to predict the weather, let alone con-trol it.

An amusing admission against interestis this comment in an October 12, 2009Climategate e-mail from Dr. Kevin Tren-berth. He is stunned that not only havetemperatures not warmed as predicted, butthe temperatures have actually hit historic

lows in his area, contradicting the suppos-edly authoritative pronouncements of theclimate cartel. Trenberth comments:

Well I have my own article on wherethe heck is global warming? We areasking that here in Boulder [Colo-rado] where we have broken recordsthe past two days for the coldest dayson record.

Trenberth then goes on to admit:The fact is that we cant account

for the lack of warming at the mo-ment and it is a travesty that wecant.

Not only did Trenberth, Jones,Mann, et al., miss the current tem-perature downturn, but noneof theIPCCs highly praised computermodels foresaw the global meantemperature decline of the pastdecade. However, their inability toexplain away this enormous fact,which Trenberth admits is trav-esty, has neither diminished the

cartels certitude nor dampened itszeal for implementing a planetaryclimate regime.

Ignore That ManBehind the CurtainFor years, the IPCC climate cartelhas been using the Wizard of Ozdefense every time some Totopulls back the curtain to exposethe IPCCs secretive machinationsand its sanctimonious claims of

transparency, openness,and overwhelming consen-sus. Inquiring scientists andthe general public alike aretold not to pay attention tothe mysterious process be-hind the curtain where thefantastic and frightening sce-narios of impending doomare being created.

However, two CanadianTotos refused to stop tug-ging on the curtain, and, asa result, have successfully exposed someof the trickery of the IPCC wizards. Re-tired businessman and statistician StephenMcIntyre and economist Ross McKitrickhave doggedly pursued the truth and havesubjected the IPCCs climate science to

rigorous examination. Troubled by unex-plained statistical anomalies in Mannsinfamous hockey stick graph, theycontacted Mann to request copies of hisdata sets. Mann balked and also refusedto divulge publicly the algorithm he hadused to concoct his hockey stick graph.McIntyre and McKitrick published sever-al articles challenging Manns work on anumber of key points. Their path-breakingresearch sparked a congressional hearing

validated by two independent academicpanels, one of which was appointed by theNational Academy of Sciences.

McIntyre and McKitrick have continuedtheir independent investigations on theiraward-winning Internet website, Climate-

Audit.com, which has won the respect ofeven many AGW proponents. However, itis clear that Mann, Jones, and the climatecartel regard the two dauntless sleuthsas the enemy, and they are the subject ofmany Climategate e-mails, often referredto as MM or the two MMs.

In an incriminating CRU e-mail of Feb-ruary 2, 2005, Jones writes to Mann:

The two MMs have been after the

The now thoroughly discredited hockey

stick, which was a big component of Al

Gores Nobel Prize-winning documentary,

An Inconvenient Truth, attempted to wipe

the Medieval Warm Period, one of the

most solidly established periods of climate

history, from the historical record.



22/48

CRU station data for years. If theyever hear there is a Freedom of In-formation Act now in the UK, I thinkIll delete the file rather than send toanyone.

Oops! The Dog Ate ItThe climate cartel, it appears, has alreadycarried through on the data deletion threat.Scientists at the University of East AngliaCRU have admitted throwing out much ofthe raw data on which their ominous pre-dictions are based.

In a statement on its website, the CRUsaid: We do not hold the original rawdata but only the value-added (qualitycontrolled and homogenised) data. Whathappened to the original data? Accordingto the CRU, it was discarded back in the

1980s. What this means is that the originalCRU data cannot be checked or replicated,which means that the graphs, research,and predictions supposedly based on themissing data is worthless. The availablevalue-added and homogenised datawould also then be worthless, since therewould be no way to verify or replicate it.

How many other data sets have likewisebeen lost or accidentally deleted? Wemay soon find out, as official investigationsand FOIA lawsuits progress. In the mean-time, we are simply supposed to trust the

IPCC experts who say that we must in-vest trillions of dollars for mitigation andreparation of past carbon consumption, aswell as for prevention of future warming.

IPCC vice-chairman Jean-Pascal vanYpersele tried to minimize the signifi-cance of the e-mail scandal as the Copen-hagen conference opened by claiming thatClimategate only pertains to one data setout of many that confirm the serious perilposed by anthropogenic global warming.

