Obama Helicopters into Yosemite to Demand an End to Climate "Lip Service"

obama head

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

President Obama visited Yosemite National Park via helicopter, to demand an end to people paying “lip service” to natural beauty and the climate crisis.

Obama at Yosemite attacks ‘lip service’ to natural beauty amid climate inaction

Barack Obama warned on Saturday that climate change could ravage many of America’s vaunted national parks, criticizing political opponents who “pay lip service” to areas of natural beauty while opposing efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

During a visit to Yosemite national park, Obama said climate change was “no longer a threat, it’s a reality”. The first sitting president to visit Yosemite since John F Kennedy in 1962 said the famed glacial valley was already experiencing changes due to rising temperatures.

“Here in Yosemite, meadows are drying up, bird ranges are shifting farther northward, mammals are being forced further upslope,” Obama said. “Yosemite’s famous glacier, once a mile wide, is almost gone. We are also facing longer, more expensive wildfire seasons.

“Rising temperatures could mean no more glaciers in Glacier national park, no more Joshua trees in Joshua Tree national park. Rising seas can destroy vital ecosystems in the Everglades and at some point could even threaten icons like the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. That’s not the America I want to pass on to the next generation.”

Obama said: “We can’t treat it like it’s someone else’s problem, it shouldn’t lead to careless suggestions that we don’t get serious about carbon emissions or that we scrap an international treaty that we spent years putting together to deal with this.

Obama’s visit to Yosemite via helicopter caused major congestion in a park already heaving with summer visitors. Yosemite advised people to enter the park either before 8am or after 6pm to avoid the worst of the disruption. All parking, trails and climbing routes in the Lower Yosemite Falls area were shut down to allow Obama, wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia to do some hiking.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/18/yosemite-obama-national-parks-climate-change

I mean, seriously? When President Obama demands that we can’t treat climate like someone elses problem, he clearly doesn’t include himself as part of that “we”.

I will start believing President Obama thinks climate is a serious issue, when he finds a way to burn less than a month of my fossil fuel budget, on a single helicopter trip to give a climate speech which demands an end to “lip service”.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 19, 2016 6:26 pm

I would not doubt that Obama has the largest carbon footprint of any President in the history of the US. When he uses the Royal, ‘we’, there is no doubt who the ‘Royal’ is.

Reply to  Jtom
June 19, 2016 8:03 pm

…except where it comes to his brain, and there I doubt there’s much logical thought at all; he’s being as deceptive with climate change as he was with “Obamacare”.

Reply to  RockyRoad
June 19, 2016 8:42 pm

You can keep your doctor. Your insurance rates will decrease. Everyone will live happily ever after. Obama has spoken.

Reply to  Jtom
June 19, 2016 8:06 pm

jtom : from the article: “I will start believing President Obama thinks climate is a serious issue, when he finds a way to burn less than a month of my fossil fuel budget, on a single helicopter trip to give a climate speech which demands an end to “lip service”.
I think that if you include all the security and so on he probably burned up my whole ANNUAL heating bill which is around $ 3500.00. in about an hour!!!! If not less.

Reply to  Jtom
June 20, 2016 6:25 am

No one’s listening to him any more. Quack, quack.

george e. smith
Reply to  Jtom
June 20, 2016 5:16 pm

Well as for ” lip service ” have you noticed that when he lies, he whistles. Literally lying through his teeth.

June 19, 2016 6:28 pm

if our President really thought that CO2 affected climate and really cared about the climate change ramifications then he would not undergo all of his unnecessary travel at the tax payer’s expense. He just loves to vacation yet there is so much he has left undone like the budget cutes that are suppose to have gone along with the tax hike on the rich and the ACA taxes as part of the President’s balanced approach to deficit reduction.

Reply to  willhaas
June 19, 2016 7:08 pm

Budgets tend to be rather ugly… 🙂

Reply to  emsnews
June 19, 2016 10:58 pm

Our President has no understanding of budgets. Remember it is Obama who said that deficit spending showed “a lack of leadership”. Apparently “a lack of leadership” has been the Hallmark of the Obama Administration.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  emsnews
June 20, 2016 9:25 am

Think he was also the one who said it would be “un-patriotic” to increase the debt ceiling when it was back-around $8 trillion.

Reply to  emsnews
June 20, 2016 1:10 pm

That was before he was president.
Now it’s un-patriotic to NOT increase the debt ceiling.

Reply to  willhaas
June 20, 2016 5:24 am

I saw a figure not long ago of it costing the American taxpayers about $70 million to pay for all of Obama’s vacations. Obama spars no expense when it comes to himself.

DD More
Reply to  TA
June 20, 2016 12:25 pm

Let alone the wife. 2nd plane, but it was only DC to Hawaii.
“But last night, Michelle Obama and her two daughters flew to Hawaii for a 17-day holiday – days before the president joins them.
The separate flights will incur costs of more than $100,000 to the taxpayer.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2075066/Obama-family-jet-Hawaii-separately-cost-100-000-taxpayer.html#ixzz4C9Ir0oYw

Tom O
Reply to  TA
June 20, 2016 2:00 pm

This is more for DD More. The plane’s the President’s family flies in costs something on the order of $15,000 an hour or more per flight hour. Even if they fly back on Air Force 1, that plane has to return to Washington. An 8 hour flight, then, costs $120,000 one way, so double that since it flies back.
But please recall that when Bill Clinton was in office, he flew on Air Force One to South Korea while Hillary flew on a different airplane, though not to South Korea. They both then flew on to Vietnam for a statue dedication in their separate planes, and from their they both flew back to Washington on separate flight paths as well.
As is the case of Air Force One I would find it unlikely that the plane with his family flies without fighter escort, which also costs the tax payer considerably more tax money, along with having refueling aircraft meet up with the fighter escorts along the way. Now, do you really think that the separate flights will ONLY cost about $100,000? My guess would be that the family flying ahead will cost, counting the cost of escorts and a return flight, probably between $350,000 and $450,000 by the time all planes are back on the ground and serviced. But hey, nothing is too good for the president and his family, right?

Reply to  TA
June 20, 2016 8:29 pm

It is worse than you think. The federal government has to borrow the money to pay for the President’s travel. I estimate that the money the federal government is borrowing today will end up costing the tax payers more than 12 times the amount borrowed to repay over the next 170 years. Our President has yet to come up with a plan for the federal government to repay all of its debts. The tax payers have a right to know how much all this federal borrowing is really costing them.

