Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Barack Hussein Obama

2010-03-24T04:49:39Z

JPope: The majority of the sources to which the word 'allegedly' linked all confirmed Obama's birth in Hawaii. I think it's well-evidenced enough at this point.

{{President
|image=President Barack Obama.jpg
|seq=44
|term_start=January 20, 2009
|term_end=Present
|party=Democrat
|vp=Joe Biden
|previous=George W. Bush
|next=
|birth_date=August 4, 1961
|age={{age|1961|8|4}}
|birth_place=
|death_date=
|death_place=
|spouse=[[Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama]]
|spouse2=
|religion=Described in this entry
}}
'''Barack Hussein Obama II''' aka '''Barry Soetoro'''<ref>http://www.newsweek.com/id/128633/page/1</ref><ref>[http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/13056.htm] israelinsider. 14 August 2008. Accessed 23 January 2010.</ref><ref>McGrew, Mark S. [http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-01-2009/106972-Barry_Soetoro-0 Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama vs World Leaders]. ''[[Pravda]].ru. 19 January 2009. Accessed 23 January 2010.</ref>, born<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82033]</ref><ref>[http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg Large, high-resolution picture of his birth certificate]</ref><ref>[http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news KITV Honolulu report]</ref><ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/farber/Obama_birth_certificate/2009/04/06/200320.html]</ref><ref>Obama's [[African]] grandmother Sarah Hussein Obama says Barack was born in her presence in Kenya.[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2104131/posts Obama Born In Kenya? His Grandmother Says Yes, Israeli News, October 12, 2008][http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78931 Democrat: Obama's grandma confirms Kenyan birth, WND, October 23, 2008][http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b58_1225645143 Audio Conversation Link]</ref> in [[Honolulu]] Aug. 4, 1961) is the 44th President of the [[United States]], and previously served less than four years as a first-term [[Democratic party|Democratic]] [[Senator]] from [[Illinois]] (2005-2008). Obama and his running mate [[Senator Joseph Biden]] won the presidential election<ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_wins_presidency/2008/11/04/147788.html?utm_medium=RSS]</ref> after 23 months of campaigning that spent over $700 million,<ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cid=N00009638</ref> much of it raised from undisclosed or fraudulent donors.<ref>"Obama’s finance team missed quite a few obviously troubling large donations, from such unsavory individuals as Mr. Jfggjjfgj, 'Mong Kong,' 'Test Person,' and 'Jockim Alberton,' who lives at a fictional address on a street that does not exist in Wilmington, Delaware. How many fictional characters might there be among the $220 million that Obama has collected in small, undisclosed contributions? Obama's small donors have all been recorded, and he could easily follow McCain’s lead by disclosing this major source of his campaign’s money."[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTllNTk2MDNmNDk1YmQ0OWEzOTZmMTVmODUwZTQwY2E= "Fake Donors, Phony Pledge, ''National Review'' (Oct. 22, 2008)] Obama did not.</ref> Obama spent far more per vote than McCain did: Obama spent $7.39 per vote, while McCain spent only $5.78 per vote.<ref>http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/?_08+00+PR</ref> Claimed by [[liberals]] to be a brilliant orator, Obama depends completely on reading from teleprompters when he talks, even in an elementary school.<ref>"President Barack Obama visited a sixth grade classroom in Falls Church, Virginia. What is particularly odd is Mr. Obama brought two teleprompters into the classroom along with the podium with the Presidential seal (video below)."[http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2010/jan/24/compare-obamas-teleprompters-classroom-moment-2006/]</ref>

As President, Obama has pushed for establishing a Palestinian state over the objection of [[Israel]]'s Prime Minister,<ref>http://www.indianexpress.com/news/us-is-not-and-will-never-be-at-war-with-islam....-many-americans-have.../444572/</ref> inclusion of [[Turkey]] in the [[European Union]]<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6051268.ece</ref> and holding [[Guantanamo]] detainees indefinitely without trial.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052104045.html Obama Endorses Indefinite Detention Without Trial for Some], Peter Finn, Washington Post, May 22, 2009. </ref>

'''Since abandoning the "War on Terror" in Obama's first year, the rate of terrorist attacks on the United States has gone from zero per year during George W. Bush's last year, <ref>During Bush's last year http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,335500,00.html</ref> to at least four.'''<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-detroit-airline26-2009dec26,0,7673563,full.story</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/us/05explode.html?_r=1&ref=us</ref><ref>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/05/25/2009-05-25_small_bomb_goes_off_outside_upper_east_side_starbucks.html</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/04recruit.html?_r=1&ref=us</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/us/politics/20hood.html</ref>.

Obama's budget and stimulus bill advanced his [[Socialism|socialist]] idea of "'''spreading the wealth'''."<ref>"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." [http://www.nypost.com/seven/10152008/news/politics/obama_fires_a_robin_hood_warning_shot_133685.htm OBAMA FIRES A 'ROBIN HOOD' WARNING SHOT], N.Y. Post </ref>
<ref>John McCain quipped during the campaign, "He's running for Redistributor In Chief, I'm running for Commander In Chief."[http://news.chennaionline.com/newsitem.aspx?NEWSID=9fab8324-a1a1-4ad6-840f-76b04a405a65&CATEGORYNAME=INTER McCain Attacks Obama's Faith in Americans] Fox News, 10-31-2008. The slogan "from each according to their ability to each according to their need" is an idea originally proposed by [[Karl Marx]] and could be the inspiration for the centrally planned economy Obama plans to introduce to the US when he is installed into office.</ref> His [[Socialized Medicine|health care plan]] would force individuals to purchase health care or pay fines and force many into a poorly run single payer system.<ref>The socialization of health care will force taxpayers to pay for healthcare for those who refuse to or can not afford to purchase it themselves.</ref> To announce his trip to [[Berlin]] in July 2008, Obama used posters which show a marked similarity to posters of [[Lenin]] and [[Che Guevara]].<ref>[http://andrightlyso.com/2008/07/24/obama-lenin-gaffe/ Obama's direct copy of a Lenin poster for his Berlin visit]</ref><ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/31/the-la-times-looks-into-the-obama-che-iconcography-connection/ The LA Times looks into the Obama-Che iconography connection] by Michelle Malkin </ref> During Obama's youth in Hawaii, he developed a strong, almost Father/Son relationship with [[Frank Marshall Davis]], a high level [[Communist Party]] functionary<ref>http://www.aim.org/aim-report/is-barack-obama-a-marxist-mole/ "Is Barack Obama a Marxist Mole?", Accuracy in Media.</ref> while Obama has stated that his favorite professors in school were themselves Marxists.

Obama has stated, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the [[national security]] objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s Video])

Charles Chaput, the Catholic Archbishop of Denver, the city where Obama was nominated for president, criticized Obama as the "most committed" [[abortion]]-supporting candidate "since the ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' abortion decision in 1973."<ref>http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14088</ref> Obama said "the first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act."<ref>[http://christiannewswire.com/news/560716251.html]</ref> It "would invalidate virtually all state and federal limitations on abortion, and would make [[partial-birth abortion]] legal again."<ref>[http://www.lifenews.com/nat3961.html, Pro-Life Voters Must Work Overtime to Stop Pro-Abortion Barack Obama,] June 4, 2008. Indeed, Obama was upset with the decision of the [[United States Supreme Court|Supreme Court]] not to strike down the law passed by the [[United States Congress]] to prohibit partial-birth abortion, believing that partial-birth abortion is guaranteed right of the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]] and that there should be no ability to legislate against it.</ref>

The [[Association of American Physicians and Surgeons]] observed that Obama used techniques of [[mind control]] in his campaign, as in this speech: "a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, 'I have to vote for Barack.'"<ref name="mind control">http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/0089 . The doctors observe that "Obama's logo is noteworthy. It is always there, a small one in the middle of the podium, providing a point of visual fixation ... [that] resembles a crystal ball, a favorite of hypnotists."</ref>

== Presidency (2009-Present) ==

The Obama administration was wracked by [[scandal]]s from its earliest days. See: [[Obama Administration]].

== Plunging approval ratings ==
:''Main article : [[Barack Obama approval ratings]]''

[[File:800px-Beer summit cheers.jpg|thumb|right|350px|center|President Obama toasts Henry Louis Gates Jr. The president told the nation at a prime time news conference Gates was a close personal friend. Gates is accredited with being the inspiration behind a 1999 apologetic entitled, ''Black Like Mao: Red China and Black Revolution.''<ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccbh/souls/vol1no4/vol1num4art1.pdf ''Black Like Mao: Red China and Black Revolution''], Robin D.G. Kelley and Betsy Esche, ''Souls'' Volume 1, Number 4 Fall 1999, p. 39 in original (p. 34 pdf).</ref> ]]

After Obama's first year in office his public approval ratings stood lower the [[George W. Bush]]'s did at the same point in the Bush presidency.<ref>[http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jOXgdP1BoxXRqTf4yf3BSFn2sa1Q Obama popularity lower than Bush's at six-month mark: poll]</ref> The growing perception of Obama's progressive [[socialism|far left]] agenda was marked after the "Gates flap,"<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073004097.html</ref> Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. of [[Harvard]] was arrested on [[misdemeanor]] charges. Gates told the arresting officer, "Do you know who I am?" Gates was a friend of Obama.<ref>http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/07/23/police-and-president-obama/comment-page-2/?action=late-new</ref> When asked about the incident at a press conference, Obama charged the arresting officer with "acting stupidly." Polls shortly after revealed Obama's personal popularity and approval ratings declined significantly across the board, on every major subject and among all demographic groups.<ref>http://people-press.org/report/532/obamas-ratings-slide</ref>

A February 2010 Marist Poll showed for the first time since taking office, a majority of Independent registered voters - 57% - disapproved of his job performance with only 29% approving. 47% of registered voters nationwide report President Obama has fallen below their expectations. 42% say he has met their expectations while just 7% think he has exceeded them.<ref>Marist Poll, [President Obama’s Approval Rating & The 2010 Midterm Elections], February 8, 2010.</ref> The Marist Poll reported "Democrats have become less positive toward Obama and Independents have become more negative."
[[File:Obama_total_approval_january_11_2010.jpg‎|thumb|right|300px|center]]
=== Approval Ratings and Obama's Misplaced Priorities ===

Obama’s approval rating for handling health care has fallen steadily since April 2009 led by a steep a 17-point slide among independents. An ''[[ABC News]]/[[Washington Post]]'' poll in August 2009 showed public doubt about [[health care reform]] with a rise in views the president's proposals would do more harm than good. Charlie Cook, a leading election analyst, compared Obama and his battle to push through his health care agenda to [[Moby Dick|Captain Ahab]] and his suicidal hunt for the great white [[whale]].<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7043884.ece</ref> Despite poll after poll showing that Americans’ main priority is jobs, President Obama focused on his health care plans.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7043884.ece</ref>

=== ObamaCare - High Stakes Political Gamble ===

In July of 2009, it was reported that President Obama indicated to a Democrat Congressman that if [[ObamaCare]] did not pass it would destroy his presidency.<ref>http://reason.com/blog/2009/07/22/obama-youre-going-to-destroy-m</ref> In addition, in July of 2009, political consultant [[Dick Morris]] publicly declared that ObamaCare was going to be Obama's [[Waterloo]].<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXcE1O1y4es Dick Morris - ObamaCare will be Obama's Waterloo - VIDEO]</ref> On March 6, 2010, the Associated Press when describing Barack Obama's efforts to get [[ObamaCare|his health care plans]] enacted used the word "frantic".<ref>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gkPFIC1wrQ-L7QiPDPFt0IQLXVygD9E9CO300</ref>
[[File:Obama-6th-grade-teleprompter.jpg|right|thumb|250px| Obama addresses a sixth grade class with two teleprompters]]
=== Barack Obama and American Conservatism Backlash ===

In October of 2009, Niles Gardiner reported in the [[Britain|British]] newspaper ''The Daily Telegraph'':
{{cquote|This week’s striking [[Gallup]] poll on political ideology is further confirmation that the United States is in essence a [[conservative]] nation, which has ironically become even more conservative under Barack Obama. According to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36 percent as moderate and 20 percent as liberal. This is the first time conservatives have outnumbered moderates in America since 2004.<ref>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100014891/barack-obama-has-failed-to-defeat-conservatism-in-america/</ref>}}

== Obama Administration Health Care Plan and Its Advocacy Methods ==
:''Main article'': [[Obamacare]]
Senior citizens are key Democratic party constituents that could kill [[Socialized medicine|Obama's socialistic health care plan]].<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsImVGsFlmA</ref> Recently, President Obama falsely claimed that the senior citizen group [[AARP]] endorsed his administration's health care plan when they never made such an endorsement.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zxf5ELaC4Q&feature=channel_page</ref> In addition, Barack Obama's "Disinformation Czar" (whose supposed job was to correct disinformation that others are spreading about the Obama administration's health care plan) was recently caught spreading misleading information.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4HgDfNsH3M&feature=channel_page</ref> Skepticism is mounting concerning Obama's health care plan and Obama himself and the skepticism is growing for valid reasons.<ref>http://www.buffalonews.com/248/story/762324.html</ref> For example, the usually pro-Obama news organization the [[Associated Press]] recently published an article which was critical of Obama that was entitled ''FACT CHECK: Obama's health care claims adrift''?<ref>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gayIiVSnEX8h2nbrvI2X4a9eo4qQD99K0NP00</ref>

The [[Association of American Physicians and Surgeons]] (AAPS) maintains there are no redeeming provisions of Obama's health care plan and offers a number of criticisms.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00377</ref> The AAPS maintains that Obama's plan will significantly increase the overall cost of health care to the United States public plus reduce the quality of care that the system provides.<ref>http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/00377</ref> Political analyst and commentator [[Dick Morris]] has asserted that Obama's health care plan will lead to the significant rationing of senior health care which will decrease the life span of senior citizens.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsImVGsFlmA</ref>

=== Obama Administration Health Care Plan and Liberal Elitism ===
[[File:arrogant_obama.jpg|right|125px|thumbnail|Barack Obama ]]
In 2007, when Obama was running for the office of President of the United States, he promised Americans "health care that is as good as the health care that I have as a member of Congress."<ref>http://www.emaxhealth.com/10/18430.html</ref> However, recently when a newspaper reporter pressed Obama on whether he would commit to Americans having the same health care as congressmen, Obama repeatedly refused to commit to his previous promise of Americans having the same coverage as members of Congress.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvzLDb2igKM</ref> President Obama merely claimed Americans would have health care coverage that would "largely match up" with what members of Congress have.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvzLDb2igKM</ref> President Obama also stated he is constantly followed around by a personal physician.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvzLDb2igKM</ref> The Obama administration's [[Liberal Elite|liberal elitism]] is not unusual when it comes to health care. For example, [[Belinda Stronach]], a former Member of the Canadian Parliament, chose to have a surgical treatment in the United States rather than be treated in Canada for her condition ([[Canada]] has a [[socialized medicine]] system of health care).<ref>http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/09/14/canadian-official-refuses-canadian-health-care/</ref>

Congressman [[John Fleming]] has offered a legislative amendment that would require United States congressmen and senators to take the same health care plan they try to force on others (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt). Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go to his website and sign his petition.<ref>http://fleming.house.gov/index.html</ref>

== Barack Obama and United States Unemployment ==

''For more information please see'': [[Barack Obama and United States Unemployment]]

The United States unemployment rate was 9.7% in February of 2010.<ref>http://www.dsnews.com/articles/unemployment-rate-unchanged-at-97-2010-03-05</ref> In addition, on March 5, 2010, MarketWatch reported concerning U.S. unemployment, "The U6 alternative gauge of the unemployment rate, which includes discouraged workers and those forced to work part-time, rose to 16.8% from 16.5%."<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/payrolls-fall-36000-jobless-rate-steady-at-97-2010-03-05?reflink=MW_news_stmp</ref>

A Kauffman Foundation study found that American entrepreneurs will limit hiring in 2010.<ref>http://www.gaebler.com/News/Small-Business-Finance/Entrepreneurs-will-limit-hiring-in-2010-19568840.htm</ref> According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, "Over a recent 15-year period, small businesses created some 65 percent of the net new jobs in the private sector."<ref>http://www.sba.gov/advo/press/10-03.html</ref> On February 12, 2010, an [[American]] small business owner published a piece in the ''American Thinker'' critical of President [[Obama]] entitled, ''Dear Mr. President: Why We Are Not Hiring '' that was reflective of anti-[[Obama administration]] policy sentiment among many United States small business owners. <ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/dear_mr_president_why_we_are_n.html</ref> American businessman William H Watson also wrote a piece critical of President Obama policies entitled, ''Why is Small Business Not Hiring?''<ref>http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2509637</ref> Given that small business owners are among the most respected individuals in the United States with a 94% approval rating among the U.S. public, small business owners speaking out against President Obama's policies likely contributes to his plunging approval ratings among the United States public.<ref>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/september_2009/americans_now_view_congress_as_least_respected_job</ref> On March 6, 2010, a coalition of business people allied with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, announced they were going spend between 4-10 million dollars in ads criticizing ObamaCare. The ads will be focused on how ObamaCare will hurt companies by adding additional taxes and requirements plus it will not control medical costs.<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-10/obama-s-health-care-push-gets-challenge-from-business-coalition.html</ref>

The ''Christian Science Monitor'' questions whether [[Obama]] is tough enough to help [[America]] break down foreign trade barriers which would create more American jobs.<ref>http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2010/0311/Jobs-jobs-jobs-For-Obama-they-lie-in-more-exports</ref>

=== Obama Policies and Return of Stagflation Concerns ===
In February of 2010, the ''[[Washington Times]]'' reported:
{{cquote|Prices rose 2.7 percent during 2009, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' recent update of the Consumer Price Index (CPI). This is a worrisome fact because last year's unemployment rate averaged more than 9 percent. This trend may signal a return of "stagflation," a merger of stagnation and [[inflation]].

In the 1970s, stagflation shocked traditional [[Keynesian economics|Keynesian]] economists, whose models said the economy could not suffer from both high unemployment and rapid inflation at the same time. Unfortunately, the Keynesians were wrong, because an economy obviously can experience both evils simultaneously...

It seems every week the Obama administration announces some new tax or mandate that will further handicap businesses. Regardless of the official definitions of recession, the economy will remain sluggish for years to come. But if the [[Federal Reserve]] continues with its reckless policies, Americans will experience high inflation on top of high unemployment. As in the late 1970s, Americans will see that the pundits are wrong, because stagflation is very real.<ref>http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/19/setting-the-stage-for-stagflation/</ref>}}

== Obamunism ==
:''Main article'' : [[Obamunism]]
[[File:4135523219 e140763872 o.jpg|thumbnail|430px|A new study demonstrates Obama currently has dramatically fewer advisors who’ve made their living via the private sector than any other [[America]]n President in the last 108 years — since the turn of the 20th century when the business of America became business.<ref>http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/12/01/obamas-achilles-heel/</ref><ref>http://blog.american.com/?p=7572</ref>]]
Critics of the Obama administration have coined the word "[[Obamunism]]" to describe Barack Obama's [[socialism|socialistic]] and "[[fascism]] light" [[economic planning]] policies ([[Benito Mussolini]] defined fascism as the wedding of state and corporate powers. Accordingly, trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] labels [[Obama administration corporate bailouts|Obama's corporate bailouts]] as being "fascism light" in nature).<ref>http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/daily-intel/2009/07/20/obamunism-inc</ref><ref>http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/gerald-celente-6944</ref> Obamunism can also refer to Obama's [[Obama administration fiscal policy|ruinous fiscal policies]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|reckless monetary policies]].<ref>http://seekingalpha.com/article/120883-monetary-policynot-obama-s-stimulusis-what-needs-watching</ref><ref>http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/editorials/bams_wise_words_169731.htm</ref><ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/</ref> In February of 2010, Jim Rogers, the world renowned investor, said concerning the [[Obama administration]]'s [[monetary policy]], that the [[European Union]], [[China|Chinese]], and [[Australia|Australian]] central bankers are more competent and honest than the [[Federal Reserve]].<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTXaAXusiI</ref> Furthermore, Mr. Rogers asserted that Federal Reserve Chairman [[Ben Bernanke]], whom President Obama re-appointed to be the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is "throwing gasoline on a fire" via his [[inflation|inflationary]] policies which are debasing the United States dollar.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTXaAXusiI</ref> Under President Obama the American government's share of the national gross domestic product has significantly increased.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kABRyZdQXGw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breakingnews.com%2Fvideo%2Fdick-morris-obamas-waterloo&feature=player_embedded</ref>

[[Wall Street]] firms and banks that were bailed out were among Obama's biggest campaign supporters.<ref>http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638</ref> Therefore, the Obama administration bailouts of corrupt, unproductive, and reckless Wall Street firms was hardly surprising, although it certainly was not helpful in making the United States economy more productive and prosperous. A 2005 study found that government corporate bailouts are often done for mere political considerations and the economic resources allocated exhibit significantly worse economic performance than resources allocated using purely business considerations.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=676905</ref> Proponents of [[free market]] capitalism said Bernanke should not have bailed out failing firms and instead should have allowed free market capitalism to quickly recover as it did in the depression of 1920 without government intervention (free market capitalists assert that government intervention drags out economic recessions and depressions).<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTXaAXusiI</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czcUmnsprQI</ref>

Top trend forecaster [[Gerald Celente]] predicts that the corrupt economic policies of the Obama administration will lead to a second [[Great Depression|great depression]] (Celente predicted the 1987 US stock market crash, the dot.com crash, the US 2008/2009 recession, and the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s) and may lead to a "second [[American Revolution]]" (Celente predicted the [[Tea Party Movement|tax protests]] that are now occurring in America).<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MMX3SKzrfU&feature=channel_page</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9bfw1ebgw&feature=response_watch</ref> Celente also asserts that the costly and inefficient temporary short term methods that the Obama administration is using to alleviate economic problems in the short term (which is causing massive increases in [[Obama administration deficit spending]]) is only making matters worse and will not prevent the worse economic depression in United States history from occurring.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C8K7rWkGGw</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LBffdIW0XA&feature=response_watch</ref>

The Obama administration has been sharply criticized for [[Obama administration deficit spending|its massive deficit spending]] and [[Obama administration monetary policy|its reckless monetary policy]] via vast increases in the [[money supply]].<ref>http://seekingalpha.com/article/120883-monetary-policynot-obama-s-stimulusis-what-needs-watching</ref><ref>http://www.nypost.com/seven/05172009/postopinion/editorials/bams_wise_words_169731.htm</ref><ref>http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/</ref> Celente predicts that if a "second American Revolution" occurs in a peaceful and productive manner, it may include a [[Third Party System|third party movement]] of governance that will advocate a more [[free market]] [[capitalism]] approach to the American economy and a more strict interpretation of the [[United States Constitution|United States constitution]] as far as the authors' [[original intent]].<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MMX3SKzrfU&feature=channel_page</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9bfw1ebgw&feature=response_watch</ref>
[[Image:LarrySummers.jpg|thumb|right|200px|thumbnail|[[Larry Summers]] ]]
=== Larry Summers - Corrupt and Incompetent Chief Economic Advisor to Obama ===
[[Lawrence Summers]] is the Director of the [[White House]]'s [[National Economic Council]] (NEC) for President Barack Obama. The NEC was established to advise the U.S. President on U.S. and global economic policy.<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nec/</ref> Larry Summers favored the bailouts of Wall Street firms and banks.<ref>http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/02/obama-administr.html</ref>

A government watchdog group reports the following conflicts of interest of Larry Summers:
{{cquote|Larry Summers, the director of the National Economic Council, ...continues to accept large speaking fees from bailed out banks.

"Most of the companies paying Summers' speaking fees are found at top the list of contributors to politicians from both parties, leaving voters to wonder if there is anyone left who isn't in Wall Street's pocket."<ref>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2009/04/06/larry-summers-speaking-fees-targeted-by-watchdogs</ref>}}

The [[Washington Post]] reported:
{{cquote|Lawrence Summers, the chairman of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, collected roughly $5.2 million in compensation from hedge fund D.E. Shaw over the past year and was paid more than $2.7 million in speaking fees from several troubled Wall Street firms and other organizations.<ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/04/03/summers_raked_in_speaking_fees.html</ref>}}

Even the liberal publication [[The Nation]] declared concerning Obama's chief economic advisor Larry Summers:
{{cquote|In 1988, he was [[Michael Dukakis]]'s chief economic advisor, but when that campaign failed to bring Summers to power, he turned to America's great rival, the former [[Soviet Union]], to try out his economic experiments. In 1990, [[Lithuania]], a restive Soviet republic seeking independence, hired Summers to advise on that country's economic transformation. Poor Lithuania had no idea what it got itself into. This was Summers's first opportunity to tackle a country in economic crisis and put his wunderkind theories into practice. The results were literally suicidal: in 1990, when Summers first arrived, Lithuania's suicide rate was 26.1 per 100,000 and falling. Just five years after Summers got his hands on Lithuania's economy, life became so unbearable under the economic transition that the suicide rate nearly doubled to 45.6 per 100,000, worse than any other ex-Soviet republic in transition. In fact, it was the highest suicide rate in the world, suggesting something particularly harsh and brutal about the economic transition in that country as opposed to the others, where suffering and pain were common. Things got so bad that in 1992, after just two years of Summers-nomics, the traumatized Lithuanians voted the [[communism|communist]] party back into power, the first East European nation to do so--even though just a year earlier Lithuanians actually died on the streets fighting [[communism]].

Fresh off his success in Lithuania, Summers moved to the [[World Bank]], where he was named the chief economist in 1991, the year he issued his famous let's-pollute-Africa memo. It was also the year that Summers, and his [[Harvard]] protégé Andrei Schleifer (who worked with Summers on the Lithuania economic transformation), began their catastrophic "rescue" of Russia's crisis-ridden economy. It's a complicated story involving corruption, cronyism and economic devastation. But by the end of the 1990s, [[Russia]]'s [[GDP]] had collapsed by more than 60 percent, its population was suffering the worst death-to-birth ratio of any industrialized nation in the twentieth century, and the financial markets that Summers and Schleifer helped create had collapsed in what was then the world's biggest debt default ever. The result was the rise of [[Vladimir Putin]] and a national aversion to [[free market]]s and anything associated with Western liberalism.<ref>http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081124/ames</ref>}}

=== Larry Summers and Leftist Economics ===

George Gerald Reisman, Professor Emeritus of Economics at [[Pepperdine University]] and author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics, wrote that Summers socialistic ideas on redistributing wealth demonstrate that Summers is a "lightweight leftist" who "fails to understand the nature of the most essential feature of capitalism, namely, private ownership of the means of production and the indispensable role it plays in the standard of living of the average person."<ref>http://blog.mises.org/archives/009031.asp</ref> Reisman also wrote that Summers is a shallow and ignorant man whose knowledge of economics is minimal and whose evil views qualify him to be the economic advisor to [[Hugo Chavez]] of [[Venezuela]] or [[Robert Mugabe]] of [[Zimbabwe]], but do not qualify him to be an economic advisor to the President of the United States.<ref>http://blog.mises.org/archives/009031.asp</ref>

== Barack Obama and Liberal Elitism ==

Obama has consistently shown himself to be a [[Liberal Elite|liberal elitist]] who looks down on "ordinary" Americans. Asked while campaigning for the [[Pennsylvania]] primary to explain why small-town [[Democrats]] did not support him, Obama replied "it's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." When Obama made this remark he was alluding to small-town people who had experienced long periods of joblessness. In response to predictable outrage when his remarks were unexpectedly publicized, Obama did not recant his statement but instead replied, I "didn't say it as well as I should have."<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7344532.stm</ref> Although many rural counties went for McCain, Obama carried the state with 54.6% of the vote, compared to 44.3% for John McCain.<ref>[http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/ElectionsInformation.aspx?FunctionID=13&ElectionID=28&OfficeID=1]</ref>

In an attempt to counter the view by many that Obama is an elitist, he began running campaign ads claiming that he "worked his way through college and Harvard Law." This claim is at best an exaggeration, as Obama only held summer jobs while in college and law school<ref>http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_work_claim.html</ref>, and he would have likely benefited from special scholarships not available to most students.