It doesnt change anything in theIPCCs conclusions, said van Ypersele,

its only one line of evidence out of doz-ens of lines of evidence. This is the partyline echoed by most of the AGW alarmists

in government, media, and environmentalactivist circles. Along with this corollary:The skeptics (or deniers, shills) areexploiting the e-mail controversy simplyto sabotage Copenhagen and distract thescientists and politicians from the impor-tant work they must conclude there.

We mustnt be distracted by the be-hind-the-times, anti-science, flat-earthclimate sceptics, British Prime Minister

Gordon Brown told the Guardian. Weknow the science. We know what we mustdo. We must now act and seal the deal.

Browns Environmental Secretary, EdMiliband, was even more scathing, de-scribing skeptics as dangerous and de-ceitful. The approach of the climatesaboteurs is to misuse data and misleadpeople, he charged. Milibands accusa-tions are especially audacious, inasmuchas it is his alarmist camp, not the skep-tics (or climate realists, as many preferto call themselves), that has been caught

red-handed misusing data. The skepticsare playing politics with science in a dan-gerous and deceitful manner, Miliband

continued, then concluded with thiswarning: There is no easy way outof tackling climate change despitewhat they would have us believe.The evidence is clear and the timewe have to act is short. To abandonthis process now would lead to mis-ery and catastrophe for millions.

According to van Ypersele, We

are spending a lot of useless time discuss-ing this rather than spending time prepar-ing information for the negotiators.

Professor Judith Curry has provided vanYpersele, Miliband, Brown, the IPCC, andother alarmists with an easy solution tothis problem: Stop hiding your data andstop engaging in the hostile tribalismdisplayed in the infamous e-mail attackson fellow scientists. Dr. Curry is no cli-

mate skeptic. In fact, she is an AGW truebeliever, an IPCC expert reviewer, andchair of the School of Earth and Atmo-spheric Sciences at the Georgia Instituteof Technology. Dr. Curry says:

Scientists claim that they wouldnever get any research done if theyhad to continuously respond to skep-tics. The counter to that argument isto make all of your data, metadata,and code openly available. Doingthis will minimize the time spent re-

sponding to skeptics; try it! If anyoneidentifies an actual error in your dataor methodology, acknowledge it andfix the problem. Doing this wouldkeep molehills from growing intomountains that involve congressionalhearings, lawyers, etc.

In other words, why not actually practicethe transparency and openness that the UNand IPCC claim to favor? Dont hold yourCO2while waiting for that to happen. n

Trenberth then goes on to admit:

The fact is that we cant account for

the lack of warming at the moment

and it is a travesty that we cant.

Michel Jarraud, Secretary-General of the United Nations World Meteorological Organization, atthe December 2009 UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen, holds up a revised Hockey Stickgraph claiming to show the past decade was the warmest on record.

A P I m a g e s


CLIMATE


23/48

Your Total Office Solutions Provider

www.necs.biz 1-800-321-6327

TM


24/48

by Edwin Vieira, Jr.

Amazing as it may seem, since ratification of theBill of Rights in 1791, the Supreme Court hasnever provided a definitive statement as to wheth-

er, in the Justices opinions, the Second Amendment ap-plies to the States as well as to the General Government.Until now. For the Court has just agreed to hearMcDonald

v. City of Chicago, in which finally that issue is squarelypresented. This case is being heralded as being of ground-breaking significance.

For among most contemporary judges, lawyers, andmembers of the legal intelligentsia, the reach of the SecondAmendment passes for a controversial question; however,both the original Constitution and the Second Amendmentmade abundantly clear that the right of the people to keepand bear Arms applies to everylevel of government, with-out exception, throughout the United States.

According to the resolution of the Congress that submit-ted the Bill of Rights to the States for ratification in 1789,

the first 10 Amendments to the Constitutionconstituted further declaratory and restric-tive clauses added in order to prevent mis-

construction or abuse of its powers. In TheFederalist, No. 84, however, Alexander Ham-ilton argued that bills of rights ... are not onlyunnecessary in the proposed Constitution butwould even be dangerous. They would con-tain various exceptions to powers which arenot granted; and, on this very account, wouldafford a colorable pretext to claim more thanwas granted.... The truth is ... that the Consti-tution is itself, in every rational sense, and toevery useful purpose, a bill of rights. In thecase of the right of the people to keep andbear Arms, Hamilton was quite correct.