Leon Brozyna
June 19, 2016 6:28 pm

So, he wants us peons to sacrifice to save the planet … gee, I wonder who’s going to be collecting on all our sacrifices?
Let me guess … all those selfless public “servants” from the capitol, where unemployment is never a problem.

Reply to  Leon Brozyna
June 19, 2016 7:45 pm

he wants you to be misdirected by his sleight of mind so you don’t see the the strings that levitate your wallet and make your productive efforts disappear.
he wants you to be concerned with global warming
the actual game is global pocket picking.
nevertheless, he need not be particularly concerned. he can treat people as if they are stupid because they are.
venezuela shows that people will allow themselves to starve before the bring themselves to contradict authority. once a generation has become dependent- they are never again independent.
it’s the dan pearl generation. selfie tweeting has completely replaced acts of courage.
victims are heroes. sacrifice is virtue. superman is a fag.
and it’ll be gone without a struggle. no bang, no whimper – just mock shock and mutual exhortation.
no resistance; no heroics. and the losers can’t even spell loser.
the outcome is ineluctible.

Tom Halla
June 19, 2016 6:30 pm

At least it’s not as bad as when Michelle and Barack use separate airplanes to go on vacation.:-)

Reply to  Tom Halla
June 19, 2016 6:33 pm

..Don’t forget about the dog !!

Reed Coray
Reply to  Marcus
June 20, 2016 5:08 pm

TH didn’t forget to mention the dog.

Reply to  Tom Halla
June 19, 2016 7:08 pm

Um, wouldn’t you?

Reply to  emsnews
June 19, 2016 7:25 pm

🙂 Good one…
Bill was more environmentally friendly – he just took a different woman on his “vacations”.

June 19, 2016 6:31 pm

I can see a lot of forthcoming comments getting “snipped” from that headline !! LOL

Tom O
Reply to  Marcus
June 20, 2016 2:04 pm

You weren’t thinking Larry S, were you?

Gunga Din
Reply to  Tom O
June 20, 2016 3:19 pm

I think he may have been thinking along the lines of Monica.
MOD! Feel free to snip. Just thought I’d try to give you a little chuckle if no one else. 😎

June 19, 2016 6:40 pm

Here’s an idea: Pull back all the armies. It will save millions of cubic meters of diesel and CO2 emissions. But first you have to achieve global peace. Which should be far simpler than stopping climatic changes

Reply to  Francisco
June 19, 2016 7:10 pm

Better still, tell the Bilderberg gangsters who met in Germany this week to plot how to screw us over, they even said they were going to focus on global warming taxes and Muslim terrorists! A two-fer for the rest of us. Watch out, citizens! Oh, and Brexit. They are against the Brits escaping their cage.

Reply to  Francisco
June 19, 2016 8:07 pm

Obama tried that in Iraq and the end results was ISIS. A “JV” decision gave us a first-class terrorist state.

Reply to  RockyRoad
June 20, 2016 5:28 am

Not only a first-class terrorist threat, but Obama’s mistakes in Iraq,Syria and Libya have created an existential threat to European civilization. And Obama acts like he is just an innocent bystander in all this.

Pat Frank
Reply to  RockyRoad
June 20, 2016 9:33 am

Europe of 50 years ago would have had no trouble stopping a movement of mass illegal migration. Angela Merkel and the EU have created an existential threat to Europe. The politics of guilt and shut-up have created a Europe that is an existential threat to itself.

Reply to  Francisco
June 19, 2016 11:03 pm

According to the President’s economic “plan” all of our offshore military personnel should have been back home and off the federal payroll no later than the end of FY 2014. Our President has failed to follow his own economic plan. This is expected from a President whose administration’s Hallmark must be “a lack of leadership”.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  willhaas
June 20, 2016 9:13 am

A lack of leadership but a surplus of lip service toward the UN agenda.

June 19, 2016 6:42 pm

Why doesn’t Obamao do something useful and tell us what the Hildabeast did with her emails, who gave Susan Rice the offensive video talking points regarding Benghazi, what he really meant when he said “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. PERIOD.”
Feel free to add to list.

Reply to  Kamikazedave
June 19, 2016 10:55 pm

According to our President’s economic “plan”, all of our offshore military personnel should be back home and off the federal payroll. Half the savings is suppose to be spent on infrastructure and the other half should be enough so that we are in our second year of running federal surpluses. According to Obama’s economic plan the National Debt should be falling.
I am still waiting for the President to go over the health care bill “line by line” with my congressman on C SPAN as our President said that he would. And our President always keeps his word.
The President once said the the White House dog would be a mutt “like me” from a shelter yet the dog they got was a purebreed who had never been in a shelter. The President is suppose to be the most powerful man in the free world yet he could not keep his word on something as trivial as the White House dog.
Gitmo is still closed as the President promised it would be is it not.
The President once said the deficit spending showed a lack of leadership. So apparently “a lack of leadership” is the Hallmark of the Obama Administration.

Reply to  willhaas
June 20, 2016 5:45 am

“The President once said the deficit spending showed a lack of leadership. So apparently “a lack of leadership” is the Hallmark of the Obama Administration.”
Include the Republican Congress in on that. They signed off on every dollar. The cowards.
They complain about Trump not being conservative enough, but where are the conservatives in the Congress? I don’t see many, and certainly none of them are in the Republican leadership. Those guys are definitely Democrat-lite.
The Republicans are scared to death of being called racists, which paralyzes them into inaction and capitulation, when it comes to confronting Obama. That has trumped conservatism, for the last seven and one half years, and for the next seven months.
After Jan. 20, 2017, the Republicans might get a little braver if Hillary is elected, but who knows, they might be spooked by being called women-haters. The Republican congress will definitely get braver if Trump is elected.
These Republican elite “conservatives” don’t represent me, or you, and we should seriously consider getting rid of them in the next election. They have proven their worthlessness.
If it were me, I would check my representatives votes and if they were not conservative enough, I would vote for someone else. Fortunately for me (and you), my representatives have voted against giving Obama a blank check, so we will keep them. 🙂

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  willhaas
June 20, 2016 1:26 pm

As I have said before, the only major difference between the two parties is the speed of the handcart, not its final destination in the nether regions.

Reply to  willhaas
June 20, 2016 2:41 pm

@ TA:
The Congressional Black Caucus admitted during the second or third year of O’s first term that they were giving him a full pass because of his race. IIRC, the leader said that if a white man were in office and African-Americans were having the difficulties they were having due to O’s policies, the CBC would be picketing the White House.
I refuse to take environmental-related advice from someone who believes it is acceptable to fly from DC to NYC for a date night (on the taxpayer’s dime). Particularly when such a flight also requires plane escorts, substantial security, a motorcade of SUVs, and ANOTHER flight home, complete with plane escorts.
Politician, heal thyself.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  willhaas
June 21, 2016 6:51 am

“The Congressional Black Caucus admitted during the second or third year of O’s first term that they were giving him a full pass because of his race.”
Do you have a cite for that?