===Obama's Charitable Giving===

''For more information please see'': [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]]

[[File:Poor-woman.jpg|right|thumb|300px|In the years 2000 through 2004, before becoming a United States Senator and being in the public spotlight, Obama gave less than 2% of his earnings to charity even though he made about $250,000 per year (In the years 2000 to 2002, Barack Obama gave less than 1% of his income to charity).<ref>http://patterico.com/2008/10/31/obama-and-bidens-charitable-giving-they-dont-want-to-spread-their-own-wealth-around/</ref><ref>http://atangledweb.squarespace.com/httpatangledwebsquarespace/obamas-charitable-contributions.html</ref> For more information please see: [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]] ]]
In the years 2000 through 2004, before becoming a United States Senator and being in the public spotlight, Obama gave less than 2% of his earnings to charity even though he made $250,000 per year. Since becoming a national figure, that amount has jumped to about 6%.<ref>http://patterico.com/2008/10/31/obama-and-bidens-charitable-giving-they-dont-want-to-spread-their-own-wealth-around/</ref>

Below is Obama's charitable giving expressed as percentage of his income for the years of 2000 to 2006 when he was earning about $250,000 per year:

*2000: 0.9%
*2001: 0.5%
*2002: 0.4%
*2003: 1.4%
*2004: 1.2%
*2005: 4.7%
*2006: 6.1%<ref>http://atangledweb.squarespace.com/httpatangledwebsquarespace/obamas-charitable-contributions.html</ref>

Obama's charitable giving pattern is not surprising given what we know about United States [[liberal]] politicians and charitable giving and also the charitable giving in the general population of liberals in the United States.<ref>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1</ref><ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref>

===Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ===
''For more information please see'': [[Liberal politicians and uncharitableness]]
The political magazine the ''[[American Spectator]]'' declared:
{{cquote|The last two Democratic Party nominees for President have come up short on the charity scale. [[Al Gore]] has been famously stingy when it comes to actually giving his own money to charities. In 1998 he was embarrassed when his tax returns revealed that he gave just $353 to charity...

Senator [[John Kerry]] likewise has a poor record. In 1995 he gave zero to charity, but did spend $500,000 to buy a half stake in a seventeenth century painting. In 1993, he gave $175 to the needy. Later, of course, Kerry married the rich widow Theresa Heinz, and today is active in charitable causes using the Heinz foundation as his vehicle...

[Senator Ted] [[Ted Kennedy|Kennedy]]’s tax returns are obviously a closely guarded secret. But when he chose to run for President in the 1970s, he released some of them. With a net worth of more than $8 million in the early 1970s and an income of $461,444 from a series of family trusts, Senator Robin Hood gave barely 1 percent of his income to charity. The sum is about as much as Kennedy claimed as a write-off on his fifty-foot sailing sloop Curragh.<ref>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&c=1</ref>}}

===Liberals and uncharitableness ===
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]]
In March of 2008, [[George Will]] cited a study by Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at [[Syracuse University]], which indicated that American liberal households earn more than conservative American households but give less to charity.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> In addition American conservatives donate more time and given more blood than American liberals.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref>

=== Barack Obama's Brother George Obama and Poverty ===
In August of 2008 the NY Daily News reported the following concerning Obama and his half-brother [[George Obama]]:
[[File:Barack Obamas Brother in Bengo-002.jpg|right|thumb|200px|[[George Obama]]]]
{{cquote|Barack Obama wants to live in the White House - but his youngest half-brother lives in the poorhouse.

George Obama, one of the candidate's seven living half-siblings, lives on pennies a month in a hut in Africa, the Italian edition of Vanity Fair revealed.

"No one knows who I am," George Obama, 26, told the magazine. "I live like a recluse, no one knows I exist."

He lives on the outskirts of Nairobi in a 65-square-foot shack decorated with posters of the Italian soccer clubs AC Milan and Inter, and a calendar of beaches.

"I live here on less than a dollar a month," he said....<ref>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/08/20/2008-08-20_barack_obamas_povertystricken_halfbrothe.html</ref>

A spokesman for Barack Obama declined repeated requests for comment yesterday.

George Obama said he met his famous brother as a 5-year-old, and again in 2006 when Obama toured East Africa and visited Nairobi.

"It was very brief - we spoke for just a few minutes," he said.<ref>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/08/20/2008-08-20_barack_obamas_povertystricken_halfbrothe.html</ref>}}
[[File:KenyaSlumR 468x301.jpg|right|200px|thumbnail|[[George Obama]]'s neighborhood]]
In September of 2008, [[National Review]] featured an article by [[Dinesh D'Souza]] which declared:
{{cquote|George Obama’s shack measures six feet by ten feet, and yet he says that Barack Obama has done nothing to reach out to him or to help him. “I live like a recluse. If anyone says something about my surname, I say we are not related. I am ashamed.”<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTk1OTc2ZGVlNjg2NmU1YTlkMGJjZjk5OGEzMzIxYjA=</ref>}}

A critic of Barack Obama's uncharitableness towards his brother wrote:
{{cquote|Well, they say charity begins at home, but it hasn't apparently in this case. Hearing about what George is going through, you can't help but wonder why his brother Barack won't send the guy $20? I mean it would double his annual income.<ref>http://www.zimbio.com/George+Hussein+Onyango+Obama/articles/3/George+Obama+Barack+Obama+Brother+Fights+Life</ref>}}

Asked by Harry Smith from CBS about Obama leaving the campaign to visit his ailing grandmother, Obama replied, "Yeah, well, the -- I think most people understand that if you're not caring for your family, then you're probably not the kind of person who's going to be caring for other people." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2008/10/23/cbs-s-smith-compares-obama-lincoln-obama-attacks-hannity CBS’s Smith Compares Obama to Lincoln; Obama Attacks Hannity] NewsBusters.org, October 23, 2008</ref>

=== Barack Obama's Treatment of George Obama and Barack Obama's Inaugural Speech ===

Barack Obama's treatment of George Obama is particularly ironic and hypocritical given Barack Obama's inaugural speech.

Barack Obama declared in his inaugural speech:
{{cquote|To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it."<ref>http://uk.oneworld.net/guides/guidesweek/obama-inauguration-speech-world-poverty</ref>}}
[[Image:CharlesDarwin.jpg|thumb|125px|right|[[Charles Darwin]] ]]

=== Barack Obama's Uncharitableness/Liberal Elitism and Social Darwinism ===
''See also'': [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]]

[[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|Barack Obama's recent pattern of charitable giving]] and [[Barack Obama and liberal elitism|Barack Obama's liberal elitism]] is consistent with Obama being a [[Narcissism|narcissist]] which is a charge that has often been made against Barack Obama.<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/obama_oprah_and_the_guru_malig_1.html</ref> However, it is also true that Barack Obama is an [[evolution|evolutionist]]. Barack Obama told the ''York Daily Record'' that "I believe in [[evolution]]...".<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1999910/posts</ref> Barack Obama's recent pattern of charitable giving and liberal elitism is also in accordance with someone who has a certain degree of [[Social Darwinism|social darwinistic]] thinking. In addition to [[Liberals and uncharitableness|American liberals giving less to charity]], it also true that [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|American liberals are also more likely to believe in evolution]].

==Michelle Obama and Liberal Elitism==

''For more information please see:'' [[Michelle Obama and liberal elitism]]

=== Michelle Obama and Patient Dumping Allegations ===

[[Michelle Malkin]] and others allege that [[Michelle Obama]] created a [[Patient dumping|patient dumping]] scheme for a Chicago health care facility.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80YK2o3kq0E</ref><ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/michelle_obamas_patientdumping_1.html</ref><ref>http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/23/video-did-michelle-obama-start-a-patient-dumping-program/</ref> In March of 2009, the ''[[American Thinker]]'' wrote:
{{cquote|Substantial coverage was given to a recent indictment of the program by the American College of Emergency Physicians. ACEP's president, Dr. Nick Jouriles, released a statement suggesting that the initiative comes "dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,' a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act, and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick' wealthy patients over poor."<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/michelle_obamas_patientdumping_1.html</ref>}}

=== Michelle Obama and Food Bank Incident ===
[[Image:Obama_Michelle.jpg|right|thumb|[[Michelle Obama]] is reported to have worn $540 shoes to a food bank.<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/29/michelle-obama-wears-silv_n_193138.html</ref><ref>http://christwire.org/2009/05/michelle-obama-makes-fun-of-homeless-by-wearing-540-shoes-to-a-food-bank/</ref>]]
In May of 2008, the following was reported:
{{cquote|[[Michelle Obama]] continued to flaunt her money recently, as she made fun of homeless people by wearing $540 shoes to a food bank.

What a sick day and age we live in when millionaires endlessly gallivant around the globe in their jets and fancy clothes, but still make sure to remind the poor of just how little they have in pocket.

This is just more proof of how the liberal elite live these extravagant lives and are not in touch with us common people. We do all the hard work of fighting wars and building up this country, while they enjoy the fruits of our labor and control all the wealth.

My stomach churns with disgust because of these types of liberal antics and disregard for human life. For just about $5 a day, you can feed a starving child in Africa. With $540, Michelle Obama could by a struggling American family a month’s worth of groceries.<ref>http://christwire.org/2009/05/michelle-obama-makes-fun-of-homeless-by-wearing-540-shoes-to-a-food-bank/</ref><ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/29/michelle-obama-wears-silv_n_193138.html</ref>}}

[[Powerline]] offers the following criticism of Michelle Obama:
{{cquote|She says that she and Barack were born to parents of modest means, not with "silver spoons" in their mouths. Nobody knows the trouble they've seen. The burden of paying for her undergraduate education at [[Princeton]] and her law school education at [[Harvard]] has scarred her. It remains a motif of her stump speech. No one is accorded a chance to ask her if she thought about attending the University of Illinois, or if she's grateful for any of the financial assistance that facilitated her and her husband's attendance at the finest institutions of higher learning in the United States.<ref>http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/05/020456.php</ref>}}

== Various Political Policies and Actions of Barack Obama ==
===Enemies list===
In July 2009 suspicions arose over reports the Obama administration was creating a network<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27655039/</ref> of domestic informants and began compiling an enemies list. In a letter to President Obama, U.S. Sen. [[John Cornyn]], R-Texas, expressed serious concern about the White House's new program requesting Americans to forward email chains and other communications opposing the President's [[health care reform]] policies. Sen. Cornyn asked for assurances that the program was being carried out in a manner consistent with the [[First Amendment]] and America's tradition of [[free speech]] and public discourse.

Sen. Cornyn's letter also inquired about the collection of names, email addresses, IP addresses, and private speech of U.S. citizens that informants report, and raises the specter of a data collection program.
{{Cquote|I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed ‘fishy' or otherwise inimical to the White House's political interests. You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of [[free speech]] rights.<ref>http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ForPress.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=ebc2c77d-802a-23ad-4ae4-6ccf4c7a255c</ref>}}
[[File:Maria-and-Che.jpg|thumb|right|275px|A community organizer poses in front of [[mass murder]]er [[Che Guevara]] poster during the 2008 campaign; [http://patterico.com/2009/08/14/roxana-mayer-invited-to-town-hall-by-obama-organizer-who-sported-che-guevara-poster-at-obama-campaign-office/] the same community organizer [http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/4r9wf] falsely represented herself as a physician during a Townhall meeting on [[healthcare reform]] in 2009.
[http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/roxana_mayer_im_not_a_doctor_but_i_play_one_at_town/] ]]
Congressman Darrell Issa also expressed grave concern about the administration blurring the lines between political and official business by collecting data on administration critics.<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=8352544</ref>

=== Health care disinformation ===

A webpage at whitehouse.gov entitled "Reality Check" claims that the president's program "would be fully paid for over 10 years, and it would not add one penny to the deficit."<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/faq</ref> The [[CBO]] is mandated to prepare cost estimates and to show how individual legislative proposals would change spending or revenue levels under current law.<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/aboutcbo/budgetprocess.shtml</ref> A July 15 2009 letter from the CBO made this assessment,
{{Cquote|enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in the federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010-2019 period."<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/103xx/doc10310/06-15-HealthChoicesAct.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=52306</ref>}}

=== ACORN scandals ===

::''Main article : [[ACORN]]''

Madeleine Talbot, a leader of the Chicago Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), was arrested along with ACORN members while pursuing direct action against the Chicago City Council. Talbot hired Obama to train her staff in organizing techniques. From 1992 to 2004, Obama ran leadership training sessions.<ref>[http://www.socialpolicy.org/index.php?id=838 Case Study: Chicago-The Barack Obama Campaign], By Toni Foulkes, ''Social Policy'', Winter 2003, Vol. 34, No. 2 Spring 2004, Vol. 34, No. 3.</ref> According to the ''Chicago Daily Herald'', Acorn demonstrators pushed over the metal detector and table used to screen visitors, backed police against the doors to the council chamber, and blocked late-arriving aldermen and city staff from entering the session.<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=</ref>
[[File:1223acorn.jpg|thumb|241px|left|'''Obama was lead attorney for ACORN Housing prior to the subprime mortgage crisis''' and has extensive experience with the groups "community organizing" tactics.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMQ20wNhB_M</ref> ACORN has been accused of voter fraud, facilitating tax fraud, human trafficking, and child prostitution.]]
In 1994 Obama represented ACORN in the ''Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank'' suit against redlining. ACORN was the driving force<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html</ref> behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the [[Clinton Administration]] that greatly expanded the [[Community Redevelopment Act]] (CRA). Obama represented ACORN before Clinton administration regulators in this effort. With the new regulations, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, and the threat of lawsuits under fair housing laws, to induce lenders to expand subprime lending, or so-called "toxic assets." A 2007 report by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis notes 50% of all subprime mortgages were in predominantly minority census tracks.<ref>http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/06/01/ChomPennCross.pdf</ref>
<ref>http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2008/200829/200829pap.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/cra/cra_lending_during_subprime_meltdown.pdf</ref>

In the weeks leading up to the [[2008 Presidential election]], [[MSNBC]] reported the [[FBI]] was looking into ACORN voter fraud in several states.<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27220798/</ref> Obama's staff worked to delay investigations into Obama's former employer. In this way, hundreds of thousands, if not many more, votes may have been overcounted. [http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=297446]

==Political views of Barack Obama==
:''For the full article see [[Political positions of Barack Obama]]''
Obama's positions have been described as that of a [[Communism|“Marxist leftist".]]<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1753197/posts</ref> On numerous occasions Obama community organizers have been found flaunting banners of [[Marxist]]
[[guerrilla]] and [[murder]]er [[Che Guevara]].<ref>[http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/02/obama_workers_c.html Obama Workers' Che Guevara Poster Was No Fluke] from Moonbattery</ref> Former presidential candidate [[Alan Keyes]] calls Obama a "radical communist." <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/keyes_obama_destroy_US/2009/02/23/184503.html Alan Keyes: Obama Will Destroy U.S.] NewsMax, February 23, 2009</ref>

=== Maoism ===
A deep strain of Maoist thought has pervaded Barack Obama's influences throughout his life and has persisted in appointments he has made while serving as President.
*The ''[[Koji_Ariyoshi#The_Honolulu_Record|Honolulu Record]]'', the newspaper Obama's mentor [[Frank Marshall Davis]] wrote for was accused of Maoist [[deviationism]] during the [[Sino-Soviet split]] by its CPUSA overlords.<ref>[http://www.archive.org/stream/scopeofsovietact411956unit#page/n248/mode/1up Scope of Soviet activity in the United States.] Hearing before the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-fourth Congress, second session - Eighty-fifth Congress, first session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. (1956), [http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Scope_of_Soviet_Activity.pdf p. 2865 (p. 14 pdf).]</ref>

*Obama fundraiser, personal friend, and past employer Professor [[William Ayers]]' teaching curricula relies heavily on material that use Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, and Fidel Castro as authoritative sources.<ref>[http://www.academia.org/bill-ayers-unmasked/ Bill Ayers Unmasked,] Bethany Stotts, August 25, 2009, Accuracy in Academia. Retrieved February 15, 2010.</ref> Ayers has been a committed Maoist since at least 1969.<ref>Foreign Influence - Weather Underground Organization (WUO). FBI Chicago Field Office Report, August 20, 1976. Section I. Ideology D. [http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath1b.pdf ''Influence of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought'',] Pages 55-62 in original (pp. 18-25 pdf).</ref> Ayers is said to have ghost written part of Barack Obama's autobiography, ''Dreams From My Father.''<ref>[http://www.cashill.com/natl_general/who_wrote_dreams_from.htm, ''Who Wrote “Dreams From My Father"?'',] by Jack Cashill, October 9, 2008.</ref> Ayers was a leader in the [[SDS]]'s Maoist "Action Faction" which became the [[Weather Underground]] (WUO). Ayers, [[Jeff Jones]], and [[Mark Rudd]] of [[Progressives for Obama]] paid homage to [[Anna Louise Strong]], author of the ''The Thought of Mao Tse-tung,''<ref>[http://openlibrary.org/b/OL16335649M/thought_of_Mao_Tse-Tung ''The thought of Mao Tse-Tung,''] Anna Louise Strong, Published in 1947, ''[[Amerasia]]'' (New York).</ref> after purging deviationist elements from the SDS leadership in 1969.<ref>Foreign Influence - Weather Underground Organization (WUO). FBI Chicago Field Office Report, August 20, 1976, [http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath1c.pdf ''Influence of China''], Pages 144-145 in original (pp. 32-33 pdf).</ref>

*Ayers wife, former FBI Top Ten Most Wanted terrorist [[Bernardine Dohrn]] worked in the Law Firm of Sidley Austin<ref>Of the nearly $700 million dollars Barack Obama raised in 2008 to run for President, Sidley Austin was the 9th largest donor to the campaign. [http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00009638 Barack Obama (D) Top Contributors',] Center For Responsive Politics. Retrieved from opensecrets.org, March 2, 2010.</ref> in the late 1980s where Barack, Michelle Obama, and Dohrn first met. Dohrn participated in the purging of [[CPUSA]] elements from SDS leadership and declared the SDS National Office was henceforth responsible for the correct Marxist-Leninist line at the exclusion of non-Maoist [[deviationist]] forces. Dohrn held the position of Inter-Organizational Secretary in the SDS National Office. The Ayers/Dohrn faction of SDS formed the Weather Underground Organization. SDS Regional [[Community organizing|Community Organizer]] [[David Gilbert]] declared violent [[Third World]] revolution was the only way to achieve "world communism," the goal of WUO.<ref>Foreign Influence - Weather Underground Organization (WUO). [http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath2a.pdf FBI Chicago Field Office Report,] August 20, 1976. Page 202 in original (p. 17 pdf). Gilbert reiterated the WUO's founding statement from [http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath1a.pdf ''You Don't Need A Weatherman To Know Which Way The Wind Blows,''] ''New Left Notes,'' June 18, 1969, reprinted in the Chicago Field Office Report, Section I. Ideology. A. Major Political Statements, pp. 6-15 original (pp. 39-48 pdf), which reads in part, "The goal is the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism. Winning state power in the US will occur as a result of the military forces of the US overextending themselves around the world..." (p.41 pdf).</ref>
[[File:O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson.jpg|left|thumb|250px| Obama speaking at the October 2002 anti-war rally in Chicago organized by Carl Davidson. Davidson is a longtime Maoist and champion of the ''Thought of Mao Tse Tung.''<ref>Davidson's anti-Trotskyite polemic, [http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=10925 ''Left in Form, Right in Essence''] defends Maoist doctrine. Retrieved from 对当代托洛茨基主义的批判：英文论集百花齐放 - 中国文革研究网, March 15, 2010.</ref>]]
*SDS veteran and [[Progressives for Obama]] webmaster<ref>[http://www.linkedin.com/in/carldavidson Carl Davidson,] LinkedIn.com, retrieved March 13, 2010.</ref> [[Carl Davidson]] first met Barack Obama through the Chicago [[New Party]], whose endorsement and campaign workers Obama sought and accepted in his run for the Illinois state senate in 1996. Davidson organized the October 2002 rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago<ref>The rally was organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq (CAWI) later renamed Chicagoans Against War and Injustice. [http://www.noiraqwar-chicago.org/?page_id=2 About CAWI] by Carl Davidson, Nov 02 2006. Retrieved from Chicagoans Against War and Injustice, March 15, 2010.</ref> where Obama established himself as an eloquent anti-war spokesman. Davidson was a leading member of the October League (OL) and the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist), or CP(M-L),<ref>[http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/pen-l/2005w11/msg00045.htm Reply to Carl Davidson], 15 Mar 2005. Progressive Economists Network List (PEN-L) Internet discussion. The poster states, "Any investigation of the 1970s will reveal that the "New Communist Movement" evolved more than less outside the Soviet ideological polarity, with many clinging to their particular conception of ''Mao Ze Tung Thought.'' During the 1973-1975 period Mr. Davidson did conduct polemics against [[Trotsky]]ism in the pages of the [[Guardian (NY)|Guardian]] and this is perhaps the reason for the current continuing dispute. At that time I was a member of the Communist League in Detroit and Mr. Davidson was a leading member of the October League which sided with the China polarity in the "Sino-Soviet" split rather than taking marching orders from the [[Kremlin]]."</ref> which was hailed by [[Chinese Communist Party]] chairman [[Hua Guofeng]] at banquet for CP(M-L) leaders in [[Beijing]] in 1977 as the semi-official Maoist party in the United States. Hua Guofeng declared the founding of the CP(ML) a “new victory of the [[Marxist-Leninist]] Movement in the U.S.”<ref>[http://www.revolutionintheair.com/chron/chron4.html Chronology of Political Events, Part Four 1975-1980.] Max Elbaum. Retrieved from Revolution In The Air: Sixties Radicals Turn to Lenin, Mao and Che, March 16, 2010. Exerpted: '''1977-''' June 4-5: October League holds founding convention of Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) - CP(ML); [[Mike Klonsky]] is chair... August 12-18: Eleventh Congress of the [[Chinese Communist Party]]. Mao and the [[Cultural Revolution]] are given positive assessments but the Congress officially declares the Cultural Revolution ended. That same month, CPC chair [[Hua Guofeng]] and U.S. CP(M-L) chair Mike Klonsky exchange toasts at banquet for CP(M-L) leaders in [[Beijing]]; this is effective recognition of the CP(M-L) as the semi-official pro-China party in the U.S. The June founding of the CP(ML) had been hailed by a top CPC leader as a “new victory of the [[Marxist-Leninist]] Movement in the U.S.”... '''1979-''' Beginning of crisis and collapse of CP(ML)... In early 1979 there was also a trip to [[China]] by representatives of CP(ML), LRS, RWH, PUL, BACU and other “pro-China” collectives as part of the efforts to build unity among all those who supported the [[CPC]] and the Three Worlds Theory, but the Chinese do not press the groups to unite although they effectively withdraw the idea (as does CP(ML) itself) that the CP(ML) is “the” party in the U.S... '''[[U.S. Peace Council]]''', with CP activists in pivotal positions, is founded... </ref> Davidson is a longtime supporter of the [[VVAW]]<ref>[http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=412 VVAW Letter of Support,] ''The Veteran'', Spring 2004 (Volume 34, Number 1).</ref> whose chief spokesman [[John Kerry]] charged American servicemen with [[war crimes]]. The VVAW worked in collusion with [[North Vietnam]] and the [[Vietcong]] to organize a domestic insugency<ref>[http://www.wintersoldier.com/staticpages/index.php?page=vcdirective Directive on the American Antiwar Movement] captured by US military forces in South Vietnam on May 12, 1972, is a communist Directive designed to motivate discussions within Vietnam about promoting the ongoing antiwar activities in the United States. The fifth paragraph of this document makes clear that the Vietnamese communists were utilizing for their [[propaganda]] purposes the activities of the [[Vietnam Veterans Against the War]]. The protest described as occurring from April 19 through April 22, 1971 coincides directly with the dates of Dewey Canyon III, the Washington, DC, protest led by John Kerry, during which John Kerry's testimony before Senator Fulbright's Foreign Relations Committee was a televised centerpiece. The description of the protest activities in the Directive even include the "return their medals" ceremony in which John Kerry and other VVAW members threw their medals and/or ribbons toward the steps of the US Capitol, with several shouting threats of violence against their government as they did so.Retrieved from www.wintersoldier.com, March 16, 2010.</ref> and the defeat of the United States in [[Vietnam]].<ref>[http://www.wintersoldier.com/staticpages/index.php?page=puppets ''John Kerry and the VVAW: Hanoi's American Puppets?] Newly discovered documents link Vietnam Veterans Against the War to Vietnamese communists,'' Jerome R. Corsi and Scott Swett. Retrieved from www.wintersoldier.com, March 16, 2010.</ref> In 2004 Davidson said, "the U.S government, at least over the past 50 years, has been the chief terrorist and sponsor of terrorism in the world."<ref>[http://www.zcommunications.org/the-2004-elections-by-carl-davidson ''The 2004 Elections'',] Carl Davidson, May 20, 2004. Retrieved from zcommunications.org, Marfch 18, 2010.</ref>

*[[ACORN]] founder Wade Rathke was an alumni of the Maoist dominated [[Students for a Democratic Society]] (SDS).<ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/a_tale_of_two_community_organi.html ''A Tale of Two Community Organizers,''] Elinor Lynn Warner, American Thinker, November 19, 2009.</ref> Obama told ACORN "during the transition, we're going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda. We're going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so that you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America."<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110131 ''Unearthed! Obama's twisted ACORN roots'',] Chelsea Schilling, ''WorldNetDaily'', Track timeline of president's ties to group immersed in scandals, September 18, 2009.</ref>

*Obama Car Czar [[Ron Bloom]] declared himself in agreement with Chairman Mao and referred to the free market system as "nonsense."<ref>[http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-czar-agrees-with-mao-too-and-thinks-free-market-is-nonsense/ Speech delivered to the 6th Annual Distressed Investing Forum Union Club], New York, February 27-28, 2008, BriebartTV, Retrieved February 15, 2010.</ref>
[[File:Shepard-Fairey-imgs.JPG|right|thumb|250px|Shepard Fairey, designer of the official Obama hope and change logo, is more known for his anti-American and pro-communist themes. Here a Maoist revolutionary is depicted. [http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-ContextMenu&rlz=1I7ACAW_en___US352&tbs=isch:1&q=Shepard+Fairey&sa=N&start=40&ndsp=20] ]]
*Obama appointee [[Van Jones]] was a founder<ref>[http://machete408.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/revolutionaries-in-high-places-van-jones/ Revolutionaries in High Places- Van Jones], by adamfreedom March 23, 2009.</ref> of the "often vulgar Maoist"<ref>
[http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2009/04/obama-file-72-obama-appoints-former.html Obama File 72 Obama Appoints "Former" Communist To White House "Green Job"], Trevor Louden, April 06, 2009.</ref><ref>[http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:9UyDTPx6dGEJ:machete408.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/revolutionaries-in-high-places-van-jones/+van+jones+demos&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=nz Machete 48]</ref> organization STORM. STORM's own literature describes the organization as laying a foundation to build "Third World communism." The group studied [[Lenin]]'s theories of the state, revolution, the party, and "the political ideas of Mao Tse-tung."<ref>[http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/stormsummation.pdf ''Reclaiming Revolution]: history, summation & lessons from the work of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM)'', Spring 2004, p.15 pdf.</ref> According to the document, the "growing Maoist orientation" within the group was a factor contributing to internal strife and the group's eventual dissolution.<ref>Ibid, p. 23 pdf.</ref> The document states that in addition to "the basics of Marxism, including [[dialectical materialism]]," it conducted "a group reading of Mao's ''On Practice'' and ''On Contradiction.'' We also pushed at or went beyond the limits of the traditional Marxist canon, studying such topics as revolutionary feminism, the Palestinian liberation struggle, transgender liberation, methods of evaluation, self-care for cadre and revolutionary mass [community] organizing."<ref>Ibid, p. 25 pdf.</ref> The group was extensively involved in the [[community organizing]] movement.<ref>Ibid, pp. 8, 10, 15 pdf.</ref> In 1992 the premier Maoist organization in the United States, the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP),<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6197 Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP).] Retrieved from dicoverthenetworks.org, March 8, 2010.</ref> an offshoot of SDS, was instrumental in fomenting riots in Los Angelas in which 58 people were killed, and more than 2,300 injured in the wake of the trial of four police officers charged with beating [[Rodney King]].<ref>[http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8939 ''Unholy Alliance: The "Peace Left" and the Islamic Jihad Against America,''] David Horowitz and John Perazzo, FrontPageMagazine.com, April 13, 2005. Retrieved March 11, 2010.</ref> Van Jones traveled from Connecticut to be on hand and was arrested in the aftermath.<ref>[http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-722-Conservative-Politics-Examiner~y2009m7d17-Van-Jones-Green-Jobs-Czar-a-selfdescribed-communist-arrested-during-Rodney-King-riots ''Van Jones, 'Green Jobs Czar', a self-described 'communist' arrested during Rodney King riots'',] Kathy Shaidle, July 17, 2009. Retrieved from examiner.com March 11, 2010.</ref> Van Jones is also a founding board member of Apollo Alliance for clean energy and so-called "green-collar jobs." [http://apolloalliance.org/blog/?tag=van-jones] [[Jeff Jones]] is the New York State director of Apollo Alliance. [http://apolloalliance.org/state-local/new-york-state/new-york-state-partners/] Jeff Jones was a member of the Maoist Action Faction of SDS and along with Ayers and Dohrn co-authored ''[[Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-imperialism]]'' based on the ''Sayings of Chairman Mao.''