The Second Amendment provides that [a]well regulated Militia, being necessary to thesecurity of a free State, the right of the peopleto keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.The Amendment did not purport to create, for

the first time in 1789, the right of the people to keep andbear Arms, though. Instead, it recognized that rights priorexistence, in order to guarantee its future exercise. Indeed,the original Constitution actually required both the GeneralGovernment and the States, not just to protect, but also af-firmatively to promote, that exercise. This is because theoriginal Constitution incorporated within its federal struc-ture the Militia of the several States.

Inasmuch as neither the original Constitution nor theSecond Amendment defined the term Militia, its mean-ing must be drawn from antecedent American law inparticular, from the great mass of pre-constitutional Co-lonial and State Militia statutes that regulated the Militiaof the Colonies and then the independent States from the1600s through the late 1700s. Four salient principles ofthe Militia derived from these statutes: First, the Militiawere State governmental institutions. Second, every able-bodied free male from 16 to 50 or 60 years of age had aduty to serve in the Militia in some capacity. (Today, thatuniversal duty would extend to every able-bodied female


As the caseMcDonald v. City of Chicago, which will determine if States are allowed to

have gun control, wends its way to the Supreme Court, the issues are examined.

The Second Amendment,The States, And The People

CONSTITUTION CORNER


25/48

as well.) Third, every member of the Militia, not specially ex-empted for some good and sufficient reason supportive of thecommon defense and the general welfare, was required at alltimes to possess in his own home his own firearm, ammunition,and necessary accoutrements (to keep ... Arms), and whenevernecessary to bring forth that equipment into the field (to ... bearArms). Fourth, all such armaments were specifically suitablefor Militia service which meant that Militiamens firearmshad to be at least equivalent to those the regular armed forcescarried. Thus, what the Second Amendment later described asthe rightof the people to keep and bear Arms was first andforemost a duty. Yet it was a right as well because, if an indi-vidual has a duty of citizenship, embodied in law, to keep andbear Arms, he must as well have a corresponding right to do

so, protected against any interference not only by other citizensbut also by rogue public officials.In keeping with these principles, when (as the Preamble to

the Constitution states) We the People of the United Statesordain[ed] and establish[ed] th[e] Constitution in Order to ...provide for the common defence, the Constitution delegated toCongress the power and the duty [t]o provide for organizing,arming, and disciplining, the Militia. Self-evidently, the power[t]o provide for ... arming ... the Militia absolutely excludes acontrary power [t]o provide for ... [dis]arming them. Moreover,because Congress cannot provide for ... arming ... the Militiawithout somehow arming all of the people of the several States that is, We the People of the United States who consti-

tute the Militia, Congress has a duty [t]o provide for ... armingevery individual possibly eligible for duty in the Militia.

Consistent with the Constitution, Congress cannot fail, ne-glect, or refuse to arm let alone attempt affirmatively to dis-arm the people, because that would effectively destroy theMilitia of the several States. And Congress has no more author-ity to destroy the Militia than it does to destroy any other partsof the States governmental structures. Or to destroy the Statesthemselves, for the security of which the existence of wellregulated Militia is necessary. Or to destroy the Constitu-tions federal system, of which the States and their Militia arecomponents as vital as Congress.

Thus, as against the General Government, the people in

each State enjoy the right ... to keep and bear Arms under theoriginal Constitution.

Because the Constitution is the supreme Law of the Land,and because the Members of the several State Legislatures,and all executive and judicial Officers ... of the several States,shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support th[e] Consti-tution, the States are powerless to interfere, in any way, withthe performance of Congresss duty [t]o provide for ... arming... the Militia. Therefore, no State (or any political subdivisionthereof) may prevent the people within her own jurisdictioneither from being arm[ed] by the provision of Congress orfrom arming themselves on their own recognizance with equip-

ment suitable for Militia service should both Congress and thatStates government fail, neglect, or refuse [t]o provide for

arm[ing] them. Plainly, too, no State may affirmatively dis-arm the people, particularly when Congress and that Statesgovernment have failed, neglected, or refused to arm them, andthe people have therefore been compelled to arm themselvesin order to fulfill their constitutional duty.