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia.
June 19, 2016 6:55 pm

“Barack Obama warned on Saturday that climate change could ravage many of America’s vaunted national parks”. If Obama studied geology and read the Yosemite website, he might realize that climate was part of why those beautiful parks are there in the first place. To help Obama, I provide a link for him to read before his next golf game:

Reply to  John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia.
June 20, 2016 9:56 am

He also invoked what I call the “plight of the pikas” that now has been thoroughly debunked. He only uses the story that supports his position and ignores the rest.

June 19, 2016 7:07 pm

What, he didn’t fly in a huge private jet with three other jets following???

Reply to  emsnews
June 19, 2016 7:19 pm

Yes, he did. His helicopter was in one of the jets following Air Force 1. He flew his helicopter from the airport to Yosemite.

Reply to  SMC
June 19, 2016 7:53 pm

You know you’re important when you’re in one aircraft and you have another aircraft inside another aircraft following you while you’re being escorted by at least one other aircraft with guns and missiles. Trump can’t trump that, yet.

Paul Coppin
Reply to  SMC
June 20, 2016 7:02 am

Trump can, he just doesn’t see the point of it.

Tom O
Reply to  SMC
June 20, 2016 2:09 pm

And I am sure Air Force Two was in the parade, since no one is supposed to know for sure whether the President is in One or Two. Oh yes, and probably a flight of at least 4 fighter jets in case some Africanized Bees get angry for all the jet fuel fumes.

Reply to  emsnews
June 20, 2016 2:48 pm

There are always two other helicopters flying with Marine One, to “hide” which actually carries the president.
One could start a new jump rope chant:
President Obama flew to Yosemite, used so much gas, it was a calamity! We gotta conserve posthaste, but he’s in a different caste! How many gallons of fuel did he waste? One, two, three, four…

June 19, 2016 7:13 pm

Excuse me while I jump on e-bay to get a new irony meter. Mine just went SPROING!

Reply to  H.R.
June 20, 2016 1:14 pm

The needle wrapped around the pin at least twice.
I wonder how many people under 20 would get the reference. ;^)

Reply to  MarkW
June 20, 2016 1:41 pm

Yup. Pegged the needle so hard it wrapped around twice.
Not many would get that, MarkW. I’m not certain they even know the definition of analogue. (And nobody dials up someone anymore.)

June 19, 2016 7:15 pm

By the way, Obama and his gang know nothing about the climate of California. Most people there know little since virtually no one lived there after the Great Drought 500 years ago, Arizona cleared out, too, it nearly totally destroyed thriving native civilizations and yes, they built cities in Arizona and New Mexico.
California was sparsely settled with Father Kino came northwards and converted some of the tribes (but not the Apaches or Comanches!). He saw the ruin of farming in these places right after the Great Drought finally ended.
This Great Drought also happened when the Little Ice Age began! This is rather scary news. Very scary. I would suggest, a cooling planet has many lurking dangers.

Reply to  emsnews
June 19, 2016 11:07 pm

Maybe the President would like to convert Yosemite valley into a huge water storage facility to help protect California from the ravages of drought.

June 19, 2016 7:17 pm

“Rising temperatures could mean no more glaciers in Glacier national park, no more Joshua trees in Joshua Tree national park. Rising seas can destroy vital ecosystems in the Everglades and at some point could even threaten icons like the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. ”
Maybe so but there is no empirical evidence that any of this can be attributed to fossil fuel emissions or that any of this can be attenuated by reducing or even eliminating fossil fuel emissions.
see also

bill johnston
Reply to  chaamjamal
June 20, 2016 11:42 am

So what?? Obama has spoken!

Reply to  chaamjamal
June 20, 2016 1:16 pm

Rising seas won’t destroy the everglades, they will just be moved inland a few miles.
Is there anything that this president knows that is actually correct?

Reply to  MarkW
June 20, 2016 2:57 pm

I think the Burmese pythons and the surrounding development (and resulting decline in habitat) are causing the native flora and fauna more problems than supposed sea level rise. Regardless, from what I understand, the sea is not rising around Florida so much as Florida is sinking/dissolving.
I suspect Yosemite is probably undergoing more degradation from all the visitors tramping around than anything else. From what I have seen at every national park I have visited, people rarely stick to trails, ignore signs that prohibit climbing, and otherwise wander all over the area with little to no thought about their effect on the natural environment. I am all for enjoying nature and the parks, but for the love of heaven, stay on the trail and do not pick the vegetation!!!
Also, “at some point” is a weasel term, not a scientific one.

June 19, 2016 7:18 pm

The forests of California have evolved to cope with wild swings in weather thanks to the many Ice Ages we have had so far. This Interglacial is no way as hot as the previous Interglacial and redwoods we see today are trees that started growing during the present Interglacial.
They evolved to reflect a warming environment not a cooling one. They are utterly indifferent to long droughts, this is what they have evolved under for the last 20,000 years! Ditto, all the cactus out west and animals. Mastodons used to stomp around LA and fell into the tar pits there and native people hunted them in Arizona, too. Then they were all gone, 10,000-5000 years ago or there about.

June 19, 2016 7:20 pm

Any politician, for that matter.

June 19, 2016 7:24 pm

Obama said climate change was “no longer a threat, it’s a reality”.
The only threat is Obama and his warmist goon squad, now that’s reality!

Reply to  TG
June 19, 2016 7:59 pm

Parse that again, you could read it the other way also, no? “Climate change is a reality, it’s no longer a threat.” We already all acknowledge that climate change is a reality. So there’s no threat/danger.

Reply to  PiperPaul
June 19, 2016 8:30 pm

Additional CO2 in the atmosphere has enhanced plant growth worldwide, and increased foodstuff production and estimated 15%. Apparently, those knobbing for climate change don’t like more food for hungry people; it’s against their primal intentions, obviously.

Mike McMillan
Reply to  PiperPaul
June 19, 2016 10:48 pm

We make up for the increased crop production by diverting a large portion of it toward biofuels, which keeps the price high enough that the nations that need the food can’t afford it.

Reply to  PiperPaul
June 20, 2016 12:39 am

Rocky, their population bomb isn’t as threatening when it is accompanied by an agricultural boom.