*White House Communications Office Director [[Anita Dunn]].

==Early life and career==

Barack Hussein Obama II claims to have been born in [[Honolulu]], [[Hawaii]] to Barack Sr. and Stanley Ann Dunham in 1961, but there is evidence<ref>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/14/the-jihadist-vote/</ref> that he may have actually been born in Kenya. In 1967, he moved with his mother and new stepfather to Jakarta, [[Indonesia]]. He attended a [[Catholic]] elementary school for two years, followed by an Indonesian public school for two years. Media scrutiny revealed that the [[secular]] public school he attended was not a [[madrassa]], which teaches Islam. On days off in observance of Islamic holidays he spent praying in a Mosque with his stepfather. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/pipes_obama_muslim/2008/10/09/138898.html Obama 'Lying' About Muslim Past, Expert Says] NewsMax, October 9, 2008</ref> Stanley Ann Dunham and the young Obama left Indonesia about 1970 for Hawaii where he attended the Punahou School, a leading private preparatory school where he graduated in 1979.
[[File:FrankMarshallDavis2.jpg|right|202px|thumb|'''Frank Marshall Davis, Communist Party Card No. 47544.'''<ref>[http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Frank_Marshall_Davis_5.pdf FBI file Frank Marshall Davis], v.5 p. 58 pdf.</ref> The [[U.S. Congress]] found the Communist Party an "instrumentality of a [[conspiracy]]...the agency of a hostile foreign power."<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000841----000-.html Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950], 50 U.S. Code Chapter 23 Subchapter IV Sec. 841</ref> The [[FBI]] placed Davis in its security index, meaning he could be detained in the event of a national emergency.<ref>[http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Frank_Marshall_Davis_3.pdf FBI File 100-15799 Frank Marshall Davis], v. 3 p. 26.</ref> Davis was an early influence on Obama.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=HRCHJp-V0QUC&pg=PA220&dq=Frank%2Brecognizing+their+struggle+as+my+own#v=onepage&q=&f=false ''Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance''], By Barack Obama, Random House, 2007, pp. 89-91, 96-98, .</ref>]]
''[[Political Affairs]]'' magazine describes itself as "affiliated with the [[Communist Party USA]],"<ref>http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/static/17/1/3/</ref> (CPUSA) published a speech by Prof. Gerald Horne upon receipt of the CPUSA archives at the Tamiment Library at New York University on March 28 2007. Prof. Horne stated,
{{Cquote|an African-American poet and journalist by the name of [[Frank Marshall Davis]]...befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu...a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from [[Kenya]] ...who retracing the steps of Davis eventually decamped to Chicago. In his bestselling memoir ''Dreams of my Father'', the author speaks warmly of an older black poet...as being a decisive influence in helping him to find his present identity as an African-American... At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack’s memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’ equally affecting memoir...when that day comes...a future student will ...examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that US imperialism created in order to subdue Communist parties..."<ref>[http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/5047/ Rethinking the History and Future of the Communist Party],By Gerald Horne, ''Political Affairs magazine, March 28 2007.</ref>}}

evoking the language in [[Chairman Mao]]'s ''Little Red Book'',
{{Cquote|unite and defeat the U.S. aggressors... Monsters of all kinds shall be destroyed.<ref>''Statement Supporting the People of the Congo (L.) Against U.S. Aggression'' (November 28, 1964), ''People of the World, Unite and Defeat the U.S. Aggressors and All Their Lackeys'', 2nd ed., p. 14. Cited in Quotations from Mao Tse Tung from: 1927 - 1964, Mao Tse Tung, [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch07.htm Chapter 7 Dare to Struggle and Dare to Win], Peking Foreign Languages Press, 1966. Online Version: Mao Tse Tung Internet Archive (marxists.org) 2000.</ref><ref>Quoted in [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ccbh/souls/vol1no4/vol1num4art1.pdf ''Black Like Mao: Black Like Mao: Red China and Black Revolution''], Robin D.G. Kelley and Betsy Esche, ''Souls'' Volume 1, Number 4 Fall 1999, p. 11 in original (p. 7 pdf).</ref>}}

In the 1995 book, ''Dreams from my Father'', the author wrote Obama learned to respect Davis's struggles, "recognizing them as my own." Obama sought Davis's advise as he left for college.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=HRCHJp-V0QUC&pg=PA97&dq=manipulate+words+so+they+don%27t+mean+anything+anymore#v=onepage&q=manipulate%20words%20so%20they%20don't%20mean%20anything%20anymore&f=false ''Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance''], By Barack Obama, Random House, 2007, pp. 97, 220.</ref> Initially Obama attended Occidental College in Los Angeles, [[California]], before transferring to [[Columbia University]] in New York, [[New York]] and graduating without honors as a Bachelor of Arts degree, majoring in [[political science]]. Obama refuses to describe his academic performance at Columbia despite commenting about New York during this period and despite disclosures of the academic record for all other major-party presidential candidates since at least 2000.<ref>http://www.nysun.com/new-york/obamas-years-at-columbia-are-a-mystery/85015/</ref>

=== Birth Certificate Controversy ===

:''Main article'' : [[Barack Obama birthplace controversy]]
[[Image:Obamapullup2.JPG|325px|thumb|left|'''Candidate Obama cultivated an image''' of sportsmanship and competition; as President, Obama ridiculed disabled people who compete in the [[Special Olympics]]. The comments "set us back decades," according to the program's director. <ref>[http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/mar/20/local/chi-090320obama-special-olympics-react Special Olympics chief responds to Obama gaffe], Stacy St Clair, ''Chicago Tribune'', March 20, 2009]</ref>([http://www.necn.com/Boston/Politics/2009/03/20/Obamas-comment-sets-us-back/1237552251.html Video])
]]
During the democratic primaries the Clinton Campaign led a smear campaign against the validity of Barack Obama's Hawaii Birth certificate, claiming that it was false and that he was ineligible for Presidency. <ref>[http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTgxZmIwNTg0OWVhMWJkODNmZjI4ZjY4Mjg2OWRmNzI= http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTgxZmIwNTg0OWVhMWJkODNmZjI4ZjY4Mjg2OWRmNzI=]</ref> After initially refusing to produce a birth certificate in response to such rumors, the Obama campaign eventually endorsed a document posted on the Daily Kos as
authentic.<ref>[http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/12/11012/6168/320/534616 Obama's Birth Certificate]</ref> The response is split regarding the birth certificate. Some commentators, such as those at the ''National Review'', are satisfied with the document.<ref>[http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWVjN2I1MjlhM2ZjZjRjYzBkODAxZjZkZGQyYWNkMDk= http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWVjN2I1MjlhM2ZjZjRjYzBkODAxZjZkZGQyYWNkMDk=]</ref> However, some analysts claim that the birth certificate is false.<ref>[http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm]</ref>

On August 21st, 2008, Factcheck.org published an article regarding the controversy.<ref>[http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html Born in the U.S.A.]</ref> The site stated, "FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship." In addition, the site posted high-resolution photographs of the birth certificate, which clearly showed the raised seal, stamp of Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka, and certificate number. The birth date corresponds to a birth announcement published in the ''Honolulu Advertiser '' on Sunday, August 13, 1961. <ref>http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html</ref>

A Philadelphia attorney, Phillip Berg, has filed a lawsuit against the DNC and Barack Obama. Berg maintains that Sen. Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen or that, if he ever was, he lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia. Berg also cites what he calls "dual loyalties" due to his citizenship and ties with Kenya and Indonesia. The "dual loyalties" which have not been shown to exist do not violate any constitutional or legal precedents and would make Sen. Obama a poor choice for President, not an invalid choice.

Obama website Fight The Smears has confirmed that Obama was once a Kenyan citizen until 1982. Attorney Philips Berg's lawsuit is being challenged by the Obama Campaign. Instead of producing the original birth certificate in court and paying a number of legal fees and taking several days out of his busy campaigning schedule the Obama campaign had the case dropped on the grounds that it lacked any supporting evidence. <ref>http://neighbors.denverpost.com/viewtopic.php?t=10815605</ref> The fact that Mr. Berg's dual arguments were mutually contradictory may also have contributed.

The state of Hawaii announced that the "Certification of Live Birth" document is legitimate and official. Since the state of Hawaii is the issuing body, they have ultimate authority with regards to the matter.<ref>http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html</ref> Critics rightfully point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state, and his "Certification of Live Birth" has likewise been dismissed as a forgery. <ref>http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html</ref>

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama's persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii. <ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92810 Justice, Supremes confirm getting eligibility challenge] WND, March 24, 2009</ref>

[[Bob Schultz]] with the [[We The People Foundation]] said:

"In the end, there is no practical reason why Obama refuses to produce his original birth certificate. He... has a duty to provide evidence that he meets the explicit requirements established by the Constitution."

[[Nancy Salvato]] with [[BasicsProject|BasicsProject.org]] perhaps put it best:

"What perturbs the rest of us is that President Obama has failed to produce a legitimate birth certificate. He has a team of lawyers who are opposing the examination of his sealed records in Hawaii. What he produced was a certificate of live birth... not a birth certificate. The rest of us are appalled at the lack of media examination surrounding the fact that there is no law requiring that a candidate for the highest office in our land produce an authentic birth certificate which proves natural citizenship."

=== Education ===

After working as a "[[community organizer]]" in New York City and Chicago, Illinois, Obama enrolled at [[Harvard]] Law School. He became a member of the ''Harvard Law Review'', which uses racial quotas, in 1989. He was then elected by popular vote as its first African American president in 1990, a story that was immediately promoted in the [[New York Times]].<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE2DC1631F935A35751C0A966958260&scp=3&sq=Obama%201990&st=cse</ref> He graduated ''magna cum laude'' with his J.D. in 1991, but did not serve in a clerkship. Federal clerkships are the typical post-graduate position for top law students.

Obama has described himself as a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/03/30/politics/p132303D74.DTL&type=politics]</ref> He held the position of Lecturer, an adjunct position, from 1992 to 1996. He held the position of Senior Lecturer from 1996 until his election to the senate in 2004. Dan Ronayne, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, has pointed that Obama was only a senior lecturer and not a full professor. <ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/03/30/politics/p132303D74.DTL&type=politics]</ref>The University states that Senior Lecturers are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure track.<ref>http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/was_barack_obama_really_a_constitutional_law.html</ref><ref>[http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html]</ref>
[[Image:Bernardine Dohrn.jpg|right|thumb|250px|'''Bernardine Dohrn formerly of the FBI's Ten Most Wanted''' enjoyed somewhat of a celebrity status among [[radical leftist]]s when she, along with her husband Bill Ayers, hosted a fundraiser for the relatively unknown Barack Obama in 1995; Dohrn issued the Weather Underground terrorist organization's Declaration of War Against the United States ([http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weather_Underground_Declaration_of_a_State_of_War Full Text]) in 1970.]]
According to the White House website, White House Press Secretary [[Robert Gibbs]] responded to this to this question on April 14 2009,
<blockquote>
Q Why is the President blocking habeas corpus from prisoners at Bagram? I thought he taught constitutional law. And these prisoners have been there -- 

MR. GIBBS: You're incorrect that he taught on constitutional law.<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-4-14-09/ Office of the Press Secretary], April 14, 2009, whitehouse.gov </ref></blockquote>

===Radical activism===

Following law school, Obama linked up with local communist networks in Chicago<ref>[http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2009/06/obama-file-78-smoking-gun-proof-that.html The Jarrett Connection. Proof That Obama’s Hawaii and Chicago Communist Networks Were Linked] Trevor Louden, June 01, 2009.</ref> and oversaw community organizing as director of Illinois Project Vote! Obama states he saw opportunism in Chicago after the election of Harold Washington as the city’s first black mayor. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/us/politics/07community.html</ref> John Bachtell, CPUSA Illinois district organizer, said at a special meeting on African American Equality, Building the Communist Party and the Young Communist League on September 30, 2007, "The historic election of Washington was the culmination of many years of struggle. It reflected a high degree of unity of the African American community and the alliance with a section of labor, the Latino community and progressive minded whites. This legacy of political independence also endures."<ref>http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/858/1/39/</ref>

Obama with [[Al Sharpton]] and [[Louis Farrakhan]] led the [[Million Man March]] on Washington in 1995.[http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/04/wright-obama-helped-organize-march-with.html][http://www1.chicagoreader.com/obama_reader/what_makes_obama_run/?q=012009K]

Obama states that he has consistently opposed the [[Iraq War]] since 2002. In his famous speech delivered at a rally organized by [[SDS]] veterans<ref>[http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/376/from_protest_to_politics/ ''From Protest to Politics:When war begins progressive work doesn’t end,''] Jeff Epton, ''In These Times,'' December 15, 2003. Retrieved March 15, 2010.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech Against Going to War with Iraq (2002)] by Barack Obama. Delivered on Wednesday, October 2, 2002 by Barack Obama, Illinois State Senator, at the first high-profile Chicago anti-Iraq war rally (organized by Chicagoans Against War in Iraq) at noon in Federal Plaza in Chicago, Illinois. Retrieved from Wikisource.com, March 15, 2010. </ref> [[Carl Davidson]] and Marilyn Katz in Chicago on October 2, 2002<ref>[http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq,] October 02, 2002. Retrieved from www.barackobama.com March 15, 2010.</ref> Even though Saddam had, in Obama's words, "developed [[weapons of mass destruction|chemical and biological weapons]]" Obama condoned the most hideous [[torture]]<ref>[http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/jackstraw1.html Saddam Hussein's Regime Methods of Torture]</ref> and dismissed Bush administration objectives of democratization and [[human rights]] as fighting a "dumb war." A commentator observed, "one would search long and hard for any words from this apostle of hope and change about the palpable benefits that [[democracy]] might bring to the Arabs and Muslims of the Middle East.<ref>[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/obama-s-war-11263 Obama's War], Peter Wehner, ''Commentary'', April 2008.</ref>

===Organizes defeat of an incumbent Democratic Senator===

In 1992, Obama was instrumental as head of Illinois Project Vote <ref>[http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence/ Vote of Confidence : A huge black turnout in November 1992 altered Chicago's electoral landscape—and raised a new political star: a 31-year-old lawyer named Barack Obama],
By Gretchen Reynolds, ''Chicago Magazine'', January 1993.</ref> in engineering the defeat of [[Democratic Party]] incumbent U.S. Senator Alan Dixon by [[Carol Moseley Braun]].<ref>[http://articles.latimes.com/1992-03-18/news/mn-3844_1_gus-savage Veteran Illinois Senator Dixon Defeated - Congress], By Bob Sector, ''[[L.A. Times]]'', March 18, 1992.</ref> Dixon, in a spirit of bipartisanship and defying his party's leadership, voted across racial lines to place a black man in high office. The [[leftist]] website [[dKosopedia]] claims "Incumbent Democratic senator Al Dixon's vote to confirm [[US Supreme Court]] Justice [[Clarence Thomas]] outraged Braun."<ref>[http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Carol_Moseley_Braun#Political_career Carol Moseley Braun], dkosopedia.com, retrieved October 25, 2009. Some sources state Moseley Braun's "outrage" was directed at the treatment of Anita Hill over her claims of sexual harassment by the nominee, however Moseley Braun voted to acquit President [[William Jefferson Clinton]] of charges stemming from a [[sexual harassment]] suit which Clinton settled by paying the aggrieved party $850,000 out of court to satisfy damage claims.</ref> With [[Communist Party USA]] backing,<ref>http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-file-39-barack-obama-carol.html</ref> Braun defeated Dixon in the Democratic Primary Election, 38% to 35%.

Sandy Newman, the founder of Project Vote! told ''Chicago Magazine'', "I was asking around among community activists in Chicago and around the country, and they kept mentioning him (Obama)... He did one hell of a job." The magazine further reported, "To understand the full implications of Obama's effort, you first need to understand how voter registration often has worked in Chicago. The Regular Democratic Party spearheaded most drives," with Obama at the helm of Chicago's Project Vote!, those conditions had been reversed. "He helped train 700 deputy registrars, out of a total of 11,000 citywide." Joseph Gardner, the director of the steering committee for Project Vote! said, "It was overwhelming."

===Legal career===

Michelle Robinson began employment at the Chicago Law firm of Sidley-Austin in 1988 where disbarred attorney and [[Weather Underground]] [[terrorist]] [[Bernardine Dohrn]] also worked.<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjY4YzdhMDBkZGQ3ZmU2MTUzYjdkMzc5ZjUzYmViZWM=</ref><ref>http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDIxMDJiNzU5M2Q1MTY3ZGI1YTdmOWY5MzkwN2QxYzg=</ref> Sidley-Austin is the legal advisor to [[ACORN]],<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=84434 Michelle Obama's old law firm defends ACORN], ''WorldNetDaily, December 23, 2008.</ref> a group accused of facilitating tax fraud, ballot box stuffing, human trafficking and child prostitution.<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmIzOTBmNGY3OGEwNzgwZWU1MjMzMjJkNWM4NzVkNmI=</ref> Barack Obama was hired a year later and appears to have misrepresented where he and future First Lady - Michelle Robinson Obama - first met.

In 1993 he was hired as an associate at the Chicago law firm Miner, Barnhill & Galland, P.C., and began lecturing in Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. He remains on the faculty on leave of absence through today. During this time he wrote his first book, ''Dreams from My Father'', detailing his background, his youth, and his education. ''Dreams'' was published in 1995.

=== Religious affiliations ===

[[Image:Barack Obama Jeremiah Wright.jpg|thumb|left|'''Obama and Jeremiah Wright.''' Despite Wright's rabid and sarcastic anti-American sermons, the Obama's regularly took their two small children to hear him speak. One Obama supporter remarked, "I cannot fathom allowing my children to hear filth from the pulpit."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html?show_comment_id=12042024#comment_12042024</ref> ]]
Obama and his wife (raised a Baptist) were members of the Trinity [[United Church of Christ]]<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776246/posts</ref> in Chicago. The church embraces [[black liberation theology]] and its emphasis on empowering oppressed groups against establishment forces. This denomination was the first in America to ordain gays, women and blacks as ministers.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31079.html, Obama's church pushes controversial doctrines, March 20, 2008</ref> According to his sister, Obama was baptized at this church the same year.<ref>[http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/30/america/30obama.php?page=2 http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/30/america/30obama.php?page=2]</ref> Obama describes his conversion in ''The Audacity of Hope''. The title was inspired by one of Wright's sermons.
After 20 years of being an active member, in April 2008 candidate Obama made public statements poised to set him at odds with the man who conducted his wedding and baptized his children. With the negative publicity persisting, a month later Obama ended the friendship, left Wright's church, and blamed the media.<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/31/obama-resigns-church-membership-in-chicago/], Obama Drops Church Membership in Chicago, May 31, 2008</ref> Obama claimed “It’s not fair to the other members of the church who seek to worship in peace...", and distanced himself from Wright's sermons as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth."<ref>USA TODAY, ''Obama breaks with former pastor, Candidate cites rants on U.S. role in terror, AIDS'', by Kathy Kiely and David Jackson [http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080430/1a_offlede30_dom.art.htm]</ref><ref>''Obama Says He Is Outraged By Wright's "Rants"''[http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080430.htm]</ref> Wright had been making inflammatory comments and posting his sermons online for sale. These include the statement "G-d damn America," and in describing the September 11th attacks, "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."<ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4443788 Obama's Pastor: G-d Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11]</ref> In addition, Rev. Wright blamed America saying "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being [[anti-Semitic]]."

[[Daniel Pipes]] claims that Obama was raised a [[Muslim]] because he attended classes on the [[Koran]] while attending a Muslim school.<ref>[http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5286 Was Barack Obama a Muslim]</ref> Obama did attend a school administrated by Muslims but [[CNN]] reports that it was a non-religious public school attended by students of many faiths, not a [[madrassa]].<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/</ref>

{{QuoteBox|In Indonesia, I'd spent 2 years at a Muslim school, 2 years at a Catholic school. In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies. In the Catholic school, when it came time to pray, I'd pretend to close my eyes, then peek around the room. Nothing happened. No angels descended. Just a parched old nun and 30 brown children, muttering words. Sometimes the nun would catch me, and her stern look would force my lids back shut. But that didn't change how I felt inside." <ref>Dreams from My Father, by Barack Obama, p.142 Aug 1, 1996 </ref>}}

Obama has described his upbringing as occurring in a non-religious environment.

{{QuoteBox|In sum, my mother viewed religion through the eyes of the anthropologist that she would become; it was a phenomenon to be treated with a suitable respect, but with a suitable detachment as well. Moreover, as a child I rarely came in contact with those who might offer a substantially different view of faith. My father was almost entirely absent from my childhood, having been divorced from my mother when I was 2 years old; in any event, although my father had been raised a Muslim, by the time he met my mother he was a confirmed atheist, thinking religion to be so much superstition.

And yet for all her professed secularism, my mother was in many ways the most spiritually awakened person that I've ever known. She had an unswerving instinct for kindness, charity, and love, and spent much of her life acting on that instinct, sometimes to her detriment. Without the help of religious texts or outside authorities, she worked mightily to instill in me the values that many Americans learn in Sunday school: honesty, empathy, discipline, delayed gratification, and hard work. She raged at poverty and injustice.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1546579-4,00.html My Spiritual Journey] Time Magazine, October 2006</ref>}}

===Obama is likely the first Muslim President===

[[Image:OBAMA MUSULMAN.jpg|left|thumb|'''Then-Senator Obama wearing traditional African garb''', a gift from his hosts while visiting Kenya<ref>[http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-wore-muslim-gear-during-kenya-trip]</ref>]]
The evidence that Obama is a Muslim includes:

*Obama declared in prepared remarks, "The United States has been enriched by '''Muslim Americans'''. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country - I know, because '''I am one of them'''."<ref>http://middleeast.about.com/b/2009/04/06/obama-in-turkey-at-the-gates-of-islam.htm</ref>
*Obama's wife Michelle does not accompany him to Muslim nations because [[Sharia law]] would apply to her there; on a presidential trip she was with him until France, but then returned home.
*Obama's background, education, and outlook are [[Muslim]], and fewer than 1% of Muslims convert to Christianity.<ref>http://www.religionnewsblog.com/17736/barack-obama-2</ref><ref>http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina31103.htm. During the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class, according to the LATimes. [http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.obama16mar16,0,1634059,print.story?coll=bal_news_nation_promo Campaign downplays his connection during boyhood in Indonesia, Baltimore Sun, March 16, 2007]</ref>
*Obama's middle name (Hussein) references '''Husayn''', who was the grandson of [[Muhammad]],<ref>A Brief History of The Fourteen Infallibles. Qum: Ansariyan Publications. 2004.</ref><ref>al-Qarashi, Baqir Shareef (2007). The life of Imam Husain. Qum: Ansariyan Publications.</ref> which most Christians would not retain.<ref>Only after Obama became politically ambitious did he declare himself to be a [[Christian]], yet he never replaced his [[Muslim]] name "Hussein" with a Christian one as most do when they undergo a religious conversion. For example, when the Italian journalist Magdi Allam recently converted to Christianity, he took a new name: "Cristiano".[http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=30814] When Saul became a Christian, he changed his name to "Paul"; when the famous boxer Cassius Clay converted to [[Islam]], he took the Muslim name of [[Muhammad Ali]]. "It is common for those converting to a new religion to change their name on conversion"[http://www.ukdp.co.uk/pages/religiousconversion.php] or adopt a Christian name at [[baptism]].[http://www.answers.com/topic/christian-name]</ref>
*Obama mentioned his religion as "[[my Muslim faith]]."<ref>Obama declared, "John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith."[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKGdkqfBICw]</ref>
*He has said that "Islam can be compatible with the modern world."<ref> [http://www.newsweek.com/id/145971 Barack Obama's Christian Journey | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008]</ref>
*Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset," and recited "with a first-class [[Arabic]] accent" the opening lines: Allah is Supreme! ... I witness that there is no god but Allah ...."<ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=78309</ref>
*Obama stated that the autobiography of Malcolm X, a Nation of Islam leader who became a Muslim, inspired him in his youth.<ref>For example, Obama writes in his own autobiography, "Only Malcolm X's autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me. The blunt poetry of his words, his unadorned insistence on respect, promised a new and uncompromising order, martial in its discipline, forged through sheer force of will. ... [E]ven as I imagine myself following Malcolm's call, one line in the book stayed with me. He spoke of a wish he'd once had, the wish that the white blood that ran through him, there by an act of violence, might somehow be expunged."[http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/does_obama_know_america.html]</ref>
*Obama raised nearly $1 million and campaigned for a [[Kenyan]] presidential candidate who had a written agreement with [[Muslim]] leaders promising to convert Kenya to an Islamic state that bans Christianity.<ref> [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78324] Text of the agreement, as three images: [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78323]</ref>
*Obama's claims of conversion to Christianity arose after he became politically ambitious, lacking a date of conversion or baptism.<ref>In his book, Obama oddly claims to have been baptized without giving his age or date, and later gave a date that postdates his political ambition (1992).</ref>
*In the book ''Obama,"Renegade"'' his friends say that "he actually really wasn't much of a churchgoer." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2009/06/16/wolffe-president-missed-rev-wright-s-racist-rants-because-he-wasn-t-much- Wolffe: President Missed Rev. Wright’s Racist Rants Because 'He Wasn’t Much of a Churchgoer'] NewsBusters.org, June 16, 2009</ref>
*On the campaign trail, Obama was reading "The Post-American World" by [[Fareed Zakaria]],<ref>http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=fa8cf1bf-2cc8-4d6e-b72d-a07d406e19ff</ref> which is written from a Muslim point-of-view.<ref>http://www.villagevoice.com/2005-08-09/news/the-interpreter/</ref>
*Contrary to [[Christianity]], the Islamic doctrine of [[taqiyya]] encourages adherents to deny they are Muslim if it advances the cause of Islam.
*Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one.<ref>Obama repeatedly pronounced "Pakistan" as "Pokiston" in the first presidential debate.</ref>
*Obama was thoroughly exposed to Christianity as an adult in Chicago prior to attending law school, yet no one at law school saw him display any interest in converting. Obama unabashedly explained how he became "churched" in a 2007 speech: "It's around that time [while working as an organizer for the Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) in Chicago] that some pastors I was working with came around and asked if I was a member of a church. 'If you're organizing churches,' they said, 'it might be helpful if you went to a church once in a while.' And I thought, 'I guess that makes sense.'"<ref>[http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=15363 Obama, ACORN, and the churches] SperoNews, October 7, 2008</ref>
*Obama is mentioned as helping to organize the 1995 million man march led by black [[Muslim]] leader [[Louis Farrakhan]] from the [[Nation of Islam]]. <ref>[http://www.biography.com/search/article.do?id=9291850 Louis Farrakhan Biography] Biography.com</ref>
*Obama refuses to refer to the United States as "''our country''", "What I think we know separate and apart from this incident -- is that there is a long history '''in this country''' of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."[8]
*Obama has chosen the [[Secret Service]] code name "Renegade". "Renegade" conventionally describes someone who goes against normal conventions of behavior, but its first usage was to describe someone who has turned from their religion. It is a word derived from the [[Spanish]] ''renegado'', meaning "Christian turned Muslim."<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/3452281/Renegade-and-Renaissance-Obama-to-replace-Trailblazer-and-Tempo-Bush-in-the-White-House.html</ref>
*Obama enjoyed a bigger increase in voter support in 2008 (compared to 2004) by Muslims than by any other voting group, including blacks;<ref>http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/a/2873/</ref> "Muslim turnout in the U.S. elections reached 95 percent, the highest Muslim turnout in U.S. history."<ref>http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/11/is_obama_the_muslim_worlds_sup.html</ref>
*"President-elect [[Barack Obama]] has yet to attend [Sunday] church services since winning the [[White House]] earlier ..., a departure from the example of his two immediate predecessors."<ref>http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15902.html</ref><ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obama-religion26-2008dec26,0,1910913.story</ref>
*Obama used his Muslim middle name when sworn in as President.<ref>http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ET_Cetera/Obama_to_take_oath_using_middle_name_/articleshow/3813120.cms</ref><ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/10/politics/main4660590.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_4660590</ref>
*Obama botched his public oath of office in which he placed his hand on a Bible, then chose not to use the Bible for his real, private oath.
[[Image:Obamabow.jpg|thumb|right|250px|'''President Obama bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia''' - April 2009]]
*'''At the G20 summit in April 2009, Obama bowed deeply to Saudi King Abdullah, a Muslim who is also the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.'''<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEUif1--r38&feature=player_embedded Video of Obama bowing almost to King's waist]</ref> Never before in the history of the U.S. has a president displayed such shocking deference to a foreign official and Obama has not bowed to any other royal leaders. Obama later stated, "We have to change our behavior in showing the Muslim world greater respect."<ref>http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/07/barack-takes-a-bow/</ref> Obama's spin doctors and left-wing apologists dismissed the obviousness of the bow. One anonymous aide stated, "It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah."<ref>http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/White_House_No_bow_to_Saudi.html</ref> However, in video of the incident, Obama's left hand can clearly be seen staying at his side until after he had finished his bow.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WlqW6UCeaY</ref> Additionally, Obama also met with Queen Elizabeth, who is much shorter than King Abdullah, but he did not bow when he shook her hand and neither he nor the queen appeared to have any difficulty.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71N34K9EVLU</ref> (Many liberals and even a handful of conservatives have proposed that President Bush also bowed before King Abdullah.<ref>http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33289_Bush_Bowed_Too</ref> However, there is a vast, inexorable difference between bending down to receive a medal as Bush did and bowing in deference to a foreign leader as Obama did.)
*Obama required that a religiously affiliated college take the extraordinary action of concealing with wood the monogram "IHS", which represents the name of Jesus, during a speech by Obama there<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/16/georgetown-university-hid-religious-symbols-white-house-request/ Georgetown hides Jesus' name at request of Obama's White House]</ref>
*On more than one occasion, Obama verbally attacks the economic livelihood of Las Vegas for unknown reasons. The reason may be his contempt of gambling which is forbidden in the Koran. <ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/02/02/AR2010020203169.html Lawmakers upset over Obama's 2nd anti-Vegas remark, WashingtonPost, February 2, 2010]</ref>

Obama tries to downplay his [[Islamic]] background by claiming that his [[Kenya|Kenyan]] [[Muslim]] father was a "confirmed [[atheist]]" before Obama was born, but in fact less than 1% of Kenyans are atheists, agnostics, or non-religious.<ref>http://www.adherents.com/Na/Na_14.html</ref> There is apparently no evidence of any Christian activities or local church participation by Obama while he was in Massachusetts from 1988 to 1991, nor of Barack Obama's joining of a Mosque (The Islamic house of worship) at any time in his life. Finally, Obama abruptly left his radical Christian church in Chicago in 2008, when it became politically controversial, without first finding another church to join. On April 7, 2009, Obama visited a mosque in Istanbul, Turkey.<ref>http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c2e3700ab4e271bc32827b0fccfe560b.421&show_article=1</ref>

== Illinois State Senate (1995-2005) ==

=== Terrorist and communist associations ===

[[File:Youngobama2.jpg|320px|thumb|left|'''Dr. Quentin Young (left) is personal physician to Barack Obama (right) and [[Bernardine Dohrn]] (not shown)'''. Dr. Young was reimbursed by the [[KGB]] after he paid rent in advance on a storefront he used to treat injured rioters during the disruptions of the 1968 Democratic National Convention.<ref>[http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Transcript_May_22_edited_version.pdf ''The Stealth Candidate''], Transcript, Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein, May 22 2008, p. 16.</ref><ref>House Committee on Un-American Activities, ''Subversive Involvement in Disruption of 1968 Democratic Party National Convention'', and ''Hearings Before the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities of the United States'' Senate. Ninety-
Fourth Congress. First Session. Volume 6. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1976, Exhibit 68-13., cited in ''Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection'', Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein, usasurvival.org</ref> The ringleaders, principally [[Weather Underground]] terrorists, received urban guerilla warfare training in Cuba from the [[DGI]] prior to the attacks.<ref>[http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Cuban_DGI.pdf Final Talk to the Fourth Contingent, Julian Rizo DGI.]</ref> ]]
In 1995 a cadre of like minded individuals gathered in the home of [[Weather Underground]] (WUO) [[terrorist]]s [[Bernardine Dohrn]] and [[William Ayers|William "Bill" Ayers]]. According to Dr. [[Quentin Young]], "I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers' house to learn that [[Alice Palmer]] was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress." Dr. Young, a longtime friend of the Ayers' and Obama's, put up the money in 1968 to pay for the office that organized a riot in Chicago during the Democratic National Convention. [[Carl Davidson]] of [[Progressives for Obama]] was told by [[Fidel Castro]] in March 1968 that Castro believed the United States was ready for [[revolution]]. Several [[Students for a Democratic Society]] (SDS) and WUO cadre trained in Cuba prior to the insurgency. The FBI summarized the situation:
{{Cquote|Rarely has any city been threatened all at one time with an invasion of 100 to 200 thousand dissidents - plots to [[assassin]]ate [[government]]al dignitaries and prominent individuals; intentions to instigate major riots in varied ways; widespread [[sabotage]] of communication, transportation and electrical systems- proposals to pour [[hallucinogen]]ic [[drugs]] into the water supply; clandestine shipments of [[arms]] and [[ammunition]] into the city for use in sniper activities - and myriad forms of [[guerrilla warfare]].<ref>Declassified U.S. Government intelligence information regarding the communist and foreign connections of the Weather Underground. Presented as evidence, on the agreement of the prosecution and defense counsel, in the trial of W. Mark Felt and Edward S. Miller, p.10.[http://www.usasurvival.org/docs/Declassified_docs.pdf ]</ref>}}
One veteran of the guerrilla warfare training in Cuba was Obama's host, [[Bernardine Dohrn]]. Young met with Dohrn after her return,
{{Cquote|Bernardine went down there already influenced by Cuba and in a state of romantic anticipation. She was at the top of her thermometer going down. I talked to her, sort of debriefed her, when she came back."<ref>Georgie Anne Geyer and Keyes Beach "Cuba: School for U.S. Radicals", ''Chicago Daily News/Chicago Sun-Times'' five part series October 1970, excerpted in [http://foia.fbi.gov/filelink.html?file=/weather/weath1c.pdf FBI file Weather Underground Organization (Weatherman),] Part 1c pp. 5-7 pdf (113-115 in original). [http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/clandestine-agents-of-the-cuban-government-ayers-dohrn-myers/]</ref>}}

Dr. Young related Illinois State Senator Alice Palmer was choosing then Chicago city councilman Barack Obama as her successor.<ref>[http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html Obama once visited '60s radicals.], Ben Smith, Politico, February 22, 2008.</ref> Palmer once served on the executive board of the [[U.S. Peace Council]], a [[KGB]] front organization<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=_PZy-U7G2EMC&pg=PA111&dq=U.S.+Peace+Council%2Bkgb&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q=%22U.S.%20Peace%20Council%22&f=false The Apocalyptic premise : Nuclear Arms Debated], By Ernest W. Lefever, E. Stephen Hunt, Ethics and Public Policy Center, Washington, D.C., 1982, pp. 127-137.</ref> that actively opposed President [[Ronald Reagan]]'s defense program. Palmer wrote a report on her visit to [[Moscow]] for the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) published by the CPUSA's ''[[People's Daily World]]''. In the twilight of the Soviet regime Palmer wrote, "Like the Reagan administration, the Soviets talk of increasing productivity among workers and curbing waste...but the Soviets' do not link these issues with ruining the living standards of human beings."

[[Image:Features ayers1.jpg|200px|thumb|right|'''Obama served on the Board of the Woods Fund of Chicago with [[Weather Underground]] [[terrorist|terrorist group]] co-founder Bill Ayers'''<ref>[http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath1a.pdf FBI file Weather Underground]</ref> '''at the time this photo appeared of Ayers stomping the American flag''' in ''Chicago Magazine'' in 2001. Ayers, Obama's boss at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, contributes to Obama election campaigns and hosted an important fundraiser in Obama's early career to meet and greet Ayers contacts.]]

Ayers and Dohrn took credit, and have never denied responsibility for a series of [[terrorist]] bombings which included the [[U.S. Capitol]], the [[Pentagon]] and the [[State Department]]. The reopening of a [[cold case]] [[homicide]] investigation of a [[San Francisco]] police officer was urged by the San Francisco Police Officer's Association in March 2009.<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/12/BATK16DHA4.DTL&hw=ayers&sn=001&sc=1000 S.F. police union accuses Ayers in 1970 bombing], Demian Bulwa, ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' March 12, 2009.</ref> An FBI informant who infiltrated the [[WUO]]<ref>''Bringing down America : an FBI informer with the Weathermen'', by Larry Grathwohl, Frank Reagan, 1976. [http://www.alibris.com/search/books/qwork/810451/used/Bringing%20down%20America%20:%20an%20FBI%20informer%20with%20the%20Weathermen]</ref> and was close to Ayers reported an exchange he had with Ayers about a prospective bombing:
{{QuoteBox|INFORMANT: We'll blow out the Red Barn restaurant. Maybe even kill a few innocent customers — and most of them are black. 

AYERS: We can't protect all the innocent people in the world. Some will get killed. Some of us will get killed. We have to accept that fact.}}
Ayers and Dohrn were not prosecuted because of tainted evidence gathered by the [[FBI]]. Assistant Director of the FBI [[Mark Felt]], also known as “Deep Throat” in the [[Watergate Affair]],<ref>[http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB156/ Nixon and the FBI: The White House Tapes], National Security Archive, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C.</ref> was prosecuted and convicted for civil rights violations of Jennifer Dohrn, Bernardine’s sister, while tracking the terrorist pair. Ayers boasted in his book that he was "guilty as hell, free as a bird," and Felt was pardoned by President [[Ronald Reagan]] who noted Felt followed procedures he believed "essential to keep the Director of the FBI, the [[Attorney General]], and the [[President of the United States]] advised of the activities of hostile foreign powers and their collaborators in this country.<ref>[http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1981/41581d.htm Statement on Granting Pardons to W. Mark Felt and Edward S. Miller], April 15, 1981.</ref><ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/1983/12/01/us/two-top-fbi-officials-cleared.html Two Top F.B.I. Officials Cleared], [[New York Times]], December 1, 1983.</ref>

Ayers, Dohrn and Barack Obama's relationship went back several years and they were lending their notoriety among [[radical]] [[leftist]]s to launch Obama's career as Palmer's successor. Ayers' and Dohrn's first book written with [[Prairie Fire Organizing Committee|Jeff Jones]], the title ''Prairie Fire'' is taken from the sayings of [[Chairman Mao]]'s ''Little Red Book'', [http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/] "a single spark can set a prairie fire"," announces, {{cquote|we are communist men and women.<ref>Harvey Klehr, ''Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today'' (Transaction Books, New Brunswick, 1988), 109.</ref> }}
Co-author and co-Weather Underground founder Jeff Jones<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106653 ''Obama's 'green jobs czar' worked with terror founder] Van Jones served on board of activist group where ex-Weatherman serves as top director'', By Aaron Klein, [[WorldNetDaily]], August 13, 2009.</ref> worked for several years with Obama administration Green Czar [[Van Jones]], another self-described communist arrested in the aftermath of a deadly riot. Like [[Frank Marshall Davis]], there is no indication Ayers, Dohrn, Jeff Jones, Dr. Young, [[Anita Dunn]], or other close associates of Obama have renounced their faith in what [[Allen Weinstein]] describes as "a murderous and discredited ideology."

Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in 1996 and served there for the next eight years.

President Obama is the first person having ties to a known former terrorist to gain control over America's nuclear weapons.<ref>http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/7127</ref><ref>http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/26/obama-associate-bill-ayers-unrepentant-for-acts-of-terror/</ref> Author and blogger Jack Cashill requisitioned a comparison of the writing style of [[Bill Ayers]]' 2001 memoir, ''Fugitive Days'', with Barack Obama's earlier 1995 book, ''Dreams From My Father'', and came to the conclusion that Obama's former boss Ayers may have ghostwritten Dreams.<ref>www.cashill.com, ''Who Wrote “Dreams From My Father"?'', by Jack Cashill, October 9, 2008, retrieved on 10/16/2008 [http://www.cashill.com/natl_general/who_wrote_dreams_from.htm] Cashill states that a computer comparison of Obama's so-called autobiography with that of the terrorist Bill Ayers, supports the theory that Ayers actually wrote parts of Obama's book; also he wrote "None of this, of course, proves Ayers' authorship conclusively, but the evidence makes him a much more likely candidate than Obama to have written the best parts of Dreams". "In assessing the signature of sample passages from Dreams," the experienced analyst found "a very strong match to all of the Ayers samples" that he processed. He did not address the possibility that Ayers had plagiarized from Obama's earlier book. A philosophy professor from England disagreed.[http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77815]</ref> Ayers confesses to violent acts, planting bombs, says he has no regrets and feels he "should have done more."<ref>[http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/7127]</ref>

=== Runs as candidate for the Marxist New Party ===
:''For the full article see '''[[New Party]]'''''
In 1995 Obama accepted the nomination, signed a contract,<ref>From the Chicago DSA website, "Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP. The political entourage included ...Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. [[Alice Palmer]]. Obama is running for Palmer's vacant seat." Retrieved from [http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932 Chicago New Party Update,]
by Bruce Bentley. Retrieved March 15,2010.</ref> and ran as a candidate of the openly [[Marxist]] New Party.<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434 NEW PARTY (NP)], discoverthenetwork.org.</ref><ref>Rick Moran. [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_alliance_with_marxists.html Obama's Alliance with Marxists], ''American Thinker'', June 03, 2008.</ref> The [[New Party]] was an electoral alliance that worked alongside [[ACORN]], formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America (SPUSA and DSAUSA) and leaders of an offshoot of the [[Communist Party of the United States of America|Community Party USA]] (CPUSA).<ref>Aaron Klein. [http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=78945 Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party], ''[[WorldNetDaily]]'', October 24, 2008.</ref> The New Party was funded by literally hundreds of leftist front-groups operating as special interest 527 organizations.<ref>JB Williams. [http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13872 Obama’s Well Organized Community Is Falling Apart], ''Canada Free Press'', August 18, 2009.</ref>

== U.S. Senate (2004-2008) ==
Following a failed campaign for the House of Representatives, Obama ran for the open Senate seat from Illinois in 2004. Obama delivered the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. He won a seat in the [[U.S. Senate]] after [[liberals]] obtained the release of confidential and personally embarrassing divorce records of his opponent, Jack Ryan, forcing him to resign from the race and be replaced by the out-of-state candidate [[Alan Keyes]].
[[Image:Democrat Obama during the Pledge.jpg|325px|thumb|right|'''Candidaate Obama stands with folded hands''during the Democratic primaries while [[Bill Richardson]] and [[Hillary Clinton]] honor the flag by placing their hands over their heart during the [[National Anthem]] in 2008. [http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Obama_doesnt_put_hand_over_heart_1022.html See Video] ]]
===CPUSA endorsements, support and get out the vote efforts===

The ''[[People's Weekly World]]'' which describes itself as "the direct descendant of the ''[[Daily Worker]]'' " that enjoys "a special relationship with the [[Communist Party USA]], founded in 1919," and publishes its news and views,<ref>[http://www.pww.org/article/static/320 About the People's Weekly World] pww.org</ref> reported on Obama's 2004 Senate primary campaign:
{{Cquote|Activists from Illinois were immersed in the campaign to elect Barak Obama to the U.S. Senate. Obama won a landslide victory in the March 16 Democratic primary.<ref>''A turning point election'', Joelle Fishman, People's Weekly World, 04/24/04.</ref>}} John Bachtell, Illinois Communist Party district organizer added,
{{Cquote|This was a historic victory. It was a victory for political independence and grassroots, coalition, and issue oriented politics over the machine and money.<ref>[http://www.pww.org/article/articleprint/5145/ The CPUSA fires up its members to ‘Dump Bush!’], By Tim Wheeler, Washington correspondent, People's Weekly World , 04/24/04.</ref>}} In June the ''People’s Weekly World'' carried a piece by Dee Myles, chair of the education commission of the Communist Party USA, eulogizing [[Frank Marshall Davis]]'s old colleague, [[Vernon Jarrett]]. Myles said,
{{Cquote|from his hospital bed, [Jarrett] wrote an article appealing to Black Chicago to turn out to vote for [[Barack Obama]] in the Illinois primaries. Obama astounded everyone with an incredible landslide victory as the progressive, Black candidate for the [[Democratic Party]] nomination for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois. From his sickbed, Vernon Jarrett issued a clarion call, and the people responded.<ref>[http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/5331/ Vernon Jarrett: a partisan journalistic giant], Dee Myles, [[People's Weekly World]] Newspaper, Jun 5, 2004.</ref>}}

===Senate career===
[[Image:obama.jpg|thumb|left|Senator Barack Obama]]

October 2008 crimes against Academy Award winner Jennifer Hudson's family highlighted Obama's record against law and order, as he voted against making it a crime in Illinois "for convicts on probation or on bail to have contact with a street gang".<ref>[http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obamas-crime-votes-are-fodder-for-rivals-2007-03-13.html]</ref><ref>The person of interest in the murders of Hudson's mother, brother, and 7-year-old nephew is the estranged husband of Hudson's sister and a convicted felon who had violated his parole conditions.[http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-julian-king-autopsy-1029,0,2752431.story]</ref> "'We've got 75,000 gang members - that's almost six gang members to one police officer,'" in Obama's hometown of Chicago.<ref>"More people have been murdered in Chicago this year than in New York - even though New York's population is three times greater. When Hudson's mother, brother and nephew were killed last month, they pushed the city's homicide total for the year to 436 and counting. New York has had 430 homicides." [http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/11/01/2008-11-01_chicago_buried_in_murders.html]</ref>

A March 16th, 2005 AP article puts Senator Obama on record to ban oil drilling in the Alaska frontier known as ANWR <ref>http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0316-13.htm</ref>

In May 2007, Obama (and Sen. Hillary Clinton) voted against funding the Iraq War for the first time.<ref>[http://uspolitics.about.com/od/legislatio1/a/HR2206.htm HR 2206 - Emergency Appropriations], Kathy Gill, Your Guide to U.S. Politics: Current Events. May 26 2007.</ref><ref>[http://more.gov.mtopgroup.com/2007/05/votes-hr-2206-iraq-supplemental.html Votes - H.R. 2206: Iraq Supplemental], May 28, 2007. Retrieved from Deeper Inside the Mountain, June 4, 2007.</ref>

His 2007 voting record in the U.S. [[Senate]] makes him as its most [[liberal]] member. Among fellow Senate Democrats, he was further left than liberals like [[Ted Kennedy]], [[John Kerry]], [[Dianne Feinstein]], [[Charles Schumer]], [[Russ Feingold]], [[Carl Levin]], [[Joseph Biden]] and [[Harry Reid]].<ref>[http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc]</ref> He has grown steadily more liberal since arriving at the Senate: the same analysis assessed him as 10th most liberal in 2006<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/members/news/2007/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc]</ref> and 16th most liberal in 2005.<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/members/news/2007/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc]</ref>

In late 2006, Obama's second book, ''The Audacity of Hope'', was published. Its title was supplied by the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., a minister who has stated that "racism is how this country was founded and how this country was run .... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God."<ref>http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/14/obama_condemns_pastors_remarks.html</ref> The book contains more of Senator Obama's personal story including the roles of both family and politics. ''Audacity'' spent 30 weeks on the ''New York Times'' Nonfiction Best Sellers list.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/books/bestseller/0527besthardnonfiction.html?_r=1&oref=slogin New York Times Best Sellers Non Fiction]</ref>

Senator Obama is the chairman of an important subcommittee that has oversight of our efforts in Afghanistan. He has not held a single hearing on Afghanistan even though American forces are risking their lives in a theatre of war. Since joining Foreign Relations, Obama has missed three meetings on a "new strategy" in [[Afghanistan]], a country he only visited in 2008.<ref>[http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-absent-at-afghanistan-hearings-2008-03-01.html</ref> Barack Obama clinched his party's nomination for President after 16 straight months of campaigning.

In June 2008, Obama voted with the Democratic party to kill the sunset provision of the [[Bush]] tax cuts. By letting these tax cuts expire, single mothers with two kids will pay an additional $1,800 annually. Married couples with incomes of $50,000 will pay an additional $2,180 annually. Elderly couples will pay an additional $2,000 annually and a family of four will pay 191% more per year in taxes. Barack Obama often claims to be for taxing the rich their fair share. By voting to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, Obama is taxing most middle class and blue collar families.

Obama and the Democratic-led Congress has voted for the upgraded GI Bill despite the opposition from the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Pentagon, the generals in combat zones and the GOP Presidential nominee. It was crafted to increase veteran benefits. Yet, the strain on our military is great.<ref>[http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/mccain_to_obama_dont_demagogue.php] http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/mccain_to_obama_dont_demagogue.php , McCain To Obama: Don't Demagogue The GI Bill, May 22, 2008</ref> The bill would cost $2.8 to $4 billion per month. Some argue that this bill depletes the US's volunteer military personnel by enticing them to leave service rather than be re-deployed.

As senator, Obama has requested nearly $936 million in earmarks which averages to $500,000. per day over four years, <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108935141721343.html?mod=googlenews_wsj Obama Can't Win Against Palin] Wall Street Journal, September 11, 2008</ref> for which the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste has given him a rating of 10% in 2007 (18% lifetime).<ref>[http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/DocServer/2007_Senate_Ratings_Final.pdf?docID=3242 2007 Senate Scorecard]</ref> A score of 100% represents voting against all pork, and 0% represents voting ''for'' all pork. Democrats averaged 5% in 2007, whereas Republicans averaged 60%. <ref>[http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=11590 CCAGW Releases ''2007 Congressional Ratings'']</ref>

According to a Fox News report on October 5th, Obama has taken more than $126,000. in campaign contribution from [[Fannie Mae]] in a little over three years. This ranks him second, only Chris Dodd has received more campaign contribution dollars from Fannie Mae.

===Use of filibuster and obstructionism ===

White House Communication Director [[Dan Pfeiffer]] described the frustration of an Administration having its legislative agenda delayed by [[filibuster]]s and obsrtructionism:

{{quotebox|If we're going to have a government that works for the American people, then we need to focus on the things that actually matter ...Every day we waste delaying votes on well-qualified public servants or obstructing progress on problems that need solving is a day we're not doing our jobs. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/02/03/needless-delays-and-filibusters-run-amok-a-case-study]}}
The ''[[Washington Post]]'' claims [[partisan]] obstructionism is "a legislative tactic [Obama] once practiced himself" :
:*In 2005, a year after his election to the Senate, Obama placed a hold on Susan Bodine to lead the Environmental Protection Agency office that oversees Superfund and emergency cleanup programs because the agency had missed a deadline on new regulations for lead paint exposure.
:*In September 2006, Obama and Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) blocked Robert L. Wilkie's nomination as a Defense Department assistant secretary over a long-delayed Pentagon report on Midwestern wind farms.
:*And Obama joined with other Democrats in October 2007 to block the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky to the Federal Election Commission. Von Spakovsky later withdrew; Wilkie and Bodine were eventually confirmed. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020303801_pf.html]

=== Bills co-sponsored ===
Obama's principal legislation was S. 2433, which was an attempt to force the U.S. to increase its foreign aid by hundreds of billions of dollars under the guise of reducing global poverty, which was subsequently blocked by [[conservatives]].<ref>http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2433</ref>

Obama did support and co-sponsor a bill championed by [[Tom Coburn]] and known as the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006, which was signed into law by President [[George W. Bush]] on Sept. 9, 2006. This law created a website that will list the federal government's grants and contracts.<ref> http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060926.html</ref>

Between Jan 13, 2007 and March 13, 2008, Sen. Obama has sponsored 120 mostly [[liberal]] resolutions and bills in the Senate.<ref>http://thomas.loc.gov/</ref> His supporters cite the following less liberal examples, but this list is not representative:

*S.117 : A bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to improve benefits and services for members of the Armed Forces, veterans of the Global War on Terrorism, and other veterans, to require reports on the effects of the Global War on Terrorism, and for other purposes.

*S.133 : A bill to promote the national security and stability of the economy of the United States by reducing the dependence of the United States on oil through the use of alternative fuels and new technology, and for other purposes.

*S.453 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.

*S.713 : A bill to ensure dignity in care for members of the Armed Forces recovering from injuries.

*A bill to raise the [[minimum wage]]; Obama voted against the bill when it was later attached to an Iraq war supplemental spending bill.<ref>[http://uspolitics.about.com/od/legislatio1/a/HR2206.htm HR 2206 - Emergency Appropriations], Kathy Gill, Your Guide to U.S. Politics: Current Events. May 26 2007.</ref><ref>[http://more.gov.mtopgroup.com/2007/05/votes-hr-2206-iraq-supplemental.html Votes - H.R. 2206: Iraq Supplemental], May 28, 2007. Retrieved from Deeper Inside the Mountain, June 4, 2007.</ref>

=== Senate Foreign Relations Committee ===

Obama worked with Sen. Lugar writing legislation aimed at improving conventional and nuclear non-proliferation efforts. This legislation was signed by [[George W. Bush|President Bush]] in January 2008.