This limitation on the States power to infringe the right ... tokeep and bear Arms was acknowledged (albeit only in dicta a judges remark not binding as legal precedent) in the SupremeCourts decision in Presserv.Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886):

It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearingarms constitute the reserve military force or reserve militiaof the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of

this prerogative of the general government, as well as of itsgeneral powers, the states cannot, even laying the [SecondAmendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keep-ing and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States oftheir rightful resource for maintaining the public security,and disable the people from performing their duty to thegeneral government.

Of course, Presserwas plainly wrong in asserting that all citi-zens capable of bearing arms constitute a reserve militia ofthe United States. For nomilitia of the United States existsunder the Constitution. Rather, all citizens capable of bearing

23www.TheNewAmerican.com

AlexanderHamilton


26/48

arms comprise the Militia of the several States, and at alltimes, not just as reserves. Nonetheless, the essential pointremains true, that no State can constitutionally prohibit [her]people from keeping and bearing arms that they would needfor their Militia service.

In addition, the original Constitution commanded [t]he United

States to guarantee to every State in this Union a RepublicanForm of Government. When the Constitution was ratified, eachof the States had a Republican Form of Government. Minorv.Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wallace) 162, 175-176 (1874). Priorto ratification, each of the States (or, earlier, Colonies) had longmaintained her own Militia. Indeed, the Articles of Confederationhad required that every state shall always keep up a well regulat-ed and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutred. So,in the America of the late 1700s, a Republican Form of Govern-ment meant nothing less than a government that incorporated aMilitia composed, as Virginias Declaration of Rights statedin 1776, of the body of the people, trained to arms. That beingso, if any State today were to infringe her peoples right ... to

keep and bear Arms and thereby undermine her own Repub-lican Form of Government the people could demand thatthe United States should intervene to protect that right.

Thus, as against each of the States, the people enjoy theright ... to keep and bear Arms under the original Constitution.

Solidified by the Second AmendmentThe Second Amendment strongly amplified the original Consti-tutions guarantee of the right of the people to keep and bearArms, as against both the General Government and the States.

No one doubts that the Amendments command reaches theGeneral Government. Confusion arises, however, from the Su-preme Courts erroneous decision inBarronv. City of Baltimore,32 U.S. (7 Peters) 243 (1833), that the Fifth Amendment andby extension the entire Bill of Rights does not apply to theStates. Although this decision has been followed many timesin different contexts, it is simply wrong. See generally WilliamW. Crosskey, Politics and the Constitution in the History of theUnited States(Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press,1953), Volume 2, Chapter XXX.

To be sure, the entirety of the First Amendment Congressshall make no law... and part of the Seventh Amendment no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in anyCourt of the United States... can apply to the General Gov-ernment only. But the remainder of the Bill of Rights is phrasedin broad language that contains not even an implicit limitation toCongress or the United States. For example, both the Ninthand Tenth Amendments mustapply to the States as well as to theGeneral Government or how else logically could the peoplefullyretain[ ] the rights, and havefullyreserved to ... themthe powers, to which those Amendments refer?

The Second Amendments application to the States is evenmore obvious. First, in general, the Amendments reference to a

free State cannot conceivably embrace only the General Gov-ernment, and not as well the very States that comprise the fed-eral system, and without which the General Government wouldnever have been formed in the first place and could not continueto exist. In particular, the Amendment declares that [a] well

regulated Militia is necessary to the securityof a free State. But the Constitution providesfor nowell regulated or even any Mi-litia of the United States, only the Militia ofthe several States. (Although the Constitu-tion allows the Militia of the several Statesto be employed in the Service of the UnitedStates in certain circumstances, it does not

deprive them of their status as State institu-tions through such temporary Service.) Soa free State for which [a] well regulatedMilitia is necessary must include each andevery one of the several States. Now, inas-much as the right of the people to keep andbear Arms is operationally essential to [a]well regulated Militia, and [a] well regulatedMilitia is necessary to the security of a freeState, then the right of the people to keepand bear Arms must be necessary to the se-curity of a free State. And inasmuch as no

Short-shrifting rights:Manybelieve that the SecondAmendment only applies toCongress not to States thereby allowing States toissue gun-control laws. But

only the First and SeventhAmendments are limited tocontrolling Congress, and otherAmendments, such as the Ninthand 10th, must apply to States.