June 19, 2016 7:26 pm

Well, if a President ever wanted to show the world just how selfish and immature a president could be, the POTUS just did.
Anyone who desires to stay overnight at any of the popular National Parks during their premium seasons must start planning months ahead of time.
POTUS decides to make a political statement. What better place to spout environmental nonsense than in John Muir’s favorite spaces?
Grab a helicopter along with a horde of secret service agents and their air and electronic support staff and drop in unannounced to make false climate pronouncements.
Yup, that’s the POTUS… Inconsiderate, uncaring, ignorant, gullible, …

Tom O
Reply to  ATheoK
June 20, 2016 2:14 pm

And the park probably was closed while he was there a well. Had a reservation? Sorry, you can’t come in.

June 19, 2016 7:30 pm

All parking, trails and climbing routes in the Lower Yosemite Falls area were shut down to allow Emperor Obama, wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia to do some hiking, away from the inconvenient citizens who pay the bills.
How lovely!

Reply to  TG
June 19, 2016 7:53 pm

When you think about it, this is the most outrageous affront of all. To the ordinary citizen, his ‘climate change’ rhetoric is just more dismissible balderdash, but wrecking the vacations of people is inconsiderate and arrogant beyond belief. Can you imagine Harry Truman or Ronald Reagan acting like this? I can’t.
/Mr Lynn

Reply to  L. E. Joiner
June 20, 2016 2:25 am

Mr. Lynn, even the Clintons had the good grace to trade political access for the use of a (palatial) home on Martha’s Vineyard.

Eve W Stevens
June 19, 2016 7:34 pm

The government of Canada has a climate change website where you can make suggestions on what to do about climate change. I suggested that the Federal and Provincial governments including all employees disconnect from the energy grid and make their own energy with non tax payer dollars. I also suggested that they all use methods of transportation that use renewable energy like electric cars, bikes, walking, sailing. I would suggest it to the government of the USA if they had a website.

Reply to  Eve W Stevens
June 20, 2016 3:03 pm

Well, with the metro exposed as criminally unsafe, a whole lot of federal workers are telecommuting for the next several months. The current idiot-in-charge will probably try to take credit for being “eco-friendly” or some such nonsense. Of course, all the people who cannot telecommute and now have to drive or rely on buses/shuttles are likely increasing emissions. Perhaps they can conserve idiot-style and get their own helicopters.

June 19, 2016 7:41 pm

Obama said: “We can’t treat it like it’s someone else’s problem…”
So why then is he treating it as if it’s my problem and not his? If he really wants the country to get serious about carbon emissions, he should set the example by lowering his emissions instead of choosing to merely “pay lip service” to the issue. Has he even tried to lower his carbon footprint? I’ve seen no evidence of it. Do any of the people who preach to us about the evils of carbon dioxide ever try to practice what they preach? I’m not aware of any. They all gleefully jet off to the next climate conference without even a thought about staying home and using video conferencing. President Obama could have given his speech in the White House. Instead, he goes to Yosemite with a private 747, several helicopters and a motorcade of a few dozen vehicles. This one trip probably released more carbon emissions than I will release in my entire lifetime, and he thinks he can guilt me into lowering my emissions even further? Is this hypocrite even self-aware?

Reply to  Louis
June 19, 2016 8:10 pm

Because he has no intention of giving up his life style. A $7M home in Hawaii and a $4M home in DC are needed so the elite can deliver the messages of wisdom to the masses.

Reply to  Pat Ch
June 20, 2016 2:31 am

Pat CH:
“[…] A $7M homedacha in Hawaii and a $4M homedacha in DC […]”
Sorry. Had to fix those typos. Comrade Commissars don’t have homes.

Reply to  Louis
June 20, 2016 5:59 am

“Obama said: “We can’t treat it [CAGW] like it’s someone else’s problem…”
But Obama can treat radical Islamic terrorism as if it were someone else’s problem, or no problem at all.

June 19, 2016 7:41 pm

Not to mention the “carbon” emitted by Airforce One getting him to the local airport for the chopper ride.

David Chappell
Reply to  lancifer666
June 20, 2016 12:01 am

And, presumably, the helicopter from the White House to Airforce One’s base (?Andrews AFB).

Reply to  David Chappell
June 20, 2016 3:05 pm

Do not forget the motorcade transporting all the support staff and security…

June 19, 2016 8:08 pm

Easily the most scientifically, economically, and statistically ignorant President in the history of the nation. His degrees in grievance studies simply are inadequate. He is an embarrassment to all except idiots and those that would use the ignoramus for their social experimentation.

June 19, 2016 8:14 pm

Pro-choice (i.e. selective) forevermore.

June 19, 2016 8:14 pm

Yosemite Park is doing just fine if you check their webcams:
Don’t ask the Park Rangers though, as they have been brainwashed like all the ones in National Parks and National Monuments.

Not Oscar, just a grouch
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 19, 2016 11:40 pm

Meaning no offense at all, Mr. Worrall, I prefer John Kennedy. “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”
I prefer to think that, at 60, there are still things I can do for my country, as well as fellow humans everywhere, other than just die and get out of everyone else’s way. 🙂

June 19, 2016 8:24 pm

Maybe obama can fly that helecopter and go look for that terrorist he let go in south america!

June 19, 2016 8:29 pm

In his first Presidential acceptance speech he gave reference to “wealth redistribution” and no one paid attention to it. It will take a drop in global temperature to even get people listening to natural variability and we’re blathering about his ‘carbon footprint’.

Reply to  markl
June 19, 2016 9:06 pm

It seems to me the blab here is about his monumental hypocrisy . .

Reply to  markl
June 19, 2016 10:21 pm

He lost me at redistributive change coupled with a pro-choice religious/moral (i.e. selective principles) philosophy that denigrates individual dignity (e.g. [class] diversity), debases human life (e.g. reactive parenthood or abortion rites, planned parenthood or clinical cannibalism), and compensates for evolutionary dysfunction and social corruption with anti-native policies (e.g. excessive immigration — refugee crises) and democratic disenfranchisement (e.g. multi-trillion dollar for-profit welfare schemes or opiates).
Still, the conflation of logical domains (i.e. science, philosophy, faith, and fantasy) has historical precedents that should not be overlooked or the consequences underestimated. The fantasy of spontaneous conception or a punctuated evolutionary process that rationalizes mass abortion under the selective-child policy is a notable aspect of his pro-choice religious philosophy that marks an unprecedented corruption of science and violation of human rights.

June 19, 2016 9:07 pm

I actually agree with Obama.
We should progress from the current policy of discussing what to do to a firm policy of doing nothing.
People should not be wasting time giving lip service to a non-problem.