In June 2007 the Senate passed his resolution condemning violence by the [[Zimbabwe]] government. It also passed legislation co-sponsored by Obama that financed a Special Court for Sierra Leone to prosecute former [[Liberia | Liberian]] President [[Charles Taylor]]. <ref> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/02/26/obamas_senate_foreign_relations_work/ </ref>

Barack Obama continued to collect money for a 2010 Senate re-election campaign as late as June 2008, and filed reports indicating money was still pouring into this fund. This is especially notable because it is an efficient way of sidetracking donations from his Presidential race. The website<obamasenate2010.gov> is now defunct.
[[File:OenEReuters.jpg|left|200px|thumb|In Egypt, June 2009.]]

=== Foreign policy experience ===

In his presidential campaign, Obama stated<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-says-no-to-foreign_b_95357.html</ref> that "foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident" and then cited "having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa". He lived in Indonesia from age 6 to 10, and he later discovered that his father had some other children in Africa.

While campaigning, he has visited several foreign countries. In [[Russia]] and the former Soviet republics, he met with representatives of the International Republican Institute and National Democratic Institute to discuss democracy in the former Soviet republics. He also met with Russian military officials and visited several nuclear and biological weapons destruction sites in Russia, [[Ukraine]], and [[Azerbaijan]] with Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN). On the same tour, he visited London, UK, and met with [[Tony Blair]], sitting UK Prime Minister.

Obama visited South Africa, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Chad; he discussed his tour of Robben Island prison, met with U.S. troops, and visited refugee camps of the people fleeing Darfur. He also addressed Africa's growing [[AIDS]] epidemic.

During a ten-day-long tour of the Middle East, he talked with government leaders in Qatar, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, and Israel.
 

== Presidential Election (2008) ==

:''See Main article'' : [[Barack Hussein Obama 2008 Presidential campaign]]

Senator Obama won the 2008 Presidential election, with over 52% of the popular vote. He carried every state that [[John Kerry]] won in 2004, in addition to Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Indiana. Of the 127 million votes cast, Obama beat John McCain by 8 million total votes.<ref>http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/</ref> [http://images.newsmax.com/misc/2008_Election_Map.jpg See county breakdown map] <ref>[www.cnn.com/election]</ref>

== Books ==

* ''Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.'' (B. Obama and, allegedly, William Ayers <ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html</ref>) ISBN 0307383415
* ''The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.'' (B. Obama) ISBN 0307455874
* ''Barack Obama in His Own Words.'' (B. Obama and Lisa Rogak) ISBN 0786720573
* ''Change We Can Believe In. Barack Obama's Plan to Renew America's Promise.'' (B. Obama)
* ''The Case Against Barack Obama. The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate. '' (David Freddso) ISBN 1596985666
* ''The Obama Nation. Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality.'' (Jerome R. Corsi) ISBN 1416598065
* ''Obama Unmasked. Did Slick Hollywood Handlers Create the Perfect Candidate?'' (Floyd Brown and Lee Trexler) ISBN 0936783591
* ''Obama: The Man Behind The Mask.'' (Andy Martin) ISBN 0965781240
* ''The Audacity of Deceit. Barack Obama's War on American Values.'' (Brad O'Leary) ISBN 1935071025

== Quotes ==
* Early in his campaign for president in 2007, Obama declared in an interview with the [[Chicago Tribune]], "I'm a [[Christian]]. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue ... my religious beliefs say that [[marriage]] is something sanctified between a man and a woman."<ref>http://thehill.com/cheri-jacobus/obama-and-miss-california-2009-04-23.html</ref>
*"This country is going to honor our [[collective]] responsibility." [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Weekly-Address-President-Obama-Announces-New-Initiatives-for-Retirement-Savings/]

== See also ==
*[[Previous Breaking News/Barack Obama|Articles about '''Barack Obama''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)]]
*[[Birthplace of Barack Obama]]
*[[Essay:Born Outside the U.S.A.!]]
*[[Essay: The Special Interests Candidate]]
*[[Lobbyists ties to the Obama administration]]
*[[New Party]]
*[[Obama birth certificate controversy]]
*[[Obama birth certificate lawsuits]]
*[[Obama doublespeak]]
*[[Obama inauguration]]
*[[Religion of Barack Hussein Obama]]
*[[The Honorable James David Manning]]
*[[Young Communist League]]
*[[ObamaCare]]

== Further reading ==

*[[Peter Hitchens|Hitchens, Peter]] [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=511901&in_page_id=1811 ''The Black Kennedy: But does anyone know the real Barack Obama?''] [[Daily Mail]]. Accessed 4 February 2008.
*James Simpson, [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html ''Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis''], American Thinker, September 28, 2008.
*[http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/ ''What Is To Be Done?] Burning Questions of our Movement'', [[Vladimir Ilyich Lenin]], Lenin’s Collected Works, Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1961, Moscow, Volume 5, pp. 347-530.

== Sources ==

*[http://www.barackobama.com/ Official Obama for President Website]
*[http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/pfd2005/N00009638_2005.pdf Barack Obama Personal Financial Disclosures Summary: 2005], retrieved from opensecrets.org 17 June 2007.
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=O000167 Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]
*[http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/obama/cv.html University of Chicago Law School] Faculty Listing
*[http://www.biography.com/search/article.do?id=12782369 Barack Obama Biography] from Biography.com
*[http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per New York Times Topics, Barack Obama]
*[http://youtube.com/watch?v=zUdjhKbImwE Documentary on Barack Hussein Obama]
*[http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490 Voting Record of Barack Hussein Obama]

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

==External Links==
*[http://www.antiobama.net/ Anti Obama.net]
*[http://www.dontvoteobama.net/ Don’t Vote For Obama.net]
*[http://nobamanetwork.com/ Nobama Network]
*[http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/ Audacity Of Hypocrisy]
*[http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/ The Real Barack Obama]
*[http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6130/ The New Cult of Personality]
*[http://www.survivingobamunism.com/index.html Surviving Obamunism T-shirts]
*[http://www.barackobamaantichrist.blogspot.com/ Barack Obama the Anti-Christ ?]
*[http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/23/che-obama-and-the-revolutionary-agenda/ Che, Obama, and the Revolutionary Agenda]
*[http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/ Obama Laundry List of Lies]
*[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/09/americas-first-muslim-president/ GAFFNEY: America's first Muslim president?] Washington Times
*[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-l-esposito/barack-obama-and-islam_b_212519.html Barack Obama and Islam.] by [[John L. Esposito]].

{{DEFAULTSORT:Obama, Barack Hussein}}
{{USPresidents}}
{{2008 presidential candidates}}
{{Liberalism}}
[[Category: Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Socialism]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Illinois]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Christmas

2009-12-12T02:30:01Z

JPope: /* History */ Caesar? Um...no.

[[Image:Merry Christmas.gif|right|260px]]
'''Christmas''' is a Christian [[holiday]] which celebrates the birth of [[Jesus Christ]]. Christmas is typically celebrated on December 25th. The word Christmas comes from "Christ's [[mass]]," and the [[Roman Catholic]] church and most [[Protestantism|Protestant]] denominations observe Christmas after sundown on the 24th of [[December]]. Some [[Eastern Orthodox Church]](s) practice it on January 6th, combining the day with [[Epiphany]]. Orthodox practice a [[Christmas Fast]] lasting 40 days (November 15 to December 24).

The story of the birth of Christ is told in the opening chapters of the [[Gospel of Luke]] and the [[Gospel of Matthew]]. Each contains different elements of "the Christmas Story." The visit of the Archangel to the shepherds and the birth of Jesus in a [[manger]] are from Luke. The story of the Star of [[Bethlehem]] and the visit from the Wise Men bringing gifts of "[[gold]], and [[frankincense]] and [[myrrh]]" are from Matthew.

It is worthwhile to note that December 25th is likely not the date of Jesus' actual birth. In the Biblican description of Jesus' birth, He was visited by three shepards who had been out that night with their sheep. Shepards would not have been out with their sheep in the winter. Jesus' birth date is more commonly agreed to be some time in the Autumn. It wasn't until A.D. 440 that the church officially proclaimed December 25 as the birth of Christ. This was not based on any religious evidence but on a pagan feast. Saturnalia was a tradition inherited by the Roman pagans from an earlier Babylonian priesthood. December 25 was used as a celebration of the birthday of the sun god. It was observed near the winter solstice. <ref> [http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/was-jesus-born-on-december-25-faq.htm] </ref>

In Western countries, during the Christmas season people generally hang up colored lights, place a [[Christmas tree]] (typically an evergreen tree) in their house, sing [[carol]]s (songs), and exchange gifts. Gift-giving commemorates the gifts given to the Christ child by the Wise Men and is symbolic of the fact that Jesus came as gift to mankind from [[God]].

==History==
[[Image:Parmigianino Virgin with Child.jpg|right|240px|The Holy Virgin with her Child]]
Festivals have always been celebrated around the time of the solstice. Two thousand years before Christ, the early Mesopotamians celebrated a 12 day new year around that time, which is still reflected in our custom of the 12 Days of Christmas. Their chief god, [[Marduk]], was supposed to battle annually against the forces of chaos, which the Mesopotamians believed were making the sunlight dwindle. The [[Mesopotamian]] King was supposed to be killed to go fight at Marduk's side. However, the king usually substituted a condemned prisoner and let him spend a day as the king. He was treated like the king for a day, then at the end of the day he was stripped and killed in the king's stead.

Some scholars assume that the historical Jesus was born in the Spring, rather than how Christian tradition indicates. It wasn't until around AD 350 that 25 December was appointed to be the Mass of Christ, probably to coincide with the date of the [[Winter Solstice]]. The early Catholic Church concurred, probably in order to draw parishioners away from licentious pagan festivals occurring at about the same time of year. The Romans decked their halls with green laurels and trees decorated with candles. This feast, called [[Saturnalia]], was a time for masquerades and feasts and the trading of presents, including "lucky fruits," the ancestor of today's fruitcake.

Christmas is a relatively unimportant holiday in the Christian liturgy (less important, for example, than the Feast of the Epiphany). Early Protestants, including the Puritans who settled in Plymouth, did not celebrate Christmas, which they denounced as Papist.

Many of the customs we have come to associate with Christmas developed in Victorian England, notably the Christmas Tree (which originated in Germany and was introduced in England by Prince Albert). The concept of Christmas as a family-centered celebration and a time of generosity, good will, and friendliness to neighbors, was promoted and codified by Charles Dickens in ''A Christmas Carol.''

In the United States, the image of [[Santa Claus]] (i.e. Saint Nicholas) and his reindeer has been shaped by Clement Moore's poem, "A Visit from Saint Nicholas" (with the famous opening line "'Twas the night before Christmas.") In other countries, the depiction of Santa vary widely. For instance, in [[The Netherlands]], Santa Claus is shown in a Catholic [[bishop]]'s [[miter]]. In some countries, Saint Nicholas is not associated with the holiday at all; for example, in [[Spain]] it is the Three Wise Men who bring gifts to children, and in [[Hawai'i]] it is the jolly native [[Kamaunamauna]]. However, the tradition of Christmas gift-giving is prevalent in all cultures.

In the [[United States]], during the twentieth century, gift-giving assumed a greater and greater role, and by mid-century had become of great commercial importance, to the point where some felt the religious aspects were becoming forgotten. As [[Stan Freberg]] put it<ref>in a recording, "Green Christmas"</ref> in 1958, "There are two S's in Christmas and they're ''both'' dollar signs." The single week before Christmas currently accounts for 25% to 30% of all retail sales.

==Modern-day cultural significance==

The tension between religious and secularized Christmas has waxed and waned periodically over the years. The pendulum swung toward secularization in the middle of the twentieth century. One marker was the emergence of songs like ''I'll Be Home For Christmas'' (1943), ''The Christmas Song,'' (1946), and ''Silver Bells'' (1951), which have become a beloved part of Christmas in America despite their lack of any religious content. [[Bing Crosby]], a devout Catholic, initially was reluctant to sing the secular 1942 song ''[[White Christmas]],'' which was to become his biggest hit.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=850892 Still Dreaming of a White Christmas], NPR story</ref>

In recent years, the celebration of Christmas has become part of the "[[culture wars]]." [[Fox News]] analysts [[John Gibson]] and [[Bill O'Reilly]] claim that Christmas has come under attack by "[[liberal]]s." Some Christian conservatives want an increased recognition of the religious core of the holiday, and want to maintain a separation between Christmas and other holidays occurring at the same time of year.

==See also==
*[[Carols by Candlelight]]
*[[Christmas Carol]]
*[[Hanukkah]]
*[[Kamaunamauna]]
*[[Pantomime]]
*[[Santa Lucia]]
*[[Santa Maria]]
*[[Saint Nicholas]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.the-north-pole.com/index.htm Welcome to The North-Pole]

==Notes and references==

<references/>

[[Category:Observances]]
[[Category:Christmas]]

Gun control

2009-12-12T02:27:23Z

JPope: Just changing a few words so that the reference for the opening paragraph wasn't on its own line.

'''Gun control''' laws restrict the purchase or ownership of guns, a weapon acquired mostly for defensive or sporting purposes. Gun control is unique among social programs in increasing the emotional and physical dependency of ''all'' voters on government. Because gun control raises the dependence of voters on government, its political effect is to shift the electorate leftward. The primary supporters of gun control are the [[liberal media]] and [[leftist]] politicians.<ref>[http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/quotes/repeal.html Quotes of Leftists Demanding Gun Control]</ref> In the [[United Kingdom]], which already has the strictest gun control in Europe, [[leftists]] demand control over 120,000 ''deactivated'' guns, even though their activation and use constitute only 0.04% of all gun offenses there; fewer guns means greater dependency on government.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3168607.ece</ref>

Gun control is a denial or limitation by [[government]]s of the right to armed [[self-defense]],<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"> "In contrast to most other weaponry, firearms are preeminently defensive in effect." [http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref> as promised by the [[Second Amendment]] of the Constitution of the [[United States of America]]. Genocide has occurred only after gun control first disarmed the citizenry.<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/>

Proponents use the discredited - but superficially appealing - claim that fewer lawfully-owned guns leads to less crime.<ref>People who support gun control generally believe that gun control laws significantly reduce violent crime. [http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/irrationality.htm Why People Are Irrational about Politics]</ref><ref>Gun control primarily restricts the lawful acquisition and use of guns. Over 99% of the guns restricted by most gun control regulation are used in a lawful manner.</ref>

In the United States the three primary [[federal]] gun control laws are:
* [[National Firearms Act]] (1934)
* [[Gun Control Act]] (1968)
* [[Brady Bill]] (1993)

These laws have further been amended by other laws such as the [[Firearms Owners Protection Act]] (1986) and the [[Omnibus Crime Bill]] (1994).

Fed up with federal gun control, in 2009 States began considering (Utah) or passing (Montana) laws "making guns that are made and kept within state boundaries exempt from federal regulations" including "background checks, licensing and registration."<ref>http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6367553</ref>

== The Fallacy and Motivation for Gun Control ==
[[Image:No Weapons Allowed.gif|right]]
Gun control potentially causes an increase in crime by restricting its main deterrent: [[self-defense]]. In the United States, law-abiding uses of guns outnumber criminal uses by about a factor of 1000 to 1,<ref>http://www.americanselfdefense.com/gunfacts3.0.pdf (p. 60)</ref> and the removal of guns from everyone eliminates the lawful use of self-defense and its deterrent effect. "[[Americans]] use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year."<ref name="Gallup_LAT">"This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times." (Just Facts - [http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp Gun Control])</ref> Specific examples of guns being used successfully in [[self-defense]] are easy to find.<ref>Two 70-ish store owners stopped armed robberies of their stores by shooting at the bandits. "The person came in and pointed the gun at him and my father shot him. I'm proud of him." [http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buffaloerie/story/253849.html Buffalo News]</ref> "In 1982, a survey of imprisoned criminals found that 34% of them had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim."<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> When [[Florida]] began allowing its citizens to carry a concealed weapon, [[Florida]]'s firearm homicide rate fell by 37% while the national average ''increased'' by 15%.<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> As explained below, the political effect of gun control is to cause voters to become more dependent emotionally on government and more supportive of bigger government.

Studies by [[John Lott]] and others indicate that gun control causes higher crime rates.<ref>[http://www.johnrlott.com/ John Lott's Website]</ref> [[Washington, D.C.]] has one of the highest crime rates in [[America]] even though it completely bans private handguns.<ref>[http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm District of Columbia Crime Rates 1960 - 2006]</ref> "Switzerland, Israel, Denmark and Finland, all of whom have a higher gun ownership rate than America, all have lower crime rates than America, in fact, their crime rates are among the lowest in the Western World."<ref>Slashdoc - [http://www.slashdoc.com/documents/71244 gun control]</ref> Lott demonstrates that in [[Britain]], [[Australia]] and [[Canada]], increased gun control in the late 1990s led to increased crime, the exact opposite of what the proponents of the gun control promised.<ref>John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer - [http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/IBDGunConFailure.html Add Gun Control To Litany Of Misbegotten Gov't Plans]</ref> States in the [[U.S.]] that have enacted concealed-carry laws enjoy lower crime rates.<ref>[http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4706 Cato report]</ref>

[[image:Robbery victims per 100K.png|300px|thumb|Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics]]
In [[Australia]], where gun ownership was less widespread and the gun control measures were less strict, there was an immediate increase in robbery and armed robbery after the gun control went into effect in 1996 (see chart at right).<ref>Gun control passed in Australia because "public was immediately whipped into a gun control frenzy by the press" after the "Port Arthur massacre" in Tasmania on April 28, 1996, in which 32 were shot dead and 19 injured. "Although polls done prior to the massacre indicated that the public was satisfied with the amount of 'gun control' they already had, a major newspaper did a poll just a few days after the massacre (while all minds were "clear") and, not surprisingly, found high levels of support for extreme gun control measures. This poll would be used forever by the commonwealth government and other gun controllers to claim that Australians supported the new gun laws to come." - [http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html Gun Control in Australia] (by gunsandcrime.org)</ref>
There is no clear evidence supporting a decrease in crime from gun control.<ref name="Results">[http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html Results of the Australian Gun "Buyback" & New Gun Laws], October 2001</ref><ref>[http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/azl084v1 Study showing lack of promised benefits from gun control]</ref>

Subsequent to gun control in England:<ref>http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html</ref>

:"from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now [as of 2002] six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people."<ref>However this increase in recorded violent crime between 1997 and 2001 is explained by the Home Office as a result of changes in the definition of violent crime and new counting rules introduced in 1998. [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf Violent Crime in England and Wales] According to the British Crime Survey, which is considered a more reliable guide to trends in crime[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf], violent crime fell 24% between 1997 and 2001/02, and burglary fell 40% over the same period.[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hosb1105tab201.xls Trends in BCS incidents of crime]</ref>

Gun control in [[Britain]] and [[Australia]] has been followed by a predictable shift to the left politically by voters as they lost their instrument of self-defense and became more emotionally dependent on government. Contrast that with the [[United States]], where an effort to push gun control after the [[Columbine massacre]] failed in 2000 and the government has remained as [[conservative]] -- if not more so -- ever since.

The emasculation of the citizenry by gun control also arguably reduces the resistance of a society to intimidation, and exacerbates fear of consequences from causing offense. Subsequent to the passage of strict gun control in [[England]] some teachers have avoided teaching controversial subjects such as the [[Holocaust]], the Arab-Israeli conflict and the [[Crusades]] during history classes.<ref>http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW100.pdf</ref>
Teaching Emotive and Controversial History 3-19] (p.15) The anti-self-defense attitude of British authorities has also turned criminals into "victims" and victims who fight back into "criminals." One particularly egregious case involved a farmer being sentenced to life imprisonment for defending himself in his home after the home was repeatedly burglarized <ref>http://www.theinternetparty.org/commentary/c_s.php?td=200107200000&section_type=com</ref>

== Trends ==
After decades of increasing gun control laws, the current trend in the [[United States]] is in the direction of more gun rights. The 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill included a ban on certain new rifles labeled assault rifles solely because of features of their appearance, and on new high-capacity magazines. This law recently expired and was not renewed by [[Congress]]. Also, Washington D.C.'s gun ban was struck down as unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals on March 9, 2007.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/washington/09cnd-gun.html?hp Appeals Court Says Gun Ban Violates 2nd Amendment]</ref><ref>The Washington Post - [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902416.html D.C.'s Ban On Handguns In Homes Is Thrown Out]</ref>

By removing the deterrent effect of guns, gun control causes dramatic increases in crimes committed with other weapons:<ref name="bbc">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm</ref>

:You are now six times more likely to be mugged in [[London]] than [[New York]]. Why? Because as common law appreciated, not only does an armed individual have the ability to protect himself or herself but criminals are less likely to attack them. They help keep the peace. A study found American burglars fear armed home-owners more than the police. As a result burglaries are much rarer and only 13% occur when people are at home, in contrast to 53% in England.

Supporters of gun control argue that homicide with guns is much less in [[England]] than in the [[United States]],<ref>In 2005/06, the total number of victims of homicide by shooting (including crossbows) in England and Wales was 50 and there were 212 victims of homicide by sharp instruments. [Home Office Statistical Bulletin - [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2005/2006][http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb0104.pdf] The data for gun deaths in the United States include guns used in self-defense, as in fending off an assault, robbery or rape, and there were a total of 11,350 gun deaths (including deaths of criminals) in 2005.[US Department of Justice, FBI - [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html Crime in the United States by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1986 - 2005]</ref> but that was true even before gun control and is likely due to cultural reasons. "A study comparing New York and London over 200 years found the New York homicide rate consistently five times the London rate, although for most of that period residents of both cities had unrestricted access to firearms. When guns were available in England they were seldom used in crime. A government study for 1890-1892 found an average of one handgun homicide a year in a population of 30 million."<ref name="bbc" />

Gun control laws are often seen to conflict with the [[Second Amendment]] to the [[United States Constitution]], which recognizes the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The "right to keep and bear arms" is a right guaranteed to the American citizen by the Bill of Rights through the virtue of a selective reading of said Bill. The phrase "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" precedes the statement, and most federal Courts of Appeals have held that this phrase requires that the "right to bear arms" relates to the collective rights of state militias, as opposed to the individual's rights to have any weapon desired. Just recently, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit went against nine other circuits in holding that the Second Amendment constitutes an individual right.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/washington/10gun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Court Rejects Strict Gun Law as Unconstitutional]</ref><ref>FOX News - [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban]</ref> However, according to the judge writing for the majority in this case, its decision does still allow for "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership and use, such as carrying of guns by intoxicated individuals, or in churches.

Only six cities in the [[United States]] ban handguns: [[Washington, D.C.]], [[Chicago]], and four of its suburbs.<ref>David Kopel, "The Democrats and Gun Control," Wall St.J., Page A19, April 17, 2008 [http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120839466717921537-lMyQjAxMDI4MDE4NzMxOTc0Wj.html]</ref>

==Overview==
"Gun control" can include:

* Restricting which persons can own firearms.
* Restrictions on the number of firearms a person may own, or purchase during a given time period
* Requirements that privately owned firearms be registered with the government.
* Bans on certain types of firearms; for example, "handguns" or assault rifles
* Restrictions on where firearms may be carried, for example into restaurants or post offices
* Requiring a "background check" and/or a "waiting period" to purchase a firearm
* Restricting when and where firearms may be bought and sold, for example banning their sale through the mail
* Requiring licenses or some other form of permission from the government to buy and/or sell a firearm
* Requiring some form of permission from the government to carry a firearm in public, either concealed or openly
* Laws granting special gun rights for some people, for example retired law enforcement officers, which are denied the rest of the public, which was used in several southern states.
* Outright bans on carrying firearms in public
* Outright bans on private possession of firearms, though this has never occurred in the United States

==Constitutional Debate==
The [[Second Amendment]] reads:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Most constitutional scholars agree that since the amendment refers to "the right of the People" instead of the right of the militia, it protects an individual right to own guns. The extent of that right was something hotly debated for decades, until the Supreme Court ruling of 26 June, 2008, Heller v District of Columbia.

The majority opinion, written by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], held for the first time that the Constitution provides an individual right to bear arms, such as for self-defense, rather than a right that applies only to a state militia.

The decision upheld an appellate court ruling striking down Washington, D.C.'s 1976 handgun ban. The case marked the first time in more than 70 years that the Supreme Court had addressed the Second Amendment ''and the first time it spoke directly about the implication of an individual right''. The court struck down two of the District of Columbia's gun control laws: its handgun ban and its requirement that other firearms kept at home have a trigger lock or be disassembled.

Relying on the broader historical record, Justice Scalia wrote:
{{cquote|'''putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.'''}}

Scalia noted that the ruling should not be interpreted to "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings." <ref>[http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf Supreme Court Opinion, District of Columbia v Heller]</ref>

==Racism of gun control==
In the [[United States of America]], gun control has a strong racist origin and reasoning. Before the Civil War ended, State "Slave Codes" prohibited slaves from owning guns. After President [[Abraham Lincoln]] issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and after the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery was adopted and the Civil War ended in 1865, States persisted in prohibiting blacks, now freemen, from owning guns under laws renamed "Black Codes." They did so on the basis that blacks were not citizens, and thus did not have the same rights, including the right to keep and bear arms protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as whites. This view was specifically articulated by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] in its infamous 1857 decision in ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'' to uphold slavery.

The United States Congress overrode most portions of the Black Codes by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The legislative histories of both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867, are replete with denunciations of those particular statutes that denied blacks equal access to firearms. [Kates, "Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment," 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204, 256 (1983)] However, facially neutral disarming through economic means laws remain in effect.

After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1878, most States turned to "facially neutral" business or transaction taxes on handgun purchases. However, the intention of these laws was not neutral. An article in Virginia's official university law review called for a "prohibitive tax...on the privilege" of selling handguns as a way of disarming "the son of Ham," whose "cowardly practice of 'toting' guns has been one of the most fruitful sources of crime.... Let a negro board a railroad train with a quart of mean whiskey and a pistol in his grip and the chances are that there will be a murder, or at least a row, before he alights."<ref>Comment, Carrying Concealed Weapons, 15 Va L. Reg. 391, 391-92 (1909); George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal (GMU CR LJ), Vol. 2, No. 1, "Gun Control and Racism," Stefan Tahmassebi, 1991, p. 75.</ref> Thus, many Southern States imposed high taxes or banned inexpensive guns so as to price blacks and poor whites out of the gun market.

Today, "gun control" laws continue to be enacted so as to have a racist effect if not intent:

* Police-issued license and permit laws, unless drafted to require issuance to those not prohibited by law from owning guns, are routinely used to prevent lawful gun ownership among "unpopular" populations.
* Public housing residents, approximately 3 million Americans, are singled out for gun bans.
* "Gun sweeps" by police in "high crime neighborhoods" whereby vehicles and "pedestrians who meet a specific profile that might indicate they are carrying a weapon" are searched are becoming popular, and are being studied by the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] as "Operation Ceasefire."
* Some U.S. cities with high minority populations, such as Washington, D.C., are singled out for gun bans.
* "Project Exile" began in the U.S. city of Richmond, Virginia and mandated that people arrested for technical firearms violations (note: not for violent crimes committed with a firearm, but for technical violations of the law) be tried in federal court where they would be subject to lengthy mandatory minimum sentences rather than in state court under the more lenient Virginia laws. As with many other restrictions this was aimed primarily at the city's Black residents. It has since been copied in many other cities.

== Sexism of gun control ==

Firearms, especially lower recoiling ones such as handguns, allow any person to wield enough power to stop another person from attacking them.<ref name="genderDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/03/19/firearms-rights-are-a-gender-equality-issue-too/ </ref> Many women (quite reasonably) fear the threat of attack by a physically stronger man, and a firearm could prevent many of these attacks, but gun bans leave these women vulnerable. Take the case of the “North Side Rapist” in Chicago, a city where hand guns are banned, as an example: The rapist broke in to the womens homes, and at least one of the women heard him break in and then climb the stairs. Had this woman had a handgun, she almost certainly could have stopped the rapist before it was too late. This would have prevented her from enduring such a horrific crime, as well as preventing the rapist’s future victims from experiencing the same thing. Instead, Chicago law prevented her from being able to defend herself, and gave the advantage to the rapist/home-invader. This is not an isolated incident, and similar events happen every day across the county.