CONSTITUTION CORNER


27/48

free State may undermine her own security especiallyby infring[ing] the right of [her own] people which her ownsupreme Law declares to be necessary to th[at] security that right must be enforceable against each of the States.

Second, perhaps not every free State everywhere in theworld must be a Republican Form of Government; but everyRepublican Form of Government in America must be a freeState. The Second Amendment declares that [a] well regulatedMilitia is necessary to the security of a free State whichmeans that such a Militia is necessary to the security of a [Re-

publican Form of Government]. [T]he right of the people tokeep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed because the actualexercise of that right is one of the primary characteristics of [a]well regulated Militia. Therefore, inasmuch as each State mustmaintain herself as a Republican Form of Government, or becompelled to comply with that requirement by the United States,each State must guarantee the right of the people to keep andbear Arms both within her own jurisdiction through her ownlaws, and within the jurisdiction of every other State through herparticipation in the General Government. That is, the SecondAmendment applies not just to each State individually, but evento all of the States collectively.

Fourteenth Amendment ConfusionMany people who mistakenly accept or acquiesce in the doctrineofBarronv.City of Baltimorebelieve that the Second Amend-ment can nevertheless be applied to the States through Section1 of the 14th Amendment, which (in relevant part) provides that[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridgethe privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; norshall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,without due process of law.

Effectively overruling the Supreme Courts erroneous deci-sions in Barron and Scottv.Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 Howard)393 (1857), Section 1 (correctly construed) includes within theprivileges and immunities of citizens of the United States all ofthe freedoms included in the Bill of Rights. See generally Cross-

key, Politics and the Constitution, Volume 3, Chapter XXXI.This is particularly obvious in the case of the Second Amend-ments right of the people to keep and bear Arms, inasmuchas Chief Justice Taney opined in Scottthat, if Negroes were citi-zens of the United States and thereby entitled to the privilegesand immunities of citizens ... it would give them the full libertyof speech ...; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, andto keep and carry arms wherever they went. 60 U.S. (19 How-ard) at 416-417. (Emphasis added.) If Taney knew any sourcesfor these privileges and immunities other than the First andSecond Amendments, he failed to identify them.

Properly applied in this particular, the 14th Amendmentwould be especially valuable, because it prohibits every State

from mak[ing] or enforc[ing] anylaw which shall abridge theprivileges or immunities of citizens. Now, a State can makea law only within her own jurisdiction. But she can enforcenot only her own law[s], but also all valid law[s] enacted bythe General Government. See, e.g.,Testav.Katt, 330 U.S. 386(1947). So, properly construed, the Amendment would precludethe States, not simply from making and trying to enforce theirown invalid law[s], but also from participating in any mannerin the enforcement of each and every unconstitutional law ofthe United States. Indeed, the Amendment would even requirethe States to oppose within their own territories the attemptedenforcement of all such invalid law[s] by rogue agents ofthe United States. Correctly understood, then, Section 1 of the

14th Amendment would provide a firm constitutional basis forthe doctrine and practice of interposition, through which theStates could protect their citizens from usurpation and tyranny atthe hands of rogue officials of the General Government.

Unfortunately, the Judiciary has made a thorough mish-mashof the jurisprudence of the 14th Amendment. Notwithstand-ing the Amendments evident purpose and expansive powerto secure individuals fundamental freedoms from abridgmentby both the States and the General Government, the SupremeCourt has perversely but consistently misconstrued the privi-leges and immunities language so as to render it more or lessuseless. See Crosskey, Politics and the Constitution, Volume

Right and duty:The Constitution commands the General Governmentto provide for arming the militia of the States. Since the federalgovernment must arm States citizens, it is logical to conclude thatStates may not rightfully disarm their citizens.

Call 1-800-727-TRUE to subscribe today! 25


28/48

3, Chapter XXXII. So, unless the contemporary Court is will-ing to reverse a long line of decisions, lose face both intel-lectually and politically, and pry open a massive judicial canof worms with respect to numerous freedoms protected by the

Bill of Rights but as yet not protected at all or only partiallyprotected by the 14th Amendment, it will not apply the SecondAmendment to the States

american czars the new american magazine jan 4 2010pdf3209

Documents