Reply to  PA
June 19, 2016 10:40 pm

Think of all the electricity and paper we can stop wasting by filing W-2 forms to the IRS!

CD in Wisconsin
June 19, 2016 9:08 pm

If the POTUS is worried about climate change, he should keep in mind that the park he is visiting is actually a massive caldera volcano.
Quote: “Catastrophic eruptions occur at Yellowstone approximately every 600,000 to 800,000 years. Two of those eruptions are among the largest eruptions known to have occurred on Earth, each more than 1,000 cubic kilometers in scope. The USGS believes that the last eruption spewed out close to 240 cubic miles of debris, including red-hot pumice, volcanic glass and rock and gas that spread as pyroclastic flows……
The USGS, the University of Utah and Yellowstone National Park formed the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory to continuously monitor activity in the region. If another caldera-forming eruption occurs, it’s estimated that the explosion would be equivalent to a force a thousand times more powerful than the Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980. The after-effects would be felt around the planet, with ash deposits dumped in 10-foot layers up to 1,000 miles away, and gases released into the atmosphere, dramatically affecting the global climate. Two-thirds of the U.S. could become uninhabitable as toxic air forces millions from their homes. Although scientists feel that the odds are good that such an eruption won’t happen within the next few thousand years, smaller and less damaging lava flows are possible.”
The last sentence above is reassuring if the scientists are right. But if the POTUS wants something that may be worth worrying about while he is there, I will suggest this is it.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
June 19, 2016 9:16 pm

Whoops….the POTUS is visiting Yosemite, not Yellowstone. Never mind.

Glenn Ledford
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
June 20, 2016 8:22 am

Miss Emily Litella agrees:

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
June 20, 2016 1:22 pm

There are several significant calderas in CA as well. Though I’m pretty sure that Yosemite isn’t one of them.

Juan Slayton
June 19, 2016 9:35 pm

The first sitting president to visit Yosemite since John F Kennedy in 1962 said the famed glacial valley was already experiencing changes due to rising temperatures.
Kennedy never said that! I tell my students to re-read everything they write; they might be surprised at what they just said. Punctuation is important, Lynn Truss’s book is an entertaining read: https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/854886-eats-shoots-and-leaves
Yeah, I know you can construe this sentence because if you misread it, there is no main verb. But you are likely to have to read it more than once, after experiencing some confusion. Professional journalists should be more careful.
Juan the Grammar Nazi

Reply to  Juan Slayton
June 19, 2016 10:54 pm

Yeah, I know you can construe this sentence because if you misread it, there is no main verb.
I don’t think that the lack of a main verb depends on misreading the sentence 🙂

June 19, 2016 9:51 pm

Obama, just leave already…another prime example of charisma without substance being a dangerous thing…

larry angier
June 19, 2016 9:52 pm

1. Do as the ruling class tells us…don’t follow their examples.
2. Without the climate having warmed the earth in the past few thousand years, wouldn’t Yosemite be buried under hundreds of feet of ice today?
3. Didn’t our POTUS also just force others into huge carbon morass that he claims to abhor, as he is spewing carbon much like his hypocritical visit in Nebraska a few month back that required many aircraft, dozens of automobiles and thousands of gallons of carbon-rich petroleum…to once again tell us to lower our carbon usage as his hits the stratosphere?
Hypocrisy in his action seems to trump true leadership by good example.

Clive Bond Wynnum Queensland Australia
June 19, 2016 9:57 pm

I see Obama has been watching Al Gore’s science fiction movie again.

Reply to  Clive Bond Wynnum Queensland Australia
June 20, 2016 1:24 pm

The real world is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense.
Al Gore’s work doesn’t even make good fiction because it made no sense.

June 19, 2016 9:59 pm

Is there any ignorant thing he’s willing to leave unsaid?

June 19, 2016 10:07 pm

“Obama said: “We can’t treat it like it’s someone else’s problem, it shouldn’t lead to careless suggestions that we don’t get serious about carbon emissions or that we scrap an international treaty that we spent years putting together to deal with this.”
I can perhaps see a little mild irritation with hypocritical consumption. But by Jov, please don’t miss the part where he announces a treaty being used to dictate domestic policy in the US, using foreign environmental regulations.
Oh what the heck.
Dear Honorable Senators All,
Let’s scrap an international treaty Obama and Hillary spent years putting together.
Thanks, PW

Reply to  Zeke
June 20, 2016 6:11 am

It’s not a treaty. The U.S. Senate has to sign off on it before it becomes a treaty. It is essentially an Executive Order by the president, which can be undone by another Executive Order by another president.

Reply to  Zeke
June 20, 2016 3:17 pm

I would prefer the president spend time on something (ANYTHING) other than a pointless international sometimes-treaty that will do nothing other than waste resources on a non-problem. Think of how many real problems might have been lessened if all those resources were put into solutions. Poverty, unaffordable energy, unclean water, disease, crazy terrorist groups like Daesh and Boko Haram…
This is very similar to the tussle over the Redskins’ football team name. All the time, energy, and money being spent on changing a name that does not offend 90+% of Native Americans, while actual problems facing those Native Americans are ignored. Imagine all those resources being used to improve education, health care, job opportunities, housing… Heck, even building a few rehab centers would do more for the Native American population than the name crusade. Which is worse, a sports team having a name that has on occasion been considered a mean nickname for your ethnic group, or not being able to provide the essentials for your family because there are no jobs in your area?
There are enough problems in this world, there is no need to make up new ones or exaggerate minor ones.

Jack Cox
June 19, 2016 10:18 pm

This is bull. The meadows are not drying up and there is an incredible amount of water now. I live about 90 minutes from Yosemite Valley. I have been going there for 60 years. Come on Mr President you are fabricating events to support your theory.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  Jack Cox
June 20, 2016 5:02 am

How few are as fortunate as we to remember the low maintenance Yosemite! Remember the Fire Fall! Remember Fern Pond! Remember the LeConte LIBRARY. Remember the quiet places that are no more.
Imagine a helicopter in the Valley, it probably drowned out even the madding crowd. Remember the silent places that are no more.

Reply to  Jack Cox
June 20, 2016 6:18 am

“Come on Mr President you are fabricating events to support your theory.”
Nothing new there, that’s what he always does. He is either the most prolific liar I have ever seen, or if he believes what he says, he lives in a very strange false reality.
You want to think Obama has to be smart enough to understand what he is saying, but when you hear what he says, you have to wonder.
One of Obama’s (and our) problems, is he thinks he is the smartest guy in the world. He is convinced of it. So he doesn’t listen.