== Elitism of gun control ==

Many of the most ardent American anti-gun politicians, such as Chicago’s Mayor Daley, are protected by taxpayer-sponsored armed body guards, but deny law abiding citizens the right to defend themselves with a gun. <ref name="classDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/04/16/a-double-standard-anti-gun-politicians-and-their-gun-toting-bodyguards/ </ref> These politicians seemingly believe themselves to be part of an elite group who deserve to be protected against violent criminals, while ordinary law-abiding citizens are left with less-effective means to defend themselves, and must instead rely on the police arriving in time.

== Gun control outside the USA ==

Gun control advocates cite foreign countries to argue that gun control can reduce crime, but such comparison can be difficult due to the presence of other factors. For example, they cite [[Singapore]] as having gun control and a lower crime rate than the [[United States]], but Singapore has less than 5 million persons and one of the highest literacy and average wealth in the world. It lacks many of the freedoms found in the [[United States]] and strictly imposes harsh physical punishment, such as caning and the [[death penalty]], for crimes that are not punished so harshly in the [[United States]]. The real issue of the security in Singapore is its tight criminal control, not the gun control itself.

Gun control supporters also cite [[Gun Control in Japan|Japan's gun control laws]], which severely restrict gun ownership and crime rates are relatively low. But [[Japan]] also lacks many freedoms and diversity which exist in the [[United States]], and [[Japan]] has strong cultural deterrents to crime. Ironically, [[Japan]] is home to [[Tokyo Marui]], the world's largest [[airsoft]] gun manufacturer, which designs airsoft guns that are made to the same scale and with the same materials as the real counterpart and which have been mistaken by police for real guns.

In the [[European Union]], gun control is more strict than in the United States, but gun ownership differs widely between member states, from 36 per 100 people in [[Cyprus]] to one per 100 in [[Poland]].<ref name="EU">http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/29/europe/union.php EU legislators push tougher gun controls</ref> In November 2007, the [[European Parliament]] passed legislation to tighten and harmonize gun control across the EU, and oblige each member state to set up a computerized database of firearms, as it "hoped to prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States".<ref name="EU" /> Parliament wanted to limit cross-border trade from states with less control to those with tougher laws, such as from [[Lithuania]], where replica guns can cost as little as [[Euro|€]]100 (US$150), to the [[United Kingdom]], where all replicas are outlawed.<ref name="EU" />

In Australia, gun violence has always been significantly lower than other types of violence.<ref>http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html</ref>. Australia has not experienced considerable violence problems with legally purchased guns. It has always had a much lower homicide rate than the more violent culture in the [[United States]].<ref>In Australia the gun related homicide rate is 0.44 per 100,000 of population. In the US it is about 8 times as high at 3.72 per 100,000 of population.</ref>

Gun control began in Australia in response to fears that guns would be used by home-grown Communist Revolutionaries.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083528 This study discusses the parallel policies of early-mid 20th century Britain and Australia.</ref> The most restrictive reforms were made in 1996 and 2002, following highly publicised shootings<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref>

Both sets of reforms (1996 and 2002) were lead by Prime Minister [[John Howard]] of the Coalition(Australia’s conservative government). Howard was well known as an anti-gun advocate.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> The move offended gun supporters, many of whom had traditionally supported the Coalition.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> Despite the loss of this voting group, Howard won elections following both reforms (in 1999 and 2004).

There is controversy over the success of Australia’s gun restrictions. Studies suggest overall gun violence has decreased since the 1996 and 2002 bans.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref> However, Australia’s bikey and drug gangs, the main perpetrators of gun violence, still easily access illegal firearms.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/a-disarming-cause/2006/04/27/1145861489519.html</ref> Further, the overall homocide rate remains constant.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04
/27/1145861484114.html?page=2</ref>

== Gun Control and Genocide ==

Gun control "contributes to the probability of its government engaging" in [[genocide]], including the three worst instances in the 20th century:<ref>"[A] society's weapons policy might be one of the institutional arrangements that contributes to the probability of its government engaging in some of the more extreme varieties of outrage. ... [I]t is [] an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed." [http://ls.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-3/753-4.html Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref>

*In 1911, [[Turkey]] imposed gun control and then, from 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million defenseless Armenians were killed.

*In 1929, the [[Soviet Union]] imposed gun control and over the next 24 years about 20 million defenseless dissidents were killed.

*In 1938, [[Germany]] imposed gun control and then over the next seven years 13 million defenseless Jews and other victims were exterminated. <ref>[http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-12.html The True Face of Gun Control], Dean Speir, The Gun Zone RKBA, Accessed December 26, 2007</ref>

"The Nazis made only two important changes to the Weapons Law that was in place when they came to power. First, they forbade Jews from owning guns or any other weapon. Second, they exempted members of the Sturmabteilung (SA) and many Nazi party officials from the law's strictures."<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/> The German Firearms Act of 1937 stated "No civilian is to have a firearm without a permit and permits shall not be issued to persons suspected of acting against the state. ''For Jews, this permission will not be granted.'' Those people who do not require permission to carry weapons include the whole of the SS, and the SA - including the Deaths Head group, and the officers of the Hitler youth." <ref name="Volokh">[http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38d04d5c7c40.htm The Journalist's Guide to Gun Policy Scholars and Second Amendment Scholars], Professor Eugene Volokh, FreeRepublic.com, March 15, 2000</ref>

Adolf Hitler said, "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." <ref name="Volokh" />

[[Josef Stalin]], former dictator of the [[USSR]] and murderer of over 20 million people, infamously supported Gun control in the fear that his evil regime might be torn down and so only soldiers could have gunpowder weapons.

== Gun Control and young mass murderers ==

''Main article: [[Young mass murderers]]''

Strict gun control failed and still fails to prevent mass murderers from starting killing sprees while the victims are unable to defend themselves.

Compare the cases of Pekka-Eric Auvinen ([[Finland]]) and Robert Steinhäuser ([[Germany]]) with the case of Matthew Murray. The latter was stopped by an armed citizen before he could harm more victims; Auvinen killed 8 people and Steinhäuser killed 16. Both Finland and Germany have gun control laws.

==Other terms==
Other terms sometimes used by those who are opposed to gun control include:
* Rights restriction
* Victim disarmament

==See Also==
* [[Gun control quotes]]
*[[Essay:US Armed Citizens and Crime Control]]
*[[John Lott]]

==External Links==

=== Opposed to gun control ===
*[http://www.2asisters.org/ Second Amendment Sisters]
*[http://www.nra.org/ The National Rifle Association]
*[http://www.nrapublications.org/AC/index.asp Armed citizens defending themselves.]
*[http://www.a-human-right.com/ A Human Right] Discussion of the human right to self defense with a firearm.
*[http://www.learnaboutguns.com/ Learn About Guns] Firearm information and politics.
*[http://www.gunowners.org/ Gun Owners of America] A no-compromise pro-gun lobby in Washington, D.C.
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/gun-control/ What Liberals Say - Category: Gun Control]
*[http://www.guncite.com/ GunCite: Gun Control and Second Amendment Issues]
=== In favor of gun control ===
*[http://www.guninformation.org/ Gun Control and the Second Amendment]
*[http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm Myth: Switzerland proves that high gun-ownership doesn't increase murder]
*[http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html Coalition for gun control]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[category:Second Amendment]]
[[Category:gun control]]
{{liberalism}}

Christmas

2009-12-12T02:22:50Z

JPope:

[[Image:Merry Christmas.gif|right|260px]]
'''Christmas''' is a Christian [[holiday]] which celebrates the birth of [[Jesus Christ]]. Christmas is typically celebrated on December 25th. The word Christmas comes from "Christ's [[mass]]," and the [[Roman Catholic]] church and most [[Protestantism|Protestant]] denominations observe Christmas after sundown on the 24th of [[December]]. Some [[Eastern Orthodox Church]](s) practice it on January 6th, combining the day with [[Epiphany]]. Orthodox practice a [[Christmas Fast]] lasting 40 days (November 15 to December 24).

The story of the birth of Christ is told in the opening chapters of the [[Gospel of Luke]] and the [[Gospel of Matthew]]. Each contains different elements of "the Christmas Story." The visit of the Archangel to the shepherds and the birth of Jesus in a [[manger]] are from Luke. The story of the Star of [[Bethlehem]] and the visit from the Wise Men bringing gifts of "[[gold]], and [[frankincense]] and [[myrrh]]" are from Matthew.

It is worthwhile to note that December 25th is likely not the date of Jesus' actual birth. In the Biblican description of Jesus' birth, He was visited by three shepards who had been out that night with their sheep. Shepards would not have been out with their sheep in the winter. Jesus' birth date is more commonly agreed to be some time in the Autumn. It wasn't until A.D. 440 that the church officially proclaimed December 25 as the birth of Christ. This was not based on any religious evidence but on a pagan feast. Saturnalia was a tradition inherited by the Roman pagans from an earlier Babylonian priesthood. December 25 was used as a celebration of the birthday of the sun god. It was observed near the winter solstice. <ref> [http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/was-jesus-born-on-december-25-faq.htm] </ref>

In Western countries, during the Christmas season people generally hang up colored lights, place a [[Christmas tree]] (typically an evergreen tree) in their house, sing [[carol]]s (songs), and exchange gifts. Gift-giving commemorates the gifts given to the Christ child by the Wise Men and is symbolic of the fact that Jesus came as gift to mankind from [[God]].

==History==
[[Image:Parmigianino Virgin with Child.jpg|right|240px|The Holy Virgin with her Child]]
Festivals have always been celebrated around the time of the solstice. Two thousand years before Christ, the early Mesopotamians celebrated a 12 day new year around that time, which is still reflected in our custom of the 12 Days of Christmas. Their chief god, [[Marduk]], was supposed to battle annually against the forces of chaos, which the Mesopotamians believed were making the sunlight dwindle. The [[Mesopotamian]] King was supposed to be killed to go fight at Marduk's side. However, the king usually substituted a condemned prisoner and let him spend a day as the king. He was treated like the king for a day, then at the end of the day he was stripped and killed in the king's stead.

Some scholars assume that the historical Jesus was born in the Spring, rather than how Christian tradition indicates. It wasn't until around AD 350 that [[Julius Caesar|Caesar]] appointed 25 December to be the Mass of Christ, probably to coincide with the date of the [[Winter Solstice]]. The early Catholic Church concurred, probably in order to draw parishioners away from licentious pagan festivals occurring at about the same time of year. The Romans decked their halls with green laurels and trees decorated with candles. This feast, called [[Saturnalia]], was a time for masquerades and feasts and the trading of presents, including "lucky fruits," the ancestor of today's fruitcake.

Christmas is a relatively unimportant holiday in the Christian liturgy (less important, for example, than the Feast of the Epiphany). Early Protestants, including the Puritans who settled in Plymouth, did not celebrate Christmas, which they denounced as Papist.

Many of the customs we have come to associate with Christmas developed in Victorian England, notably the Christmas Tree (which originated in Germany and was introduced in England by Prince Albert). The concept of Christmas as a family-centered celebration and a time of generosity, good will, and friendliness to neighbors, was promoted and codified by Charles Dickens in ''A Christmas Carol.''

In the United States, the image of [[Santa Claus]] (i.e. Saint Nicholas) and his reindeer has been shaped by Clement Moore's poem, "A Visit from Saint Nicholas" (with the famous opening line "'Twas the night before Christmas.") In other countries, the depiction of Santa vary widely. For instance, in [[The Netherlands]], Santa Claus is shown in a Catholic [[bishop]]'s [[miter]]. In some countries, Saint Nicholas is not associated with the holiday at all; for example, in [[Spain]] it is the Three Wise Men who bring gifts to children, and in [[Hawai'i]] it is the jolly native [[Kamaunamauna]]. However, the tradition of Christmas gift-giving is prevalent in all cultures.

In the [[United States]], during the twentieth century, gift-giving assumed a greater and greater role, and by mid-century had become of great commercial importance, to the point where some felt the religious aspects were becoming forgotten. As [[Stan Freberg]] put it<ref>in a recording, "Green Christmas"</ref> in 1958, "There are two S's in Christmas and they're ''both'' dollar signs." The single week before Christmas currently accounts for 25% to 30% of all retail sales.

==Modern-day cultural significance==

The tension between religious and secularized Christmas has waxed and waned periodically over the years. The pendulum swung toward secularization in the middle of the twentieth century. One marker was the emergence of songs like ''I'll Be Home For Christmas'' (1943), ''The Christmas Song,'' (1946), and ''Silver Bells'' (1951), which have become a beloved part of Christmas in America despite their lack of any religious content. [[Bing Crosby]], a devout Catholic, initially was reluctant to sing the secular 1942 song ''[[White Christmas]],'' which was to become his biggest hit.<ref>[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=850892 Still Dreaming of a White Christmas], NPR story</ref>

In recent years, the celebration of Christmas has become part of the "[[culture wars]]." [[Fox News]] analysts [[John Gibson]] and [[Bill O'Reilly]] claim that Christmas has come under attack by "[[liberal]]s." Some Christian conservatives want an increased recognition of the religious core of the holiday, and want to maintain a separation between Christmas and other holidays occurring at the same time of year.

==See also==
*[[Carols by Candlelight]]
*[[Christmas Carol]]
*[[Hanukkah]]
*[[Kamaunamauna]]
*[[Pantomime]]
*[[Santa Lucia]]
*[[Santa Maria]]
*[[Saint Nicholas]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.the-north-pole.com/index.htm Welcome to The North-Pole]

==Notes and references==

<references/>

[[Category:Observances]]
[[Category:Christmas]]

Talk:Global warming

2009-12-11T18:01:52Z

JPope: /* Science related sections should be placed first... */

Merge with [[Science of global warming]]? [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:31, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

good idea

== Other planets ==

I just wanted to explain why I deleted the material that was in place on this matter and why I disagree with its reinstatement, rather than getting into an edit war.

Yes there are measurements from other planets that go back several years but that does not constitute a continuous measurement period. The temporal and spatial coverage of such measurements varies each time and is naturally very limited in this respect. Measurements taken relatively close together in time have shown stark differences that cannot simply be said to be climate change but rather are natural short time-scale variations in time and space as you would find if you compared the temperature in the Sahara and the Antarctic on different days and with each other. The data that does exist has not been sufficient for scientists to produce running averages with anything like the reliability of those used for earth. Long-term trends are built using ''these'' figures not simply single temperature measurements from irregular times and places. As such it is not possible to make any accurate claims about climate change on these planets within the past few decades based on the available data. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 21:56, 26 February 2009 (EST)

:Congrats RobertWDP, I love when you follow the rules like that, we want respectable contributors as yourself. I feel that you are knowledgeable on the climate subject. If you say the data is inconclusive (other planets) and therefore cannot be used. I am not convinced. Show me studies that solar system planets have no bearing on Earth climate models, then cite references as proof.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 22:25, 26 February 2009 (EST)

::I shall try to elaborate on points Robert has already made. We do not have ice core samples from Neptune or Pluto. We don't have fossil data from Mars or Titan. What data we do have is at best a starting point for further analysis. On Earth we have much more data, and we also have the ability to carry out almost any experiment. As Robert said, what data we do have about the climates of other planets is absolutely useless for establishing a model of any kind. It could be that Mars is undergoing a typical cycle of climate change that is unique to its environment. We don't know. It could be that Neptune is warming because more gasses than normal are collapsing to the center of the planet and releasing heat caused by the friction of the particles rubbing against each other as they fall. We don't know. Premises don't spring from nothing, so we can't make an argument out of facts that we don't have.

::It is also a bad idea to compare the climates of gas giants with rocky planets: the differences are so extreme that it is hardly worth going over.

::I'll end by saying this: If common argument is that we don't really understand the Earth's climate, then how are we to know it any better through comparison of environments that we know almost nothing about? [[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 00:01, 27 February 2009 (EST)

:::I'll add that if ALL our solar system is getting warm at the same time, insufficient evidence? I believe that's the data that was presented, was at least cited. I am all for the truth in this matter. If you have a source, add it but don't delete the point that is countered.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 00:09, 27 February 2009 (EST)

::::If the entire solar system was warming at the same rate in the same instance (now) then you would have a very compelling case that human impact is far less than originally believed. However, we currently lack those facts if they in fact exist at all. Gas giants are not analogous to rocky planets; reasons for their climate change(s) is an entirely different matter for science to investigate. Also consider that the outer planets receive very little solar energy; the entire idea that the sun could provide sufficient energy to increase their average temperature is not based in reality. Mars could be warming because it is unable to deflect any appreciable amount of solar energy it receives. We have an atmosphere, and a magnetic shield of sorts to mitigate the influx of solar energy, so if we could take humanity out of the equation, Earth would likely warm at a much lower rate than Mars or any other planets if just due to solar activity alone.

::::The truth is though, that we just don't know. There's no credible way to link the climates of different planets in the fashion this section does. Gaseous planets obviously can't be compared to our own, and the conditions inherent to the other planets open up so many variables that we have no hope of meaningfully comparing them to our own in the near (or even distant) future.

::::What I mean by all this is that you don't really need a cited source (though I accept where the burden appropriately lies) to realize that you can't compare apples to oranges.[[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 00:31, 27 February 2009 (EST)

:::::''"the entire idea that the sun could provide sufficient energy to increase their average temperature is not based in reality"'' I am disagreeing but I don't know what I am disagreeing about. Sunlight on Pluto is insufficient for solar temperature fluctuations? --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 00:51, 27 February 2009 (EST)

:::::Consider the distances involved: Pluto is so far away that the sun would at best appear as a very bright star if you stood on the surface and tried to find it. Granted, Pluto isn't so far away that it receives no solar energy whatsoever, but the amount (inverse square law) is so negligible that you can't ascribe significant weight to it. In fact, Pluto only warms to the point of having a minimal atmosphere after it's orbit changes by almost 3 billion miles.

:::::I don't want to run into 90/10 problems, but again I gotta ask: how can we compare Pluto to the Earth, or even Mars to the Earth when they are so different that they are barely similar?[[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 01:05, 27 February 2009 (EST)

:::::The sun is gigantic! [http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/sun_size_distance.html] --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 01:15, 27 February 2009 (EST)

::::::And what's your point?[[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 14:59, 27 February 2009 (EST)

:::::::The sun is everything, all encompassing, all powerful and to say comparing planets in our solar system are like comparing apples with oranges, I say hooey! The IPCC hasn't taken into account sun irradiation, solar spots, and a host of other issues. Their findings are the heart of Global Warming Politics. It has already been disproved no matter how many agree to its findings. As YECs correctly point out, you can't just throw seven apples on the floor, all at once, perfectly spaced. Yet, God aligned the planets in our system that way. God controls the destiny of Earth, not man. God tells us it is a sin to worry. Leave mother nature for God to decide. As said in 'Platoon', "We all gotta die sometime." Bot capture guy says what? --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 01:27, 4 March 2009 (EST)

So are you telling me that the most extensively studied body in the sky, has somehow been omitted from all studies related to global warming despite the very necessary fact that the sun is probably the most important part of our climate (Being the driving force and all...)? I mean not to sound condescending, but the sun has been factored into every single climate model period because without the sun we don't really have a climate. The verdict? The sun is not the primary causative agent behind global warming. If the sun's output was so high that it was warming Pluto at (for the sake of argument) the same rate as Earth, we'd be dead. So the outer planets no, don't indicate anything about the climates of the inner planets unless it is understood that the outer planets (especially the gas giants) have some analogous variables as the inner planets do.

Also, please note that the IPCC is usually criticized for /understating/ global warming, but it's predictions are still "There is GW, humans activity is the cause." The more nuanced questions of "by how much..." "by what specific behavior..." have yet to be answered, no one disagrees there, but we can't answer those questions if we must continually go back and reassert that what we already know to be true is true.

Also what is perfectly spaced about the planets? Pluto went (back when it was a planet, though I still personally consider it such) from 9th farther to 8th farthest planet depending on when you looked at it. Uranus is helplessly tilted on its side. Saturn's rings are also note stable. What about any of this is perfection? If your idea of perfection is rooted in the tradition of Platonic forms, then I could see your point, but then again always assigning God as the reason why X occurred when we don't currently know only sets up God to fail in the long run when we DO figure it out. If God exists, and I assume he does, he does not exist in such a way that we can view him through a telescope.[[User:Jirby|Jirby]] 15:18, 5 March 2009 (EST)

:This is a typical argument, used by liberals to trick the ignorant. I don't know whether you are a trickster or one of the tricked, but it doesn't matter.

:The sun's output consists of energy and matter. The energy that heats the earth is infrared light, which is what McDonald's uses to keep the French Fries warm. The matter is called cosmic rays, but these are actually charged particles; they move slower than the speed of light.

:Variations in the '''energy output''' of the sun have little effect on the earth's climate, but variations in cosmic rays have a significant effect.

:The difference between a sincere person and a liberal liar depends on whether he'll stop saying something after he finds out that it is not true. So, I'll ask you: if someone can prove to your satisfaction that variations in solar output, i.e., [[cosmic rays]], have a greater effect on the temperature of the earth's atmosphere, will you stop saying otherwise? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:20, 29 September 2009 (EDT)

== Media claims ==

Again, I shall bring this issue here rather than risk reverting an admin.

Jpatt, you state quite blatantly that Boykoff is biased towards global warming. I have to ask at this point (this is actually a question not an attempt at an insult in case of any apparent ambiguity) if you have read any of his research or actually know where his grants come from? If the answer is no to the latter in particular then such comments as you have added to the article would amount to libel, which it would be virtually impossible for you to defend against. I am familiar with his work and so hopefully can be of some use here. Boykoff's work is not actually so much research on the science of climate change itself. He actually studies how climate change (amongst other things) is portrayed and perceived by politicians, the public, and the media, not to mention the actual climate scientists. As such the funding for such research which generally involves looking at freely available material, mostly newspaper articles, is pretty negligible, especially when compared to actual climate studies that I assume you are referring to. Although I admit I cannot state for certain the actual source of the funding, I would be quite certain it is from a source that specifically funds media research and not actual climate studies. As such, Boykoff is actually studying issues such as possible bias regarding the issues of climate science, especially in politics and reporting and even mentions media bias on numerous occasions. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 07:09, 27 February 2009 (EST)
:Further, I would request that if my points above are not adequately addressed (i.e. the removal of libellous claims about an individual) then I would instead request that you simply allow me to remove all reference to the person's work rather than have it and him portrayed in such a way. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 07:15, 27 February 2009 (EST)
::Please note that I have now done this. There should be little argument not only due to my points above but also as I added the references in the first place. I am disappointed at te attitude that has been taken by some. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 19:01, 27 February 2009 (EST)

== Quotation ==

The grammar and punctuation in the quotation from Obama in the article could be improved.

== Generally ==

The ecological movement generally has been described as a white attempt to stop non-whites'
industrialising, a middle-class attempt to stop working-class whites' industrialising,
an attempt to conjure up salaries for millions of scientists or an emotional
substitute for failed socialism.

== Not only liberals ==

Edited the section of liberal claims of consensus. There are more groupos than liberals that are claiming consensus on this issue. Moreover, that information seems old, maybe the whole article should be refreshed.

Also, took away the quotation marks from "consesus", otherwise it looks stupid.~~

No only liberals, make the claim that there is consensus. They claim that there is consensus, with other groups but that doesn't make it so. Also, it's better to have quotation marks since then we emphasize that there isn't any real consensus. Finally your spelling, could be improved.

==Hackers evidence scam ==

Working on other stuff myself, but thought this may be note worthy for an editor, though its depth and impact is yet to be ascertained:

[http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/11/hackers-prove-global-warming-is-scam.html ''Hackers Prove Global Warming Is A Scam'']

"One particular thing you said - and we agreed - was about the IPCC reports and the broader climate negotiations were working to the globalisation agenda driven by organisations like the WTO."

Also [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM ''The Dog Ate Global Warming Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data have been fiddled?''][[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 09:39, 21 November 2009 (EST)

==list of New York Times articles dating back to 1855 addressing the global warming and cooling==

http://newsbusters.org/node/11640

Here or on the controversy page?[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:47, 21 November 2009 (EST)

:Good question, but not an urgent one. We need to start separating the [[science]] of global warming from the [[politics]]. The "[[greenhouse effect]]" is real, but the threat of a [[runaway greenhouse effect]] is overhyped, and [[politicized science]] has contaminated the educational process.

:We need to give our series of [[global warming]]-related articles an overhaul. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 00:55, 22 November 2009 (EST)

== Science related sections should be placed first... ==

There's really no reason for the sections regarding the 'politics' and 'liberal claims of consensus' to come first. It seems appropriate that all of the scientific sections should come first in an article about a scientific issue.

Also, while I understand that many global warming supporters have a liberal inclination, doesn't this seem a bit biased: "'''Liberal''' claims of consensus"?[[User:JPope|JPope]] 13:01, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Talk:Global warming

2009-12-11T18:00:30Z

JPope: /* Science related sections should be placed first... */

Talk:Global warming

2009-12-11T17:59:50Z

JPope: /* Science related sections should be placed first... */ new section

Global warming

2009-12-11T17:53:33Z

JPope: I rewrote the section about global warming science - adding appropriate information regarding the lag of CO2 behind temperature rise. Also, I put the science related sections first.

[[Image:Composite antarctic NASA.jpg|thumb|right|250px|A composite map of [[Antarctica]] showing areas of greatest warming in red, other colors indicate cooling. The Wilkins Ice Shelf lies off the peninsula in the top left corner, and shows extensive warming. Overall, Antarctica shows more cooling than warming, especially in the east, the area to the right.]]
The '''Global warming''' theory asserts that human activity causes dangerous increases in temperatures, despite studies showing the the Earth has been in a cooling pattern since 1998. [[Liberal]] scientists have insisted that man-made pollution has caused dangerous warming, but all of their computer models failed to predict cooling that the Earth is experiencing. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,570469,00.html Earth Cools, and Fight Over Warming Heats Up, FoxNews, October 30, 2009]</ref> By pushing their baised liberal agenda, they are misinforming citizens. In November 2009, emails were publicly released that demonstrated wrongful manipulation and concealment of data by scientists who have insisted that there is dangerous man-made global warming.

The myth of dangerous man-made global warming is promoted by liberals and socialists seeking greater government control over the production and use of energy, which is a substantial percentage of the economy. Numerous scientists, especially those outside of university faculties, have been critical of this myth, but liberals have censored dissent and pretended that there is a "[[scientific consensus]]" supporting their theory for greater government control. Prior to [[Climategate]], both the Republican and Democratic party Platforms in 2008 suggested that global warming is happening, that it is caused by human activity, and that it should be counteracted. On most college campuses criticism of man-made global warming is silenced or censored, and even scientists skeptical of it are afraid to speak out.

Temperatures have been decreasing rapidly throughout this decade (as of 2009). Historically, natural periods of global warming and global cooling have alternated, and not long ago liberals were demanding more government control to combat an alleged cooling in temperatures.

The unsuccessful Democratic candidate for President in 2000, [[Al Gore]], won a [[Nobel Prize]] in 2007 for claiming that there is a dangerous man-made global warming that threatens the world. Neither he nor his supporters admit that a rapid cooling in temperatures is being observed. In 2007, the Republican presidential candidate Senator [[John McCain]] called global warming "an issue we can no longer afford to ignore".<ref>[http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/John_McCain_Environment.htm]</ref>

In 2008 86 evangelical pastors, including Rev. Dr.[[Rick Warren]] signed a statement titled "Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action", which called on Christians to acknowledge the moral importance of action to counteract man - made climate change. the statement includes specific support for market - based CO2 reductions such as a cap - and - trade program.<ref>[http://christiansandclimate.org/]</ref>

==Presence of CO2==

One of the primary concerns of Global Warming research is the increased presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Original claims stated that the increase in carbon dioxide - which is a greenhouse gas - were caused primarily through the burning of [[fossil fuels]], and that such increases were the foremost cause of global temperatures rising. However, recent research has shown that the average global temperature and carbon dioxide do have a relationship, but that the relationship is the other way around. Global temperature changes precede changes in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, leading to the increasing belief amongst the skeptical science community that global temperatures are causing carbion dioxide to increase in the atmosphere. <ref> [http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm]</ref>

The most obvious way that this would occur would be through the evaporation of ocean water. The oceans are the single largest storage unit for carbon dioxide gas on the planet, containing about 93% of the Earth's carbon dioxide. <ref> [http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Bi-Ca/Carbon-Dioxide-in-the-Ocean-and-Atmosphere.html] </ref> As temperatures rise, ocean water evaporates, causing the dissolved carbon dioxide gas to enter the atmosphere, and begin trapping radiation from the sun. Scientists now believe that this cycle causes a sort of chain effect, where increased temperature causes more carbon dioxide to enter the atmosphere, which in turn causes more temperature rise. However, this discredits the idea that human contributions to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are significant enough to affect global climate change.

It is also noteworthy to point out that carbon dioxide, while not as abundant in the atmosphere, has a more significant effect on global warming than water vapor does. Carbon dioxide cannot form clouds, as water vapor does. When water vapor forms clouds, those clouds actually block some of the sun's radiation from reaching the Earth, causing water vapor to both contribute positively and negatively to global temperature rise. Carbon dioxide can only act as a greenhouse gas, causing the above mentioned cyclic effect.

==The Modern Warm Period==

The Average [[Earth]] surface air temperature has risen about 1° F since 1970.
<ref>Hansen's group at the Goddard Institute wrote, "Global warming is now 0.6 °C [1.0 °F] in the past three decades and 0.8 °C [1.4 °F] in the past century." http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2005/</ref> Studies have ruled out the possibility that errors in the measurements and sampling significantly affect the temperature trends detected over the past century. This accounts for spatial errors in the sampling and thus also incorporates errors associated with the urban-heating effect. According to Karl et al. (1993) ''"Results imply that the errors associated with century-scale trends of temperature are probably an order of magnitude smaller than the observed global warming of nearly 0.5°C per 100 years since the late nineteenth century"'' <ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994JCli....7.1144K Karl et al. (1993) 'Global and Hemispheric Temperature Trends: Uncertainties Related to Inadequate Spatial Sampling' in Journal of Climate, 7(7); 1144 - 1168</ref>

According to temperature reconstruction made within an [[Old Earth]] paradigm, there have been many cycles of naturally-caused global warming and cooling over many millions of years (see [[climate cycles]]). Some scientists, including [[Richard Lindzen]] of [[MIT]], [[Sallie Baliunas]] of [[Harvard]] and [[Fred Singer]] (independent), say that the recent warming could be part of another natural cycle or random fluctuations in the atmosphere. However, many scientists also think that human activities were most likely the cause of the the planet's recent warming.

== Sun Spots ==
Sunspot activity may be a primary factor in climate fluctuations, according to Willie Soon, a researcher affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and the Harvard College Observatory. '''“The sun is a great driving force to climate change.”''' Soon said that there have been much greater temperature fluctuations due to sunspots in the past and that proponents of global warming need to consider the effects of sunspot activity on global temperatures. Brian Farrell, a Harvard meteorology professor, acknowledged a connection between sunspot activity and temperatures on the Earth, “A strong correlation between the amount of radioactive carbon and temperature from ice cores has shown that solar activity can affect temperature." <ref>[http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/42006/181/ Harvard astrophysicist: Sunspot activity correlates to global climate change] TGDaily.com, April 10, 2009</ref>

==Politicization of the issue==

Environmentalists and their political allies have presented a one-sided, anti-scientific account of global warming. They have ignored natural warming cycles and suppressed evidence which contradicts their theories. They have viciously attacked the credibility of any scientist daring to contradict them, creating a climate of fear where only a tiny handful of scientists dare speak out.

Bill Gray wrote:
* The contrary views of the many warming skeptics have been largely ignored and their motives denigrated.
* The normal scientific process of objectively studying both sides of the question has not yet occurred.<ref> [http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/XchangeGray_FtCollinsFeb08.pdf Area Experts Debate Global Warming]</ref>

Journalists in the West, dominated by liberal viewpoints, have painted a misleading picture of the science. They have publicized liberal slanders against scientists who dare to speak up against the fake "consensus"

Even organizations that are not normally biased towards leftist ideas have publically supported the global waming theory. The oil company Exxon/Mobil official policy is that CO2 emissions pose risks to society and ecosystems. Exxon/Mobil has also committed to reducing their own CO2 emissions, and invested $600 million in algae based fuels.<ref> [http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/energy_climate_views.aspx]</ref>

Agencies of the United States Government such as NASA, EPA & NOAA give selected information that strongly supports the global warming theory. At the same time, they reject freedom of information requests to see the raw data. <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/58087 Vitter, Inhofe Ask NASA Inspector General to Probe Possible Obstruction of FOIA Requests Seeking Climate Change Records, CNSNews.com, December 04, 2009]</ref> The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for one example, states that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising due to human activity, and that the surface of the Earth has warmed, on average, quickly over the last 50 years, even though North America cooled slightly.<ref> [http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#q2]</ref> In 2008 The Bush Administration requested $4.1 billion dollars of taxpayer money from Congress to fund NOAA, a 7.7 percent increase from 2008.<ref> [http://www.noaa.gov/budget/] </ref>

The 2008 Democratic National Committee Platform states;<ref>[states;http://www.democrats.org/a/party/platform.html]</ref>

"We must end the tyranny of oil in our time. This immediate danger is eclipsed only by the longer - term threat from climate change"

and

"...climate change is not just an economic issue or an environmental concern - this is a national security crisis."

The 2008 Republican National Committee Platform states; <ref>[http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/Environment.htm]</ref>

"The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. While the scope and long-term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment."

There have also been some Conservatives, such as John Bliese, Ph.D., who at one point believed that global warming is a critical problem, and that [[Conservatism]] and environmental conservation are fully compatible. Speaking to those who are skeptical of global warming, in the [[Summer]] of 2001, he wrote, "[T]here is nothing conservative about denying scientific evidence."<ref>[http://www.rep.org/news/GEvol5/ge5.1_globalwarming.html]</ref>

On October 10, 2009, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham coauthored (with Democrat Senator John Kerry) an op ed piece in the New York Times which stated "Even climate change skeptics should recognize that reducing our dependence on foreign oil and increasing our energy efficiency strengthens our national security. Both of us served in the military. We know that sending nearly $800 million a day to sometimes-hostile oil-producing countries threatens our security. In the same way, many scientists warn that failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will lead to global instability and poverty that could put our nation at risk."
<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/opinion/11kerrygraham.html?pagewanted=1]</ref>

in 2008 the Center for Naval Analyses empaneled eleven retired generals and admirals to prepare a paper titled "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change". They concluded that Global climate change presents a serious national security threat which could impact Americans at home, impact United States military operations and heighten global tensions.<ref>[http://securityandclimate.cna.org/]</ref>

The Central Intelligence Agency has opened The Center on Climate Change and National Security to study the impact of climate change on US national security.<ref>[https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/center-on-climate-change-and-national-security.html]</ref>

==Climate science fraud==
{{main|Climategate}}

The [[Climategate#Climategate_scandal|Climategate scandal]] revealed how liberal scientists appeared to be deceiving the public with the use of fraudulent data for use as climate science. The [[Liberal media|liberal media]] has attempted to bury the story and discount it as the work of computer hackers illegally stealing data, however, [[FOIA|Freedom of Information]] requests is likely what led to the data being leaked — intentionally.<ref>http://www.junkscience.com/</ref> Dr. Willie Soon, a [[Physicist|physicist]], [[Astronomer|astronomer]] and climate researcher at the solar and stellar physics division of the [[Harvard University]]-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said in an interview, "[The Climatic Research Unit climate scientists] are making scientific progress more difficult now. This is a shameful, dark day for science." Dr. Soon also suggested that there has been systemic suppression of dissenting opinion among scientists in the climate change community, ranging from social snubs to e-mail stalking and even threats of harm.<ref>Gene J. Koprowski. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html Global Warming Scandal Makes Scientific Progress More Difficult, Experts Say], ''[[Fox News]]'', December 01, 2009.</ref>

[[Image:GoreFireBreathing.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Al Gore's [[Schlockumentary]] under fire; [[An Inconvenient Truth]] found to be an inconvenient [[lie]] based on [[junk science]] and digitally enhanced, totally faked scenes of polar icecaps melting.]]
===Controversy===
{{main|Global Warming Controversy}}

Since 1989, advocates have clashed on the issue of whether human beings are more responsible than nature for modern periods of global warming; see "[[greenhouse warming]]" and [[global warming theory]].<ref>Some people predicted "global warming," which has come to mean extreme [[greenhouse warming]] of the atmosphere leading to catastrophic environmental consequences. [http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm]</ref>

Most non-scientific support for the global warming theory rests on popular accounts such as Al Gore's ''[[An Inconvenient Truth]]'' or on reports issued by the UN's [[IPCC]]. However, Keston Green of Monash University and Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School wrote:
{{cquote|Because the forecasting processes examined in Chapter 8 overlook scientific evidence on forecasting, the [[IPCC]] forecasts of climate change are not scientific. <ref>http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/Public_Policy/WarmAudit31.pdf</ref>}}

Former vice-president [[Al Gore]] called it a [[moral issue]], while climate scientist [[Richard Lindzen]] says, "It is probably the most immoral thing you could do to restrain energy so that the billions in the earth who don’t have access to electricity won't conveniently get it." <ref>http://www.americaabroadmedia.org/media/On line extra materials/Climate change - lindzen interview.doc</ref> However, it is to be noted that many proponents of the theory propose energy conservation only until 'green' energy generation becomes predominant.

In general, the term ''global warming'' can be used for any upward trend in the [[Global mean temperature record|global mean temperature]], but it is mostly used to refer to the 1° F warming since 1850. The two sides are divided on whether this warming is a natural recovery from the [[Little Ice Age]] or a man-made environmental phenomenon. There are also debates regarding the potential positive or negative effects of a warming.

Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. are evenly split on the issue. ''Boston Globe'' writer [[Ellen Goodman]] wrote:
{{cquote|Only 23 percent of college-educated Republicans believe the warming is due to humans, while 75 percent of college-educated Democrats believe it.<ref> [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/09/no_change_in_political_climate/] </ref>}}

Controversy and scientific inaccuracies may have contributed to addressing 'Climate Change' in place of using Global Warming. As the northern pole region melts, the southern pole region ice is growing <ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0110/p14s01-sten.html], http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0110/p14s01-sten.html, As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows, January 10, 2008</ref> <ref>[http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25348657-401,00.html Antarctic ice is growing, not melting away] News.com.au, April 18, 2009</ref> The argument is that for alarmists to claim a global threat, it would have to include the entire globe. For skeptics, the evidence is conclusive, there is no threat.

A recent warming trend in 2009 is also seen by some as contradicting predictions of imminent global warming, and necessitating a change of terminology to ''Climate Change.''<ref>http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1799/Global-temperatures-have-plunged-74degF-since-Gore-released-An-Inconvenient-Truth</ref> It is also pointed out that ''global cooling'' was seen as a threat by the mid-1970's.<ref>[http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf Newsweek, April 28, 1975 (photocopy)]</ref>

==Liberal claims of "Consensus"==
[[Richard Lindzen]] wrote in 1992,

:Indeed, a recent Gallup poll of climate scientists in the American Meteorological Society and in the American Geophysical Union shows that a vast majority doubts that there has been any identifiable man-caused warming to date (49 percent asserted no, 33 percent did not know, 18 percent thought some has occurred; however, among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far). <ref name="cato">http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html</ref>

Oddly enough, even though 82% of US climate scientists refused to support the global warming theory then, [[liberal]] activists were already claiming a scientific consensus for [[anthropogenic global warming]]. (It's hard to understand how 18 percent credence in ''any'' global warming translates into "consensus" support for ''human-caused'' global warming.)

The campaign to convince the public (and their elected representatives) that the "science is settled" began in 1988 or 1989.

By the 2008 elections both candidates for the Presidency of the United States were proposing plans to mitigate climate change.

Over 31,000 American scientists have signed the petition rejecting global warming. <ref>[http://www.petitionproject.org/</ref>

[[Image:Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg|600px|center|thumb| Global Warming Petition]]

It is well understood that most media companies do not offer balanced reporting. Many politicians have bought into the liberal claim of consensus, for example Barack Obama's views, "Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than fighting climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear." <ref>[http://cato.org/special/climatechange/ Climate Change Reality] Cato Institute</ref> In fact, many scientists disagree with the "facts," their certainty, and their interpretation. Over 100 of them have signed the statement that appears in the Cato Institute's newspaper ad. Liberals have failed to back up their claims with any scientific facts.

[[File:ad.jpg|center]]

==Natural Variability of the Climate System==
It is virtually universally accepted amongst climatologists that the earth has experienced numerous [[Ice Age|ice age]]s over two million years, during which global temperatures fluctuated created glacial and inter-glacial periods. The frigid temperatures allowed ice sheets to expand southward, covering much of [[Asia]], [[Europe]], and [[North America]]. The cooling associated with ice ages is gradual, while the terminations are relatively rapid. However, even the rapid terminations of ice ages take centuries to millennia.

==Natural Climate Change on Other Planets==

Since the [[Viking spacecraft]] reached [[Mars]] in the 1970s until recent readings were taken, the average temperature on Mars has risen {{temperature|0.6|1.1}} just as the average temperature on the earth has risen. Since human industrialization is clearly not to blame for the change on Mars, other causes are being considered. One possibility is that dust storms are changing the albedo of the planet, allowing it to warm, while another possibility is that solar variations from the sun are causing the warming.<ref>http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070404_gw_mars.html</ref><ref>http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977</ref>

Recently, it has also been found that similar to the Earth and Mars, [[Neptune]] is also undergoing global warming. Measurements taken at the Lowell observatory in [[Arizona]] have shown an increase in Neptune's brightness and temperature since 1980 following the same pattern seen on Earth and Mars. The researchers who discovered this warming suggest there may be a correlation between the warming and solar variations.<ref>http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007.../2006GL028764.shtml</ref>

[[Pluto]] has also been found to be undergoing global warming. The overall temperature increase on Pluto has been greater than that on the earth.<ref>http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_021009.html</ref>

On the other hand [[Uranus]] has had no net change in temperature since 1977. A rapid increase in temperature reversed itself. The reasons for this are not understood.<ref>http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~layoung/eprint/ur149/Young2001Uranus.pdf</ref>

Global temperatures change on other planets even when there is no life, something which strongly supports the idea that humans are not necessarily the cause of earth's global warming. Moreover, the temperature on Uranus has fluctuated back and forth. There is no reason that fluctuations cannot occur on earth, too.

Although measurements have been made of the temperatures of other planets these are by no means thorough or comparable with the measurements used for earth. The short space of time over which measurements have been taken and the very limited spatial coverage means that reliable average figures have not been obtained. They have certainly not been taken extensively enough to produce a five year average temperature, which is the standard when determining temperature trends on earth.

However, if accurate measurements could be made, and their accuracy and reliability is improving over time, then they may prove useful to climate science. Their different atmospheres and distances from the sun provide natural laboratories to study climatic changes without human influences. Though of course they will not be directly comparable due to the vast differences.

==Beneficial effects of Global Warming==

Some researchers point out that benefits of health global warming have been overlooked, or minimized. As far back as 1996, Thomas Gale Moore, Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution (Stanford University) contended that positive health and amenity effects would be a result of projected increases in temperature. <ref>[http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/health.html Health and Amenity Effects of Global Warming]</ref>

Another source notes,

In areas that see extreme cold temperatures, deaths related to colder weather would drop significantly, leading to decreased health care costs. Warmer temperatures would also mean less energy use to heat homes and buildings, helping to conserve energy. With the changes brought about by global warming more land would become available for uses like farming and living. Forests and plants would grow stronger, healthier, and more abundant because of the warmer weather, and this would mean more oxygen being released into the atmosphere.<ref>http://www.bionomicfuel.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-global-warming/</ref>

==Politics of Global Warming==
{{main|Politics of global warming}}

Christine Stewart- Canadian Environment Ministry, "'''No matter if the science is all phony''', there are collateral environmental benefits . . . Climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” <ref>[http://www.aim.org/wls/use-environmentalism-to-change-the-world/ Christine Stewart] Accuracy in Media</ref>

'Global Warming Now World's Most Boring Topic’ <ref>http://newsbusters.org/node/14167</ref>

The need to fight "global warming" has become part of the dogma of the liberal conscience. <ref name="cato" />

Clearly, "global warming" is a tempting issue for many very important groups to exploit.
... dealing with the threat of warming fits in with a great variety of preexisting agendas [like] dissatisfaction with industrial society (neopastoralism), ... governmental desires for enhanced revenues (carbon taxes), and bureaucratic desires for enhanced power. <ref name="cato" />

If their biased findings are to be believed, the IPCC concluded that the global average surface temperature warmed about 0.6 °F during the 20th Century. <ref>[http://www.answers.com/topic/global-warming Growing Signals of Global Warming] U.S. History Encyclopedia</ref> The IPCC is desperate to claim the 20th century-- the warmest on record. Thus, tying the progress of modern mankind to our supposed planet imbalance problem. Unfortunately for the IPCC, that point is disputed as well. In 2008, it was discovered that tree rings in Finland were more accurate record of the warmest century. The current era was not the warmest period-- it was the period between 931 and 1180. <ref>[http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/archive/2008/6?page=2 The Trees of Finland; Temperature Readings and Historical Reconstruction] Tbirdnow.mee.nu Blog (with links to actual data sources), June 24, 2008</ref>

Assessments of climate science by the [[United Nations]] (see [[IPCC]] - ''Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change'')
have claimed that scientists are 90% sure that over 50% of the observed global warming in recent decades is human-caused, and that continued global warming should be expected over at least the next century.

Several prominent scientists have pointed out the [[politicized science]] of the UN's assessment methods. The scientific reports are submitted to a panel of representatives appointed by each country in the IPCC. Several scientists whose research demonstrates that climate change is taking place have complained about their work being misrepresented by the U.N.

In addition, a number of the participants have testified to the pressures placed on them to emphasize results supportive of the current scenario and to suppress other results. That pressure has frequently been effective, and a survey of participants reveals substantial disagreement with the final report. <ref name="cato" />

Richard Lindzen wrote:
:Perhaps more important are the pressures being brought to bear on scientists to get the "right" results. Such pressures are inevitable, given how far out on a limb much of the scientific community has gone. The situation is compounded by the fact that some of the strongest proponents of "global warming" in Congress are also among the major supporters of science (Sen. Gore is notable among those). <ref name="cato" />

Christopher Monckton wrote an article titled Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered.
:States that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change studies are flawed. The present analysis suggests the models failure to predict other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of radioactive forcing, no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter and feedback multiplier. In conclusion, that there may be no "Climate Crisis" and for governments to reduce emissions may be pointless or even harmful. <ref>http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/monckton.cfm , Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered, July 2008</ref> This was published on a forum of the American Physical Society with the following disclaimer "The article has not undergone any scientific peer review" and "the APS disagrees with the articles conclusions" In fact, the APS disagrees with the article without ever reviewing it.

Ryan N. Maue:
:A doctoral student at the Department of Meteorology at Florida State University did a study of global tropical cyclone activity. Its conclusions state that global warming might be greatly overblown. <ref>[http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_617111.html# Global warming? More doubts] Pittsburgh Tribune, March 21, 2009</ref> Mr. Maue found that tropical cyclone activity worldwide "has completely and utterly collapsed" during the past two to three years with energy levels sinking to those of the late 1970s.

Dr. Vincent Gray:
:A member of the IPCC’s expert reviewers’ panel asserts, “There is no relationship between warming and the level of gases in the atmosphere,” and "there is no serious threat to the climate" <ref>[http://americanfreedomnow.com/2009/06/04/the-panic-over-global-warming-is-totally-unjustified-says-vice-chair-ipcc/ “THE PANIC OVER GLOBAL WARMING IS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED” says Vice Chair, IPCC] Americanfreedomnow.com, June 4th, 2009</ref>

Joe D’Aleo: Climatologist
:The International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project says new data "show that in five of the last seven decades since World War II, including this one, global temperatures have cooled while carbon dioxide has continued to rise," and "'''The data suggest cooling''', not warming, in Earth's future." <ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92557 Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening] Worldnetdaily, March 22, 2009</ref>

Dr. John S. Theon:
:Retired senior NASA atmospheric [[scientist]], Dr. John S. Theon, the former boss of global warming alarmist James Hansen of [[NASA]], rebukes him declaring “climate models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit,” “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results." <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/01/28/former-boss-rebukes-nasa-global-warming-alarmist-hansen-agw-skeptic Former Boss Rebukes NASA Global Warming Alarmist Hansen, Is AGW Skeptic] NewsBusters.org, January 28, 2009 </ref>

Sammy Wilson -Ireland's environment minister
:He argues that global weather patterns are naturally cooling, not warming. He calls television ads that promote global warming as "an insidious propaganda campaign" peddling "patent nonsense." <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=43255 Belfast Environment Chief Bans Climate Change Ads] AP, February 09, 2009</ref>

After the broadcast of his movie '[[The Great Global Warming Swindle]]', filmmaker Martin Durkin's statements read <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=32796 UK Broadcaster Scolded for Film on Global Warming] CNSNEWS July 22, 2008</ref>

*“Everywhere you are told that man-made [[climate change]] is proved beyond doubt,” “But you are being told lies.”
*“This is a story of how a theory about climate turned into a political [[ideology]] ... it is the story of the distortion of a whole area of [[science]].”
*“as the frenzy over man-made [[global warming]] grows shriller, many senior scientists say the actual scientific basis for the [[theory]] is crumbling.”

In late 2008, the [[AP]] published an article by its Science Writer Seth Borenstein, which is seen by skeptics as another example of one-sided, uncritical reporting on the issue by [[liberal media]]. The report stated that global warming was "a ticking time bomb that President-elect Barack Obama can't avoid", and that "We're out of time", with Al Gore calling the situation "the equivalent of a five-alarm fire that has to be addressed immediately."<ref>http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D952LKOO1&show_article=1</ref> In response, Fox New (December 16, 2008) reported that scientists skeptical of anthropogenic global warming criticized the report as "irrational hysteria," "horrifically bad" and "incredibly biased", containing containing sweeping scientific errors and being a one-sided portrayal of a complicated issue. Geology professor [[David Deming]] stated, "If the issues weren't so serious and the ramifications so profound, I would have to laugh at it", and accused Borenstein of "writing a polemic and reporting it as fact." Deming noted that "the mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980." The AP responded to criticism by stating that, "It’s a news story, based on fact and the clearly expressed views of President-elect Barack Obama and others."<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468084,00.html Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria'] Fox News, December 16, 2008</ref>

Also in the discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho stated, "There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes."

The year 2008 turned out to be the coolest year since 2000, yet the seventh to tenth warmest year on record, according to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.<ref>http://news.eoportal.org/research/090127_res3.html</ref> According to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, the average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average – the 34th coolest on record.<ref>[http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090910_summerstats.html NOAA: Summer Temperature Below Average for U.S.]</ref>

Richard S. Courtney, a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expert reviewer and a U.K.-based climate and atmospheric science consultant says "Rubbish! Global warming is not 'accelerating," and "...that anybody who proclaims that 'Global warming is accelerating' is a liar, a fool, or both." <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/global_warming_debunked/2008/12/16/162489.html Global Warming’s Last Gasp] NewsMax, December 17, 2008</ref>

Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D., emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, asked, "What does it take to ignore 10 years of global cooling....? The answer is really quite simple — just follow the money!"

==Al Gore's Claims==

The decision by the government to distribute Al Gore's film, ''An Inconvenient Truth'', became the subject of a legal challenge by [[New Party]] member Stewart Dimmock. A school governor from Dover and father of two, Dimmock charged the Government with brainwashing children with propaganda by presenting Gore’s sci-fi film as science. In October 2007, Mr Justice Burton of London's High Court found that while the film was "broadly accurate", it contained nine significant errors,“in which statements were made that were not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus”, some of which had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”. He also found the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisers only worked to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.<ref>[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/clearly_its_al_gore_whos_in_de.html American Thinker; ''Clearly It's Al Gore Who's In Denial'']</ref><ref>Times online, October 11, 2007 ''Al Gore’s inconvenient judgment''</ref>

Taken from the official transcript,<ref>[http://noteviljustwrong.com/images/nejw/docs/22161.pdf Stuart Dimmock and Secretary of State for Education and Skills]</ref> the nine errors the judge found were:

*1. Sea level rise of up to 20 feet (7 metres) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland in the near future. This is distinctly alarmist, and part of Mr Gore's 'wake-up call'. It is common ground that if indeed Greenland melted, it would release this amount of water, but only after, and over, millennia, so that the Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of 7 metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus.

*2. Low lying inhabited Pacific atolls are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming. In scene 20, Mr Gore states "that's why the citizens of these Pacific nations have all had to evacuate to New Zealand". There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened.

*3. Shutting down of the "Ocean Conveyor". According to the IPCC, it is very unlikely that the Ocean Conveyor (known technically as the Meridional Overturning Circulation or thermohaline circulation) will shut down in the future, though it is considered likely that thermohaline circulation may slow down.

*4. Direct coincidence between rise in CO2 in the atmosphere and in temperature, by reference to two graphs. In scenes 8 and 9, Mr Gore shows two graphs relating to a period of 650,000 years, one showing rise in CO2 and one showing rise in temperature, and asserts (by ridiculing the opposite view) that they show an exact fit. Although there is general scientific agreement that there is a connection, the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts.

*5. The snows of Kilimanjaro. The film asserted that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidenced global warming. The Government's expert was had to admit that this is not correct. Mr Gore asserts in scene 7 that the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is expressly attributable to global warming. It is noteworthy that this is a point that specifically impressed Mr Milliband (see the press release quoted at paragraph 6 above). However, it is common ground that, the scientific consensus is that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.

*6. Lake Chad etc. The drying up of Lake Chad is used as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming. However, it is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability.

*7. Hurricane Katrina. In scene 12 Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans is ascribed to global warming. It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that.

*8. Death of polar bears. In scene 16, by reference to a dramatic graphic of a polar bear desperately swimming through the water looking for ice, Mr Gore says: "A new scientific study shows that for the first time they are finding polar bears that have actually drowned swimming long distances up to 60 miles to find the ice. They did not find that before." The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.

*9. Coral reefs. In scene 19, Mr Gore says: "Coral reefs all over the world because of global warming and other factors are bleaching and they end up like this. All the fish species that depend on the coral reef are also in jeopardy as a result. Overall specie loss is now occurring at a rate 1000 times greater than the natural background rate." The actual scientific view, as recorded in the IPCC report, is that, if the temperature were to rise by 1-3 degrees Centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and widespread coral mortality, unless corals could adopt or acclimatise, but that separating the impacts of climate change-related stresses from other stresses, such as over-fishing and polluting, is difficult.

Dimmock's lawyer, Mr. Downes, argued that by schools making available such film to its teachers, and if teachers then showed such film to their pupils, then this would inevitably result "in the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject in the school, which is thus not only not being forbidden by the local education authority (and the DES), but being positively facilitated by them."

Mr Justice Barton stressed that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change. “It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film – although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion – but that it is a political film.

Justice Barton also stated that, “I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act.”<ref> BBC news, Thursday, 11 October 2007</ref>

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that

*1. The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.

*2. If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.

*3. Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.<ref>http://www.newparty.co.uk/articles/inaccuracies-gore.html</ref>

Science and Public Policy took issue with the response to the ruling by Al Gore’s spokesman and environment adviser, and asserted that his film contains ''35 Inconvenient Truths''.<ref>[http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html 35 Inconvenient Truths]</ref>

Related to above, while Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame, the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported,

:Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame." <ref name="sun">http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article</ref>

Regarding his claims that the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame, the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine stated,

:Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine." <ref name="sun" />

Many conservatives see Al Gore as an example of [[liberals]] using [[deceit]]ful tactics in important debates, i order to make a position seem more solid than it is.

==2008 Presidential candidates on climate Change==

[[Bob Barr]] is the only major 2008 Presidential Candidate who has not adopted wholesale the theory of human-caused global warming.

According to his website,<ref>[http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/BA6709C3-B27D-4EF9-81E6-2BA9D6F8AB20.htm John McCain on Global warming.]</ref> [[Republican]] Presidential candidate [[John McCain]] will take a more "aggressive approach" to global warming which he has declared as "undeniable and urgent." He was supported in this in June 2008 by Republican governor [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] who said McCain was the "real deal on the environment".<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/30/MNDB11H66C.DTL&type=politics Schwarzenegger backs McCain on climate Change]</ref>.

In his own words, McCain says "the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion in America today, and in the world, is that climate change is real. The fact is that it ''is'' real. The fact is that the solution to it is the development of technologies.... and a [[cap and trade]] proposal.... the debate is over."[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es] Unless McCain believes that Global Warming is entirely or largely man-made, there would be no sense in supporting a cap and trade solution.

[[Barack Obama]] believes "that global warming is not just the greatest [[environmental]] [[challenge]] facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind." During his first 100 days in office, he would enact a giant and far-reaching [[tax]] "an economy-wide cap on U.S. carbon emissions that will reduce U.S. emissions by the amount scientists agree is necessary (80% by 2050). With worldwide cuts in emissions estimated to cost '''$45 Trillion dollars''' overall. <ref>[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article4079036.ece World needs $45 trillion energy revolution] Timesonline.uk, June 6, 2008</ref> He comments "Putting a price on carbon is the most important step we can to take to reduce emissions."<ref>[http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/Obama/tab1.html League of Conservation Voters] presidentialprofiles2008.org</ref>

==Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" Movie Claims==

A [[British]] court has determined that Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods <ref>[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth], http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth, October 9, 2007</ref>

Those inaccuracies include the following

* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found the film misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
* The film uses emotive images of [[Hurricane Katrina]] and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a [[scientific]] impossibility.
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
* The film suggests that the [[Greenland]] ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
* The film suggests that the Antarctic [[ice]] covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. The evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to [[New Zealand]]. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

== Scientists ==

[[Image:Rogerrevelle.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Roger Revelle]]

{|
| valign="top" width="35%"|
* [[Roger Revelle]]
* [[Achim Steiner]]
* [[Fred Singer]]
* [[Richard Lindzen]]
* [[Sallie Baliunas]]
* [[Lonnie Thompson]]
| valign="top" width="33%"|
* [[James E. Hansen]]
* [[Michael Mann]]
* [[Charles Keeling]]
* [[Edwin A. Hernández-Delgado]]
|}

==See Also==
*[[Anthropogenic global warming theory]]
*[[Global Warming Controversy]]
*''[[Massachusetts v. EPA]]''
*[[Socialism and global warming]]
*[[Politics of global warming]]
*[[Liberal_hysteria#Global_Warming_Derangement_Syndrome|Global Warming Derangement Syndrome]]
*[[Socialist Environmental Disasters]]
*[[An Inconvenient Truth]]
*[[Previous Breaking News/Global Warming|Articles about '''Global Warming''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Wikiproject:News by Subject#Global Warming| Wikiproject:News by Subject- Global Warming]]

===Critique of the Hockey Stick Reconstruction===

*[http://www.climateaudit.org/pdf/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf Corrections To The Mann et. al. (1998) Proxy Data Base And Northern Hemispheric Average Temperature Series] by Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, ''Energy & Enviornment'' volume 14, 2003.
*[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/05/the_decay_of_the_hockey_stick.html The Decay of the Hockey Stick by Von Storch] published on the journal ''Nature'''s blog, May 3, 2007.
*[http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/ A Global Warming Bombshell] by Richard A. Muller, ''Technology Review'' , Oct. 2004; calls into question famous graph by Michael Mann.
*[http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/306/5696/679 Reconstructing Past Climate from Noisy Data] by Hans von Storch, Eduardo Zorita, Julie M. Jones, Yegor Dimitriev, Fidel González-Rouco, Simon F. B. Tett, ''Science'' magazine, 22 October 2004.


{{Climategate scandal}}
==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External Links==
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/global-warming/ What Liberals Say - Category: Global Warming], [[Accuracy In Media]]
*[http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2007/12/attempting_to_stop_global_warm_1.html Attempting to Stop Global Warming is Futile and a Mistake, says letter to the UN]
*[http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164004 Signatories of an open letter on the UN climate-conference]
*[http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~motl/global-temperature-not-exist.pdf Does a global temperature exist?], ''Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics'', June 2007.
*[http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032821,00.html The appliance of science] by Mike Hulme.
*[http://www.climatecrisis.net/ ''An Inconvenient Truth''], Film by [[Al Gore]]
*[http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2332531355859226455&q=great+global+warming+swindle ''The Great Global Warming Swindle'' - Documentary Film]
*[http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~motl/iris-effect.pdf Climate Sensitivity and Observed Negative Feedbacks], lecture by Richard Lindzen and Roberto Rondanelli.
*[http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~motl/lindzen-nature-of-arguments.pdf Nature of Arguments for Anthropogenic Global Warming], by Richard Lindzen
*[http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=42 ''Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warmings's Unfinished Debate'', by S. Fred Singer]
*[http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus] - [[Richard S. Lindzen]], Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]]
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=47&articleID=604 "Should We Have Acted Thirty Years Ago to Prevent Climate Change?", by Randall G. Holcombe].
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=25&articleID=296 "After Kyoto: A Global Scramble for Advantage," by Bruce Yandle].
*[http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=2319 The physical evidence of earth's unstoppable 1,500-year climate cycle]
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1714 "Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm?", by Richard Lindzen]
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/policy_reports/detail.asp?type=full&id=5 "New Perspectives in Climate Change: What the EPA Isn’t Telling Us"]
*[http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17181 Survey Shows Climatologists Are Split on Global Warming]
*[http://www.magma.ca/~hurleyp/FightingTheHoax.htm Fighting the Hoax]
*[http://www.climateaudit.org Climate Audit], Steve McIntyre's blog
*[http://www.realclimate.org Real Climate], blog by a group of climatologists including Michael Mann
*[http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/co2_fairytales_in_global_warmi.html "CO2 Fairytales in Global Warming"]
*[http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm A complete list of things caused by global warming]
*[http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/11/hackers-prove-global-warming-is-scam.html Hackers Prove Global Warming Is A Scam]

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Earth Sciences]]
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Liberal Bias]]
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]

Percussion

2009-12-11T01:32:21Z

JPope:

[[Image:Percussion_Instruments1.jpg|thumb|right|350px|A varied array of percussion instruments, including [[bell]]s, [[cymbal]]s of different sizes, various kinds of [[drum]], a [[triangle (instrument)|triangle]], octobans, and even improvised items such as a pail. (Pic: Ottmar Liebert)]]

'''Percussion''' is one of the main categories of [[musical instrument]], which includes all instruments that produce a sound when struck or shaken. This encompasses a wide variety of [[drum]]s, as well as [[xylophone]]s, [[glockenspiel]]s and, technically, keyboard instruments such as the [[piano]], since the sound is produced by a [[hammer]] striking a [[string]].

== Classification ==

The instruments of the percussion family may be placed into one of four categories:<ref>Blatter, A. 1997. pg. 201. ''Instrumentation and Orchestration'', 2nd edition. Schirmer Thomson Learning. California, USA</ref>

# Wooden instruments (called woods or keyboard instruments (excluding the vibraphone))
# Metal instruments (called metals)
# Skin-covered instruments (called hand drums)
# Other sound sources

=== List of percussion instruments ===

==== Wooden ====

* marimba
* [[xylophone]]
* xylorimba ''or'' xylomarimba

==== Metals ====

* orchestral bells
* [[vibraphone]]
* tubular chimes
* [[celesta]]
* button gong
* [[gong]]
* crotales
* steel drum
* [[bell|handbells]]
* almglocken
* anvil
* musical saw
* flexatone
* tubaphone

==== Skin-Covered ====

* [[timpani]]
* roto-tom

==== Other Sound Sources ====

* slide whistle
* musical glasses

== Basic Percussion Strokes ==

The fundamental sound-producing gesture in percussion music is the single stroke. This consists simply of striking a sound-producing object once with something capable of setting the object into vibration <ref>Blatter, A. 1997. pg. 191. ''Instrumentation and Orchestration'', 2nd edition. Schirmer Thomson Learning. California, USA</ref>. Below is an outline of the various strokes used in percussion music.

* single stroke
* flam
** can be described as a fast combination of two single strokes, one played by each hand
* drag
** a fast combination of three strokes, usually played either left-left-right ''or'' right-right-left
* ruff
* open roll
* closed roll ''or'' buzz roll ''or'' crush roll

Percussion instruments are used in most forms of music, providing a [[rhythm]] for the other instruments to keep to, as well as dramatic sounds that can punctuate important passages of the music. In the modern [[orchestra]], the percussion section often includes [[timpani]] and a range of smaller instruments such as triangles, [[bell]]s and [[woodblock]]s.

Percussion is particularly important in types of music, such as most [[Latin America]]n and [[Africa]]n styles, that place a strong emphasis on rhythm; these genres often use an array of traditional percussive instruments such as [[bongos]] and [[guiro]]s. In recent years, some genres of [[popular music]] have abandoned 'real' percussion altogether in favor of [[drum machine]]s, but the sounds these produce still have their roots in traditional drums and [[cymbal]]s for the most part.

Percussion instruments are one of the oldest types of music-making device. Cymbals are often mentioned in the [[Bible]], eg in Psalm 150:5.

== References ==

<references/>

[[Category:Musical Instruments]]

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:28:39Z

JPope: Formatting change. There was a random citation, which I've placed next to what it was actually referring to.

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory. <ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory should have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. However, some scientists mistakenly refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories are generally extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy. Some more speculative 'theories' are more accurately labelled 'hypothesis' within the scientific community, such as String Theory.

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, this would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

Common misunderstanding of the difference between a scientific theory and the laymen definiton of the word often leads to confusion regarding scientific topics - especially Evolution. <ref>[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm] </ref>

==Common scientific theories==

Cell Theory - how our bodies are made up of cells. <ref>[http://library.thinkquest.org/12413/theory.html]</ref>

Gravitational Theory - the explanation (which is yet unfinished, as scientists attempt to find the elusive Higgs Boson) for why matter attracts other matter. <ref>[http://users.ameritech.net/dennisreynolds1/GravitationalTheory.html] </ref>

Atomic Theory - the current understanding of the basic makeup of living and nonliving things. <ref> [http://library.thinkquest.org/27948/bohr.html] </ref>

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Talk:Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:27:34Z

JPope: /* Regarding my edits... */

"Why are scientists pushy about their theories (opinions)."
So hilariously bad, that it must be vandalism. Oh, and you forgot a question mark.
--[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 03:34, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Yes, vandalism, or some sort of joke. "Everyone had a thermometer that measured differently, which is why we have two temperature scales; fahrenheit and celcius." Ha ha. Please revert. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 03:48, 10 March 2007 (EST)

== Theory v hunch ==
This article is still in bad shape. It is not true that there is any big difference between scientific and non-scientific usage of the word "theory". Scientists use the word to describe a hunch as much as non-scientists do. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 12:47, 10 March 2007 (EST)

That's not necessarily true. Scientific "hunches" are known as hypotheses, and most hypotheses are disproved. Theories have corroborating evidence to suggest that they are accurate. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 13:34, 10 March 2007 (EST)

: No, you are not correct. If you were, then give me some citation backing you up. Show me some scientific paper that says, "That hypothesis might be good enough to be called a theory according to the layman's use of the word, it has not been proved accurate enough to be called a scientific theory." It doesn't happen. There are theories like String Theory that have not been confirmed at all. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 17:02, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Actually [[RSchlafly]] the statement preceding yours is correct. Your demand regarding a scientific paper makes no sense; why would a scientist writing for an audience of other scientists ever make the statement you require? Next, the National Academy of Sciences, which has reasonable jurisdiction over basic scientific terminology, defines a theory as, "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." In other words, not a "hunch." String Theory moreover doesn't really apply, since many physicists such as Carlo Rovelli and Philip Anderson contest the validity of calling String Theory a theory at all. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 20:10, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

: I accept the NAS definition, but where is the proof that scientists use the term "theory" differently from others? They don't. A lot of physicists use the term "String Theory", if not all. Are you saying that they are wrong? Does the NAS say that they are wrong? The article promotes a phony distinction that is not recognized by the vast majority of scientists. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 16:12, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

==Theory v Scientific Theory==

The [[Theory]] page seems to overlap with [[Scientific theory]] at least in intent, but the former takes a very different position on what the word "theory" means. In fact, it takes a position that makes other uses of the word here problematic. I made a note about that on [[Talk:Theory]]. Perhaps Theory could just redirect to this one? And it would be nice to see something here about how personal bias can lead to the word "theory" being attached to something that isn't really a theory at all (not falsifiable, for example, or having many inconsistencies that are overlooked because they contradict personal bias). Just because the word "theory" gets attached to something in common usage doesn't make it a theory. [[User:Bwilliston|Bwilliston]] 14:05, 10 March 2007 (EST)

: Scrap the other page. It just adds to the confusion. Make it redirect here. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 17:05, 10 March 2007 (EST)

The disputed section says that a common speech theory is different from a scientific theory, with the former being an "unsubstantiated guess" and the latter having to be "well-supported and accepted". My dictionaries don't say any of those things, and they don't reflect any popular or scientific usage to my knowledge. I'd be happy to use a dictionary definition, but if you want something else, then you should provide some support for it. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 05:00, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

I propose replacing the definition in this article with one that conforms more closely to dictionaries and common usage. I suggest:
: A Scientific Theory is a model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. A theory is a plausible or consistent explanation; it becomes scientific when it is subjected to empirical scrutiny. A Scientific Theory must be falsifiable, meaning that there must be some way to do observations that might disprove the theory.
: A scientific theory does not necessarily have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. Scientists often refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories can be extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy, or wildly speculative, such as String Theory. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 18:14, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
::That sounds pretty good, I'm all for it. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 18:15, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

== Blocking and reverting ==

Why is my version of the article being reverted? I see no fault in it. If you wish to block it, I request that you please give reason.

'''Reason''': Because you are a mindless liberal vandal. Oooooooo. Anything else? --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 22:59, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

My version got reverted too! The true reason is that the crazy fundamentalists behind this website can't handle the truth. They have to twist it a little bit so that it doesn't contradict the infallible (yeah right) bible. Sorry guys but evolution is real and there's nothing you can do about it! {{unsigned|Thoth}}

== Reorganization ==

I broke the existing entry into two paragraphs, and added mention of Scientific Laws. Sources still need to be cited (specifically for the first statement. Would the person who wrote the original article cite that?). [[User:Charliemc86|Charliemc86]] 16:46, 21 March 2007 (CST)

==Advocacy==

Cut:

:The concept of scientific theory has come under fire from fundamentalist Christians who don't accept the theory of evolution. The recurring argument is that "it's not fact. It's only a theory" but as shown here in a scientific theory is something that is supported by fact. It's a verified hypothesis and thus in science theory and fact don't stand in opposition.

This is not encyclopedic<s>, it's not even spelled right</s>. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 18:51, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

:This could be expanded on at [[Theory and fact]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 18:53, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

== Evolutionists ==
Palpable pap! Among scientists there are no "evolutionists", which is a term made up by the pseudo-scientists of Creationism. Read the quotes in the article. It refers to scientists, not evolutionists, and those scientists include geologists, astronomers, physicists and chemists. NitramNos 16:18, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

: No, that is not the origin of the term. Yes, the quotes refer to scientists. They are examples of evolutionists talking about scientists. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 16:42, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
::I beg to differ (along with the rest of the scientific community). They are examples of scientists talking about scientists. You are confused by the nonsense propagated by non-scientists and evangelical scientists. There is no such thing as an evolutionist. The misinformation on this site about what science is and what scientists do boggles the scientific mind. Perhaps that is why there are Natural History Museums, and then there are Creationist museums. NitramNos 15:52, 9 June 2007 (EDT)

::: If you had the scientific community on your side, then you'd be able to cite some sources. You can find the word "evolutionist" in the dictionary. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 10:11, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
::::I guess your confusion, RSchlafly, lies in the fact that you conflate the profession of a biologist who specializes in the study of evolution (an "evolutionist") with all scientists who accept the Theory of Evolution as the unifying theory of all the life sciences, and make observations, perform experiments and publish their findings on that basis. Scientist studying the mutations of a flu virus, scientists studying a troop of baboons, and scientists classifying new plants discovered in the Amazon may all rely on the Theory of Evolution to predict and explain much of what they observe, but they are not evolutionists as defined by the dictionary. You, however, use the term to include any scientist who accepts the Theory of Evolution as fact. That is ann error. NitramNos 10:35, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

::::: Your ad hominem attacks are not relevant to the article. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 10:41, 10 June 2007 (EDT)

== Evolution example ==
The section on the evolution example is hopelessly confused, and duplicated in [[Theory and fact]]. Both ought to be deleted. It makes sweeping statements about "all scientists" and "opponents of Evolution", none of which are supported. Some of it is nonsensical. It concludes "This is an unfair way to win a debate", but there is citation to anyone actually trying to win a debate that way, or to the supposed misunderstandings. I considered trying to improve it, but I think that it is hopeless. The stuff just does not belong. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 23:34, 30 August 2007 (EDT)

==Gravity example==

Deleted:
:The set of observations and mathematical formulae that explain how this force works, and the experiments which demonstrate that those observations and formulae are correct is called the Theory of Gravity.

No one has ever explained how the force of gravity works. We merely '''observe''' that gravitational force is proportional to an object's mass. Why this is so, and how it works is another story: a story yet to be told.

Formulas do not explain how something works. They merely predict the workings. For example, you can drive a car, knowing that the controls to operate it are reliable. But you need not understand the concepts of [[internal combustion]] or [[centripetal force]] to get a driver's license. You don't even have to know the basic formulas about [[momentum]], [[inertia]] and [[force]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:26, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

==Usage of the term==

We need to examine the implications of applying the word ''theory'' to an idea. In contrast to [[scientific law]]s such as the [[law of gravity]] - which are universally accepted by scientists - theories are not considered quite as thoroughly proven. Some theories have been retained in the face of contrary evidence or put forth despite the lack of any favorable evidence; see [[phlogiston theory]].

The political debate over the [[theory of evolution]] exploits the connotations of the word ''theory''. But this uses a [[circular argument]]:
#Since it's a theory, it must be true.
#It qualifies as a "theory" because many scientists believe it.
#Schoolchildren should believe it because it's a "theory".

This is tantamount to a confession that "we believe it because we believe it", i.e. we support it for reasons other than its explanatory power and its consistency with observations. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:09, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

--[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:09, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

:Ed, this doesn't sound familiar to me. Can you point me to something where I can find those 3 arguments, or a portion of them, being used? Thanks. [[User:Murray|Murray]] 10:25, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

::Ed - As far as I can see, the opening sentence of the article has it about right, and I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. In science a '''law''' ''describes what (always) happens'', while a '''theory''' ''proposes an explanation of why it happens''. It's nothing to do with whether it's "thoroughly proven" and "universally accepted". A theory never becomes a law; it's a completely different kind of thing. The law of gravity says (roughly!) that an apple will always fall to the ground, but does not explain why. Phlogiston theory was an attempt at an explanation of observed phenomena; evolution theory is another attempt to explain a set of observations. Whether they are true or not, and whether you (or "many scientists") accept them or not, has nothing to do with it. Theories are not "second-class" laws, and they do not (as it were) aspire to become laws. Nobody is saying "Since it's a theory, it must be true" - so I don't see where your line of reasoning comes from, or where it is leading. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 16:36, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

== Scientific Lexicon ==

Should it be added that, in the scientific community, a theory is the highest "rank", for lack of a better word, a scientist could hope for a hypothesis to achieve? Should we also differentiate String theory, so called because it's a hypothesis in the branch of theoretical physics, and the theory of evolution, so called because it's a scientific theory? Should we say that theories, under no circumstances, can become laws, but are rather an explanation of how laws interact with each other? I'm afraid that this article appears to liken theories to what most scientists call "hypotheses". I'm not sure if it was intentional, but it is incorrect to say the least. [[User:MykalOfDefiance|MykalOfDefiance]] 21:52, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

: I don't think that it is true that theories have highest rank. Some theories are better than others. Some have not been validated at all. Some theories are indeed hypothetical. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 01:07, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

== Regarding my edits... ==

I would like to be given an explanation for why my edits - which are, to the best of my knowledge, in line with the current scientific understanding - were undone. Is the idea that String Theory is not necessarily a theory offensive to somebody? Or was it the section about other theories, such as Cell Theory, Atomic Theory, etc? [[User:JPope|JPope]] 20:13, 10 December 2009 (EST)
:Your string theory contributions remain in the article. But your claim that evolution is true has been reverted. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:16, 10 December 2009 (EST)
::I apologize for being so outright about that. I edited the article again - removing the direct assertion regarding Evolution - but maintaining my section about examples of scientific theories, and changing that pesky grammar edit. Also, I added appropriate citations.[[User:JPope|JPope]] 20:27, 10 December 2009 (EST)

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:26:18Z

JPope: Undo revision 729102 by JacobB (Talk) - I tried to be more favorable towards the Conservative opinion, and I added appropriate citations.

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory.

<ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory should have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. However, some scientists mistakenly refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories are generally extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy. Some more speculative 'theories' are more accurately labelled 'hypothesis' within the scientific community, such as String Theory.

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, this would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

Common misunderstanding of the difference between a scientific theory and the laymen definiton of the word often leads to confusion regarding scientific topics - especially Evolution. <ref>[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm] </ref>

==Common scientific theories==

Cell Theory - how our bodies are made up of cells. <ref>[http://library.thinkquest.org/12413/theory.html]</ref>

Gravitational Theory - the explanation (which is yet unfinished, as scientists attempt to find the elusive Higgs Boson) for why matter attracts other matter. <ref>[http://users.ameritech.net/dennisreynolds1/GravitationalTheory.html] </ref>

Atomic Theory - the current understanding of the basic makeup of living and nonliving things. <ref> [http://library.thinkquest.org/27948/bohr.html] </ref>

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:15:22Z

JPope: /* Common usage */ Grammar thing...

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory.
<ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory should have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. However, some scientists mistakenly refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories are generally extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy. Some more speculative 'theories' are more accurately labelled 'hypothesis' within the scientific community, such as String Theory.

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, this would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future.

<ref>For example, this 2004 NY Times article on the pros and cons of string theory [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Talk:Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:13:56Z

JPope: /* Regarding my edits... */

Talk:Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:13:32Z

JPope: /* Regarding my edits... */ new section

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:11:00Z

JPope: Theories must, by definition, be evidenced by empirical data. I don't know who edited in that this was not true.

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory.
<ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory should have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. However, some scientists mistakenly refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories are generally extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy. Some more speculative 'theories' are more accurately labelled 'hypothesis' within the scientific community, such as String Theory.

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, thsi would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future.

<ref>For example, this 2004 NY Times article on the pros and cons of string theory [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:06:45Z

JPope: /* Common usage */ I was going to just correct a grammar mistake, but I added a paragraph about the confusion regarding 'theory' versus a nonscientific 'theory'.

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory.
<ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory does not necessarily have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. Scientists often refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories can be extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy, or speculative, such as [[String Theory]].

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, this would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future.

<ref>For example, this 2004 NY Times article on the pros and cons of string theory [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

Common misunderstanding of the difference between a scientific theory and the laymen definiton of the word often leads to confusion regarding scientific topics - especially Evolution. While science holds that the Theory of Evolution is a credible explanation for the facts observed in the fossil record and in the geographical distribution of species, many people see the word 'Theory' and are led to believe that Evolution is not completely valid.

Other common theories include:

Cell Theory - how our bodies are made up of cells.
Gravitational Theory - the explanation (which is yet unfinished, as scientists attempt to find the elusive Higgs Boson) for why matter attracts other matter.
Atomic Theory - the current understanding of the basic makeup of living and nonliving things.

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Scientific theory

2009-12-11T01:02:06Z

JPope: /* Common usage */ - Adding some information about the 'String Theory' quote, with more accurate information about the usage of the word 'theory' in 'String Theory'.

A '''scientific theory''' is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable [[phenomena]]. While a [[scientific law]] describes something that always happens in the same way, a scientific [[theory]] explains what causes it to do so.

For example, doctors have long known that being near a person who has a communicable disease exposes you to a risk of catching it (see [[quarantine]]). It was a "law" of [[contagion]] that staying far away protected you from catching the disease, even before Pasteur's [[germ theory of disease]] provided the modern scientific explanation (the "theory").

It is more substantial than a conjecture or [[hypothesis]], but may not be verified as consistent with [[empirical]] data. <ref>For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.</ref> Controversially, some scientists have declared that causes other than natural, observable ones should not be examined - and that theories involving such causes are "not scientific", e.g., [[behavioral psychology]]. This limitation and its implications for the [[philosophy of science]] plays a large role in the [[origins debate]].

For many philosophers of science, a theory must be ''[[falsifiable]]'' to be considered [[science|scientific]].
This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory.
<ref>"A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a [[theory]] is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php] </ref>

Generally accepted scientific theories have survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. <ref>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory </ref> Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory does not necessarily have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. Scientists often refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories can be extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy, or speculative, such as [[String Theory]].

A successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

In contrast to scientific consensus, science philosopher [[Karl Popper]] asserted that the [[theory of evolution]] could be considered a metaphysical research program depending on the definition being used. <ref>The science philosopher Karl Popper famously called Darwinian evolution a "metaphysical research program".</ref>

== Common usage ==
Scientists frequently claim that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: <ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html</ref>
:''When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.''

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: <ref>http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php</ref>
:''In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.''

One common way the term 'theory' is misused in scientific literature is in the field of speculative physics, which proposes something commonly deemed 'String Theory'. At it's most basic level, string theory states that the entirety of the universe is made up of tiny, multi-dimensional strings. However, this proposal cannot currently be verified or refuted by modern science - that is, scientists cannot determine if this is right or wrong. Since String Theory makes no verfiable predictions about the universe, either, scientists can say nothing more about String Theory than that it may or may not fit the facts we currently know. However, thsi would disqualify String Theory as a scientific theory, which must both be evidenced by facts and must make correct, verifiable predictions about the future.

<ref>For example, this 2004 NY Times article on the pros and cons of string theory [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html?ei=5090&en=fd15a74e2dca3af0&ex=1260075600&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=all&position=] used the word "theory" 70 times without any suggestion that ideas must be well-substantiated before they qualify as a theory. Physicist Lawrence Krauss used the term "string theory" even though the theory has "yet to have any real successes in explaining or predicting anything measurable". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/08essay.html] A month later, he argued that it should really be called the "string enterprise" because using the word "theory" causes problems with intelligent design advocates and those who say that evolution is "just a theory". [http://genesis1.phys.cwru.edu/~krauss/newscieditorial.html]</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Computing]]
*[[Evolution and science]]

==External links==

*[http://wilstar.com/theories.htm Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method]

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]