Reply to  TA
June 20, 2016 2:01 pm

“[…]he thinks he is the smartest guy in the world.”
Then why doesn’t he unseal his transcripts and prove it? (Probably doesn’t want to be shown up by Al Gore’s transcripts, but I’m just guessing since his are sealed.)

Reply to  TA
June 20, 2016 3:28 pm

IIRC, he said he would be better at his advisors’ jobs than they would be. This raises the question: why not get better advisors?
Having gotten very good grades, and not-so good grades, I can tell you that there is only one reason not to be cagy about one’s grades: the grades are not as good as they should be and/or as one wishes them to be. I do not think O’s grades were necessarily bad, but I suspect that they would reveal that he did not really qualify for Harvard, etc. on his own merits. I suspect they would expose his scholarship as closer to mediocre than good, and show that he is nowhere near as smart as he claims or believes.
The funny thing is, I believe that schools were already moving away from the “gentleman’s C” (as my art history professor put it) when he entered higher education, so it is likely that his grades were higher than they might have been a decade or two before.

Chuck Wiese
June 19, 2016 10:26 pm

Run along, little people, now run along! All you good little nippers gives us your carbon tax money, don’t ever use air conditioning, reduce your winter heating to 65 degF, dry your clothes outside and wipe your rear ends on leaves. And while you’re at it, sacrifice your transportation to bicycle riding. You don’t need a car with all of the CO2 emissions that causes.
In the meantime, Michelle, Joe, Hillary, Bill, John and I and all of our extended families in the White House cabinet are going to travel the world monthly and assess all of the horrible, horrible things that climate change is doing to our environment. And because you’re such good little nippers and great citizens of the world, we are going to privilege you all with monthly reports from around the world as to just what progress your efforts are making to combat climate change.
Now this will take a lot of work and you do realize that using the brain power you have voted for that put us all in charge will require that to nourish our brains and efforts as your world leaders that we must eat and drink the finest food and wine anywhere in the world that money can buy to refresh our tired bodies. And to refresh our tired and brilliant minds, we must have hotel accomodations second to none so that we can carry on as brilliantly in the following days as we did when we first left.
You can be sure that in the days ahead, we will save this deteriorating world from the ravages of all of the irresponsible behavior you rotten citizens of this country have partaken in with all of your self centered greed that is causing this accelerating change in the climate, which I declare is the most pressing problem facing humanity today.

June 19, 2016 10:29 pm

Now don’t blame Mr Obama! We have to remember that he is but an actor and simply follows his script un critically.
Its more important to find who composes the script.

June 19, 2016 10:42 pm

Eminent Domain laws must be stricken from the law books to make way so nature can own the land, this is my suggestion.

June 19, 2016 11:02 pm

There are no inductive inferences.
Karl Popper.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  ptolemy2
June 20, 2016 5:08 am

Read The Science of Conjecture: Evidence and Probability Before Pascal by James Franklin. He may tell the origins of our dependence on induction. He does tell the origins of frequentist statistics and its dependence on induction. It is an excellent and long read.

June 19, 2016 11:02 pm

When I was a kid in the late 50s/ early 60s, I visited the glaciers. IIRC the tour guides told us that the glaciers had been shrinking ever since the 1800s.

Reply to  commieBob
June 20, 2016 4:52 am

Most valley or alpine glaciers formed after the Holocene Climatic Optimum, during the Neoglaciation period and reached their maxima during the mid-1800’s.

June 19, 2016 11:15 pm

So Yosemite valley as well as other locations in the sierras should be dammed to provide more water storage capacity to ease the adverse effect of California droughts and more CO2 free electrical power. That is the best way to fight the effects of climate change.

June 20, 2016 12:21 am

Even if “we” whities get serious about climate change, it will have nearly no effect on global “carbon” emissions in coming decades. They’re going way up regardless. Obama is being willingly played by the alarmists he chooses to listen to exclusively.

Larry Wirth
June 20, 2016 12:45 am

Math, people! Obamao didn’t spent your month’s heating bill visiting Yosemite, he spent 1000x the total lifetime energy consumption of you, your kids and their kids on a propaganda op. Someone needs to do the math. Math is hard…

Bob in Castlemaine
June 20, 2016 12:48 am

I share Larry Pickering's concerns about whether the world can survive another six months of the US "Gander-in chief".
Whether it's his blind, irrational obsession with "climate or change" or his wilful blindness when it comes to the undeniable connection between Islam and the current explosion in terrorism seen throughout the world.  The bloke is a massive threat to the safety and prosperity of the western democracies.

Reply to  Bob in Castlemaine
June 20, 2016 9:32 pm

Thanks for the read, Bob, good perspective.

Johann Wundersamer
June 20, 2016 1:50 am

During a visit to Yosemite national park, Obama said climate change was “no longer a threat, it’s a reality”.
chew gum on past walk is no longer a threat, it’s reality.
/ no one told Obama /

Harry Passfield
June 20, 2016 1:57 am

I guess Obama’s words were written for him by Holdren. ‘Nuff said, really.

June 20, 2016 1:59 am

it shouldn’t lead to careless suggestions that we don’t get serious about carbon emissions or that we scrap an international treaty that we spent years putting together to deal with this.

Dude, I thought your team said this wasn’t a treaty, and on that basis you felt empowered to send $500 million to the climate shakedown fund?

June 20, 2016 4:24 am

During a visit to Yosemite national park, Obama said climate change was “no longer a threat, it’s a reality”. The first sitting president to visit Yosemite since John F Kennedy in 1962 said the famed glacial valley was already experiencing changes due to rising temperatures.

Note to the Moron-in-Chief… Glacial valleys are the result of climate change. They can’t exist without “changes due to (falling and) rising temperatures.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 20, 2016 8:28 am

Mr. Obama desperately needs to distract Americans from critically reviewing his policies and leadership.
His ranting faux-scientific drivel about so-called “climate change” is just one of his Allinsky tactics in action.

Bruce Cobb
June 20, 2016 4:55 am

Mr. Obama, you are an embarrassment to our once-great country, and that will be your legacy. Your teleprompted, mindless drivel regarding climate shows you to be both a moron and a liar. Get off the stage, dimwit.

June 20, 2016 4:56 am

I have answers to Mr. Obama’s inappropriate, alarmist statements in my new book “The Real World, A Synthesis: Featuring the One Simple but Critical Question that Albert Einstein (and Everybody Else) Never Thought to Ask,” at amazon.com/dp/B01ERXVQ8K.

June 20, 2016 5:17 am

June 20, 2016 6:26 am

From the article: “During a visit to Yosemite national park, Obama said climate change was “no longer a threat, it’s a reality”.
By making such statements, Isn’t Obama defrauding the American people and the world? Where’s an AG when you need one.

June 20, 2016 7:43 am

Obama’s drivel was mindbogglingly ignorant…

“Rising temperatures could mean no more glaciers in Glacier national park, no more Joshua trees in Joshua Tree national park. Rising seas can destroy vital ecosystems in the Everglades and at some point could even threaten icons like the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. That’s not the America I want to pass on to the next generation.”

Rising temperatures could mean no more glaciers in Glacier national park
Glacial mass balance has, on average, been decreasing since the mid-1800’s. In other words, glaciers have generally been retreating over the past 150 years. Would it be better if the globally averaged glacial mass balance was increasing? That’s a “big fat no.”
Glacial mass balance was increasing from 2000 BC up until the mid 1800’s.
It was decreasing from 8000 BC up until 2000 BC.
The glaciers at North Cascades National Park have stopped retreating…

Geologists understand that glacial mass balance is almost always positive or negative. While glacially slow, very few glaciers sit still. Geologists also know that most alpine/valley glaciers in North America are of very recent origin, only dating back to the Mid-Holocene Neoglaciation. Most reached their maximum extent in the 1800’s during the Little Ice Age. The “small glaciers” of Glacier National Park, Montana may have not existed during the Holocene Climatic Optimum (HCO). The geological evidence suggests that they formed less than 7,000 years ago as the Earth’s climate began to cool after the HCO…

History of Glaciers in Glacier National Park

The history of glaciation within current Glacier National Park boundaries spans centuries of glacial growth and recession, carving the features we see today. Glaciers were present within current Glacier National Park boundaries as early as 7,000 years ago but may have survived an early Holocene warm period (Carrara, 1989), making them much older. These modest glaciers varied in size, tracking climatic changes, but did not grow to their Holocene maximum size until the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA) around A.D. 1850. While they may not have formed in their entirety during the LIA, their maximum perimeters can be documented through mapping of lateral and terminal moraines. (Key, 2002) The extent and mass of these glaciers, as well as glaciers around the globe, has clearly decreased during the 20th century in response to warmer temperatures.
Climate reconstructions representative of the Glacier National Park region extend back multiple centuries and show numerous long-duration drought and wet periods that influenced the mass balance of glaciers (Pederson et al. 2004). Of particular note was an 80-year period (~1770-1840) of cool, wet summers and above-average winter snowfall that led to a rapid growth of glaciers just prior to the end of the LIA. Thus, in the context of the entire Holocene, the size of glaciers at the end of the LIA was an anomaly of sorts. In fact, the large extent of ice coverage removed most of the evidence of earlier glacier positions by overriding terminal and lateral moraines.

“Mapping of lateral and terminal moraines” clearly demonstrates that the maximum extent of the glaciers was reached during the Little Ice Age (LIA).
Most of the alpine glaciers in Colorado formed after the HCO and reached their maximum extent during the LIA, between 400 and 150 years ago. Most have generally been retreating since the early 1900’s…

[T]here have been three small Holocone (10,000 years BP to present) glacial advances termed, from oldest to youngest, Triple Lakes, Audubon, and Arapaho Peak advances. Collectively these minor advances are termed Neoglaciation, and the largest glacier during these advances was only 1.6 km long. The Arapaho Peak advance is local evidence for the Little Ice Age (the popular name for a period of cooling in the northern hemisphere lasting approximately from the 14th to the mid-19th centuries). Most of the glaciers and perennial ice patches in Colorado today are the tattered remnants of these small Little Ice Age glaciers.
Glaciers of Colorado

The glaciers of Mt Ranier National Park may date back to the last Pleistocene glaciation, but they also exhibit a similar variability to those of Glacier National Park and the Colorado Front Range…

The size of glaciers on Mount Rainier has fluctuated significantly in the past. For example, during the last ice age, from about 25,000 to about 15,000 years ago, glaciers covered most of the area now within the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park and extended to the perimeter of the present Puget Sound Basin.
Geologists can determine the former extent of glaciers on Mount Rainier by mapping the outline of glacial deposits and by noting the position of trimlines, the distinct boundaries between older and younger forests or between forests and pioneering vegetation. Geologists determine the age of some of the deposits by noting the age of the oldest trees and lichens growing on them and the degree of weatherring on boulders. Between the 14th century and AD 1850, many of the glaciers on Mount Rainier advanced to their farthest went down-valley since the last ice age. Many advances of this sort occurred worldwide during this time period known to geologists as the Little Ice Age. During the Little Ice Age, the Nisqually Glacier advanced to a position 650 feet to 800 feet down-valley from the site of the Glacier Bridge, Tahoma and South Tahoma Glaciers merged at the base of Glacier Island, and the terminus of Emmons Glacier reached within 1.2 miles of the White River Campground.
Retreat of the Little Ice Age glaciers was slow until about 1920 when retreat became more rapid. Between the height of the Little Ice Age and 1950, Mount Rainier’s glaciers lost about one-quarter of their length. Beginning in 1950 and continuing through the early 1980′s, however, many of the major glaciers advanced in response to relatively cooler temperatures of the mid-century. The Carbon, Cowlitz, Emmons, and Nisqually Glaciers advanced during the late 1970′s and early 1980′s as a result of high snowfalls during the 1960′s and 1970′s. Since the early-1980′s and through 1992, however, many glaciers have been thinning and retreating and some advances have slowed, perhaps in response to drier conditions that have prevailed at Mount Rainier since 1977.
Mount Rainier National Park Information Page

The Mt. Ranier glaciers also seem to have reached their maximum Holocene extent during the Little Ice Age.
Most valley or alpine glaciers formed after the Holocene Climatic Optimum, during the Neoglaciation period (4,000 to 150 years ago) and reached their maxima during the mid-1800’s. Without the natural warming of the millennial climate cycle, those glaciers would have continued to advance. That would be a very bad thing.

No more Joshua trees in Joshua Tree national park


Where Two Deserts Meet
Two distinct desert ecosystems, the Mojave and the Colorado, come together in Joshua Tree National Park. A fascinating variety of plants and animals make their homes in a land sculpted by strong winds and occasional torrents of rain. Dark night skies, a rich cultural history, and surreal geologic features add to the wonder of this vast wilderness in southern California.
National Park Service

It’s a desert. Unless climate change is going to turn it into something other than a desert, it will remain a desert. Maybe the formerly respectable National Geographic can explain Maobama’s moronic claim…

Climate Change Threatens an Iconic Desert Tree
It’s not just the polar bear. Animals and plants in Earth’s other extreme environment—the desert—are endangered by rising temperatures.

By Osha Gray Davidson, National Geographic
Close your eyes and imagine a species living in a harsh environment threatened by climate change. If you conjured up a polar bear, Cameron Barrows has a suggestion: Consider, instead, the Joshua tree—the gnarly icon of the Southwest’s Mojave Desert that looks like it sprang from a Dr. Seuss book.
“Animals living in the Arctic get a lot more attention than plants in arid lands, but desert plants like the Joshua tree are also threatened by a changing climate,” says Barrows, a research ecologist at the University of California, Riverside’s Center for Conservation Biology.
One study predicted under a scenario of changing climate that between 15 and 37 percent of Earth’s plants and animals will have populations so small by 2050 that extinction is virtually certain.
Other than the Arctic, deserts may have the most to lose as the planet warms because anything surviving there already lives on the edge.
Because plants and animals in ecosystems have complex relationships, it’s not just the Joshua tree at risk, says Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, based in Tucson, Arizona.
Based on climate models using a 3-degree Celsius (5.4-degree Fahrenheit) increase, the range of Yucca brevifolia could be reduced up to 90 percent by the end of this century, Barrows says. Under that scenario, it would exist only in isolated pockets, called refugia, scattered across the 800,000-acre national park.

The Joshua trees are apparently threatened by a climate model which forecasts 3°C of warming by the end of this century. No scientifically realistic model forecasts anything remotely close to 3°C of warming by the end of this century. The only models forecasting that mush warming are based on Relative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (“The stuff nightmares are made from”).
Rising seas can destroy vital ecosystems in the Everglades and at some point could even threaten icons like the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island.
The average elevation of Everglades National Park is about 6′ above sea level. No actual data indicate that sea level will rise by more than 1 foot by the end of this century. Claims of several feet of sea level rise are invariably based on RCP 8.5 – BAD SCIENCE FICTION.
Sea level rises and it falls… always has, always will. It was about 1-2 meters higher than it currently is about 4,000 years ago during the Holocene highstand. The Everglades moved to it’s current location during the fall in sea level (which was related to the formation and advance of the Glacier National Park Glaciers). When sea level rises, the Everglades move up-slope and inland. When sea level falls, it moves down-slope ans seaward. Florida is dominated by Karst topography.
The idiotic comment about “icons like the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island” really doesn’t deserve to be addressed… But, I will address it, because it’s fun and easy. Unsurprisingly, the formerly respectable National Geographic has made similar moronic comments about the Statue of Liberty.

This is NOAA’s record of sea level rise at The Battery in New York City…

Sea level near the Statue of Liberty has been rising at less than 3 mm/yr for as long as it’s been measured. That’s about 1″ every 10 years.
The top of the Statue of Liberty’s torch is 315′ above sea level.
Here is NOAA’s sea level trend projected to 2100 plotted at the same scale as the Statue of Liberty…

Reply to  David Middleton
June 20, 2016 12:19 pm

Any living thing that exists in a narrow range of ecosystem is necessarily at risk of change, and change has always and will always happen. Pup fish, bristle cone pines, Joshua trees, redwood trees – none have assured futures. That is the case for the vast majority of every specie that has ever lived. We can’t prevent it and we shouldn’t try to reverse this very natural process.
The models are wrong and should not be used as justification for doing environmental evil against natural change.

June 20, 2016 7:53 am

I was said Obama is black, and Michael Jackson is dead, so who is this WASP man with a US flag pin smiling on the picture ?

Curious George
June 20, 2016 8:03 am

It is forbidden to fly over Yosemite lower than 2,000 feet above the rim. Our beloved Nobel Peace Prize winner must have granted himself an exception.

June 20, 2016 8:23 am

Every president is bought and paid for on taking office. And not by the voters. Obama made promises to the green lobbies, but said essentially nothing, until the last year of his presidency. Now, he is talking only to get the donations flowing in to the Democrat party for the upcoming election. Before you jump on me, his executive orders via EPA were simply payoffs to another lobbying group, who he thought would be more profitable than coal. Climate change was the cover. Wolves in greensheep clothing.
Obama (and most presidents) is nothing more than a biomechanical automaton. Just look for who is pulling the strings.

June 20, 2016 8:25 am

Watching a person suffering from narcissistic personality disorder is never a pleasant sight.
Living under the thumb of one is even worse.

June 20, 2016 8:32 am

Yet again, this is easy to disprove. Any time the global-warming cultists claim changing temps in some area are causing some disaster, go see if there is any evidence even that the temp has been rising there.
It is easy. You go to WolframAlpha at the site below, and enter a phrase such as what I have posted below.
If you do this for “Yosemite,” you will not see rising temperatures.
If you end up in a crowd with some global-warming believers, just start asking them where they are from, or where on the globe they have worked or visited, enter that town, and play “try to find the Hockey Stick.” You almost CANNOT find a specific temp record at one locale with a temp increase that parallels the supposed global temp rise….
“average temperature yosemite past 80 years”

Curious George
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
June 20, 2016 9:06 am

“Yosemite temperature trend” yields a negative trend, -0.082 F/year there. Wolfram should be investigated by a RICO fame attorney general.

Gunga Din
June 20, 2016 3:14 pm

Why do I get the feeling that his little speech was an excuse to take his family on a very expensive vacation?
Sort of like, on your taxes, righting off a family vacation to Disney World as “a business trip”.

Chris Yu
June 20, 2016 4:22 pm

Calm down people, this was nothing more than Obama try to fit in a few more vacations on the taxpayer’s expense. He had to make a speech so it would be “official USA business” and all expenses covered.

June 21, 2016 4:57 am

I don’t believe for a second Obama believes this climate change crap. This is a power grab opportunity and knows that if he and others in on this preach this lie long enough, people will believe it true and then they can justify all the tax thievery they can hand out. Just another step of progression towards communism.

June 22, 2016 6:20 pm

If I remember what I was taught in the 80s the Black Hawk burns between 2 and 3 pounds of fuel per minute. I am willing to bet there were at least three of them on this detail. So he flew on Air Force One to New Mexico then to Nevada, again on Air Force One loaded onto Black Hawks flew them to Yosemite flew back to the airport boarded Air Force One again and flew back to D.C. All for a father’s day outing that he used to tell us the evils of manmade global warming. For some reason I have a hard time taking him seriously.

%d bloggers like this: